Re: PROOF OSWALD WAS CIA
lazu...@webtv.net
close-Phillips aka Bishop-Bertrand-aka-Shaw-Ferrie-Banister
-DeMohrenschildt...and the paines have CIA connections thru Dulles, and
probably more...Laz
tomnln
<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:9406-4B8D...@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net...
Secret Service advised Marina that Ruth Paine had CIA Connections.
j leyden
Yeah, the CIA loves to recruit 10th-grade dropouts who couldn't write
a decent report because of Dyslexia and poor grammar. And LHO's
military career was a further inducement -- never made it above PFC,
two courts martial and time in the brig. Moreover, in civilian life
he was a career minimum-wage worker ( when he worked) who couldn't
support his family. The slug couldn't even drive a car. We're not
talking James Bond here, are we?
JGL
JGL
mucher1
news:b41e11a1-0644-4eb8...@d27g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
> McCone memo to Rowley:
>
> http://i49.tinypic.com/2e16d5v.jpg
Seems to be a tiny, almost unreadable, pic of the infamous McCone-Rowley
memo. Ask Gary Buell if he still thinks it's genuine:
http://mccone-rowley.blogspot.com/
Bud
If Oswald was being charged with the crime of being CIA (if there
was such a crime), do you think you`d have enough evidence to convict
him in a court of law?
Chuck Schuyler
>
> Yeah, the CIA loves to recruit 10th-grade dropouts who couldn't write
> a decent report because of Dyslexia and poor grammar. And LHO's
> military career was a further inducement -- never made it above PFC,
> two courts martial and time in the brig. Moreover, in civilian life
> he was a career minimum-wage worker ( when he worked) who couldn't
> support his family. The slug couldn't even drive a car. We're not
> talking James Bond here, are we?
>
> JGL
No doubt James Bond could do better than Judyth Baker as his trusty
gun moll.
tomnln
"Chuck Schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:6d8eebdd-7adf-4a05...@c16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Oswald sure could track U-2 Planes though with a "CRYPTO" Security Clearance
.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
chuck thinks Frank Sturgis was a Rhodes Scholar ! ! !
mucher1
I have a strong suspicion that Tom Rossley graduated summa cum laude
from the A**hole Academy.
aeffects
get those nylons off shithead..... there's a time and place for all
that -- does the wife know where your at these day's?
Gil Jesus
> "Gil Jesus" <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote in message
It's too bad that you don't use Google to read posts, Quagmire. You
would have seen that I deleted the original post and the link therein
because I wasn't convinced myself of its authenticity.
Gigiddy.
timstter
Much more proof that Oswald was a Marxist, Laz.
Anyone credible ever seen Oswald and Banister together?
I didn't think so.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Gil Jesus
>
> Anyone credible ever seen Oswald and Banister together?
>
> I didn't think so.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnKHsBaWTJw
mucher1
Congrats on showing a modicum of good sense, Gilly, but shouldn't you
have listened to your inner voice BEFORE trotting out a bogus document
as "PROOF OSWALD WAS CIA"?
Gil Jesus
> Congrats on showing a modicum of good sense, Gilly, but shouldn't you
> have listened to your inner voice BEFORE trotting out a bogus document
Part of research involves making errors from time to time. You people
know that, since you can't wait for some issue to surface so that you
attack the poster with it.
And you ( your side, not necessarily you personally ) seem to be
unforgiving at times, intent with harping on those issues
indefinitely.
One example is your foolish harping on the "yellow pants" issue with
Ben Holmes.
I don't see what a problem it is if in my research I post something
that may be unverified or questionable, and then rescind it later when
more information becomes available to me.
It's called GROWING and it's part of research.
When you people do some research, you'll know what I mean.
Chuck Schuyler
How 'bout rescinding the "Connally may have whipped a pistol out of
his boot and shot JFK" theory you promoted/advanced?
Why don't you forcefully condemn the idea that JBC was involved in
JFK's murder. It's ridiculous.
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Mar 3, 6:23=EF=BF=BDam, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Anyone credible ever seen Oswald and Banister together?
The answer for kooks, of course, is that anyone who *did* see them together
isn't "credible."
>> I didn't think so.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tim Brennan
>> Sydney, Australia
>> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DHnKHsBaWTJw
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
curtjester1
Oswald and the CIA (Otto Otepka) - past post
Otto Otepka was head of the State Department's Office of Security
(SY) and responsible for issuing or denying security clearances for
State
Department personnel. He took his job very seriously and, in 1958,
received an award for Meritorious Service from Secretary of State,
John Foster Dulles (brother of CIA Director Allen Dulles) for his
attention to detail, loyalty, devotion to duty, and sound judgment.
By October, 1960 eighteen US Citizens had "defected" to the Soviet
Union and came to Otepka's attention at the State Department. He
*informally* asked the CIA and military intelligence to identify
which these "defectors" were double agents working for the US but,
after
receiving no response, formally requested the information.
On October 25 Hugh Cumming, of the State Department's Intelligence
and Research Bureau, wrote a letter to CIA Deputy Director of Plans
(DDP)
Richard Bissell requesting detailed information on the eighteen
"defectors." Bissell turned the request over to James Angleton's
Counterintelligence (CI) staff and Sheffield Edwards' Office of
Security (OS), *but not to the Soviet Russia (SR) division which had
jurisdiction in dealing with the "defectors," including Oswald. This
is confirmation that Angelton's CI staff was involved with false
"defectors," including Oswald.* Angleton's CI/SIG chief, Birch D.
O'Neal, prepared the responses on behalf of counterintelligence while
Robert Bennerman handed the request to members of his staff in the
CIA's Office of Security that included Bruce Solie, Morse Allen, and
Paul Gaynor. Gaynor was head of the Security Research Staff where
*James McCord, of future Watergate fame*, worked.
Bennerman specifically instructed Marguerite Stevens, in the research
staff (OS), to provide information *only on American "defectors"
other than Lee *Harvey* Oswald* (and six other "defectors"),
explaining
that Otepka already had information on these individuals. The Office
of
Security then coordinated their response with Angleton's CI staff
before sending it to Richard Bissell (DDP) in lave November for his
signature. When Otepka finally received the CIA's response at the
State Department, the 10th name on the list was Lee Harvey Oswald
with the notation "SECRET."
On December 9, 1960, a few days after providing information on
"defectors" to the State Department, Angleton's trusted associate Ann
Egerter, of the Special Investigation Group (SIG), opened a "201"
file on Lee *Henry* Oswald (201-289248). *This file was opened 13
months
*after* Oswald "defected" to the Soviet Union and 6 months *after*
the memo was written about the CIA's interest in the *Harvey*
story."*
It appears that if not for Otepka's investigation into American
"defectors", the CIA would never have opened a file on Oswald. *This
indicates that Lee *Harvey* Oswald and his activities were so
sensitive that only Angleton, and perhaps SIG , knew the truth about
Oswald which they held only in memory.* Prior to President Kennedy's
assassination, Lee *Henry* Oswald's "201" file was held within
Angleton's Special Investigations Group (SIG).
NOTE: *During Oswald's stay in the Soviet Union cover sheets of
Oswald documents contained the notation "CI/OPS," which is an
abbreviation "Counterintelligence Operations."
#SIG member Ann Egerter was asked by the HSCA if a CIA asset or agent
would have a "201" file and if it would contain material of an
operational nature. She replied, "I assume that person would have a
201 file but it would be a restricted 201 file and *it might even be
a false 201 file, not having anything in it. Everything would be
held
by the case officer...operational material is not filed in 201
files...It would be held by the operations officer, case officer."*
#*Angleton's deputy Ray Rocca said, "The key documents in
establishing a fiduciary relationship would not be in the 201. They
would be in a
separate file held by the desk and whoever was handling the
individual."*
#*Former CIA employedd Phillip Agee said, "The 201 file is divided
into two parts which are stored separately for maximum secutiry. One
part contains true name documents while the other contains
operational information."
#*The obvious question: "Who was Oswald's case officer?"*
Soon after trying to pry information on the eighteen American
"defectors" from the CIA, Otto Otepka's duties began to change and
soon his position as Chief of Security at The State Department
appeared to be in jeopardy. Even though head had received awards for
Meritorious Service only two years earlier. Otepka soon found that
his access to sensitive cases was limited. Stories began to appear
in the press that the State Department, and specically Otepka's
Office
of Securiy, would soon experience a "reduction in force." Otepka was
soon asked by his superior to transfer to another division within the
State Department and take a different job but refused.
*NOTE: James Angleton had developed a fearsome reputation within the
agency and was known to expose agents he no longer trusted. CIA
career officer John Whitten (aka John Scelso) told the HSCA, "Several
times in my career I was appointed by Helms or Karamessines to
investigate or look into investigations where Angleton was
running....They always told him. And when they say, now, you go tell
Angleton you are going to do this. I used to go in fingering my
insurance policy, notifying my next of kin."*
*It is reasonable to speculate that Otepka's problems originated with
Angleton after he began pressing the CIA for information relating to
"defectors", including Oswald. A phone call from Angleton to CIA
Director Allen Dulles, and a subsequent call from Dulles to his
brother, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles , could easily have
set the wheels in motion to "neutralize" Otepka and stop his
investigation at the State Department (the Eishenhower administration
remained in
the White House until late January, 1961).*
Otepka, *for unexplained reasons*, was called before the Senate
Internal Security Subcommittee, which was chaired by Senator James
Eastland and Senator Thomas Dodd. He was questioned at length by
Jules (Jay) Sourwine, the subommittee's Chief Counsel, about
procedures established by Otepka for issuing clearances for State
Department applicants. Sourwine and Otepka soon became friends and
discussed at length a proposal by the subcommittee to loosen security
clearance procedures for State Department personnel.
Sourwine soon realized that the loosening of security procedures was
not the only reason the subcommittee was focusing their attention on
Otepka. In an attempt to learn what was really happening at the
State Department, behind the scenes, Sourwine began to informally
question
Otepka. But Otepka, following protocol and procedure, told Sourwine
that if he wanted to question him further he would have to question
him before the committee.
When the subcommittee questioned Otepka they asked if had been
subjected to any recent "reprisals" from the State *Department, which
he denied, and defended the department's actions. A short while
later* hidden listening devices were placed in Otepka's office and a
former employee of the National Security Agency (NSA), David Belisle,
was assigned to work with him. Otepka's secretary was replaced by an
individual who spied on him, his house was placed under surveillance,
and his trash was inspected daily.
*QUESTION: Which agency of the US government has the capability and
the political muscle to electronically bug the Office of Security at
the State Department?*
One evening Otepka was working late in his office and went out for
dinner. Upon returing he found David Belisle and an NSA employee in
his office, but when he asked for a reason for their intrusion
*neither man gave a rational explanation for being there.*
Otepka soon found that someone had drilled a hole in his safe and,
with a tiny mirror, had determined the combination and removed the
contents. According to Otepka the only sensitive material in the
safe was his uncompleted study of American "defectors" to the Soviet
Union, *which included Lee *Harvey* Oswald. Fred Traband, who also
worked
in the Office of Security ate the State Department, told the Eastman
Committee that it was Otepka's boss, John Francis Reilly, who
searched, who searched Otepka's files and his safe.
*NOTE: Three weeks before the assassination of President Kennedy,
Otto Otepka was ousted from the State Department, but had not yet
determined if Lee *Harvey* Oswald was an agent of the US Government.
Following the assassination OTepka told journalist Sarah McClendon
that he knew who had JFK killed, but declined comment in public.*
pgs. 306-08 Harvey and Lee, How the CIA framed Oswald, J. Armstrong.
* = Italicizing
CJ
tomnln
"mucher1" <muc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4fc849aa-035b-4249...@b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Da Porn Queen wrote;
I have a strong suspicion that Tom Rossley graduated summa cum laude
from the A**hole Academy.
I write;
? You got an Academy back there ?
If not, it was KUM laude ! ! !
You're better off gettin your ass Kicked with evidence/testimony.
Wanna discuss Oswald's Crypto Security Clearance Loser?
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/roy_schaeffer.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"timstter" <tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:02fbabd8-c468-4cb2...@f17g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:59d0c4d0-54b1-4bc7...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com...
timstter
> In article <59d0c4d0-54b1-4bc7-a6bc-9f071e611...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
Got it in one, Yellow Pants!
Kurtz is a crackpot, just like you and Gil.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
ps If I get no response to this message I'll take it that you agree
with what I say. TB
Gil Jesus
> He "Loves" it when you shove it up his ass Gil.
I guess he's about to love me some more then.
GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS SHOW THAT THE CIA DEBRIEFED OSWALD WHEN HE
RETURNED TO THE US:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INdAhPxf_70
Gil Jesus
> Why don't you forcefully condemn the idea that JBC was involved in
Connally lied about it being Kennedy's idea to come to Texas.
He said that the President wanted to come becuase he hadn't been there
since the election of 1960.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MNrxNE9JkY
Kennedy gave a speech at Rice University in Houston in September,
1962.
Connally lied about a lot of things, including that the shot that hit
him bent him over.
No such thing happens in the Zapruder film or any other film.
Innocent men have no reason to lie.
Connally was not an honorable man. He was Johnson's campaign manager
during the Box 13 scandal.
He was the one who fought for the Trade Mart as the location for the
luncheon.
And the motorcade route was dependent on the luncheon site.
Connally's wounding may not have been incidental. Apparently when he
was hit he realized that because he was the "missing link" that could
name the conspirators, he was going to be killed also.
Because he said, "My God, THEY'RE going to kill us all !!"
WAKE UP CHUCKLES, IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE
Chuck Schuyler
> On Mar 3, 9:34 am, Chuck Schuyler <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote:
>
> > Why don't you forcefully condemn the idea that JBC was involved in
> > JFK's murder. It's ridiculous.-
>
> Connally lied about it being Kennedy's idea to come to Texas.
If true, so what?
>
> He said that the President wanted to come becuase he hadn't been there
> since the election of 1960.
So? Moot point.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MNrxNE9JkY
>
> Kennedy gave a speech at Rice University in Houston in September,
> 1962.
So what.
>
> Connally lied about a lot of things, including that the shot that hit
> him bent him over.
> No such thing happens in the Zapruder film or any other film.
"Lie" is the only explanation? (Maybe this is more proof the Zapruder
film was, um...altered.)
>
> Innocent men have no reason to lie.
Non sequitur. Logical fallacy.
>
> Connally was not an honorable man. He was Johnson's campaign manager
> during the Box 13 scandal.
...so he pulled a pistol out his boot and shot JFK on Elm St.
>
> He was the one who fought for the Trade Mart as the location for the
> luncheon.
Which proves what, Gil.
>
> And the motorcade route was dependent on the luncheon site.
All decided shortly before the assassination, and yet you kooktards
think a massive plot was put together in that time, framing Oswald in
the TSBD--who wasn't even working there when the JFK Texas trip was
being formulated.
>
> Connally's wounding may not have been incidental. Apparently when he
> was hit he realized that because he was the "missing link" that could
> name the conspirators, he was going to be killed also.
Quick thinking!
>
> Because he said, "My God, THEY'RE going to kill us all !!"
So he was involved in the assassination, and at the same time blew the
lid off of the plot by his exclamation.
>
> WAKE UP CHUCKLES, IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE
You're the one out in outer space.
aeffects
we now understand why your agency went kaput!
Chuck Schuyler
>
> we now understand why your agency went kaput!
WTF are you babbling about?
mucher1
> On Mar 3, 6:48 am, mucher1 <much...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Congrats on showing a modicum of good sense, Gilly, but shouldn't you
> > have listened to your inner voice BEFORE trotting out a bogus document
> > as "PROOF OSWALD WAS CIA"?
>
> know that, since you can't wait for some issue to surface so that you
> attack the poster with it.
Much of what "you people" consider research is shoddy, one-sided
analysis, recycled indefinitely.
> And you ( your side, not necessarily you personally ) seem to be
> unforgiving at times, intent with harping on those issues
> indefinitely.
Keep in mind that, if your "side" is wrong--and it almost certainly
is--you seem to have accused a lot of innocent people of being
accessory to murder.
> One example is your foolish harping on the "yellow pants" issue with
> Ben Holmes.
A case of a CT, fond of calling other people liars and cowards,
advancing a stupid theory and later refusing to admit that he was
wrong. It's healthy for people like that to be reminded of their
hypocrisy once in a while.
> I don't see what a problem it is if in my research I post something
> that may be unverified or questionable, and then rescind it later when
> more information becomes available to me.
>
> It's called GROWING and it's part of research.
>
> When you people do some research, you'll know what I mean.
Would an open-minded researcher immediately jump on the bandwagon and
trot out the document as "PROOF OSWALD WAS CIA"? A more open-ended
approach might have something like "I happened to google up this
mysterious document and would like to hear what you guys think about
it."
timstter
Er, Verm, we already discussed that grainy junk, I mean *eyewitnesses
on video* and found it wanting.
BTW, that guy Denslaer (sp?) sounds EXACTLY like Jim DiEugenio. Sure
DiEugenio didn't do a voiceover on that nonsense?
KUTGW, Verm!
Did you know that tomnln's old mate, Harold Weisberg, got the boot out
of State in 1947 for helping the Russkies? Maybe we should start
calling him comnln, Verm. Whaddya say?
Helpful Regards,
Gil Jesus
>PROOF COMNLN WAS KBG!
ROFLMAO....I guess Von Pein has no problem with THIS misspelling.