The Mob/CIA and the Castro "Retaliation" Theory

[Anthony Marsh]

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2019/10/colhoun.html#more

[j***@yahoo.com]

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.
https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2019/10/colhoun.html#more

All this theory needs is evidence that Castro directed Oswald to
assassinate JFK as opposed to Oswald acting on his own.

[Steven M. Galbraith]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.
https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2019/10/colhoun.html#more

All this theory needs is evidence that Castro directed Oswald to
assassinate JFK as opposed to Oswald acting on his own.

Oswald visits the FBI in Dallas about 10 days before the assassination. A
man who is part of a conspiracy to kill JFK doesn't draw attention to
himself doing that.

Okay, so say it was stupid. Conspirators do stupid things. But Oswald
retrieves his rifle - one that was apparently sitting in a garage for two
months with no maintenance done, with no practice on his part - the day
before the assassination. And he gets a ride to the scene from a friend.
Then he leaves his revolver at his rooming house. Which he goes back and
retrieves. And changes clothes. Then he leaves the scene and is out going
where?

Where's the help? Where's the planning? His behavior is that of someone
with little resources, little planning and no help.

I think his anger towards JFK was inflamed by pro-Castro people he met in
Mexico City. Maybe even Cuban agents. The essentially told him that JFK
was a fascist, et cetera. But that's far, far different than saying Castro
directed or instructed him. There is simply no evidence of that.

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by j***@yahoo.com

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.
https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2019/10/colhoun.html#more

All this theory needs is evidence that Castro directed Oswald to
assassinate JFK as opposed to Oswald acting on his own.

Oh, you're not playing along. Supposedly one of Oswald's uncles had
connections to the Mob.
Do you know what a cut-out is?

[Anthony Marsh]

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.
https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2019/10/colhoun.html#more

Nice to hear from the CIA.

[Steven M. Galbraith]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2019/10/colhoun.html#more

The squirrels in your yard are really CIA assets monitoring you.

I wasn't supposed to reveal that but I'm fed up with the lousy pay they
give me for all of this work I do protecting the conspirators.

[Mark]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?

This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

[Steven M. Galbraith]

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

If the CIA came out and admitted they killed JFK I think some of these
conspiracy people would say the admission was just CIA disinformation
intended to distract from the fact that they killed JFK.

That's tongue in cheek I think.

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?


http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm


The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.

Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.

Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English

Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

[19efppp]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.

The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.

But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

[19efppp]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

I assume you mean the "Oswald impersonator" photos. I don't find it
credible that Win Scott's crew could not identify him. And some of the
photos of this man are said to be from after Oswald supposedly left
Mexico. This guy was still embassy hopping after the Mexico station had
Oswald's name and after Oswald had already returned to Dallas.

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

I assume you mean the "Oswald impersonator" photos. I don't find it

Something like that, but no one impersonated Oldwald. The agenents in the
MEXI office were sloppy and just picked eome visitor ar approximately the
right time and ASSUMED it was Oswald.

Post by 19efppp
credible that Win Scott's crew could not identify him. And some of the
photos of this man are said to be from after Oswald supposedly left
Mexico. This guy was still embassy hopping after the Mexico station had
Oswald's name and after Oswald had already returned to Dallas.

[19efppp]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

I assume you mean the "Oswald impersonator" photos. I don't find it

Something like that, but no one impersonated Oldwald. The agenents in the
MEXI office were sloppy and just picked eome visitor ar approximately the
right time and ASSUMED it was Oswald.

Post by 19efppp
credible that Win Scott's crew could not identify him. And some of the
photos of this man are said to be from after Oswald supposedly left
Mexico. This guy was still embassy hopping after the Mexico station had
Oswald's name and after Oswald had already returned to Dallas.

And why did the sloppy CIA boys not get photos of the actual Oswald?

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

I assume you mean the "Oswald impersonator" photos. I don't find it

Something like that, but no one impersonated Oldwald. The agenents in the
MEXI office were sloppy and just picked eome visitor ar approximately the
right time and ASSUMED it was Oswald.

Post by 19efppp
credible that Win Scott's crew could not identify him. And some of the
photos of this man are said to be from after Oswald supposedly left
Mexico. This guy was still embassy hopping after the Mexico station had
Oswald's name and after Oswald had already returned to Dallas.

And why did the sloppy CIA boys not get photos of the actual Oswald?

typicaal incompetence. Maybe they were having tehnical problems.

[19efppp]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

I assume you mean the "Oswald impersonator" photos. I don't find it

Something like that, but no one impersonated Oldwald. The agenents in the
MEXI office were sloppy and just picked eome visitor ar approximately the
right time and ASSUMED it was Oswald.

Post by 19efppp
credible that Win Scott's crew could not identify him. And some of the
photos of this man are said to be from after Oswald supposedly left
Mexico. This guy was still embassy hopping after the Mexico station had
Oswald's name and after Oswald had already returned to Dallas.

And why did the sloppy CIA boys not get photos of the actual Oswald?

typicaal incompetence. Maybe they were having tehnical problems.

Ah yes, the Keystone Kops Theory. The CIA was just having tentacle
problems. Never depend on spooks. They know nothing about cameras. The
Science Guy was in Acapulco that weekend smoking crack and getting foot
jobs. What is Win Scott talking about?

[Steven M. Galbraith]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB agents/Embassy staffers who met Oswald
in MC, identified the man in his book ("Passport to Assassination") on the
assassination. All three agents who met Oswald were shown the photograph.
They all said the man they saw who said he was Oswald WAS Oswald and
wasn't that man. Nechiporenko said the man was a US citizen who had
visited the Embassy before seeking a visa. He never said he was Oswald.

[Anthony Marsh]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

It is not clear where you wrote a reply.
Mark it somehow or add blank liines.

[John Corbett]

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh

Post by Mark

Post by Anthony Marsh

Here's a review of a book by a former Church Committee lawyer alleging,
based in part on mobster Johnny Rosselli's claims, that Castro killed JFK
in retaliation for the plots directed against the Cuban dictator.

Written by CIA agents.

Here we go again. Of course, no cites are given for where we too can find
out the book was written by "CIA Agents."

You think that the CIA announces when its agents write a book or make up
propaganda? You know nothing about the CIA. I have written about this
before, but you never pay attention. Do I have to cut and paste the same
essay 100 times just for you?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/cubahoax.htm
The Cuba Hoaxes
When President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 top
US officials thought that it was a conspiracy.
Because of Oswald's defection to Russia and his support of Fidel Castro,
the suspicion was that he was acting on behalf
of Castro or the Russians. This was later reinforced by a series of
hoaxes designed to link Oswald to Castro.
On November 25, 1963 a Nicaraguan intelligence officer
sympathetic to the Cuban exiles named Alvarado
Ugarte Gilberto claimed that on September 18, 1963 he saw a Cuban
consulate employee give $6,5000 in cash to Oswald to assassinate the
President. Because his story was so elaborate and because it fit in with
the prevailing suspicions in the intelligence community it was widely
believed to be true. But under intense questioning by the CIA,
Alvarado's story began to unravel. Oswald could not have been at the
Cuban Consulate in Mexico on the day that he allegedly received the cash,
because he was known to have been in New Orleans appplying for
unemployment insurance. And there was no
red-headed Negro Cuban intelligence officer working at the Cuban
Consulate in Mexico. Alvarado admitted that
he had made up the story in hopes that the US would be prompted to
invade Cuba in retaliation. The assassination of
a head of state is a casus belli. Another false allegation seemed to
confirm Alvarado's story. A Cuban named
Fernando Penabaz claimed that Oswald had been contacted in Nicaragua by
a Cuban intelligence officer. But Penabaz
had no direct knowledge. His story came from two Cuban Exile leaders,
Sixto Mesa and Miguel de Leon, associates of
the Cuban Exile leader Manuela Artime. Helping to spread these false
rumors were the virulent anti-Communist
journalists Jerry and James Buchanan in Miami. One of their stories
alleged that Oswald had been seen in Miami in
contact with a Cuban intelligence officer. It turned out that the source
of their story was CIA operative Frank Sturgis.
None of the facts checked out and Oswald was never in Miami. It was yet
another hoax.
Then in a letter to President Johnson, dated December 2, 1963,
a Mexican named Pedro Gutierrez Valencia stated that on
September 30, 1963 or on October 1, 1963 he saw a Cuban give money
to an American, just outside the Cuban Embasssy in Mexico City,
and he claims now to identify the American now as Oswald.
But the CIA discounted his story because at the time he said he saw Oswald
at the Cuban Embassy they were observing Oswald at the Soviet Embassy.
This is all summarized in a memo from Coleman and Slawson which another
researcher has put into a PDF.

Slawson seems to have screwed up or to have been fed an incorrect version
here. He has Oswald physically present for conversations at the Soviet
Embassy which are actually represented as telephone calls in the intercept
transcripts. If Oswald was recorded with in situ bugs, we don't seem to
have any evidence of it.
The point here is that the CIA would be able to prove that "Oswald" was
making telephone calls to the Soviet Embassy two or three minutes before
Gutierrez allegedly bumped into "Oswald" and "Ernie" coming out of the
Cuban Consulate. So, if the CIA had wanted to "prove" that Gutierrez was
right, all they would have to do is say that Oswald was calling the Soviet
Embassy from the Cuban Consulate. It is an extraordinary coincidence that
"Oswald" was calling the Soviets at the same moment that Gutierrez was
inside the Cuban Embassy. And the implication would be that he was calling
from the Cuban Consulate, as he done before.
But, I agree with the overall point here; this was another hoax sighting
of an Oswald payoff, and all of them were hoaxes. Somebody wanted to be
able to implicate Oswald, but not so completely that it could be proven,
and that would serve LBJ's coverup function. Since LBJ need only suggest a
Cuban connection, not prove one, this gives LBJ what he needs without
actually risking WWIII, since there really is no proof at all of an Oswald
payoff.

Did you notice how nobody wanted to idenify the American seen on the
camera at the embassy?

Post by 19efppp

Post by Anthony Marsh
That PDF also has additional documents about Alvarado.
The very possibility that Oswald had been paid to assassinate
President Kennedy is what caused the cover-up of
the JFK assassination and the formation of the Warren Commission.
President Johnson was concerned that rumors
of Cuban involvement would get out of hand and force the US to invade
Cuba, thus sparking WWIII. President Johnson
was convinced that the assassination was indeed a conspiracy, but if
that fact ever became public, it might lead to WWIII
and a full nuclear exchange with Russia. It was for reasons of national
security that the public had to be convinced that
Oswald had acted alone. Lyndon Johnson told several key people of the
report from Hoover that Oswald had been paid
by the Cubans to shoot President Kennedy. But the decision was made to
cover it up rather than retaliate. LBJ
blackmailed Earl Warren and other Warren Commission members into serving
on the commission by telling them about
the rumor of Oswald being paid in Mexico, but if that ever became public
it could lead to WWIII and the death of 40
million Americans. For example, listen to LBJ's November 29, 1963 phone
conversation with Senator Richard Russell .
Just as these rumors were beginning to die down, a new hoax
appeared which could have been even more
devastating. A series of letters were mailed from Havana, Cuba which
suggested that Oswald was working for Cuban
intelligence. The first letter was postmarked November 28, 1863 from
Havana, Cuba addressed to Lee Oswald.
It was signed by a "Pedro Charles" and dated November 10, 1963. It
appeared to discuss the upcoming assassination.
In addition to personal chit-chat it contained references to Oswald's
great markmanship, the job that he was going to do,
the money he had been paid, and how proud the "Chief" would be. U.S.
intelligence considered the "Chief" to be a
reference to Fidel Castro. But there were a few tip-offs which indicated
the letter was not genuine. The letter was sent
to Lee Oswald c/o "Mail Office", Dallas, Texas. And the FBI and CIA
could not find anyone named Pedro Charles in
Cuba. A second letter also postmarked November 28, 1963 was mailed from
Havana, Cuba to Attorney General
Robert Kennedy alleging that a Cuban agent named Pedro Charles had met
with Oswald in Miami several months
previously and paid him $7,000 to assassinate the President. This letter
was signed by a "Mario del Rosario Molina."
But FBI analysis revealed that both the Molina letter and the Pedro
Charles letter had been typed on the same typewriter,
a Remington Number 10, large Pica type, mailed in envelopes from the
same batch, postmarked at the same place, and signed with the same type
of pen and ink. And again there was no such person as Mario del Rosario
Molina. Later analysis by Cuban intelligence identified the unique
characteristics of the typewriter used for both letters. In particular
they noted that the "a" key had a characteristic wear mark. This was
presented at a conference in Havana in 1995. Two more letters were sent
from Havana, postmarked December 3, 1963 and signed by a "Miguel Galban
Lopez." One was addressed to Voice of America and the other to the
Editor of the "Diario del New York." Both letters announced that it was
Pedro Charles who paid Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate the President.
The FBI examined all four letters and concluded that they probably
represented a hoax by anti-Castro groups to blame the assassination on
Cuba. But the most amazing thing is that it took Hoover so long to catch
onto the fact that these letters were a hoax. On December 12, 1963 the
very day that his lab was informing him that the Pedro Charles letters
were a hoax, he was citing them to his closest aides as the reason why
he felt that the FBI report should not conclude that there was no
conspiracy. Although Hoover was personally satisfied that Oswald alone
had fired all the shots,
he still suspected that Oswald was working on behalf of someone, in
particular Castro, based on those letters.
This was the reason for the cover-up of the JFK assassination, not
because US officials thought that Oswald acted alone,
but because they thought that he was acting on behalf of Castro and if
that fact ever became public, it would lead to WWIII.
Below are the actual letters and documents which you can click on and
view. The original letters were written in Spanish
and translated into English by the FBI.
Pedro Charles letter: Spanish English envelope
Letter to AG Robert Kennedy: Spanish, page 1 Spanish, page 2 English,
page 1 English, page 2 envelope, both sides
Letter to Voice of America: Spanish English envelope
Letter to Diario de New York: English
Dallas agent Heitman report to FBI HQ on December 5, 1963: page 1 page
2 page 3 page 4
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 10, 1963: page 1 page 2
FBI memo to State Department on December 12, 1963: page 1 page 2
Griffith to Conrad memo on December 30, 1963: page 1 page 2
Wannall to Sullivan memo on January 2, 1964: 1 page
Hoover memo to WC's Rankin on January 17, 1964: page 1 page 2
Coleman-Slawson memo on Gutierrez on April 1, 1964: PDF

Post by Mark
You think Marsh has ever heard about the tale of the boy who cried wolf?
This time, I'm not gonna waste my time. Mark

It is not clear where you wrote a reply.
Mark it somehow or add blank liines.

Why are you replying to yourself?