What Did Robert Oswald Know?

(Updated on my SubStack site:  https://georgebailey.substack.com/p/what-did-robert-oswald-know)

A number of researchers have wondered if Lee Oswald's brother Robert knew more than he ever admitted to.  Indeed, his half brother John Pic told the FBI that Robert knew more that he was letting on.  As one researcher told me, Robert wasn't going to be doing any talking from early on to this day.  Robert did publish a book in 1967 regarding his relationship with his brother (Lee: A Portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald by His Brother) and did appear in several documentaries.  Publicly, he has always stood by the official story and kept a low profile over the years.  

However, his testimony to the Warren Commission, conducted in 1964, reveals Robert's contradictory accounting of events.  A careful reading of the transcript makes it apparent that Robert is not being forthright regarding many issues and this opens up other unexpected mysteries.

The Oswald Trust

Early on, much attention is given to a trust fund set up to accommodate donations given to Marina Oswald, Lee's widow after his death.  The amount was $25,000, supposedly donated from people around the country.  Robert was one of the signatories to the trust.  However, this was not the only amount of money Marina received.  Before she was called to give testimony,  in February of 1964, Marina signed a contract with Tex-Italia Films and Cinema International Productions, to appear in a movie about her life.  She was paid a flat fee of $132,350.  Soon after signing the contract, the Tex-Italia Film company shut their doors in Hollywood, never to be heard from again.  No movie about Marina was ever made.  How's that for taking care of the star witness in the case?

However,  it's unlikely that Robert would not have known something about the details of this transaction as close as he was to Marina. He was, in fact, with her when she was working out the details of the contract.  In fact, it's hard to see how the Commission lawyers didn't know about it either.  FBI Director Hoover must have known as he told lead counsel, J. Lee Rankin, that the FBI was not going to be investigating any of Marina Oswald's financial dealings.  Rankin must have breathed a sigh of relief!  So the kibosh was put on this from the beginning and was never to be mentioned again.   

It's unknown what Marina Oswald did with this large amount of money or for that matter, where the mysterious men of Tex-Italia Films acquired the funds. 

Marina Speaking English

Robert told the Warren Commission that his sister in law Marina had "limited knowledge" of English and he would communicate with her via hand signals.  As we shall see in the section, this is not true–Marina was a very good English speaker and before he spoke to the Commission, Robert Oswald actually admitted to it.

In December of 1963 Robert gave the FBI S.A. Barnwell Odom a 15-page statement and in it he notes meeting with Marina to discuss a management contract she was about to sign with Jim Martin (who briefly became her lover).  There was a discrepancy in the contract that Marina noted–since she could read English–and discussed this issue in English with Robert with no translator present.   He'll deny her language skills later.  It should be noted that Jim Martin told the HSCA in 1978 that Marina could understand English quite well (Armstrong p. 340-341). 

And there are other sources regarding Marina and her English speaking.  Robert’s mother Marguerite Oswald said in her Commission testimony that Marina could speak English.  Lee wrote Marina letters in English while in the Soviet Union (Armstrong, p. 339). The so-called "other defector" Robert Webster (who I might add is the spitting image of Lee) said he met Marina while in Moscow in 1959-60 and she spoke in English to him (she denies knowing him).  Also, Marina’s stenographic notebook (CE100) that was found by the Dallas Police is written in English.  They also found other notebooks with her English writing that are now in the National Archives (Armstrong p. 340-341).

So why is Robert Oswald obviously covering for Marina?  He's speaking under oath and perjuring himself in the process.  And no one on the Warren Commission or their staff attorneys outs him on this.  Marina meanwhile, requires the use of an interpreter to answer questions from the Commission during her testimony.  Many researchers consider Marina to be a KGB agent and speaking English too well would be a dead giveaway to the CIA.  Conversely, Lee spoke excellent Russian yet rarely spoke it in Russia.  Likewise, that would give him away to the KGB if he were operating as an agent.  

Basically, Marina had excellent English language skills and was allowed to pull the wool over everybody's eyes.  Robert helped facilitate this charade.   

The  Strange 1947 to 1948 Jump

During the Robert Oswald's questioning by assistant counsel Albert E. Jenner, Jr., the following happens:

Mr. Oswald.  No, sir. I would say at no time it was. In moving up perhaps there to the time of the divorce and everything, I don't remember when Mr. Ekdahl moved out of the house. At that time we were living on Eighth Avenue in Fort Worth. This was during a summer period there. And I think this was the summer after the second year that we attended there this would be the summer of 1947.

Mr. Dulles.  If it is agreeable, I think we will adjourn for just a minute. It is now 11 o'clock.

Coming back from the break, the Commission starts qualifying the exhibits.  When finished, they resume the testimony: 

Mr. Jenner.  At the recess, Mr. Oswald, we were dealing with excuse me. We were dealing with the period of time that you and your mother and your two brothers lived in Benbrook, Tex. This brought us through the summer of 1948, I believe. Am I correct?

Mr. Oswald.  That is correct, sir.

So, a year is lost from the summer of 1947 to the summer of 1948.  It’s odd that Robert is going along with this.  How could he not recall 1947, the year they left off at?  Or, could have it been a conflict of addresses?  Robert’s older brother, John Pic, in earlier testimony listed their address at this time as 1505 8th avenue in New Orleans.  But there is evidence to show that there was an Oswald family living at 101 San Saba at the same time, in the summer of 1947.  As noted by researcher Jones Harris, Allen Dulles was the most informed member about the assassination on the Warren Commission.  Harris pointed out to me that it was Dulles that called for the break.  Was Dulles trying to prevent a mishap here?  It was known in Washington circles that Dulles had an interest in doubles and had once met a young man at a party that was fresh out of college and spoke fluently in both Russian and Chinese.  Dulles learned that this young man also had a twin brother who was also fluent in both languages.  Dulles reportedly said, “I must have this pair.” So if the former CIA Director had this interest in doubles and Oswald was part of a doppelgänger scheme, then by ordering the break in testimony, Dulles averted a possible exposure of intelligence operations.  

And this flew over everybody’s heads.  

Stripling Junior High

Probably the most controversial part of Robert Oswald's testimony to the Commission.  While talking of Lee's early life, and school attendance, Robert mentions Lee attending W. C. Stripling in Irving, Texas.  However, under the official story, neither Lee nor his mother are supposed to be living there at that time and existing school records have him attending Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans in the fall of 1954.  And this is not the first time Robert makes a mention of Stripling.  In fact, he mentions it three times.  The first is in 1959 to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram upon Lee's defection to the Soviet Union; the second instance is to the Star-Telegram in 1962 upon Lee's return, and the final time in front of the Warren Commission.

In fact, it would have been difficult for any one to have known of this except for Robert mentioning it three times.  Researcher John Armstrong started digging into this and ran across Frank Kudlaty, the assistant principal at Stripling.  When asked, Kudlaty said he remembered Lee Oswald attending because he was called by the Principle to head to the school Saturday morning (the 23rd) and hand over all records pertaining to Lee Oswald to the FBI agents who were on their way.  This he did, but did not get a written receipt nor did he have the ability to make a photostat of the records.  Lee Oswald apparently was only there for about six weeks in the fall of 1954.  Kudlaty noticed an interesting fact–there was no letter stating where the records were sent upon Lee Oswald leaving.   Also, there was no loss of six weeks from his records at Beauregard in New Orleans during this time (Armstrong, p. 97-101).).

Frank Kudlaty wasn't the only witness either, faculty and former students remembered Lee Oswald attending Stripling.  He lived across the street from the school.  It's easy to remember the kid that gets to go home for lunch. 

It's quite surprising that the attorney  Albert Jenner allowed Robert to pass this by without correction.  The Commission and staff had the records and they knew the answers beforehand; that’s basic lawyering.  Robert was never corrected.  Nevertheless, it's not the only instance of Lee's school records contradicting.  His records from the fall of 1953 do as well.  One set has him in PS #44 in New York and the other set has him in Beauregard Junior high in New Orleans at the exact same time.

Evidence of Lee Oswald being doubled?

Thanksgiving 1962

This is also known as "family reunion" before the Big Event that occurs a year later, to the day.  It's also an example of odd family behavior.  Gathering for the holiday dinner are Robert, his wife Vada and kids, Lee and Marina and their child June, and half brother John Pic, his wife Margret, and their kids.  Robert would say in an interview years later that it was a "Typical Thanksgiving day for any family."  But there is one person missing.  Their mother, Marguerite.  As Robert stated to the Commission, their mother was not invited, never knew of the gathering, and according to him, her name was never mentioned at the gathering.

Imagine you have one living parent, she lives nearby and you never invite her to Thanksgiving day dinner, nor mention her name with your siblings.  This has the appearance of deeper levels of family intrigue.  

There are other instances before and after showing Robert's aloofness for his mother.  For example in the summer of 1956 he was engaged to Vada.  He never introduced her to his mother or Lee before the wedding. Vada only met them a few years later.  When Robert was being interviewed in 1959 by Star-Telegram, he was asked where they could get in touch with his mother.  Robert was evasive saying that Marguerite was in seclusion and under a doctor's care.  This is not true and there is no evidence to support this.  The reporter eventually found her and she wasn't tucked away.  

Through these actions, Robert displays an apparent aversion to talking about his mother or associating with her.  It's as if he is ashamed of her.  Others who believe that Marguerite was being impersonated (along with Lee) believe Robert's aversion is to an impostor.  And it's not just his mother, in later years he will have nothing to do with Lee's two daughters either.  

Visiting Lee In Jail

Robert going to visit Lee in jail will be the first time he has seen him since the Thanksgiving gathering from the previous year.  Robert had also experienced more than one shock this day.  Other than seeing his brother arrested for the murder of a police officer and the President of the United States, he also was to learn that Marina had given birth to a second child, Rachel.  Robert never knew that Marina was pregnant, let alone had given birth to a new child.

Most striking is Robert's comments when he finally got to speak to Lee.  He noticed that Lee seems to speak in a "mechanical" way with little visible emotion.  That eerie calm that he possessed, that all around him noticed.  Robert did too.  Even more striking is Robert's observation, "I was not talking to the Lee I knew."  That Lee was long gone, replaced by another spirit.  Maybe even a different Lee altogether that wanted to be called Harvey.  And maybe it dawned on Robert at some point what had happened.

Lee Driving
Robert Oswald states in his testimony that he never saw Lee drive a car or even wanted to learn to drive.  Michael and Ruth Paine testified to the same, as did Marina.  However, researchers over the years have found numerous witnesses to Lee driving.  For example Cliff Shasteen, the barber who owned his own shop in (Irving, Texas) had cut Lee's hair numerous times and told the Warren Commission that he and the other barbers saw him driving up to the shop 6 or 7 times in the summer of 1963. Which it should be noted, was the time period of Oswald living in New Orleans, spending most of his time unemployed. Researcher John Armstrong reports at least 27 people saw Oswald driving a car and 3 others report seeing his driver's license.  In fact, more witnesses attest to Lee Oswald driving a car than not.  Only four, Michael and Ruth Paine, Marina Oswald, and of course, Robert Oswald, say Lee could not drive an automobile. 

So What Did Robert Know?

There are hints here and there which are never followed up on such as Robert admitting that he thought Jack Ruby knew Lee before he shot him on live TV.  An interesting line of thought never explored.  Odd things stick out.  Such as in his book on Lee, Robert stated that Lee came home on leave in February 1958 and they went hunting.  But his released Marine leave records show no such occurrence in February of that year.  It’s quite telling when Robert speaks of Lee seeming like a different person altogether.  The brother who he had grown up with, suffered hardships with, who had idolized him, following in his footsteps into the Marines and beyond, was now a totally different man sitting on a barbed-wire fence.

These brothers loved each other.  The drift probably started when Lee went to the Soviet Union, what Robert would later say with a grin as "sowing his oats."  As a former Marine, and no doubt a patriotic American, Robert should have been appalled at this event.  If he was, he's not telling us.  

So Robert Oswald remains a mystery in this affair.  If he has been charged with retaining secrets, along with the burden that must have been, he has done his job well.  Like a good soldier does.

Sources

Book:  Harvey and Lee by John Armstrong

Testimony pages:  The Oswald Trust, p.290; Marina speaking English, p.338; The 1947 to 1948 Jump, p.282 & 291; Stripling Junior High, p.299; Thanksgiving, 1962 p.388; Visiting Lee In Jail, p.455-456 & 462.

Testimony Sources:

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/00/oswald_r.html

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh1/html/WC_Vol1_0138b.htm

Hard Copy interview with Robert Oswald (11.26.90).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DVQgFeUiuM

Robert Oswald's handwritten report to Bardwell Odum regarding Marina

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/fbi-bardwell-odum/680562

Jack White Interview

"We do know Oswald had intelligence connections. Everywhere you look with him, there are fingerprints of intelligence." -Republican Senator Richard Schweiker, member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (Village Voice: 12/15/75)

Researcher Jack White passed away recently (1927-2012).  He was well admired in the research community and helped broaden our knowledge of the Kennedy assassination.

Here is an interview conducted by Len Oscanic at Black Op Radio with Jack (black583d).

One interesting point Jack White makes is in regards to his testimony in with the HSCA and how he was told by a lawyer the limits of what could be discussed.  Issues made clear to him was that there would be no discussions of Lee Oswald being an intelligence agent or being impersonated.  If he did so, says White, he would be held in contempt of Congress.  Very heavy-handed!  Why are there issues like this that can’t be investigated or for that matter discussed?  And then out of the other side of their mouth they say there is no evidence to support Oswald being a government agent.  Of course not if you are not going to look into it.  What cheek!

RIP Mr. White.

The Sum Of All Things

"The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy."

HSCA, Final Report, 1979

From the very beginning, the Powers that Be have treated the Warren Report as if it is the word of God, come down from on high, etched in stone. In the picture above, that big book almost looks like a stone tablet. Why, it might as well be Moses himself placing it in Lyndon Johnson’s awaiting hands. Later, he would tell Walter Cronkite that he never believed in the lone gunman theory. After second thoughts he asked CBS to delete the comment, under the grounds of National Security. A moment of candor we are not supposed to know about.

In a 1999 doctoral dissertation by Ross Frank Ralston, he relates an important concept in the study of JFK. It is the principle of "hegemony" in the media. In other words, the ability of certain players in the media to dominate others. According to Ralston, those main players are CBS and Time-Life in the way they presented the government’s case in the assassination. And early on, they set the standard as to how the assassination would be relayed to the public after the Warren Report was published in late 1964. The Warren Report, as Ralston summarizes is, "a man in a building shot a man in a car..."

However, there is more than one theory of what happened because there was another, and final, investigation launched in 1977 to become known as the House Select Committee on Assassinations. In this case they explored both the deaths of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King. Despite political infighting and government agencies lacking in openness and outright lying to the Committee (i.e., CIA) their final report published in 1979 concluded there was a possibility of a conspiracy in the deaths of Kennedy and King but they didn't have the means to continue any further investigation. 

So we are left with two official government investigations both with different outcomes. The first, a lone gunman with no confederates; and the last, more than one gunman with a conspiracy in play.

What Ralston concentrates on in his dissertation is how the media focuses on the former, ignoring the latter, and extending into every possible area of the media from print to TV. In effect, the Warren Report becomes the sum of all things.

The Watch Dog Became The Lap Dog
The way the "Fourth Estate" functions with the Kennedy assassination has long been the fly in the ointment. It is a frustrating issue to examine. Where they should question, they accept without comment. Isn't one of the aims of journalism to research what the facts are? Research what you are told? After all, we are not living in Nazi state, right? In many ways the American press operates like a propaganda arm of the government. Joseph Goebbels never had it so good! One can view this behavior in the way they cover the official government investigations from JFK, to Watergate, to 9-11.

And therein lies the disconnect. The public will question what they are told; the mainstream press, largely, will not. The Watch Dog became the Lap Dog. No one in the American Press ever did a critical analysis of the Warren Report, the 26 volumes of collected evidence and hearings, from then till now. It is as if they wanted to prove the Government's story of what happened. And why? Probably because press independence is a thing of the past. Plus, there are many connections between the government and press at this point. As Carl Bernstein reported in a piece for Rolling Stone magazine in 1976, he found at least 400 CIA operatives in the press, either as volunteers or paid agents.

The internet itself has been a great boon to critical thought on JFK’s assassination. No other media outlet comes close. True, there is a lot of junk out there, misinformation out there from both sides of the issue. One ultimately needs to do their own research to filter out the nonsense. And as I have found in my own research, a careful examination of the evidence paints a totally different picture of the assassination and the surrounding events. Well, back in the day when there were only three networks reporting the news it was easy to play cover for the Ruling Class. Or for that matter, cover up anything that the status quo wanted. Of course they have their own shills in operation on the Internet now as well, but they are all just voices–their impact is diminished as there are so many more voices in opposition

Various Machinations
Ross Frank Ralston does a good job at accounting the various machinations of CBS, Time and Life. It’s the standard mishmash of cherry picked evidence, straw man arguments, and slight of hand, misdirection ploys. These guys are good! And run this same game now. Just watch any History Channel or Discovery Channel documentary on the assassination of Kennedy and you’ll see the Warren Commission’s conclusion verified every time. If you take note of any of these documentaries, their aim is to support the government’s theories and claims on everything from assassinations to terror attacks. While there are too many to document in this post, you can download the PDF below,  about 7.9 megs in size.

I would however, like to point out a few discrepancies that Ralston chronicles regarding the 1967 CBS Kennedy assassination documentary since so much malfeasance occurred masquerading as a legitimate journalistic investigation.

Such as, when they tell us that Oswald’s rifle, utilized by an expert could recycle the weapon in 5 seconds. (The Warren Report settled on 4.8 to 5.6 seconds.) Sounds reasonable, of course. The trouble is, they never alert the viewers that Oswald was never an expert rifleman and barely qualified on his last of three marksmen tests. Nor do they mention the three metal shims used to properly align the telescopic site, or a host of other problems with the lone gunman scenario. (And I might add, you can read about this and a lot more here on this blog.) And since then, a FOIA request has uncovered a CIA document that their own photographic analysis department concluded a time span of just 1.6 seconds, obviously far too fast for anybody to work the bolt manually.

Nevertheless, it’s interesting to see how they manipulate the facts so the man in the building is forever shooting at the man in the car. The Lone Gunman is an ever present character in documentaries like this since he’s the fall-guy to quash conspiracy. In CBS ballistics tests done with a Mannlicher-Carcano, which by the way, is a model they acquired, not Oswald’s original weapon, they used it to shoot up masonite and gelatin dummies to simulate bone and flesh. Their conclusion? Yep, one bullet could do all that damage on two men. The trouble is, they never showed what the spent bullets looked like. Did they resemble CE399, the so-called pristine bullet? We’ll never know for sure but my hunch is that it did not. It certainly didn’t at the Edgewood Arsenal test where experts fired at the radial bones in 10 different cadavers and all ten bullets were, as Dr. Joseph Dolce said in his report, “markedly deformed.” He was never called to testify for the Commission and his report was concealed.

One thing Ralston left out, which I think is particularly egregious of CBS, is the way they treated Orville Nix in this show. He, of the Nix film and a witness to shots coming from the grassy knoll was interviewed in such a way so they could edit the tape later so he was heard saying the shots came from the school book depository building. This bit of tomfoolery is what the Nazis used to make propaganda films showing Jews in the ghetto, living happily. Years later, another TV producer would pull the same stunt on Jim Garrison making him look like a nut saying there were 33 gunmen in Dealey Plaza. When actually, he was referring to the number of people involved in a conspiracy. Garrison thought only six gunmen were involved in the slaying, which were cut out of the final broadcast in order to make him look like a fool. This is an example of the nasty games these people play under the guise of “journalism.” Yes, journalism for their Masters.

And this is why the Internet is so great. They can’t do this now. It would be posted somewhere on the web. One can see why the Ruling Class despises this new medium so much and are constantly floating ways of controlling it. As we used to say, “The free press is free for whomever owns one.” Now we all do..

Epilogue
Look at the lengths the government goes to quash a conspiracy in the death of John F. Kennedy? If this case is so strong and so true, why go to all the trouble to manipulate witness testimony as the CBS did with Orville Nix, or Life Magazine’s notorious shuffling of the Zapruder film frames in order to fool the public into thinking all the shots came from the rear? What do they have to fear? Why do they want us to believe this myth they created so strongly?

Probably because there is official history and there is what actually happened. They fear the truth and the public’s lack of confidence in them and their seat of power. Finally, they failed. The Majority do not believe the official fiction of what happened. They fail every time they have to resort to Nazi-style propaganda techniques in order to present their case, and by doing so, show us how weak their case really is.

1999 doctoral dissertation by Ross Frank Ralston.  PDF on https://georgebailey.substack.com/p/the-sum-of-all-things?sd=pf

Sources:
Fonzi, Gaeton; The Last Investigation; Law, William In The Eye of History; HSCA Report, 1979; Warren Report, 1964

The Lopez Report And The Road To Mexico

"This group's purpose and interest in Oswald is detailed in another section of this final report dealing with whether or not Lee Oswald was an agent or asset of the Central Intelligence Agency."

Lopez Report, p. 142

One of the most overlooked documents that was born of the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the late 1970’s is the Lopez Report. That is mainly due to it being classified by National Security for almost 30 years. The product of two young lawyers, Ed Lopez and Dan Hardway were sent to Mexico City by one of the HSCA lead investigators Gaeton Fonzi, to investigate Oswald’s time there in the months before the assassination took place. Their declassified report, coined by Vince Bugliosi as a "giant dud" is hardly that—only a dud to the misinformed or in Bugliosi’s case, those who want to ignore the truth of one of the great crimes of the twentieth century.

Known as Oswald’s Mexico Mystery Tour, this phase of Kennedy assassination research is filled with cloak and danger deeds, odd happenings and coincidences, Oswald impersonators, missing tapes, straight out lying by top CIA officials, and Oswald’s own peculiar behavior. Like many areas of this investigation, none of it makes any sense at first glance, and becomes an exercise in bewilderment. Only until the circumstantial facts start piling up that Oswald was more than a long nut loser, and more of a man on a mission for clandestine services, do things begin to make a bit of sense. Though it is still a mysterious undertaking.

Oswald’s Mexico Mystery Tour
Suffice to say, Oswald’s trip to Mexico is a convoluted and complex issue. Better for the reader to go to James DiEugenio’s detailed account at CTKA.net, HERE.

As a summary, Lee Oswald in late September of 1963 boarded a bus for Mexico City. For unstated reasons he wanted back in the Soviet Union but assumed he would need to travel through Cuba first, so he proceeded to travel by bus to Mexico City to speak with the Soviets there at their consulate and obtain a visa. Upon arriving, he went to the Cuban embassy first and was told he needed the visa from the Soviets first. Proceeding there, he was told it would take weeks or months to obtain the visa. So, he returns to the Cubans and tells them he has it. Staff member Silvia Duran becomes suspicious, rings the Russians, and finds out the truth. Oswald had lied; not even basic paperwork had been filed. Being confronted with this, Oswald gets belligerent and is escorted out by security personnel. He hangs around in Mexico a few more days, allegedly calls both embassies inquiring about the visas before leaving.

However, this weird episode is not over here. The CIA had the Soviet and Cuban embassies wiretapped.

The person claiming to be Oswald uses broken Russian when talking to them. He uses excellent Spanish when talking to the Cubans. This is where the imposter claim appears and is most likely correct. FBI director Hoover believed it and told Lyndon Johnson that in a five-page memo (and a phone call). Oswald was an excellent Russian speaker, so good that his wife Mariana, upon meeting him, thought he was a local because of his Baltic accent. He was never known to speak Spanish to any degree. Also, FBI agents that were familiar with Oswald’s voice, upon listening to the tapes, state the caller was not Oswald. Another issue were the calls themselves. The speaker is asking questions about the visa process that Oswald would have known were finished, since he failed to fill out any forms and the visa process was dead.

Silvia Duran, mentioned above, describes the Oswald she spoke with as being short with blonde hair. (This description was omitted from the Warren Report.) Other witnesses describe meeting an Oswald with blonde hair as well. Nevertheless, a lot of phone calls were made that were of a suspicious nature and some were made on days when witnesses like Duran said she was not in the office. She is either lying or was impersonated as well as Oswald was. As a side note, one Oswald call was made in English. It was transcribed but the CIA has never released it.  

The CIA told the Warren Commission that they had no knowledge as to what Lee Oswald was up to prior to the assassination. This is blatantly a lie. The Soviet and Cuban embassies were thoroughly wiretapped and the CIA had a team of transcribers documenting every call. They knew every word Oswald, or his imposter, said. To make matters worse, top CIA officer David Phillips lied under oath and said that the tapes were destroyed before the assassination. They were not and can be easily proven so now such as CIA officer's Stanley Watson's testimony to the HSCA stating that the tapes were in existence after the assassination (and the 5-page memo from Hoover to LBJ saying his agents had listened to the tapes, 11/23/63). 

Plus, any American showing up at a communist embassy at the height of the cold war would be of operational interest as pointed out in the Lopez report. Oswald spoke to a Russian embassy official, Kostikov, who was also a top KGB agent, in charge of assassinations for the western hemisphere. Coupled with that, with Oswald being a former Soviet defector, and approaching a Soviet embassy, should have sent a bolt of electricity up the chain of command. We know from released CIA cables, this was not the case. Perhaps that was because Oswald was on a mission so no need to get excited? We know for example, as Lopez and Harden discovered, there were also false cables sent out as well to most likely cover up Oswald’s true reason for being in Mexico City. One had six agents signing it and they had to have known the information on it was false.

So who was the impostor? Jeff Morely in his excellent book, Our Man in Mexico, believes the impostor was a CIA agent. They did use operatives to investigate suspicious activities and did so on an American that had visited the Cuban embassy. The FBI arrested that man when he returned to Texas. Interestingly, there was no entrapment of Oswald going on like this and no one questioned him upon his return. And to think he was trying to travel to Cuba, which was and still is, against the law!

The Missing Section
Going back to the quote for the Lopez report above, it was mentioned that in another section of the report there was going to be information about Oswald’s relationship with the CIA. When the report was finally declassified that section was missing and is presumably still classified. Researcher James DiEugenio pointed this out personally to Ed Lopez, much to his agitation. As he said at the discovery, “They always hated that part…If I was them, I would have hated it too." The CIA hated anyone knowing how close they were with Oswald. And obviously, fashioned a cover up by deleting that section, just like they did with Mexico station chef Winston Scott’s memoir when they redacted his entire chapter on Oswald (and in fact, most of his memoir is classified also—see Morley). 

Questions Still Remain
What the Lopez Report documents is the tremendous amount of conniving going on with the CIA in regards to Oswald’s activities in Mexico City. Everything from phony cable traffic to top-level agents lying. It is known from document releases that Oswald’s SIG 201 file was under direct control of counter espionage chief James Angleton at his CI/SIG (counterintelligence/special investigation group) and had been since Oswald’s defection in 1959. It has been suggested that Angleton was running the false defector program to the Soviet Union. John Newman in Oswald and the CIA, believes Angleton was running Oswald on operations as an off the books agent and possibly using him to assassinate Kennedy. It was not an uncommon practice for Angleton to run ops around his own station chiefs without their prior knowledge—the “need to know” basis coming into play. James DiEugenio believes Angleton was running the show from HQ while David Philips was taking care of things from the field, in whatever exercise was going on here with Oswald. Both have been caught in numerous lies and you don’t do that unless you have something to hide. Hunter Leake, second in command of CIA station in New Orleans said in an obscure interview that Lee Oswald was used for low level currier work and that his purpose of moving to New Orleans was at the behest of the CIA for further operations. While you can’t prove anything substantial in the area of conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination, you can prove the cover-ups. They are all over the place and everybody is involved. 

One question that still remains is—what was Oswald really doing in Mexico City and what was his real purpose there? The whole deal is screwy and fraught with incompetence. It hardly seems like something an experienced intelligence agency would plan and execute. Somebody would have to know that to get a visa from the Soviet embassy would take a long time. Shouldn’t Oswald have been furnished with a phony one to present to the Cuban embassy officials? Or perhaps it was a last minute venture hastily thrown together. Maybe it was a ruse to draw out other operatives? Some have suggested that Oswald’s real intent was to go to Cuba to assassinate Castro and the trip to Russia was just a ruse to provide cover. 

We know one thing for certain—at this late date over forty years later, the CIA is still withholding information on this affair.


Sources

The Lopez Report 

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/contents/hsca/contents_hsca_lopezrpt_2003.htm 

Morely, Jeff, Our Man in Mexico; Newman, John, Oswald and the CIA; Fonzi, Gaeton, The Last Investigation.

Transcript of Hoover and LBJ phone call.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=807&relPageId=2

assassination

The Last Investigation, back in print

Good news, Gaeton Fonzi’s account of his experiences of being an investigator for HSCA, The Last Investigation, is back in print. A highly recommended read. Updated for 2008 with a new epilogue by the author. Check it out at www.maryferrell.org.