Our Man in Mexico: ‘Really great’

Rob writes: “I just finished Our Man in Mexico and wanted to tell you it was really great.”

Our Man in Mexico“Excellent on Win Scott’s FBI to OSS to CIA history; excellent on the Kennedy assassination issues; and just a really enjoyable bio. You have some of the most succinct and informative expositions of the various facets of the story that I have come across. So, kudos!”

Rob is right, and that’s not my bias speaking. Here’s what the Wall Street Journal said about Our Man in Mexico.

You can order the book in hardcover or paperback here.

15 thoughts on “Our Man in Mexico: ‘Really great’”

  1. Michael McDonald

    Hello Jefferson,

    Read your very interesting bio of Winston Scott a couple of years ago. While cogitating on Angleton’s actions following Scott’s death (as well as Mary Meyers and certain others), thought of Scott’s book manuscript
    and its title, something like IT ALL CAME TO NOTHING. I wonder what are your thoughts on the supposed title,
    What “it all” is, and how/why it came to “nothing”?

    Thanks, Mike

    1. At the end of his life, Win Scott had regrets that he had devoted so much time to espionage. He felt the Cold War was a stalemate and all much of what he hoped the CIA would accomplish–defeat the Soviet Union–had not come to pass. He wished he spent more time with his wife and five children and his friends. He was, as they say, “a burnout case.”

  2. “For the first time I learned that the FBI was in possession of diary-like material which Oswald had had in his possession and was found after the assassination. I learned for the first time that Oswald was the man who had taken a pot shot at General Edwin Walker, two key facts in the entire case.”

    Morley, Jefferson. Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA Kindle Edition.

    This is the first time I have heard of Oswald keeping a diary.

    Fascinating. This is what Win Scott wrote in his unpublished manuscript.

    Can you elaborate on this diary of LHO Mr. Morley.

    I recently read Our Man In Mexico.

    I also began to wonder about the authenticity of the Scott manuscript after it was taken after his death by Angleton.

    Why would that manuscript have been saved and be retained by the Government when so much else was destroyed including Angleton’s Assassination files.

    1. Oswald’s “historic diary” was found in his home after the assassination. The interesting thing about it is that it purports to cover many months of his life but was written in a single setting.
      Rest assured, the copy we have of Win Scott’s manuscript is authentic. There were multiple carbons copies and Scott’s family recognized the typewriter and the story. The best argument for its authenticity is its contents in which Scott explains how the CIA fed a lie to the Warren Commission and his own rejection of the Warren Commission’s conclusions.

      1. $$$peaking of OUR MAN IN MEXICO, there is a Spanish language edition being offered by Half Price Books.

        Nuestro hombre en Mexico / Our Man in Mexico
        Nuestro Hombre En Mexico / Our Man In Mexico: Winston Scott Y La Historia Oculta De La Cia / Winston Scott And The Hidden History Of The Cia
        by Morley, Jefferson/ Scott, Michael (FRW)/ Videgaray, David Francisco Toscana (TRN) (2011)
        Available Book Formats: Paperback (1)
        SEE DETAILSSee all from $366.94

  3. Epstein is confused about Win Scott’s manuscript. It is withheld in part, not missing.

    The tape in Scott’s possession with supposedly Oswald’s voice on it – now that’s missing.

    1. Dismissing Epstein’s unexpected role in the deMohrenschildt saga fails to consider a number of intriguing details that brought about his scheduled series of interviews of the alleged handler of Lee Oswald.

      deMohrenschildt’s friend in Dallas since the mid-fifties, Sam Ballen accommodated either Reader’s Digest directly or Epstein personally to arrange the series of interviews in Palm Beach, FL on the eve of deM’s subpoena to appear before the HSCA. Ballen had been in communication with his friend deMohrenschildt in the months prior, planning for his visit to Santa Fe, NM that year.

      According to Ballen’s private memoir – written for his family and not widely distributed – he got a phone call the afternoon of deM’s “death” while he was in Austin, TX appearing before the Texas Railroad Commission, the agency that determined US Federal Government oil policies.

      Can anyone else envision the film scene with a Ballen character winking to members of the TRC board, “it’s taken care of?”

      1. Ballen (by pure happenstance and in spite of numerous theories) was the conduit for the introduction of Ruth Paine to Lee and Marina Oswald. Contrary to various versions, if one studies WC testimony you read that Sam Ballen met Everett Glover, employee of Magnolia Labs Dallas, at a gathering at (Texas Instruments connected) Lauriston Mashall’s home in early 1963. By chance Glover had met both Jeanne and George deMohrenshicldt while ice skating (a sport we recall from David Ferrie testimony) in the late ’50’s, but according to testimony they had ‘lost touch’. Miraculously, Sam Ballen reintroduced Everett Glover to the deMohrenchildt]s and the foursome took up doubles tennis throughout the winder of ’62-63. In the early months of ’63, Glover hosted a dinner gathering, and he (purely by chance) phoned his friend Ruth Paine to attend the dinner; at that gathering Glover introduced the Oswald’s to Ruth Paine. The deMohrenschildt’s arrived late and may or may not have met Ruth Paine. That’s how it rolled out, according to WC testimony.

        There is Sam Ballen, standing in the side lines, having established his financial reputation post WWI with Lehman Brothers; Robert Lehman sitting on the board of the Dulles’ United Fruit (Sullivan Cromwell), the Rockefeller’s American Express, and Ret. General Lucian Clay who held a significant role in those enterprises.

        Ballen by chance landed a financial coup when he purchased a division of Schlumberber located in the Texas Panhande; French based company Schlumberger is named in the Houma weapons raid related to …

    2. Mr. Simpich, I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for your outstanding work on the Mexico City question in State Secret.

      You have done truly astounding work to draw so many plausible and logical inferences from such a patchy and obfuscated collection of records.

      Well done sir, and thank you, thank you, thank you, so very much.

  4. Clarence Carlson


    This is a very well written book. Having accurate information regarding the events that transpired in Mexico both before and after the assassination is essential in arriving at any understanding of the big picture. This is deep backround. Recommended.

  5. I suppose the next big book of this sort should be titled “How the OSS/CIA helped Hitler escape to Argentina and live there Happily ever after.”

    Just sayin’…..

  6. Dr. Donnie Briley

    I just sent the below message to your email address last night. I am now posting it here.
    I have been studying the JFK assassination for 20 years. I bought your book about 3 months ago and I have read it 4 times.
    This book consolidates my beliefs that LHO was the lone assassin but did not act alone.
    Your book is factual, without subterfuge, without hyperbole, and empirical with it’s message to the reader. I find it simply fantastic!
    It is the book I have been waiting for that promotes the theories of Jay Epstein, Lopez Report, project AMLASH, etc.
    With that said… Can you please tell me what your opinion is on Oswald in Mexico. Most writers give you a summary of their opinion. You did not.
    Maybe you just want to leave this to the reader, but come on… Give a Doctor of Computer Science a bone!

    Here is my theories based on your book (Our Man in Mexico)
    1. Oswald was really in Mexico and met Sylvia and slept with her and she helped him that Sat. night (but why did he speak broken Russian)
    2. Oswald was really in Mexico and met Sylvia and slept with her, but two imposters made that call on Sat. night. (Jim Angleton was running someone as an Oswald imposter!)
    3. I have 6 other theories I could talk about here but I want your opinion on what you believe after writing this amazing book! I think you owe that to us!

    Before I read your book my opinion was that Oswald was a sleeper agent hired by the Russians to assassinate JFK. He knew Kostin, the photos sent from the Mexico station were not him!
    Why! Because the CYA! Cover your Ass. What would be worse? Proving that the real LHO was at the Cuban and Russian Embassies and meeting with Kostikov thus provoking a world war 3.
    Or, defusing this situation by letting everyone think that the conspiracy was homegrown? The choices are WWIII or a conspiracy that can never be proven.

    After I read your book I feel that my above theory is being reinforced.
    Again, please tell me the summary of what your book is telling me…. (I don’t want to misinterpret such a brilliant book and then look like an idiot)

    Dr. Donnie Briley

  7. Richard McColman

    Jeff — I find it interesting that you cite Edward Jay Epstein’s review of Our Man in Mexico as a positive review of your book. As I read Epstein’s piece, the review came across as less than positive, particularly towards the end where he discusses the proposition that Oswald was part of a CIA op that the CIA was attempting to cover up, and he appears to throw cold water on your support of that proposition in your book.

    There is some suspicion I’ve read among members of the JFK assassination research community that Epstein has too readily bought into the “cover story” propagated by the CIA that Oswald was a Soviet/Cuban agent who was trying to kill JFK for the communists. Allegations against Epstein, rightly or wrongly, go so far as to suggest that he may be / have been a U.S. intelligence disinformation agent. (I have no particular info on this myself, mind you, though I find it not at all beyond the realm of possibility, given Carl Bernstein’s 1977 investigative piece in Rolling Stone detailing how so many members of the U.S. media had been employed and co-opted by the CIA. Of course, by itself that doesn’t point the figure at Epstein. I merely offer a word of caution.

  8. I’d never read Epstein’s review or your book Mr. Morley. It’s quite good. Coming from him it surprised me. While I have and have read Inquest I’ve also read Mr. Epstein had a change of heart regarding conspiracy after writing the book. Thus my surprise at the favorable review. Glad he appreciates it as much as I do.
    However, he never mentioned Michael, or, Angleton’s name in the recovery of Scott’s files from his safe in Mexico City.

Leave a Comment

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

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

Scroll to Top