‘there are numerous indications that Oswald was being used in counter-intelligence operations.

In response to the post about the last of the JFK files that the CIA wants to hide, Anthony writes a cogent interpretation of the evidence developed in Morley v. CIA,as well as Bill Simpich’s State Secret and John Newman’s Oswald and the CIA

“The intensity of the efforts to block the release of the Joannides files is itself highly suggestive.

“If you look at Oswald’s activities in the 1962-3 time period there are numerous indications that he was being used in a number of counter-intelligence operations. These indications include:

  • the nature of the work undertaken at Jaggar’s-Childs-Stovall,
  • the Camp St address on the New Orleans leaflets
  • and the interesting reaction of the CI/SIG team to the ‘Oswald’ phone calls in Mexico City.

“The planting of ‘marked cards’ in the form of two different incorrect descriptions of Oswald in memos going to different organisation suggests CI/SIG officials were concerned that the impersonation of Oswald in Mexico might indicate a mole with access to information about him, with the false information planted in different documents to see where that information next appeared, I presume. It is interesting that one of these marked cards (5’ 10 inches and 165lbs) turned up in Dealey Plaza.

“If the above is broadly accurate Oswald’s movements in 1963 would not have been his own decisions but the result of instructions. It seems likely that the New Orleans operation involved the DRE and therefore Joannides who was their case officer, which is probably why this is so sensitive (together with explaining why he was used to help manage the HSCA).

Interestingly it may be worth considering who might have had to authorise Oswald’s movements across Dallas, New Orleans and Mexico City. That strikes me as needing someone further up that Joannides but probably on the CI side of things?

 

7 comments

  1. russ tarby says:

    who was authorizing Oswald’s movements in 1963?
    my money’s on David Atlee Phillips.

  2. Kennedy63 says:

    Seems there is a body of evidence that purports Oswald as the “unlikely assassin.” I’ve come across literature that states Jack Ruby was legally innocent, because his first conviction was set aside. Ruby was given clearance for a new trial in a new venue. Innocent until proven guilty. Really? One need only look at film footage clearly showing Ruby shot Oswald, causing his death. One can not, by any legal means, assert Oswald’s guilt, or even presume he assassinated President Kennedy. The DPD, and the Warren Commission, knew they could not prove Oswald killed President Kennedy. Hoover admitted as much. DPD Chief Curry admitted as much in his tome on the JFK assassination. Nixon offered that the Warren Commission was the greatest hoax ever foisted on the [global]public. Nixon knew of Operation 40, the elite group of ultra-right wing fascist assassins assembled under the National Security apparatus, to kill Fidel Castro, or any other “troublesome” world leader.

  3. Ger Ven says:

    . . . there are numerous indications that he (Oswald) was being used in a number of counter-intelligence operations.

    ” one headquarters officer told the HSCA that when the name Oswald came on the radio after the assassination ‘the effect was electric.'”

    https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/The_CIA_and_the_JFK_Assassination.html

  4. Peter says:

    I have two genuine questions regarding Oswald’s contacts with Dre in New Orleans.

    1. If Oswald’s confrontation with Carlos Bringuier and other members of Dre on August 9 was a staged event, why was Oswald first seen handing out leaflets in another location at 1.15pm when the incident didn’t occur until after 4pm with their arrest taking place at 4.15pm. Why was Oswald wasting his time handing out leaflets earlier in the day.

    2. Within days of JFK’s assassination, Carlos Bringuier was telling the press he first thought Oswald was a United States intelligence agent. If this was a CIA backed operation, why muddy the waters by saying that. Especially taking into consideration Oswald’s mother was saying she believed Oswald had worked for the CIA.

    • Bogman says:

      I don’t think anyone thinks Bringuier was in on the staging. It does appear that LHO was very good at playing the role of provocateur, getting the street fracas he predicted in a letter to the FPCC a couple weeks BEFORE the event.

      • Max says:

        I think Bringuier WAS involved in the staging. Testimony of Orest Pena seems to indicate HE thought Bringuier was somehow involved (enemy of the US), along with FBI agent Warren De Brueys. During the Oswald-Bringuier WDSU radio debate (also staged, arranged by CIA informant Bill Stuckey)Bringuier asks Oswald: “Do you agree with Fidel Castro when in his last speech of July 26th of this year he qualified President John F. Kennedy of the United States as a ruffian and a thief? Do you agree with Mr. Castro?”

  5. Peter says:

    The description used by Charlotte Bustos in Dir-74830 on October 10 1963 of Oswald being 5’10” and 165lbs originally came from a description given by Marguerite Oswald to the FBI in April 1960.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.