- Spitfire List - http://spitfirelist.com -

FTR #926 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 2: “Oswald” in Mexico City

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained HERE [1]. 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 [2].

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3].

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE [3].

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE [4].

This broad­cast was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment [5].

Lee Harvey Oswald: Ersatz Communist [6]

Lee Har­vey Oswald: Ersatz Com­mu­nist

jfkandtheunspeakable [7]Intro­duc­tion: The sec­ond of a two-part series review­ing infor­ma­tion about what the bril­liant Berke­ley researcher Peter Dale Scott [8] 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.

For pur­pos­es of con­ve­nience and con­ti­nu­ity, we begin this descrip­tion 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:

The vast bulk of the pro­gram mate­r­i­al con­sists of a read­ing of an excerpt from JFK and the Unspeak­able: Why He Died and Why It Mat­ters by James Dou­glass. As we have seen in so many pro­grams, JFK was mov­ing to dras­ti­cal­ly reduce Cold War ten­sions by imple­ment­ing a num­ber of things, includ­ing with­draw­ing the U.S. from Viet­nam [27] and nor­mal­iz­ing rela­tions [28] with Cuba.

Con­tin­u­ing a pat­tern of sub­vert­ing [19] White House attempts at achiev­ing detente with the for­mer Sovi­et Union, dom­i­nant ele­ments of CIA “paint­ed Oswald red.” A major fea­ture of that suc­cess­ful effort was a vis­it to Mex­i­co City by Oswald, and/or some­one pre­tend­ing to be Oswald, where the pat­sy-to-be vis­it­ed the Cuban con­sulate and Sovi­et embassy, osten­si­bly attempt­ing to obtain entry doc­u­ments to both coun­tries.

Note­wor­thy, here, is “Oswald’s” meet­ing with Valery Kostikov, a KGB assas­si­na­tion expert at the Sovi­et embassy. This liai­son appears to have played into the sce­nario pre­sent­ed in FTR #925 [29], in which Oswald was linked by ele­ments of the W.A.C.C.F.L. with the assas­si­na­tion of Ukrain­ian fas­cist leader Stephan Ban­dera.

Sign­f­i­cant aspects of the “Oswald” who oper­at­ed in Mex­i­co City:

We observe that the orgias­tic media pro­pa­gan­da blam­ing Rus­sia for the DNC hack and the Shad­ow Bro­kers “non-hack” (with its ludi­crous Boris-and-Natasha-like bro­ken Eng­lish), on top of the pro­pa­gan­da exco­ri­at­ing Rus­sia about Ukraine and Syr­ia, places Hillary Clin­ton in a sim­i­lar posi­tion as LBJ. It will be extreme­ly dif­fi­cult for her to avoid being sucked in to the New Cold War.

We note again, with great empha­sis, that the oper­a­tion front­ed for by “the Obverse Oswald” (Snow­den) destroyed the Obama/Clinton State Depart­men­t’s re-boot with Rus­sia as thor­ough­ly as the JFK assas­si­na­tion, with its “paint­ing of Oswald Red” destroyed JFK’s attempts at estab­lish­ing detente with the U.S.S.R.

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1. For pur­pos­es of con­ti­nu­ity and con­ve­nience, we review infor­ma­tion about the high-pro­file hacks, which Mr. Emory has com­pared to the “paint­ing of Oswald red.”

There are dis­turb­ing indi­ca­tions 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. (Wik­iLeaks is part of “Team Snow­den.”)

Points of infor­ma­tion reviewed include:

 

2. The vast bulk of the pro­gram mate­r­i­al con­sists of a read­ing of an excerpt from JFK and the Unspeak­able: Why He Died and Why It Mat­ters by James Dou­glass. As we have seen in so many pro­grams, JFK was mov­ing to dras­ti­cal­ly reduce Cold War ten­sions by imple­ment­ing a num­ber of things, includ­ing with­draw­ing the U.S. from Viet­nam [27] and nor­mal­iz­ing rela­tions [28] with Cuba.

Con­tin­u­ing a pat­tern of sub­vert­ing [19] White House attempts at achiev­ing detente with the for­mer Sovi­et Union, dom­i­nant ele­ments of CIA “paint­ed Oswald red.” A major fea­ture of that suc­cess­ful effort was a vis­it to Mex­i­co City by Oswald, and/or some­one pre­tend­ing to be Oswald, where the pat­sy-to-be vis­it­ed the Cuban con­sulate and Sovi­et embassy, osten­si­bly attempt­ing to obtain entry doc­u­ments to both coun­tries.

Note­wor­thy, here, is “Oswald’s” meet­ing with Valery Kostikov, a KGB assas­si­na­tion expert at the Sovi­et embassy. This liai­son appears to have played into the sce­nario pre­sent­ed in FTR #925 [29], in which Oswald was linked by ele­ments of the W.A.C.C.F.L. with the assas­si­na­tion of Ukrain­ian fas­cist leader Stephan Ban­dera. Alleged­ly com­mit­ted by Bog­dan Stashyn­sky, the killing of Ban­dera occurred on the same day as Oswald’s defec­tion to the for­mer Sovi­et Union. W.A.C.C.F.L.-linked ele­ments dis­trib­uted the dis­in­for­ma­tion that Oswald had been trained by the KGB along with Stashyn­sky. We not­ed in FTR #925 [29] that the head of a bro­ken key to Ban­der­a’s apart­ment was still in the lock two years lat­er, as Stashyn­sky was on tri­al! Fur­ther­more, Stashyn­sky still had the bro­ken-off shaft of the key in his pos­ses­sion, link­ing him to a cap­i­tal crime and open­ing him up to “ter­mi­na­tion with extreme prej­u­dice” by the KGB, had he actu­al­ly been in there employ.

Sign­f­i­cant aspects of the “Oswald” who oper­at­ed in Mex­i­co City:

JFK and the Unspeak­able: Why He Died and Why It Mat­ters by James W. Dou­glass; Touch­stone Books [SC]; Copy­right 2008 by James W. Dou­glass; ISBN 978–1‑4391–9388‑4; pp. 75–81. [32]

. . . . Accord­ing to the War­ren Report, Lee Har­vey Oswald was in Mex­i­co City from Sep­tem­ber 27 to Octo­ber 2, 1963, and vis­it­ed both the Cuban and Sovi­et Con­sulates. This is the point at which the per­son Lee Har­vey Oswald begins to dis­ap­pear down a black hole. As a Cold War actor who took on assigned roles, the per­son Oswald was nev­er easy to see. In Mex­i­co City, the real Oswald almost drops out of sight, but with his absence cov­ered by imper­son­ators and the CIA’s smoke and mir­rors.

The CIA’s Mex­i­co City Sta­tion kept a close watch on activ­i­ties at the Cuban and Sovi­et Con­sulates. Agents had set up hid­den obser­va­tion posts across the street that took pic­tures of vis­i­tors to the two sites. The Agency had also wire­tapped the phones at both the Cuban And Sovi­et facil­i­ties. Thus, the CIA had front-row sur­veil­lance seats for what tran­spired there.

The Agency’s reports on what were sup­pos­ed­ly Lee Har­vey Oswald’s vis­its and phone calls to the two con­sulates inad­ver­tent­ly revealed more about the CIA than they ever did about Oswald. The Mex­i­co City sto­ry being cre­at­ed about Oswald in care­ful­ly pre­served doc­u­ments was writ­ten with such dex­ter­i­ty in some places, and with such clum­si­ness in oth­ers, that it even­tu­al­ly drew more atten­tion to itself and its authors than it did to its fic­tion­al­ized sub­ject. As a result, what Oswald him­self real­ly did in Mex­i­co City is in fact less cer­tain today than what the CIA did in his name. The doc­u­ments con­tain­ing this self-rev­e­la­tion have final­ly been declas­si­fied and made avail­able to the avail­able to the Amer­i­can pub­lic dur­ing the past decade as a result of the JFK Records Act passed by Con­gress in 1992. How­ev­er, only a few ded­i­cat­ed researchers of the Kennedy assas­si­na­tion have stud­ied these mate­ri­als and have under­stood their impli­ca­tions.

On Octo­ber 9, 1963, CIA head­quar­ters received a cable from its Mex­i­co City Sta­tion about an Octo­ber 1 phone call to the Sovi­et Con­sulate that had been wire­tapped, taped, tran­scribed, and trans­lat­ed from Russ­ian into Eng­lish. The call came from “an Amer­i­can male who spoke bro­ken Russ­ian” and who “said his name [was] Lee Oswald.” The man who said he was Oswald stat­ed that he had been at the Sovi­et Embassy on Sep­tem­ber 28, when he spoke with a con­sul he believed was Valery Vladimirovich Kostikov. He asked “if there [was] any­thing new re telegram to Wash­ing­ton.” The Sovi­et guard who answered the phone said noth­ing had been received yet, but the request had been sent. He then hung up.

The CIA’s Octo­ber 9 cable from Mex­i­co City is note­wor­thy in two respects. The first is the con­nec­tion between Oswald and Valery Vladimirovich Kostikov. Kostikov was well known to the CIA and FBI as the KGB (Sovi­et Com­mit­tee for State Secu­ri­ty) agent in Mex­i­co City who direct­ed For­mer FBI direc­tor Clarence M. Kel­ly stressed in his auto­bi­og­ra­phy: “The impor­tance of Kostikov can­not be over­stat­ed. As [Dal­las FBI agent] Jim Hosty wrote lat­er: ‘Kostikov was the offi­cer-in-charge for West­ern Hemi­sphere ter­ror­ist activities–including and espe­cial­ly assas­si­na­tion. In mil­i­tary rank­ing he would have been a one-star gen­er­al. As the Rus­sians would say, he was their Line V man–the most dan­ger­ous KGB ter­ror­ist assigned to this hemi­sphere!’”

Equal­ly note­wor­thy in the Octo­ber 9 cable is the evi­dence it pro­vides that the “Lee Oswald” who made the Octo­ber 1 phone call was an impos­tor. The caller, it said, “spoke bro­ken Russ­ian.” The real Oswald was flu­ent in Russ­ian. The cable went on to say that the Mex­i­co City Sta­tion had sur­veil­lance pho­tos of a man who appeared to be an Amer­i­can enter­ing and leav­ing the Sovi­et Embassy on Octo­ber 1. He was described as “appar­ent age 35, ath­let­ic build, cir­ca 6 feet, reced­ing hair­line, bald­ing top.” In a CIA cable back to Mex­i­co City on Octo­ber 10, the Lee Oswald who defect­ed to the U.S.S.R. in Octo­ber 1959 was described as not quite 24, “five feet ten inch­es, one hun­dred six­ty five pounds, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes.”

What one is con­front­ed with in the Octo­ber 9 cable is an appar­ent­ly damn­ing con­nec­tion between Oswald and a KGB assas­si­na­tion expert, but a con­nec­tion made by a man imper­son­at­ing Oswald. It is the begin­ning of a two-tracks Mex­i­co City sto­ry. On one track is the CIA’s attempt to doc­u­ment Oswald’s com­plic­i­ty with the Sovi­et Union and Cuba in the assas­si­na­tion of John F. Kennedy. On the oth­er track is the recur­ring evi­dence with­in the same doc­u­ments of a fraud­u­lent Oswald at work.

Giv­en the noto­ri­ety of Valery Kostikov in U.S. intel­li­gence cir­cles, it is remark­able that when CIA head­quar­ters cabled the State Depart­ment, the FBI, and the Navy on Octo­ber 10 to relay the wire­tapped infor­ma­tion it had received on Oswald the day before, the cable made no ref­er­ence to his spe­cif­ic con­nec­tion with Kostikov. Kostikov was not even men­tioned. This would be like a 2001 intel­li­gence report on a sus­pect­ed ter­ror­ist neglect­ing to men­tion that he had just met with Osama bin Laden. CIA head­quar­ters was keep­ing its knowl­edge of the Oswald-Kostikov con­nec­tion close to its vest. The CIA’s silence regard­ing Kostikov was main­tained just long enough for Oswald to be moved qui­et­ly (with­out being placed on the FBI’s Secu­ri­ty Index) into a posi­tion over­look­ing Dealey Plaza on Novem­ber 22. After the assas­si­na­tion, the CIA used its dor­mant Mex­i­co City doc­u­ments to link the accused assas­sin Oswald with the KGB ‘s Kostikov.

On Novem­ber 25, 1863, Richard Helms sent a mem­o­ran­dum to J. Edgar Hoover that mar­shaled the CIA’s phone-tapped evi­dence sug­gest­ing that Oswald had received not only Sovi­et but also Cuban gov­ern­ment sup­port in assas­si­nat­ing Kennedy. Attached to the Helms mem­o­ran­dum were tran­scripts for the audio­tapes of sev­en calls to the Sovi­et Mex­i­co City embassy attrib­uted to Oswald. Two of them stood out. One was the Octo­ber 1 call in which “Oswald” iden­ti­fied Kostikov as the Sovi­et con­sul he had met with on Sep­tem­ber 28. In the oth­er out­stand­ing call, report­ed­ly made on Sep­tem­ber 28, the same man, speak­ing from the Cuban Con­sulate, made ref­er­ence to his hav­ing just been at the Sovi­et Embassy. To under­stand this reveal­ing call, we need to put it in the con­text of what may or may not have been the real Oswald’s shut­tles between the Cuban and Sovi­et Con­sulates dur­ing his first two days in Mex­i­co City, Sep­tem­ber 27 and 28.

Giv­en Lee Har­vey Oswald’s will­ing­ness to take on intel­li­gence roles, the pri­ma­ry ques­tion con­cern­ing his vis­its to the Cuban and Sovi­et Con­sulates is not: Was it real­ly he? Whether it was Oswald or some­one using his name, the “he” was still an actor fol­low­ing a script. If the actor was him­self, from his lim­it­ed stand­point his role’s pur­pose would have been, as in New Orleans, to dis­cred­it the Fair Play for Cuba Com­mit­tee in a minor Cold war bat­tle. Accord­ing to an FBI mem­o­ran­dum dat­ed Sep­tem­ber 18, 1963, dis­cov­ered by the Church Com­mit­tee, the CIA advised the FBI two days ear­li­er that the “Agency is giv­ing some con­sid­er­a­tion to coun­ter­ing the activ­i­ties of [the FPCC] in for­eign coun­tries.” Nine days lat­er in Mex­i­co City, “Oswald” vis­it­ed the Cuban and Sovi­et Con­sulates dis­play­ing his FPCC cre­den­tials and seek­ing visas to both those com­mu­nist coun­tries. Whether it was Oswald or not who was play­ing out anoth­er FPCC-dis­cred­it­ing role in his name, the more basic ques­tion is: What was the Mex­i­co City scenario’s pur­pose in the larg­er script writ­ten for the President’s mur­der? It is this ques­tion of ulti­mate pur­pose that the CIA’s Mex­i­co City sur­veil­lance tapes will assist us in answer­ing, after we first con­sid­er the Sep­tem­ber 27–28 vis­its to the con­sulates that were act­ed in the name of Oswald.

Accord­ing to Sil­via Duran, the Cuban Con­sulate’s Mex­i­can employ­ee who spoke with Oswald, he (or an impos­tor) vis­it­ed their con­sulate three times on Fri­day, Sep­tem­ber 27. At his 11:00 A.M. vis­it Oswald applied for a Cuban tran­sit visa for a trip to the Sovi­et Union. Duran was a lit­tle sus­pi­cious of Oswald. She felt the Amer­i­can was too eager in dis­play­ing his left­ist cre­den­tials: mem­ber­ship cards in the Fair Play for Cuba Com­mit­tee and the Amer­i­can Com­mu­nist Par­ty, old Sovi­et doc­u­ments, a news­pa­per clip­ping on his arrest in New Orleans, a pho­to of Oswald being escort­ed by a police­man on each arm that Duran thought looked Pho­ny. Duran also knew that belong­ing to the Com­mu­nist Par­ty was ille­gal in Mex­i­co in 1963. For that rea­son, a Com­mu­nist would nor­mal­ly trav­el in the coun­try with only a pass­port. Yet here was Oswald doc­u­ment­ed in a way that invit­ed his arrest.

Duran told Oswald he lacked the pho­tographs he need­ed for his visa appli­ca­tion. She also said he would first need per­mis­sion to vis­it the Sovi­et Union before he could be issued a tran­sit visa for Cuba. Vis­i­bly upset, Oswald depart­ed, but returned to the con­sulate an hour lat­er with his visa pho­tos.

In the late after­noon, Oswald returned again to the Cuban Con­sulate, insist­ing this time to Sil­via Duran that he be grant­ed a Cuban visa at once. He claimed that the Sovi­et Con­sulate had just assured him he would be giv­en a Sovi­et visa. Duran checked by phone with the Sovi­ets and learned oth­er­wise. She told Oswald, who then flew into a rage. He rant­ed at Duran, then at the Cuban con­sul, Euse­bio Azcue, who had stepped out of his office into the com­mo­tion. Oswald raged in response to Azcue’s expla­na­tion of the visa pro­ce­dure. Azcue yelled back at him. Oswald called Azcue and Duran mere “bureau­crats.” Then, as Sil­via Duran recalled in 1978 to the House Select Com­mit­tee on Assas­si­na­tions (HSCA), Azcue went to the door, opened it, and asked Oswald to leave. The extra­or­di­nary episode had, per­haps as intend­ed, left an indeli­ble impres­sion on Duran and Azcue.

Oswald’s two vis­its to the Sovi­et Embassy have been described by the KGB offi­cer who served as its vice con­sul, Col. Oleg Max­i­movich Nechiporenko, in his 1993 mem­oir Pass­port to Assas­si­na­tion. At his first vis­it on Fri­day after­noon, Sep­tem­ber 27, Oswald did indeed speak briefly with Valery Vladimirovich Kostikov. Nechiporenko refers to Kostikov casu­al­ly as “one of the con­sulate employ­ees who on that par­tic­u­lar day was receiv­ing vis­i­tors from eleven in the morn­ing until one in the after­noon.” Oswald said he was seek­ing a visa to the Sovi­et Union. Kostikov hand­ed him over to Nechiporenko, who lis­tened to Oswald’s urgent request for an imme­di­ate visa. Nechiporenko explained that their Wash­ing­ton, D.C., embassy han­dled all mat­ters regard­ing trav­el to the Sovi­et Union. He could make an excep­tion for Oswald and send his papers on to Moscow, “but the answer would still be sent to his per­ma­nent res­i­dence, and it would take, at the very least, four months.”

Oswald lis­tened with grow­ing exas­per­a­tion. “When I had fin­ished speak­ing,” Nechiporenko recalled, “he slow­ly leaned for­ward and, bare­ly able to restrain him­self, prac­ti­cal­ly shout­ed in my face, ‘This won’t do for me? This is not my case? For me, it’s all going to end in tragedy!” Nechiporenko showed the unruly Amer­i­can out of the com­pound.

Oswald returned to the Sovi­et Embassy the next morn­ing. He renewed his request for a quick visa to the U.S.S.R., this time to Valery Kostikov (this being their Sep­tem­ber 28 meet­ing) and Sovi­et con­sul Pavel Yatskov. Oswald became even more agi­tat­ed than he had been the day before, refer­ring to FBI sur­veil­lance and per­se­cu­tion. He took a revolver from his jack­et pock­et, placed it on a table, and said, “See? This is what I must now car­ry to pro­tect my life.” The Sovi­et offi­cials care­ful­ly took the gun and removed its bul­lets. They told Oswald once again they could not give him a quick visa. They offered him instead the nec­es­sary forms to be filled out. Oswald did­n’t take them. Oleg Nechiporenko joined the three men as their con­ver­sa­tion was end­ing. For the sec­ond day in a row, he accom­pa­nied a depressed Oswald to the gate of the embassy, this time with Oswald’s returned revolver and its loose bul­lets stuck back in his jack­et pock­et. Nechiporenko says that he, Kostikov, and Yatskov then imme­di­ate­ly pre­pared a report on Oswald’s two embassy vis­its that they cabled to Moscow Cen­ter.

Oswald’s three vis­its to the Cuban Con­sulate on Sep­tem­ber 27, and his two vis­its to the Sovi­et Embassy on Sep­tem­ber 28 phone tran­script sent by Richard Helms to J. Edgar Hoover. The CIA’s tran­script states that the Sat­ur­day, Sep­tem­ber 28, call came from the Cuban Con­sulate. The first speak­er is iden­ti­fied as Sil­via Duran. How­ev­er, Sil­via Duran has insist­ed repeat­ed­ly over the years, first, that the Cuban Embassy was closed to the pub­lic on Sat­ur­days, and sec­ond, that she nev­er took part in such a call.

“Duran” is said to be phon­ing the Sovi­et Con­sulate. Oleg Nechiporenko denies in turn that this call occurred. He says it was impos­si­ble because the Sovi­et switch­board was closed.

The “Duran” speak­er in the tran­script says that an Amer­i­can in her con­sulate, who had been in the Sovi­et Embassy, wants to talk to them. She pass­es the phone to a North Amer­i­can man. The Amer­i­can insists that he and the Sovi­et rep­re­sen­ta­tive speak Russ­ian. They engage in a con­ver­sa­tion, with the Amer­i­can speak­ing with the trans­la­tor describes as “ter­ri­ble hard­ly rec­og­niz­able Russ­ian.” This once again argues against the speak­er being Oswald, giv­en his flu­ent Russ­ian. The CIA tran­script of this unlike­ly con­ver­sa­tion then reads:

NORTH AMERICAN: “I was just now at your embassy and they took my address.”

SOVIET: “I know that.”

NORTH AMERICAN: “I did not know it then. I went to the Cuban Embassy to ask them for my address because they have it.”

SOVIET: “Why don’t you come again and leave your address with us. It is not far fro he Cuban Embassy.”

NORTH AMERICAN: “Well, I’ll be there right away.”

What is the pur­pose behind this strange, coun­ter­feit dia­logue?

Richard Helms, in his accom­pa­ny­ing let­ter to J. Edgar Hoover, states that the “North Amer­i­can” in the Sat­ur­day, Sep­tem­ber 28, call is the same man who iden­ti­fied him­self as Lee Oswald in the Octo­ber 1 call (which con­firmed and doc­u­ment­ed Oswald’s Sat­ur­day meet­ing with Kostikov). In that con­nec­tion the bogus Sat­ur­day call has “Oswald” say­ing he was “just now” at the Sovi­et Embassy (with KGB assas­si­na­tion expert Kostikov) and that his cor­rect address is known only by the Cuban Embassy, not him­self. He will bring it to the Sovi­ets. Thus, in the CIA’s inter­pre­ta­tion of events, doc­u­ment­ed by fraud­u­lent phone calls, the Cuban author­i­ties and Sovi­et assas­sin Kostikov were work­ing togeth­er in their con­trol of Oswald’s address and move­ments, two months before Kennedy’s assas­si­na­tion. As researcher John New­man said in a pre­sen­ta­tion on these doc­u­ments, “It looks like the Cubans and the Rus­sians are work­ing in tan­dem. It looks like [Oswald] is going to meet with Kostikov at a place des­ig­nat­ed by the Cubans . . . Oswald expect­ed to be at some loca­tion fixed by the Cuban Embassy and want­ed the Rus­sians to be able to reach him there.”

In addi­tion, Oswald (or an impos­tor) was apply­ing for Cuban and Sovi­et visas, which could be used as evi­dence of his attempt­ing to gain asy­lum in Com­mu­nist coun­tries. The Mex­i­co City sce­nario had laid the foun­da­tion for blam­ing the president’s upcom­ing mur­der on Cuba and the U.S.S.R., there­by pro­vid­ing the ratio­nale in its after­math for an inva­sion of Cuba and a pos­si­ble nuclear attack on Rus­sia.

The alarm­ing impli­ca­tions of the CIA’s Mex­i­co City case against Oswald had to be faced on the morn­ing after the assas­si­na­tion by the new pres­i­dent, Lyn­don Baines John­son. As a result of the pub­lic dis­clo­sure under the JFK Act of LBJ’s taped con­ver­sa­tions, we now know how John­son was informed of the CIA set­up. Michael Beschloss, edi­tor of the John­son tapes, tells us that at 9:20 A.M. on Novem­ber 23, 1963, John­son was briefed by CIA direc­tor John McCone about “infor­ma­tion on for­eign con­nec­tions to the alleged assas­sin, Lee Har­vey Oswald, which sug­gest­ed to LBJ that Kennedy may have been mur­dered by an inter­na­tion­al con­spir­a­cy.” Then at 10:01 A.M. John­son received a phone brief­ing on Oswald from FBI direc­tor J. Edgar Hoover. It includ­ed the fol­low­ing exchange:

LBJ: “Have you estab­lished any more about the vis­it to the Sovi­et embassy in Mex­i­co in Sep­tem­ber?”

HOOVER: “No, that’s one angle that’s very con­fus­ing, for this reason–we have up here the tape and the pho­to­graph of the man who was at the Sovi­et embassy, using Oswald’s name. That pic­ture and the tape do not cor­re­spond to this man’s voice, nor to his appear­ance. In oth­er words, it appears that there is a sec­ond per­son who was at thee Sovi­et embassy down there. We do have a copy of a let­ter which was writ­ten by Oswald to the Sovi­et embassy here in Wash­ing­ton [a Novem­ber 9. 1963, let­ter that Oswald began by refer­ring to ‘my meet­ings with com­rade Kostin in the Embassy of the Sovi­et Union, Mex­i­co City, Mex­i­co,’ which was inter­pret­ed to mean Kostikov] . . . Now if we can iden­ti­fy this man who was at the . . . Sovi­et embassy in Mex­i­co City . . .”

Hav­ing just been briefed on Oswald by CIA direc­tor McCone, John­son was anx­ious to get to the bot­tom of “the vis­it to the Sovi­et embassy in Mex­i­co in Sep­tem­ber.” Hoover’s brief­ing adds to Johnson’s anx­i­ety. Hoover con­fronts John­son with strong evi­dence of an Oswald impos­tor at the Sovi­et Embassy: “The tape and the pho­to­graph of the man who was at the Sovi­et embassy: do not cor­re­spond to “this man’s [Oswald’s] voice, nor to his appear­ance.” Hoover knows very well that the fal­si­fied evi­dence of a Cuban-Sovi­et plot to kill Kennedy (which John­son has just been giv­en by McCone) came from the CIA. Hoover sim­ply gives John­son the raw fact of an Oswald impos­tor in Mex­i­co City, then lets John­son chew on its impli­ca­tions. Hoover’s own reac­tion to the CIA’s Mex­i­co sub­terfuge was record­ed sev­en weeks lat­er, when he scrib­bled at the bot­tom of an FBI mem­o­ran­dum about keep­ing up with CIA oper­a­tions in the Unit­ed States: “O.K., but I hope you are not being tak­en in. I can’t for­get the CIA with­hold­ing the French espi­onage activ­i­ties in the USA nor the false sto­ry re Oswald’s trip Mex­i­co, only to men­tion two instances of their dou­ble deal­ing.”

Lyn­don Johnson’s CIA and FBI brief­in­gs left him with two unpalat­able inter­pre­ta­tions of Mex­i­co City. Accord­ing to the CIA, Oswald was part of a Cuban-Sovi­et assas­si­na­tion plot that was revealed by the audio-visu­al mate­ri­als gar­nered by its sur­veil­lance tech­niques. Accord­ing to Hoover, Oswald had been imper­son­at­ed in Mex­i­co City, as shown by a more crit­i­cal exam­i­na­tion of the same CIA mate­ri­als. Hoover left it to John­son to draw his own con­clu­sions as to who was respon­si­ble for that imper­son­ation.

The CIA’s case scape­goat­ed Cuba and U.S.S.R. through Oswald for the president’s assas­si­na­tion and steered the Unit­ed states toward an inva­sion of Cuba and a nuclear attack on the U.S.S.R. How­ev­er, LBJ did not want to begin and end his pres­i­den­cy with a glob­al war.

Hoover’s view sug­gest­ed CIA com­plic­i­ty in the assas­si­na­tion. Even assum­ing for the moment that John­son him­self was inno­cent of any fore­knowl­edge or involve­ment in the plot, nev­er­the­less for the new pres­i­dent to con­front the CIA over Kennedy’s mur­der, in a war with­in the U.S. gov­ern­ment, would have been at least as fright­en­ing for him as an inter­na­tion­al cri­sis.

One must give the CIA (and the assas­si­na­tion spon­sors that were even fur­ther in the shad­ows) their due for hav­ing devised and exe­cut­ed a bril­liant set­up. They had played out a sce­nario to Kennedy’s death in Dal­las that pres­sured oth­er gov­ern­ment author­i­ties to choose among three major options: a war of vengeance against Cuba and the Sovi­et Union based on the CIA’s false Mex­i­co City doc­u­men­ta­tion of a Com­mu­nist assas­si­na­tion plot; a domes­tic polit­i­cal war based on the same doc­u­ments seen tru­ly, but a war the CIA would fight with every covert weapon at its com­mand; or a com­plete cov­er-up of any con­spir­a­cy evi­dence and a silent coup d’etat that would reverse Kennedy’s efforts to end the Cold War. . . .

3. 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 [30], whose First Look Media were not only recip­i­ents of Snowden’s pur­loined files, but served as the jour­nal­is­tic plat­form for Glenn Green­wald [31], Snowden’s leak­ing jour­nal­ist of choice.)

The pro­gram seg­ment details the assas­si­na­tion of OUN/B leader Stephan Ban­dera [33]–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.

We high­light the 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 [34].)

(The ersatz Oswald in Mex­i­co City, meet­ing with Vale­ty Kostikov, a KGB assas­si­na­tion expert, sup­ple­ment­ed and fur­ther devel­oped this ele­ment of dis­in­for­ma­tion.)

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.

We not­ed in FTR #925 [29] that the head of a bro­ken key to Ban­der­a’s apart­ment was still in the lock two years lat­er, as Stashyn­sky was on tri­al! Fur­ther­more, Stashyn­sky still had the bro­ken-off shaft of the key in his pos­ses­sion, link­ing him to a cap­i­tal crime and open­ing him up to “ter­mi­na­tion with extreme prej­u­dice” by the KGB, had he actu­al­ly been in there employ. 

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 [35].)