Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #925 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 1

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash drive that can be obtained HERE. The new drive is a 32-gigabyte drive that is current as of the programs and articles posted by early winter of 2016. The new drive (available for a tax-deductible contribution of $65.00 or more.) (The previous flash drive was current through the end of May of 2012.)

WFMU-FM is podcasting For The Record–You can subscribe to the podcast HERE.

You can subscribe to e-mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can subscribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can subscribe to the comments made on programs and posts–an excellent source of information in, and of, itself HERE.

This broadcast was recorded in one, 60-minute segment.

Lee Harvey Oswald: Ersatz Communist

Lee Harvey Oswald: Ersatz Communist

Stephan Bandera, head of the OUN/B

Stephan Bandera, head of the OUN/B

Introduction: The first of a two-part series reviewing information about what the brilliant Berkeley researcher Peter Dale Scott calls “level one coverup” of the JFK assassination, this broadcast presents part of the “painting of Oswald Red,” by way of giving us historical perspective on the apparent framing of
Russia for the hack of the DNC and the “non-hack” of NSA cyberweapons by the “Shadow Brokers.”

On November 22, 1963, President Kennedy’s assassination fundamentally altered the American political landscape, neutralizing JFK’s peace initiatives in Europe, Southeast Asia and Cuba. Furthermore, LBJ was manipulated into pursuing the open-ended Vietnam commitment JFK had studiously avoided.

In past discussion of “Eddie the Friendly Spook,” we have characterized him as “the Obverse Oswald.” With their exercise of “Technocratic Fascism,” “Team Snowden” is destroying American democracy as definitively and effectively as the bullets in Dealy Plaza did on 11/22/1963.

Supplementing and summing up the exhaustive FTR series on “The Eddie the Friendly Spook” series, this program sets forth the Snowden “psy-op” and the high-profile hacks against the background of Lee Harvey Oswald, the U.S. spy infiltrated into the Soviet Union and then into leftist organizations in the United States, Oswald was framed for JFK’s assassination and then killed before he could defend himself.

Whereas Oswald was portrayed as a villain, Eddie the Friendly Spook’s operation is the obverse, with Snowden portrayed as a hero, while decamping first to China and then to Russia.

We begin by reviewing and synopsizing information indicating that Russia has been framed for the “Shadow Brokers” alleged hack of the NSA, much as it appears to have been framed for the DNC hack. Indeed, with both the DNC hack and the “Shadow Brokers” non-hack of the NSA, the evidence points increasingly toward “Team Snowden” and Eddie the Friendly Spook himself.

Points of information reviewed include:

  • Evidence suggesting that Russia was NOT behind the DNC hacks. ” . . . . None of the technical evidence is convincing. It would only be convincing if the attackers used entirely novel, unique, and sophisticated tools with unmistakable indicators pointing to Russia supported by human intelligence, not by malware analysis.The DNC attackers also had very poor, almost comical, operational security (OPSEC). State actors tend to have a quality assurance review when developing cyberattack tools to minimize the risk of discovery and leaving obvious crumbs behind. Russian intelligence services are especially good. They are highly capable, tactically and strategically agile, and rational. They ensure that offensive tools are tailored and proportionate to the signal they want to send, the possibility of disclosure and public perception, and the odds of escalation. The shoddy OPSEC just doesn’t fit what we know about Russian intelligence. . . . Given these arguments, blaming Russia is not a slam dunk. Why would a country with some of the best intelligence services in the world commit a whole series of really stupid mistakes in a highly sensitive operation? Why pick a target that has a strong chance of leading to escalatory activity when Russia is known to prefer incremental actions over drastic ones? Why go through the trouble of a false flag when doing nothing would have been arguably better?. . . .”
  • Information indicating that the NSA “hack” may well not have been a hack at all, but the work of an insider downloading the information onto a USB drive. “. . . Their claim to have ‘hacked’ a server belonging to the NSA is fishy. According to ex-NSA insiders who spoke with Business Insider, the agency’s hackers don’t just put their exploits and toolkits online where they can potentially be pilfered. The more likely scenario for where the data came from, says ex-NSA research scientist Dave Aitel, is an insider who downloaded it onto a USB stick. . . . When hackers gain access to a server, they keep quiet about it so they can stay there. . . .One of the many strange things about this incident is the very public nature of what transpired. When a hacker takes over your computer, they don’t start activating your webcam or running weird programs because you’d figure out pretty quickly that something was up and you’d try to get rid of them. . . . . . . If the Shadow Brokers owned the NSA’s command and control server, then it would probably be a much better approach to just sit back, watch, and try to pivot to other interesting things that they might be able to find. . . People sell exploits all the time, but they hardly ever talk about it. . . . Most of the time, an exploit is either found by a security research firm, which then writes about it and reports it to the company so it can fix the problem. Or, a hacker looking for cash will take that found exploit and sell it on the black market. So it would make sense for a group like Shadow Brokers to want to sell their treasure trove, but going public with it is beyond strange. . . .”
  • Eddie the Friendly Spook endorsed the cover story of the Shadow Brokers’ NSA “hack”–that the event was a hack (despite indicators to the contrary) and that Russia did it.  . . . If you ask ex-NSA contractor Edward Snowden, the public leak and claims of the Shadow Brokers seem to have Russian fingerprints all over them, and it serves as a warning from Moscow to Washington. The message: If your policymakers keep blaming us for the DNC hack, then we can use this hack to implicate you in much more.‘That could have significant foreign policy consequences,’ Snowden wrote on Twitter. ‘Particularly if any of those operations targeted US allies. Particularly if any of those operations targeted elections. . . .” 
  • The code in the files was from 2013, when Snowden undertook his “op.”  “. . . . The code released by the Shadow Brokers dates most recently to 2013, the same year Edward Snowden leaked classified information about the NSA’s surveillance programs.. . . Snowden also noted that the released files end in 2013. ‘When I came forward, NSA would have migrated offensive operations to new servers as a precaution,’ he suggested — a move that would have cut off the hackers’ access to the server. . . . “
  • Author James Bamford highlighted circumstantial evidence that WikiLeaker Jacob Applebaum–who appears to have facilitated Snowden’s journey from Hawaii to Hong Kong–may have been behind the Shadow Brokers non-hack. “. . . . There also seems to be a link between Assange and the leaker who stole the ANT catalog, and the possible hacking tools. Among Assange’s close associates is Jacob Appelbaum, a celebrated hacktivist and the only publicly known WikiLeaks staffer in the United States – until he moved to Berlin in 2013 in what he called a “political exile” because of what he said was repeated harassment by U.S. law enforcement personnel. In 2010, a Rolling Stone magazine profile labeled him “the most dangerous man in cyberspace.”In December 2013, Appelbaum was the first person to reveal the existence of the ANT catalog, at a conference in Berlin, without identifying the source. That same month he said he suspected the U.S. government of breaking into his Berlin apartment. He also co-wrote an article about the catalog in Der Spiegel. But again, he never named a source, which led many to assume, mistakenly, that it was Snowden. . . .”
  • Applebaum was anti-Clinton, sentiments expressed in the clumsy Boris and Natasha-like broken English that accompanied announcement of the Shadow Brokers’ gambit. . . . . Shortly thereafter, he [Applebaum] turned his attention to Hillary Clinton. At a screening of a documentary about Assange in Cannes, France, Appelbaum accused her of having a grudge against him and Assange, and that if she were elected president, she would make their lives difficult. ‘It’s a situation that will possibly get worse’ if she is elected to the White House, he said, according to Yahoo News. . . .. . . . In hacktivist style, and in what appears to be phony broken English, this new release of cyberweapons also seems to be targeting Clinton. It ends with a long and angry ‘final message” against ‘Wealthy Elites . . . breaking laws’ but ‘Elites top friends announce, no law broken, no crime commit[ed]. . . Then Elites run for president. Why run for president when already control country like dictatorship?’ . . .” 
  • The e-mail account used by the Shadow Brokers is in Germany and is resistant to attempts at disclosing users’ information. Applebaum, Laura Poitras, Sarah Harrison and Peter Sunde are in Germany.  “. . . He said Tutanota had only ever been forced to hand over encrypted data of its users a few times and it has a transparency report where it discloses those cases. ‘However, we release data only in very, very few cases … And when we have to provide the data due to a court order, it is still encrypted,’ Pfau added, going on to explain the company’s stance on surveillance. . . .”
  • Recall that, in FTR #’s 891 and 895, we noted that Snowden was working for the CIA in the summer of 2009 when he decided to infiltrate NSA and leak its information. NSA “non-hack” suspect Applebaum and much of the so-called “privacy” advocates have received funding from CIA-derived organizations such as the Broadcasting Board of Governors, Radio Free Asia and the Open Technology Fund. What role is the CIA playing in this? “. . . Jacob Appelbaum’s will­ing­ness to work directly for an old CIA cutout like Radio Free Asia in a nation long tar­geted for regime-change is cer­tainly odd, to say the least. Par­tic­u­larly since Appel­baum made a big pub­lic show recently claim­ing that, though it pains him that Tor takes so much money from the US mil­i­tary, he would never take money from some­thing as evil as the CIA. . . .. . . Appelbaum’s finan­cial rela­tion­ships with var­i­ous CIA spin­offs like Radio Free Asia and the BBG go fur­ther. From 2012 through 2013, Radio Free Asia trans­ferred about $1.1 mil­lion to Tor in the form of grants and con­tracts. This mil­lion dol­lars comes on top of another $3.4 mil­lion Tor received from Radio Free Asia’s par­ent agency, the BBG, start­ing from 2007. . . . . . . . Though many of the apps and tech backed by Radio Free Asia’s OTF are unknown to the gen­eral pub­lic, they are highly respected and extremely pop­u­lar among the anti-surveillance Inter­net activist crowd. OTF-funded apps have been rec­om­mended by Edward Snow­den, cov­ered favor­ably by ProP­ub­lica and The New York Times’ tech­nol­ogy reporters, and repeat­edly pro­moted by the Elec­tronic Fron­tier Foun­da­tion. Every­one seems to agree that OTF-funded pri­vacy apps offer some of the best pro­tec­tion from gov­ern­ment sur­veil­lance you can getIn fact, just about all the fea­tured open-source apps on EFF’s recent “Secure Mes­sag­ing Score­card” were funded by OTF. . . .. . . . You’d think that anti-surveillance activists like Chris Soghoian, Jacob Appel­baum, Cory Doc­torow and Jil­lian York would be staunchly against out­fits like BBG and Radio Free Asia, and the role they have played — and con­tinue to play — in work­ing with defense and cor­po­rate inter­ests to project and impose U.S. power abroad. Instead, these rad­i­cal activists have know­ingly joined the club, and in doing so, have become will­ing pitch­men for a wing of the very same U.S. National Secu­rity State they so adamantly oppose. . . .”
Thomas J. Dodd

Thomas J. Dodd

After synopsizing the apparent framing of Russia for the DNC hack and the Shadow-Brokers’ non-hack of NSA, the broadcast recaps two key episodes in the painting of “Oswald Red.”

One of the results of the Snowden “op” was the death of the Obama/Clinton State Department’s attempted re-boot with Russia. In this regard, the actions of the Obverse Oswald are similar to the way that the painting of Oswald Red served to exacerbate Cold War tensions.

The killing of the attempted diplomatic rapprochement with Russia was, in turn, central to the realization of the destabilization of the Yanukovich government in Ukraine and the installation of the heirs to Stephan Bandera’s OUN/B in the Maidan coup.

(Recall that the Maidan coup was financed, in part, by Pierre Omidyar, whose First Look Media were not only recipients of Snowden’s purloined files, but served as the journalistic platform for Glenn Greenwald, Snowden’s leaking journalist of choice.)

This program details the assassination of OUN/B leader Stephan Bandera–a key part of the painting of Oswald Red.

Blamed on the KGB, the killing was–in all likelihood–performed by BND (German foreign intelligence and the successor to the Reinhard Gehlen “org”) or other Underground Reich-connected elements, possibly elements of CIA.

The broad­cast cen­ters on dis­in­for­ma­tion point­ing to Lee Har­vey Oswald as a KGB-trained assassin. (The disinformation was spread by the World Anti-Communist Congress for Freedom and Liberation–the forerunner of the World Anti-Communist League.)

Attempt­ing to pin the assas­si­na­tion on the Sovi­ets and/or Cubans, these ele­ments spurred many lib­er­als to endorse the “Oswald as lone-nut” hypoth­e­sis. They were afraid that the assas­si­na­tion could lead to nuclear war, if the per­cep­tion gained traction that Oswald was a com­mu­nist. A cen­tral ele­ment in this dis­in­for­ma­tion ploy was an attempt to con­nect the JFK assas­si­na­tion to the death of Stephan Ban­dera, allegedly per­formed by an KGB assas­sin named Bog­dan Stashyn­sky.

Murdered on the same day that Lee Harvey Oswald “defected” to the Soviet Union, Bandera’s killing was linked to Oswald’s alleged killing of JFK by elements associated with the W.A.C.C.F.L.

W.A.C.C.F.L. ele­ments dis­sem­i­nated the lie that Oswald was trained at the same facil­ity as Stashyn­sky, and that the JFK hit was part of a Soviet pro­gram of assas­si­na­tion of West­ern polit­i­cal lead­ers. It should be noted that W.A.C.C.F.L.-related ele­ments also fig­ured promi­nently in the “han­dling” of Oswald in New Orleans, Dal­las and (pos­si­bly) the Soviet Union.

Those W.A.C.C.F.L. elements were closely associated with the OUN/B and the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, a consortium of Eastern European fascist groups inextricably linked with the Gehlen organization, the BND, the CIA and the Underground Reich.

The disinformation that Oswald was a KGB assassin was inserted into a Senate Subcommittee report by Sen. Thomas Dodd, with assistance from elements of CIA.

Carlos Bringuier (left) and Ed Butler.

Carlos Bringuier (left) and Ed Butler.

Another episode in the painting of Oswald Red concerns an interview set up on WDSU in New Orleans. Arranged by Ed Butler, whose Information Council of the Americas served as a front for elements of the U.S. intelligence committee, the interview featured Oswald proclaiming his Marxist, pro-Castro sympathies, as well as discussing his so-called “defection” to Russia. One of the participants in the interview was Carlos Bringuier, an anti-Castro Cuban and key member of the DRE, one of the anti-Castro Cuban groups managed by the CIA.

George Joannides, who served as something of a case officer for the DRE, was the liaison between the House Select Committee on Assassinations and the CIA. Joannides was also reported by the BBC to have been present at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on the night Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated.

The myth of “Lee Harvey Oswald the Communist” was successfully displayed and stemming from that fiction led many liberals to opt for the “Oswald the lone nut” scenario because they feared a Third World War might result from the public perception that a “commie” had killed the President. The second  program features a re-broadcast of the interview that Oswald gave on WDSU in New Orleans in August of 1963. In this interview, Oswald expresses sympathy for Castro’s Cuba and discusses his sojourn in the Soviet Union.

To all outward appearances, Oswald looked like a communist sympathizer in the interview. Oswald was the sole member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee’s New Orleans chapter, which shared an address with Guy Bannister’s detective agency, a front for various right-wing activities, including the [then] ongoing paramilitary efforts to oust Castro. (Bannister is pictured at right.) In addition to the WDSU interview, the second side features discussion—excerpted from the Guns of November, Part I from 11/1/1983—of the intelligence connections of Ed Butler, whose Information Council of the Americas arranged the Oswald interview. Again, Butler’s INCA was little more than an intelligence front, with close ties to Bannister’s detective agency.

Program Highlights Include:

  • Oswald’s WDSU gaffe in which he disclosed his relationship with the U.S. government while in the U.S.S.R.
  • The highly unlikely fact that alleged K.G.B. operative Stashynsky had the broken key to Bandera’s apartment in his possession when he went to trial two years later.
  • The equally unlikely proposition that the other half of the broken key was still in the lock of Bandera’s apartment two years later!

1. We begin by reviewing and synopsizing information indicating that Russia has been framed for the “Shadow Brokers” alleged hack of the NSA, much as it appears to have been framed for the DNC hack. Indeed, with both the DNC hack and the “Shadow Brokers” non-hack of the NSA, the evidence points increasingly toward “Team Snowden” and Eddie the Friendly Spook himself.

Points of information reviewed include:

  • Evidence suggesting that Russia was NOT behind the DNC hacks. ” . . . . None of the technical evidence is convincing. It would only be convincing if the attackers used entirely novel, unique, and sophisticated tools with unmistakable indicators pointing to Russia supported by human intelligence, not by malware analysis.The DNC attackers also had very poor, almost comical, operational security (OPSEC). State actors tend to have a quality assurance review when developing cyberattack tools to minimize the risk of discovery and leaving obvious crumbs behind. Russian intelligence services are especially good. They are highly capable, tactically and strategically agile, and rational. They ensure that offensive tools are tailored and proportionate to the signal they want to send, the possibility of disclosure and public perception, and the odds of escalation. The shoddy OPSEC just doesn’t fit what we know about Russian intelligence. . . . Given these arguments, blaming Russia is not a slam dunk. Why would a country with some of the best intelligence services in the world commit a whole series of really stupid mistakes in a highly sensitive operation? Why pick a target that has a strong chance of leading to escalatory activity when Russia is known to prefer incremental actions over drastic ones? Why go through the trouble of a false flag when doing nothing would have been arguably better?. . . .”
  • Information indicating that the NSA “hack” may well not have been a hack at all, but the work of an insider downloading the information onto a USB drive. “. . . Their claim to have ‘hacked’ a server belonging to the NSA is fishy. According to ex-NSA insiders who spoke with Business Insider, the agency’s hackers don’t just put their exploits and toolkits online where they can potentially be pilfered. The more likely scenario for where the data came from, says ex-NSA research scientist Dave Aitel, is an insider who downloaded it onto a USB stick. . . . When hackers gain access to a server, they keep quiet about it so they can stay there. . . .One of the many strange things about this incident is the very public nature of what transpired. When a hacker takes over your computer, they don’t start activating your webcam or running weird programs because you’d figure out pretty quickly that something was up and you’d try to get rid of them. . . . . . . If the Shadow Brokers owned the NSA’s command and control server, then it would probably be a much better approach to just sit back, watch, and try to pivot to other interesting things that they might be able to find. . . People sell exploits all the time, but they hardly ever talk about it. . . . Most of the time, an exploit is either found by a security research firm, which then writes about it and reports it to the company so it can fix the problem. Or, a hacker looking for cash will take that found exploit and sell it on the black market. So it would make sense for a group like Shadow Brokers to want to sell their treasure trove, but going public with it is beyond strange. . . .”
  • Eddie the Friendly Spook endorsed the cover story of the Shadow Brokers’ NSA “hack”–that the event was a hack (despite indicators to the contrary) and that Russia did it.  . . . If you ask ex-NSA contractor Edward Snowden, the public leak and claims of the Shadow Brokers seem to have Russian fingerprints all over them, and it serves as a warning from Moscow to Washington. The message: If your policymakers keep blaming us for the DNC hack, then we can use this hack to implicate you in much more.‘That could have significant foreign policy consequences,’ Snowden wrote on Twitter. ‘Particularly if any of those operations targeted US allies. Particularly if any of those operations targeted elections. . . .” 
  • The code in the files was from 2013, when Snowden undertook his “op.”  “. . . . The code released by the Shadow Brokers dates most recently to 2013, the same year Edward Snowden leaked classified information about the NSA’s surveillance programs.. . . Snowden also noted that the released files end in 2013. ‘When I came forward, NSA would have migrated offensive operations to new servers as a precaution,’ he suggested — a move that would have cut off the hackers’ access to the server. . . . “
  • Author James Bamford highlighted circumstantial evidence that WikiLeaker Jacob Applebaum–who appears to have facilitated Snowden’s journey from Hawaii to Hong Kong–may have been behind the Shadow Brokers non-hack. “. . . . There also seems to be a link between Assange and the leaker who stole the ANT catalog, and the possible hacking tools. Among Assange’s close associates is Jacob Appelbaum, a celebrated hacktivist and the only publicly known WikiLeaks staffer in the United States – until he moved to Berlin in 2013 in what he called a “political exile” because of what he said was repeated harassment by U.S. law enforcement personnel. In 2010, a Rolling Stone magazine profile labeled him “the most dangerous man in cyberspace.”In December 2013, Appelbaum was the first person to reveal the existence of the ANT catalog, at a conference in Berlin, without identifying the source. That same month he said he suspected the U.S. government of breaking into his Berlin apartment. He also co-wrote an article about the catalog in Der Spiegel. But again, he never named a source, which led many to assume, mistakenly, that it was Snowden. . . .”
  • Applebaum was anti-Clinton, sentiments expressed in the clumsy Boris and Natasha-like broken English that accompanied announcement of the Shadow Brokers’ gambit. . . . . Shortly thereafter, he [Applebaum] turned his attention to Hillary Clinton. At a screening of a documentary about Assange in Cannes, France, Appelbaum accused her of having a grudge against him and Assange, and that if she were elected president, she would make their lives difficult. ‘It’s a situation that will possibly get worse’ if she is elected to the White House, he said, according to Yahoo News. . . .. . . . In hacktivist style, and in what appears to be phony broken English, this new release of cyberweapons also seems to be targeting Clinton. It ends with a long and angry ‘final message” against ‘Wealthy Elites . . . breaking laws’ but ‘Elites top friends announce, no law broken, no crime commit[ed]. . . Then Elites run for president. Why run for president when already control country like dictatorship?’ . . .” 
  • The e-mail account used by the Shadow Brokers is in Germany and is resistant to attempts at disclosing users’ information. Applebaum, Laura Poitras, Sarah Harrison and Peter Sunde are in Germany.  “. . . He said Tutanota had only ever been forced to hand over encrypted data of its users a few times and it has a transparency report where it discloses those cases. ‘However, we release data only in very, very few cases … And when we have to provide the data due to a court order, it is still encrypted,’ Pfau added, going on to explain the company’s stance on surveillance. . . .”
  • Recall that, in FTR #’s 891 and 895, we noted that Snowden was working for the CIA in the summer of 2009 when he decided to infiltrate NSA and leak its information. NSA “non-hack” suspect Applebaum and much of the so-called “privacy” advocates have received funding from CIA-derived organizations such as the Broadcasting Board of Governors, Radio Free Asia and the Open Technology Fund. What role is the CIA playing in this? “. . . Jacob Appelbaum’s will­ing­ness to work directly for an old CIA cutout like Radio Free Asia in a nation long tar­geted for regime-change is cer­tainly odd, to say the least. Par­tic­u­larly since Appel­baum made a big pub­lic show recently claim­ing that, though it pains him that Tor takes so much money from the US mil­i­tary, he would never take money from some­thing as evil as the CIA. . . .. . . Appelbaum’s finan­cial rela­tion­ships with var­i­ous CIA spin­offs like Radio Free Asia and the BBG go fur­ther. From 2012 through 2013, Radio Free Asia trans­ferred about $1.1 mil­lion to Tor in the form of grants and con­tracts. This mil­lion dol­lars comes on top of another $3.4 mil­lion Tor received from Radio Free Asia’s par­ent agency, the BBG, start­ing from 2007. . . . . . . . Though many of the apps and tech backed by Radio Free Asia’s OTF are unknown to the gen­eral pub­lic, they are highly respected and extremely pop­u­lar among the anti-surveillance Inter­net activist crowd. OTF-funded apps have been rec­om­mended by Edward Snow­den, cov­ered favor­ably by ProP­ub­lica and The New York Times’ tech­nol­ogy reporters, and repeat­edly pro­moted by the Elec­tronic Fron­tier Foun­da­tion. Every­one seems to agree that OTF-funded pri­vacy apps offer some of the best pro­tec­tion from gov­ern­ment sur­veil­lance you can getIn fact, just about all the fea­tured open-source apps on EFF’s recent “Secure Mes­sag­ing Score­card” were funded by OTF. . . .. . . . You’d think that anti-surveillance activists like Chris Soghoian, Jacob Appel­baum, Cory Doc­torow and Jil­lian York would be staunchly against out­fits like BBG and Radio Free Asia, and the role they have played — and con­tinue to play — in work­ing with defense and cor­po­rate inter­ests to project and impose U.S. power abroad. Instead, these rad­i­cal activists have know­ingly joined the club, and in doing so, have become will­ing pitch­men for a wing of the very same U.S. National Secu­rity State they so adamantly oppose. . . .”

2. After synopsizing the apparent framing of Russia for the DNC hack and the Shadow-Brokers’ non-hack of NSA, the broadcast recaps two key episodes in the painting of “Oswald Red.”

One of the results of the Snowden “op” was the death of the Obama/Clinton State Department’s attempted re-boot with Russia. In this regard, the actions of the Obverse Oswald are similar to the way that the painting of Oswald Red served to exacerbate Cold War tensions.

The killing of the attempted diplomatic rapprochement with Russia was, in turn, central to the realization of the destabilization of the Yanukovich government in Ukraine and the installation of the heirs to Stephan Bandera’s OUN/B in the Maidan coup.

(Recall that the Maidan coup was financed, in part, by Pierre Omidyar, whose First Look Media were not only recipients of Snowden’s purloined files, but served as the journalistic platform for Glenn Greenwald, Snowden’s leaking journalist of choice.)

This program details the assassination of OUN/B leader Stephan Bandera–a key part of the painting of Oswald Red.

Blamed on the KGB, the killing was–in all likelihood–performed by BND (German foreign intelligence and the successor to the Reinhard Gehlen “org”) or other Underground Reich-connected elements, possibly elements of CIA.

The broad­cast cen­ters on dis­in­for­ma­tion point­ing to Lee Har­vey Oswald as a KGB-trained assassin. (The disinformation was spread by the World Anti-Communist Congress for Freedom and Liberation–the forerunner of the World Anti-Communist League.)

Attempt­ing to pin the assas­si­na­tion on the Sovi­ets and/or Cubans, these ele­ments spurred many lib­er­als to endorse the “Oswald as lone-nut” hypoth­e­sis. They were afraid that the assas­si­na­tion could lead to nuclear war, if the per­cep­tion gained traction that Oswald was a com­mu­nist. A cen­tral ele­ment in this dis­in­for­ma­tion ploy was an attempt to con­nect the JFK assas­si­na­tion to the death of Stephan Ban­dera, allegedly per­formed by an KGB assas­sin named Bog­dan Stashyn­sky.

Murdered on the same day that Lee Harvey Oswald “defected” to the Soviet Union, Bandera’s killing was linked to Oswald’s alleged killing of JFK by elements associated with the W.A.C.C.F.L.

W.A.C.C.F.L. ele­ments dis­sem­i­nated the lie that Oswald was trained at the same facil­ity as Stashyn­sky, and that the JFK hit was part of a Soviet pro­gram of assas­si­na­tion of West­ern polit­i­cal lead­ers. It should be noted that W.A.C.C.F.L.-related ele­ments also fig­ured promi­nently in the “han­dling” of Oswald in New Orleans, Dal­las and (pos­si­bly) the Soviet Union.

Those W.A.C.C.F.L. elements were closely associated with the OUN/B and the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, a consortium of Eastern European fascist groups inextricably linked with the Gehlen organization, the BND, the CIA and the Underground Reich.

The disinformation that Oswald was a KGB assassin was inserted into a Senate Subcommittee report by Sen. Thomas Dodd, with assistance from elements of CIA.

(We went into this at greater length in FTR #876.)

3. Another episode in the painting of Oswald Red concerns an interview set up on WDSU in New Orleans. Arranged by Ed Butler, whose Information Council of the Americas served as a front for elements of the U.S. intelligence committee, the interview featured Oswald proclaiming his Marxist, pro-Castro sympathies, as well as discussing his so-called “defection” to Russia. One of the participants in the interview was Carlos Bringuier, an anti-Castro Cuban and key member of the DRE, one of the anti-Castro Cuban groups managed by the CIA.

George Joannides, who served as something of a case officer for the DRE, was the liaison between the House Select Committee on Assassinations and the CIA. Joannides was also reported by the BBC to have been present at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on the night Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated.

The myth of “Lee Harvey Oswald the Communist” was successfully displayed and stemming from that fiction led many liberals to opt for the “Oswald the lone nut” scenario because they feared a Third World War might result from the public perception that a “commie” had killed the President. The second  program features a re-broadcast of the interview that Oswald gave on WDSU in New Orleans in August of 1963. In this interview, Oswald expresses sympathy for Castro’s Cuba and discusses his sojourn in the Soviet Union.

To all outward appearances, Oswald looked like a communist sympathizer in the interview. Oswald was the sole member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee’s New Orleans chapter, which shared an address with Guy Bannister’s detective agency, a front for various right-wing activities, including the [then] ongoing paramilitary efforts to oust Castro. (Bannister is pictured at right.) In addition to the WDSU interview, the second side features discussion—excerpted from the Guns of November, Part I from 11/1/1983—of the intelligence connections of Ed Butler, whose Information Council of the Americas arranged the Oswald interview. Again, Butler’s INCA was little more than an intelligence front, with close ties to Bannister’s detective agency.

Discussion

One comment for “FTR #925 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 1”

  1. It’s worth noting that Yasha Levine, who has done critical work covering the relationships between the privacy advocacy/cypherpunk tech community and folks like Jacob Appelbaum with the national security state (like his critical article about the BBG) appears to be unemployed at the moment. It’s something that came up after an Intercept reporter, Sam Biddle, got in a Twitter spot with Levine and Biddle belittled him for being unemployed.

    Considering the importance and sensitivity of the topics Levine covers, it will be very interesting to see if he can find a new gig soon or has landed on some sort of journalistic blacklist. He’s currently working on a book Surveillance Valley according to his website, so hopefully that’s what he’s doing now and he hasn’t actually been blacklisted, but that will be something to watch.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | September 30, 2016, 5:55 pm

Post a comment