Lee Oswald, International Man of Mystery

Much has been written over the years about the possibility of Lee H. Oswald being an intelligence operative. Oswald’s mother Marguerite believed her son to be an agent and stated so many times in her Warren Commission testimony. The CIA and other agencies of the Federal government denied hiring Oswald for any type of employment. But down through the years, declassified documents and witness testimony has come forth to show that Lee Oswald could very well possibly have been an agent. It certainly paints a different picture than what we were originally told. In fact, the evidence, though piecemeal, is quite substantial. He was most likely a low level operative. Oswald as “secret agent” helps fill in some of the mysterious and inexplicable events of his life. Let us take a look at what we know.

Marine Health Records
It’s been widely reported that Oswald’s health records document his contracting gonorrhea “in the line of duty” and “not of his own fault.” This makes no sense at all unless Oswald was involved with a covert operation, this being under the Office of Naval Intelligence. At this time, a serviceman found to be infected with a sexually transmitted disease was grounds for immediate dismissal from the military. Yet, Oswald slides by, just as he does when he is court-martialed twice and still remains in the Marines.

Oswald was known to frequent a “gentlemen’s club” in Tokyo when on leave. His fellow marines were surprised that he could afford to go there, as they couldn’t. It was known as an exclusive club and quite expensive. There was a geisha there that was allegedly a KGB agent. Perhaps the source of Oswald’s infection? We’ll never know for certain, but it makes more sense than the official explanation contained in Oswald’s medical records.

Years in Russia
Much has been written on Oswald’s entry into the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. John Newman’s Oswald and the CIA is a good book to cover that period in detail, as I don’t have the space here to plod through it all. Probably the most important point to examine is the CIA’s false defector program, headed by chief of counter intelligence, James Angleton, which was in operation at this time. Oswald, ever portrayed as a loser, never has any problems financing his trip to the Soviet Union, getting passports and visas in record time, obtains a job a radio plant, acquires a monthly stipend from the Red Cross, marries a Russian woman within a month of meeting her, and has no trouble in getting a loan from the State Department for his return to the USA. All of this, from a man that has proven himself to be as anti-American and unpatriotic as a person could be in this highly charged time. Meanwhile, his wife gets permission to leave with a foreign defector (within ten days—unheard of!), and he gets his new passport in 24 hours and off they go.

When his mother Marguerite asks him why did he return, Oswald replies, “…not even Marina knows why I returned.” Why the big secret? Why can’t you tell your wife, or your family about such a big turnaround of events such as this? Maybe to cover for his operations there?

One item of note is the stamping of Lee and Marina’s passports. Since they are traveling together their passports should confirm identical stamps. Marina says they were never separated during their long train journey to Rotterdam to board the ship. However, there is a discrepancy. When they crossed the East German border to the west, Marina’s passport is stamped at the Helmstedt crossing—Lee’s is not. His passport is not stamped till they get to the Belgium border crossing at Bentheim/Oldenzaal. Could he have been detained for questioning at this point? Other than a bureaucratic screw-up, there is no other explanation other than Oswald being held aside and debriefed. Especially since the FBI and CIA shown so little interest in chatting with him upon his return stateside. Perhaps that is because he was debriefed in west Berlin.

The Agents That Talked
Over the years several CIA agents have come forward with interesting revelations on Lee Oswald and his interaction with the Agency. Many others have given testimony in regards to Oswald to various investigations (Church Committee, HSCA, etc.) and their statements remain classified.

Some have broken the silence. One was Hunter Leake, formerly second in command at the CIA station in New Orleans. He gave an interview 1981 to historian Michael Kurtz, professor at Southeastern Louisiana University. In the interview he candidly stated that he had hired Oswald out as a low-level currier. Leake paid Oswald in cash for his efforts. Leake also said that Oswald moved to New Orleans in April of 1963 on behest of the CIA to work for them there. After the assassination, Leake reports he was ordered by the Agency to deliver all files on Oswald personally to the CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia. And there, in the belly of the Beast, goes the evidence.

Former CIA officer Joan Roman, who worked directly under counter intelligence chief James Angleton, admitted to author Jeff Morley in 1994 that the CIA had an “keen interest” in regards to Oswald that was held in a “need to know basis.” She later regretted making the statement but never recanted it. An October 10, 1963 cable, now declassified shows there was a great interest in Oswald and his activities before the assassination. This information was never given to any of the investigations that have been conducted. So deep was the need to know that the station chief in Mexico City, Winston Scott, was kept in the dark about many of Oswald’s activities. So, a keen interest in Oswald but to what end? For his operational work? Maybe so. James Angleton was known to run operations under the nose of his station chiefs, leaving them in the dark. Jeff Morley, author of Our Man in Mexico, stated in an interview (www.maryferrell.org) that the reason for an interest in Oswald, and the deceptive nature of not telling all to Win Scott, belies an Agency use of Oswald for operations.

Winston Scott keep copies of everything in home safe that were later acquired personally by James Angleton. They stayed in the belly of the Beast till they were destroyed by written order in 1986. This is the destruction of material evidence in a murder investigation. Classic CIA cover-up.

Former CIA accountant James B. Wilcott gave his testimony in a secret session of the HSCA in 1978. It was kept classified for over 20 years till a FOIA request pried it out of the bowels of the Beast. In his testimony, under oath, Wilcott claimed that his role was furnishing money to Case Officers for reimbursement to their assets in the field. After the assassination of Kennedy, he learned from a Case Officer (name by this time forgotten) that Oswald was a recipient of payments. Critics have cited other witness testimony to discredit Wilcott’s claims but he did pass a lie detector test in regards to his statements. As one researcher once said, if he is lying then where is the perjury indictment? Also, why was the testimony taken in secret and held classified for so long, if not important? I believe Wilcott’s testimony is correct and collaborates the interview Hunter Leake gave in 1980. Perhaps Leake was the agent Wilcott was distributing cash to?

Antonio Veciana, head of anti Castro group, Alpha 66 had a meeting in Dallas in 1963 with his CIA handler Maurice Bishop (alias for David Philips). As he was walking up to meet Bishop/Philips he noticed his handler was talking to a young, pale, skinny young man. He took careful note of the young man’s looks as his CIA handler had taught him to do. Antonio Veciana hung around for a while till the conversation was over. Only then did he approach the CIA officer. Veciana conducted his business with Bishop/Philips and then left Dallas, never asking about the young man he had seen. Later, as the news flashed across the world that President Kennedy had been shot and a suspect had been arrested, Veciana instantly recognized the suspect. He was the same young man he had seen talking to his CIA officer in Dallas. Veciana then realized how deep he was in the matrix.

Finally, years later, David Philips would write an outline for a novel with Lee Oswald (named) as one of the main characters. It’s allegedly autobiographical with a CIA agent character as Philips. In the outline he states that Oswald had two handlers and was being groomed for an assassination mission against Castro. The Philips character can’t understand why Oswald shot Kennedy, as if this is an operation gone badly, forever a mystery to even those “in the know.” Of course it may all be very self-serving too—the words of a man with a guilty conscience. A man who spent the last years of his life dodging the question of what really happened on that day in Dealey Plaza in November 22, 1963.

Epilogue
The main argument of the Warren Commission apologists is that no government agency would ever be dumb enough to hire somebody Lee Oswald for espionage work. Well, they were dumb enough to hire out the Mob to kill Castro; weirdoes like David Ferrie; goofs like Frank Sturgess (of Watergate break-in fame). With that understanding, it seems perfectly plausible they would hire somebody like Oswald to do freelance work. I’ve read that the CIA likes to hire fringe types or people with criminal backgrounds so in the advent they are uncovered the CIA can disavow ever dealing with such a person. Oswald was just that type of person, with his two court-marshals, snarky personality, inability to hold down a job, and his arrest record in New Orleans.

All roads lead to Lee H. Oswald. If they didn’t, there wouldn’t be so much covering up, destruction of evidence, files still classified, lying, and obstruction. We only have threads. But over time, collect enough threads and suit shall ye make.


Sources: Google, www.joanmellen.com, www.ourmaninmexico.com, www.history-matters.com, www.maryferrell.org. Books: Our Man in Mexico, Oswald and the CIA, Farewell to Justice, Reclaiming History

assassination

The Grassy Knoll Shooter Missed

As you can see by the diagram above, if there was a shooter on the grassy knoll, he didn’t make the kill shot. His angle would have made an exit wound on the left side of Kennedy’s head. Basically, ear to ear. As has been fully documented, Kennedy’s head wound was lateral, from the back to front, or front to back, depending on your orientation and beliefs. So if there were a second shooter he would have to be positioned at or near the railroad overpass in front of the motorcade. But that causes other problems too. If a shooter or shooters were positioned at the railroad overpass they don’t have a lateral angle either. In fact, a careful study of the angles will show that that the kill shot could only have been accomplished from behind.

I’ve always thought there could have been a shooter from the grassy knoll. Now, I am not so sure. There are the eye witness reports of Secret Service agents shooing people away from the area; there is the Newman family standing on the curb, seen later in photos on the grass covering their children claiming they heard shots over the heads (from the knoll); there is Senator Yarbrough’s comments on smelling gun smoke from the knoll; two of Kennedy’s aids said they heard shots from the knoll; eight men on the railroad overpass said they saw smoke coming from the trees in the knoll; there is the photograph of the motorcycle cop climbing over the short wall there as if he was in pursuit of a suspect; Zapruder claiming he heard shots from his right as he filmed the assassination; there are the photos and films of throngs of people rushing up the stairs to look behind the fence after the shooting.

From all of this, it is easy to conclude that something is going on there. The grassy knoll is deeply ingrained in the lore of the Kennedy assassination. In the end, it may turn out to be a straw man of conspiracy belief that leads many astray. So when I say the shooter there missed, I really mean if he were there to begin with, he would have missed, as he couldn’t have gotten the right angle for Kennedy’s fatal head wound. That applies to you, Mr. Files and your claim of being the grassy knoll shooter.

But even with the missing angle there is still the multiple witness testimony of hearing, seeing, and smelling something taking place on the knoll. Could someone have been there firing blanks as a diversion? I find it hard to believe all of these witnesses are mistaken. As Vince Bugliosi wrote in Reclaiming history, find me 10 witnesses that are all wrong. There are more than 10 witnesses here. That salient image of the Newman’s laying on the curb protecting their children means something. A parent does not do that lightly; there is a sense of fear in their faces from the danger they had just experienced and survived. It’s not fakery.

Of course, you can still have more shooters than just Oswald that have the right angle for the kill shot. There is another good position—the Dallas County Records Building, on Huston street. This location provides a bee-line to the limousine as it passes on Elm Street. Jim Mars in Crossfire, tells of a technician working on an air-conditioning unit atop of this very same building. On the roof he spots a large caliber spent cartridge. It’s weathered and has apparently be lying there for years. It also shows signs of being crimped to allow the use of a sabot, an insert used to allow the use of a smaller caliber bullet. This would allow for a higher velocity and higher impact shot. This piece of evidence was found years after the assassination and of course was never entered into evidence by the FBI. Proof of another shooter?

So here again we have another black hole. Loads of witnesses to an event that doesn’t add up. As with issues like this involving the Kennedy assassination one has to weigh all of the facts and try to draw a conclusion from it. And sometimes it’s just not possible.

Sources: Google; Mars, Crossfire; Buglosi, Reclaiming History

Lee Oswald: The Pamphleteer

Traveling down the rabbit trial again I keep crossing paths with Oswald handing out the Free Play for Cuba pamphlets on Canal Street in New Orleans. There are a lot of things at play here and many other things that remain a mystery to this day. As I trek down this trail I see there is a lot more going on here than just a guy handing out flyers; this story travels far and wide from New Orleans to Montreal.

First of all, Lee H. Oswald is the only member (and president) of the FPFC committee in New Orleans. An organization for the support of Castro and communist Cuba that was established in 1960 and went out of operation soon after the assassination. Even after all of the publicity Oswald gets on local TV showing him handing out the pamphlets, has his altercation with anti Castro Cubans, gets arrested, does his TV interview and radio debate—he’s still the only member. Nobody ever joins. After he later moved to Dallas, he never hooked up with the FPFC committee there.

The pamphlets he is handing out are stamped with “554 Camp Street” address. Warren Commission apologists maintain that Oswald had no rented office at the address. Guy Banister, the conservative, anti communist former FBI agent turned private eye, did maintain an office there. Under the official story, Oswald did not work for Banister, nor did they know each other. Independent researchers maintain they did, based on numerous eyewitness reports, including Banister’s secretary who said she saw Oswald passing through the office on more than one occasion. 

It is all self-defeating. Because if Oswald does not maintain any connections to the Camp street address, then nobody can get in touch with him after he passes out the pamphlets. Isn’t that one of the purposes? Besides spreading the word? And apparently, nobody ever does. 

Even more curious is Oswald’s letter to the FPFC headquarters in New York describing the altercation on Canal Street. The letter is postmarked 5 days before the incident occurs! This doesn’t make any sense, other than assuming the scuffle was a set-up, a covert undertaking, to craft a public image of Oswald as a Marxist. Or, a method to flush out Cubans with communist sympathies. If the scuffle was a prearranged event, then Oswald apparently mailed the letter on the day he thought the operation was to take place and for some reason, it was altered. Perhaps not enough Cubans on Canal Street that day to get into a quarrel with?

A side issue, but one of interest, is the printing of the leaflets themselves. It has been documented that they were printed at the Jones Printing Company of New Orleans. In the National Archives is the crude drawing Oswald did of the leaflet copy. The folks at the print shop recalled doing business with a man identifying himself as “Lee Osborne.” Neither the owner Douglass Jones, nor the secretary Myra Silver, could identify photos of Oswald as being the same man named Lee Osborne that ordered the pamphlets printed. Jones specifically said the man he dealt with had a huskier build, that of a laborer. So who was this guy? Another cog in the operation?

Osborne is a reoccurring surname. Oswald met a man named Osborne on his bus trip to Mexico City in September of 1963. And Osborne was from Montreal. (The significance of Montreal will be discussed below.)

After a while, the story starts to take a different turn. Oswald begins to show up handing out pamphlets in different places. He is spotted handing out leaflets at the port where the USS Wasp was docked. Here Oswald got into a heated debate with a port security official and was asked to leave, since he had no permission to be there. After a bit of arguing he did depart. There are surviving samples of the pamphlets he handed out at the dock and none were stamped with a return address. So once again, nobody is going to be getting in touch with Oswald.

It gets really strange when Oswald turns up again passing out pamphlets in Montreal, Canada! This suppressed story was never presented to the Warren Commission or later to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. It was chased down by researcher Gary Shaw who waged a long FOIA battle with the FBI, which resulted in a stalemate in 1984. Finally, the JFK Records act of 1993 forced the FBI to open their files and release photos and other documents about a possible Oswald trip to Montreal. 

What we now know about this account of Oswald in Canada comes from a reputable source—Jean Paul Tremblay, a U.S. Customs and Excise agent doing casework on Cuba in Montreal in the summer of 1963. In his documented report, he states that in August of 1963, he learned there was a fellow handing out leaflets for Cuba on St. Jacques and McGill Streets and walked up to the young man and got one, making note of his looks. He would later positively identify the man as Lee Oswald. He also took note that Oswald was not alone but accompanied by three individuals; two men and a woman. Two of three people, a blonde, freckle faced man and a short, heavyset woman, agent Tremblay would later identify from a photograph of participants in the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo Walk for Peace, which had occurred in June of 1963. Both of these individuals would later be identified as Fred Moore and Erika Enzer. It is unknown if there were follow up interviews with these people. If so, we would have two more witnesses to Oswald being in Montreal.

Under the government-approved narrative, Oswald can’t be in Canada. He’s dirt poor, his wife does not acknowledge any trips during this period and if he does travel there, where does he get the money? How does he go via bus, train, or plane? However, as John Newman points out in his book Oswald and the CIA, the FBI acknowledges Oswald's whereabouts from April to June in 1963.  Oswald is supposed to be working at the William Reily Coffee Company during this time, being terminated for theft, on July 19.

More importantly, Tremblay’s report made it to the upper channels of the government. In one released document, an Airgram that was sent to the Department of State by the United States Consul General in Canada. Two sources are listed. Agent Tremblay, and an unnamed police officer quoted as a source in a Montreal Star newspaper article dated from November 27. At first they discount the affair, but then add: "However, there may be something to the story."

We may never know what led them to this conclusion and what they followed up on.

I respect Jean Paul Tremblay’s account of what happened. He’s no Johnny off the street, someone with years of changing statements for the Bugliosi’s of the world to chew up and spit out. In fact, he is virtually unknown in assassination investigation chronicles. Tremblay was a trained investigator, a professional in the examination of people and situations. His account stands. Too bad we don’t have his copy of the FPFC flyer he retrieved. It may exist in some file somewhere in the bowels of the beast.

Once again we have a story with evidence of a cover-up (FBI withholding documents and fighting to keep them withheld) and circumstantial evidence of Lee Oswald on covert operations. This is an event known to the FBI and kept from the public and all investigative agencies of the government for over 20 years. Once again, if there is nothing to it then why not release this information?

If we just had a photograph of him on the streets of Montreal as we do on the streets of New Orleans.

Sources: http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/; Google; Newman, Oswald and the CIA, Bugliosi, Reclaiming History; www.history-matters.com