Mexico City CIA Station: ‘STATION WOULD APPRECIATE EFFORT TO DELETE PHOTO FROM PUBLICATION.’

“STATION WOULD APPRECIATE EFFORT TO DELETE PHOTO FROM PUBLICATION.”

— Mexico City CIA Station, Sept. 25, 1964, asking that CIA HQ attempt to convince the Warren Commission not to publish the photograph of the Mexico City “mystery man.”

While CIA personnel were ostensibly concerned with revelation of the “sources and methods” of their photographic surveillance of the Cuban Embassy, there appears to be more to it. The cable continued:

1. REFS OBVIOUSLY CROSSED. IN STATION VIEW DANGERS PARA 3, LARGELY RECOGNIZED IN REF A, STILL APPLY.

2. ONLY REMAINING HOPE WOULD APPEAR BE TO GET ASCHAM PREVAIL ON COMMISSION NOT ONLY RETOUCH BACKGROUND IN PHOTOS BUT ALSO RETOUCH FACE TO DEGREE OBVIOUSLY NOT IDENTIFIABLE WITH RUBY BUT ALSO NOT WITH ACTUAL SUBJECT OF PHOTO.

“ASCHAM” appears to be Warren Commissioner and former CIA Director Allen Dulles. Why would Mr. Dulles need to be prevailed upon to not only have the background retouched, but also the face of a supposedly unknown individual?

See the cable and also this 11/22/63 note from Station Chief Win Scott to CIA Western Hemisphere Division Chief J.C. King. In it, Scott refers to the man in the photograph as “as certain person who is known to you.”

For more information see this essay with further discussion.

11 comments

  1. LMB says:

    While mentioning mystery man, does anyone have any information concerning former Watergate burglar Virgilio Gonzalez ? His name has been mentioned as someone with firsthand knowledge of JFK assassination. As recently as June, 2012 The History web site stated the following:
    Virgilio Gonzalez
    A Cuban refugee, Gonzalez was one of the five burglars arrested at the Watergate complex on June 15, 1972. He spent 13 months in prison. Now 86, he works as a mechanic in Miami. (Credit: Acey Harper/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images)

  2. Jonathan says:

    I don’t believe the man Jack Ruby killed went to Mexico City. There are scant, questionable facts supporting the alleged trip. The fact “Oswald” was being impersonated, apparently, in Mexico City is significant, because it points clearly toward his being an intelligence asset. But I draw no sinister conclusions from the fact he was being, or may have been, impersonated.

    • I think the odds are Oswald did go to Mexico City if for no other reason than David Atlee Philips says he did not, which I think is a likely lie and diversionary tactic.

    • alex says:

      re: jonathan. If Oswald was an intelligence asset, and an impersonation in mexico city would have great significance, then why would you say nothing sinister can be drawn from someone impersonating him in mexico. It is contradictory. If he was an asset, him being impersonated in mexico is paramount to him being a patsy. so my case and point if you believe he was an asset at one time or another if he was impersonated the only ones that would know when and where to impersonate him would be the intelligence agency he was working for or being monitored by.

      • Jonathan says:

        Alex,

        Not all intelligence activity is sinister, even if it involves wiretaps, impersonations, planting of false stories, and so on.

        FWIW, I believe Oswald when he says he’s just a patsy.

        Whatever was going on down in Mexico City involving Oswald or an Oswald impersonator could have been part of a non-sinister intelligence operation. I’m not saying it was; I don’t know. I’m just saying it could have been.

        It’s a mistake, IMO, to leap from the conclusion that Oswald was a CIA or FBI asset to the conclusion that either or both of those agencies [a] set up Oswald as a Patsy, and [b] plotted to kill JFK. The one conclusion does not necessarily lead to the other.

        All that is just logic. If in fact Oswald was a CIA or FBI asset, then I say, let’s have all the facts of such — to satisfy the public and end speculation.

  3. Alan Dale says:

    I am (currently) convinced that the “Mexico City Mystery Man” has been identified as most probably a Soviet KGB Agent named Yuri Ivanovich Moskalev (with no documented relation to either Lee Harvey Oswald or the taped and transcribed calls to the Cuban consulate and the Soviet Embassy attributed to someone identifying himself as Lee Harvey Oswald). As far back as April of 1977 an internal CIA document (http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=5724) raised this possibility. Moskalev functioned as a Soviet scientist and attended international conferences in that capacity.

    Bill Simpich will soon publish an eBook titled “State Secret” which will include important information regarding how and why these now famous images became associated with the alleged assassin, LHO.

  4. Jonathan says:

    The alleged Mexico City trip must be considered alongside the Sylvia Odio incident of the same time, when a “Leon Oswald,” subsequently identified by Sylvia Odio as the man Jack Ruby shot, came to visit Sylvia and her sister Annie (with two other men, in late September or early October 1963).

    Sylvia Odio was deemed highly credible by one of the W.C. staff attorneys — although the W.C. rejected her story insofar as it pertained to “Oswald.” Annie’s story had to be rejected too, because she nailed “Leon” as “Oswald” and had no dog in the fight.

    My take, FWIW: Here we see sloppiness on the part of the plotters. An honest investigation would have determined there were conflicting stories of Oswald’s whereabouts. Conflicting stories point toward set-up.

  5. Jonathan says:

    I was an army counter-intelligence officer.

    My take on Oswald is that [a] he was being handled, and [b] he always had a cover story.

    The cover story is key. It’s why you are doing what you’re doing.

    It cannot be penetrated.

    Take Oswald in Dallas. Hosty was harassing Marina. Oswald had to confront Hosty. Total cover story. You have to understand intelligence operations.

  6. Not all the photos of the so-called “mystery man” are of Moskalev [of which there are about 21 photos]. Indeed, there is a connection between some of the “mystery man” photos and Oswald; and to write that Oswald’s Mexico City trip did not take place or is “alleged” is sheer nonsense. Win Scott, were he alive today, would probably wish it had not occurred since he was so easily duped by what was really going on under his nose.

  7. Michael McDonald says:

    Re: ASCHAM, CURTIS and [01] “withheld” in memo #104-10310-10001
    Perhaps this is already known, but I am able to confirm with high confidence the identity of the high Mexican official in the memo #104-10310-10001 at RIF. It is the President of Mexico at that time (1961), Adolfo Lopez Mateos. “Withheld” refers to the time when he was at “labor,” Lopez Mateos was Secretary of Labor under the previous President Ruiz Cortines starting in 1952.

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