Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bill Simpich's State Secret is completed
#1
The concluding chapter of Bill Simpich's new book State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City, Double Agents, and the Framing of Lee Oswald is now available for reading online here at MFF.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.ph...Conclusion

The book is completed. Its focus is about the impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City. This final chapter covers Bill's thoughts on who framed Oswald and killed the President. Rather than sell the book, Bill is asking for donations to Mary Ferrell. Leads for good radio shows are also appreciated - He wrote it, now he has to let people know it's there.

In the final chapter, subtitled Only Justice Will Stop a Curse, State Secret takes a hard look at suspects and "persons of interest" in the assassination, as opposed to the cover-up. The discussion of the role of the Secret Service, the near-pristine "magic bullet" found by a stretcher at the hospital, and JFK's autopsy illustrates some ways to think about the distinction between assassination planners and cover-up actors. The chapter also suggests that the NSA's ability in 1963 to listen to foreign leaders, access nuclear weapons codes, and obtain details on presidential protection were the crown jewels of US intelligence. These state secrets had to be protected from public view.
www.jfkessentials.com
Where Angels Tread Lightly, 2015, John M. Newman
State Secret, 2013, Bill Simpich
Oswald and the CIA, 2008 ed., John M. Newman
Deep Politics and DP ll, 2003 ed., Peter Dale Scott
Our Man In Mexico... 2008, Jefferson Morley
Wilderness of Mirrors, 1980, David C. Martin
JFK and Vietnam, 1992, John M. Newman
Enemy of the Truth...2012, Sherry P. Fiester
Reply
#2
Too bad Mr. Simpich's important new work has generated so little discussion here. It deserves WAY more attention!

His research certainly underscores one of his main contentions: that the LHO impersonations in Mexico City may be the key to unlocking wider understanding of the setup for the general public.

In an earlier chapter, Mr. Simpich made a statement that really resounded with me. It essentially said that the biography of Lee Harvey Oswald was the real State secret in the Kennedy Assassination. Well said!

One thing that disappointed me, though, was Bill's assumption that the LHO/Hidell wallet Westbrook found, or more likely brought, to 10th & Patton then somehow became the wallet supposedly found in the pocket of the Oswald arrested at the Texas Theater. If this is just Bill's hunch, there are certainly other explanations. If he has evidence of the wallet's movement, I must have missed it.

Megathanks, though, for making this outstanding work so easily accessible.
Reply
#3
I had not finished the work - which I find very well thought out and done [from what I had read], as I was waiting for it to be completed. Right at the begining, Simpich states something profound. It is not exactly new, but is stated in a clear way that makes old information visible in a new light...:

Quote:Strong evidence is provided in this book that both Oswald andDuran were impersonated on these tapes. Furthermore, I believe thatGoodpasture realized during September 1963 that someone had found outabout the CIA's Mexico City wiretap operation. Theimpersonation of Oswald and Duran meant that the Agency had to takeaction to ensure its security. Goodpasture got together with theoffices of covert action chief Dick Helms and CI chief Jim Angletonand launched an operation to try to figure out who had done it andwhy. It all blew up in their faces on 11/22/63, when the man who hadbeen impersonated was named as JFK's assassin.
When President Kennedy was shot down in Dallas, the CIA and theircolleagues at the FBI were effectively blackmailed. If their Oswaldmemos written prior to the assassination had been made public in thewake of JFK's death, public reaction would have been furious. If the word got out that CIA officers knew that Oswald had been impersonated prior to the assassination, this would imply both that Oswald had been set up for the assassination (which was presumably carried out by others), and that the CIA could have prevented JFK's death if it had reacted differently. The response would have been tectonic.

Tectonic indeed!...and any good Sherlock Holmes would have followed this trail - as it surely leads to those who planned the event[s] - perhaps even those who instigated them. Simpich has now made a stab at just that. I need to finish the work to comment fully. It certainly does deserve our attention, and consideration of its evidence and conclusions.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#4
^ Thanks for responding, fellas. Glad to know somebody noticed.



Bill has just added an organizational chart for use in reading, and understanding, State Secret.

Here's a direct link which includes Bill's corresponding links to MFF:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index....479&page=2

Valuable primer for all who care to invest the necessary time.

My 1 hour, 17 minute conversation with Bill may be heard here:

http://www.jfklancer.com/audioconversations.html
www.jfkessentials.com
Where Angels Tread Lightly, 2015, John M. Newman
State Secret, 2013, Bill Simpich
Oswald and the CIA, 2008 ed., John M. Newman
Deep Politics and DP ll, 2003 ed., Peter Dale Scott
Our Man In Mexico... 2008, Jefferson Morley
Wilderness of Mirrors, 1980, David C. Martin
JFK and Vietnam, 1992, John M. Newman
Enemy of the Truth...2012, Sherry P. Fiester
Reply
#5
It seemed premature to take a lot of questions about a book in progress. Now I'm working on
a description of the lead characters. Here's a timeline for many of the key events. I'm agnostic
about whether Oswald went to Mexico City, and convinced that an imposter made the
calls attributed to him on Sept. 28 and Oct. 1. All questions welcome.


State Secret timeline...


November 1962 Harvey is told that he is being transferred from Cuban operations

January 1963 Harvey suggests trying to recruit Cuban consul Eusebio Azcue

July SAS chief Des FitzGerald is extremely interested in recruiting Azcue

August Mexico City chief Win Scott agrees to try to recruit Azcue

September 10 - FBI agent Hosty reports Oswald has FPCC card and subscribes to CPUSA newspaper

September 13 Scott suggests using two agents in a compartmented 1-2 punch

September 16 SAS officer Tilton suggests deceptive op to embarrass the FPCC

September 17 Oswald receives a visa to go to Mexico City for fifteen days

September 19 Azcue recruitment fails "let's wait for further developments"

September 23 Lechuga and Attwood discuss Castro-JFK rapproachment

September 25 - Harvey's pal Will Potocki receives Hosty's Sept 10 memo about Oswald

September 26 Anderson: Fabricated evidence OK, if not initiated by CIA

September 27 Oswald shows FPCC and CPUSA cards during 3 visits to Cuban consulate

September 28 Call from Duran and Oswald at Cuban consulate to Soviet consulate

September 30 David Phillips leaves for CIA HQ in DC

October 1 Oswald identifies self by name in call to Soviet consulate

October 1 or 2 Tarasoff identifies "Lee Oswald" as caller on the 28[SUP]th[/SUP] and 1[SUP]st[/SUP]

October 2 Actual date of visit by "mystery man" to Soviet consulate, not Oct 1

Early October Three CIA memos express concern that FBI/MC is penetrated

October 8 Goodpasture dictates a memo linking Oct 1 call to Mystery Man

October 9 Gheesling & Anderson take Oswald off the FBI security watchlist

October 10 CIA HQ conducts molehunt aimed at SAS/JMWAVE, FBI, Mexico City

Mid-October - Goodpasture claims this is when Tarasoff linked the two calls

November 22 - CI/SIG chief says only CIA information on Oswald comes from FBI and State

November 23 - FBI Dallas agents say that the tape of Oswald doesn't match his voice

November 23 - Hoover tells LBJ that there were two different men in Mexico City






Alan Dale Wrote:^ Thanks for responding, fellas. Glad to know somebody noticed.



Bill has just added an organizational chart for use in reading, and understanding, State Secret.

Here's a direct link which includes Bill's corresponding links to MFF:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index....479&page=2

Valuable primer for all who care to invest the necessary time.

My 1 hour, 17 minute conversation with Bill may be heard here:

http://www.jfklancer.com/audioconversations.html
Reply
#6
Bill Simpich Wrote:It seemed premature to take a lot of questions about a book in progress. Now I'm working on
a description of the lead characters. Here's a timeline for many of the key events. I'm agnostic
about whether Oswald went to Mexico City, and convinced that an imposter made the
calls attributed to him on Sept. 28 and Oct. 1. All questions welcome.


HI, Bill. Thanks for making all this research so freely available.

One of the things creating doubt about the official Mexico City saga, as eventually dribbled out to us, was the Agency's inability--or refusal--to produce a photo of anyone looking remotely like the fellow shot dead by Jack Ruby. Somewhere in your book you mention that at one of the embassies, the Cuban Consulate if memory serves, CIA technicians were changing cameras or something on the day LHO supposedly visited and therefore missed getting his mug shot. What luck! Do you believe that explanation?

My understanding of the the surveillance at both the Soviet and Cuban installations was that there was a pulse camera system as well as one or more backup systems. It always has seemed to me that government agencies like the CIA are nothing if not thorough, and I just can't believe the excuses for failing to get photos or keep audio recordings of the elusive LHO. Why doesn't the dog sometimes eat someone else's homework?

Thanks again.
Reply
#7
That was an excellent series, Bill. Thanks for making it available online to everyone.
Reply
#8
Jim Hargrove Wrote:
Bill Simpich Wrote:It seemed premature to take a lot of questions about a book in progress. Now I'm working on
a description of the lead characters. Here's a timeline for many of the key events. I'm agnostic
about whether Oswald went to Mexico City, and convinced that an imposter made the
calls attributed to him on Sept. 28 and Oct. 1. All questions welcome.


HI, Bill. Thanks for making all this research so freely available.

One of the things creating doubt about the official Mexico City saga, as eventually dribbled out to us, was the Agency's inability--or refusal--to produce a photo of anyone looking remotely like the fellow shot dead by Jack Ruby. Somewhere in your book you mention that at one of the embassies, the Cuban Consulate if memory serves, CIA technicians were changing cameras or something on the day LHO supposedly visited and therefore missed getting his mug shot. What luck! Do you believe that explanation?

My understanding of the the surveillance at both the Soviet and Cuban installations was that there was a pulse camera system as well as one or more backup systems. It always has seemed to me that government agencies like the CIA are nothing if not thorough, and I just can't believe the excuses for failing to get photos or keep audio recordings of the elusive LHO. Why doesn't the dog sometimes eat someone else's homework?

Thanks again.

Jim,

My mind is open on this subject. The CIA failed to provide to the HSCA or the ARRB the photos from LILYRIC or the Cuban consulate, as discussed in Chapter 4. So the photos may be hidden from us to this day.

I have to say, though, that if you look at the Cuban and Soviet embassy photo logs you will notice several things. The visits for Friday, Sept. 27 ended in the morning, which was not unusual. They took no photos on Saturday, also not unusual.

Also, those logs were for the embassies. The Cuban consulate was physically separate from the Soviet consulate. The Cuban consulate door had just been reopened to the public after being shut down for a year due to David Phillips' stink bombs (LITAINT)! It was as if they were trying to get the camera working for Oswald's arrival - so there's that issue.

Most importantly to me is that Win Scott said that photos were taken of Oswald coming and going for every visit on Sept. 27 and 28 by Oswald. That would mean at least ten photos. That doesn't line up with what the logs say. I think Scott made that up, because his ego was bruised by the notion that his people didn't photo Oswald.

To make it even wilder, Joseph Piccolo and Stanley Watson remembered seeing a photo of Oswald from a rear view entering the Cuban embassy. Watson said that the photo made Scott "the number one boy" of LBJ. I think it's entirely possible Scott phonied up a photo!

I say the focus should be on getting all the documents released. I also believe that it's the Oswald legend, not what Oswald or an impersonator did in Mexico City, that is so important. I do think that an impersonator was used for the Sept. 28 and Oct 1 calls is important, and tells us what we need to know.

Why was he impersonated? To get the Mexico City and Angleton's people all worked up to conduct a molehunt and find out who breached Mexico City's security. That creates a paper trail around Oswald that can be used for blackmail purposes after the assassination.

Bill
Reply
#9
Bill Simpich Wrote:Jim,

My mind is open on this subject. The CIA failed to provide to the HSCA or the ARRB the photos from LILYRIC or the Cuban consulate, as discussed in Chapter 4. So the photos may be hidden from us to this day.

I have to say, though, that if you look at the Cuban and Soviet embassy photo logs you will notice several things. The visits for Friday, Sept. 27 ended in the morning, which was not unusual. They took no photos on Saturday, also not unusual.

Also, those logs were for the embassies. The Cuban consulate was physically separate from the Soviet consulate. The Cuban consulate door had just been reopened to the public after being shut down for a year due to David Phillips' stink bombs (LITAINT)! It was as if they were trying to get the camera working for Oswald's arrival - so there's that issue.

Most importantly to me is that Win Scott said that photos were taken of Oswald coming and going for every visit on Sept. 27 and 28 by Oswald. That would mean at least ten photos. That doesn't line up with what the logs say. I think Scott made that up, because his ego was bruised by the notion that his people didn't photo Oswald.

To make it even wilder, Joseph Piccolo and Stanley Watson remembered seeing a photo of Oswald from a rear view entering the Cuban embassy. Watson said that the photo made Scott "the number one boy" of LBJ. I think it's entirely possible Scott phonied up a photo!

I say the focus should be on getting all the documents released. I also believe that it's the Oswald legend, not what Oswald or an impersonator did in Mexico City, that is so important. I do think that an impersonator was used for the Sept. 28 and Oct 1 calls is important, and tells us what we need to know.

Why was he impersonated? To get the Mexico City and Angleton's people all worked up to conduct a molehunt and find out who breached Mexico City's security. That creates a paper trail around Oswald that can be used for blackmail purposes after the assassination.

Bill

This sounds a little like John Newman's analysis, if I remember it correctly, and there's something about this line of thinking I've never been able to comprehend. Let's just digress for a moment to point out the obvious about "Lee Harvey Oswald," the Russian-speaking commie-talking U.S. marine who knew all kinds of stuff about top secret U-2 spy planes, who "defects" to the U.S.S.R, telling our side he's going to tell the Russkies everything he knows, then gets State Department help to come home without prosecution, and is soon posing as a Castro supporter in New Orleans working for virulent anti-Castro operatives. Then, a few months before the assassination, he gets through U.S. Customs AGAIN, bound for Mexico City, loudly threatens to kill JFK, and then comes back, AGAIN, and again with few repercussions.


Plenty of researchers smarter than me have been reluctant to call Oswald a flat-out spook, but I've never understood why. If his m.o. isn't the m.o. of a spy, I can't imagine a more obvious example.

But back to the matter at hand, if someone OUTSIDE the Agency was going to set up someone as a ticking time bomb with a couple of phone calls and such, it's easy to see why they would want to pick a CIA insider to make the blackmail work. But what would possibly make them think such a plan would work? Agency handlers don't talk to their own operative? They don't know what he looks like or recognize the sound of his voice? It doesn't sound like much of a plan to me.

But if someone INSIDE the Agency was doing the set-up, someone with substantial contacts with the Patsy-to-be, that might be a lot more workable. Just a thought....

Jim
Reply
#10
Jim Hargrove Wrote:
Bill Simpich Wrote:Jim,

My mind is open on this subject. The CIA failed to provide to the HSCA or the ARRB the photos from LILYRIC or the Cuban consulate, as discussed in Chapter 4. So the photos may be hidden from us to this day.

I have to say, though, that if you look at the Cuban and Soviet embassy photo logs you will notice several things. The visits for Friday, Sept. 27 ended in the morning, which was not unusual. They took no photos on Saturday, also not unusual.

Also, those logs were for the embassies. The Cuban consulate was physically separate from the Soviet consulate. The Cuban consulate door had just been reopened to the public after being shut down for a year due to David Phillips' stink bombs (LITAINT)! It was as if they were trying to get the camera working for Oswald's arrival - so there's that issue.

Most importantly to me is that Win Scott said that photos were taken of Oswald coming and going for every visit on Sept. 27 and 28 by Oswald. That would mean at least ten photos. That doesn't line up with what the logs say. I think Scott made that up, because his ego was bruised by the notion that his people didn't photo Oswald.

To make it even wilder, Joseph Piccolo and Stanley Watson remembered seeing a photo of Oswald from a rear view entering the Cuban embassy. Watson said that the photo made Scott "the number one boy" of LBJ. I think it's entirely possible Scott phonied up a photo!

I say the focus should be on getting all the documents released. I also believe that it's the Oswald legend, not what Oswald or an impersonator did in Mexico City, that is so important. I do think that an impersonator was used for the Sept. 28 and Oct 1 calls is important, and tells us what we need to know.

Why was he impersonated? To get the Mexico City and Angleton's people all worked up to conduct a molehunt and find out who breached Mexico City's security. That creates a paper trail around Oswald that can be used for blackmail purposes after the assassination.

Bill

This sounds a little like John Newman's analysis, if I remember it correctly, and there's something about this line of thinking I've never been able to comprehend. Let's just digress for a moment to point out the obvious about "Lee Harvey Oswald," the Russian-speaking commie-talking U.S. marine who knew all kinds of stuff about top secret U-2 spy planes, who "defects" to the U.S.S.R, telling our side he's going to tell the Russkies everything he knows, then gets State Department help to come home without prosecution, and is soon posing as a Castro supporter in New Orleans working for virulent anti-Castro operatives. Then, a few months before the assassination, he gets through U.S. Customs AGAIN, bound for Mexico City, loudly threatens to kill JFK, and then comes back, AGAIN, and again with few repercussions.


Plenty of researchers smarter than me have been reluctant to call Oswald a flat-out spook, but I've never understood why. If his m.o. isn't the m.o. of a spy, I can't imagine a more obvious example.

But back to the matter at hand, if someone OUTSIDE the Agency was going to set up someone as a ticking time bomb with a couple of phone calls and such, it's easy to see why they would want to pick a CIA insider to make the blackmail work. But what would possibly make them think such a plan would work? Agency handlers don't talk to their own operative? They don't know what he looks like or recognize the sound of his voice? It doesn't sound like much of a plan to me.

But if someone INSIDE the Agency was doing the set-up, someone with substantial contacts with the Patsy-to-be, that might be a lot more workable. Just a thought....

Jim


Jim, the book lays out in Chapter 5 that I think someone inside the Agency did the set-up - David Morales or someone a lot like him, probably from the Miami station. That's where the dissension against JFK appeared to be the strongest.

Morales and his buddies were highly skilled in counter-intelligence. They would have had no problem manipulating Oswald - wittingly or unwittingly - into doing pretty much whatever they wanted.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The State of the ARRB today Jim DiEugenio 0 1,656 28-10-2019, 09:22 PM
Last Post: Jim DiEugenio
  Jim Garrison: Some Unauthorized Comments on the State of the Union Jim DiEugenio 2 2,869 13-08-2019, 06:39 PM
Last Post: Jim DiEugenio
  NATO's Secret Armies, Gladio and JFK Jim DiEugenio 3 2,865 20-07-2019, 01:14 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Bill Kelly on Angleton, Jefferson Morley, and Thomas Powers Anthony Thorne 5 13,153 11-06-2019, 04:50 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Collins Radio Connection to JFK Assassination - Bill Kelly (revised) Peter Lemkin 15 8,514 20-05-2019, 09:08 PM
Last Post: Scott Kaiser
  Richard Bartholomew's THE DEEP STATE IN THE HEART OF TEXAS Anthony Thorne 15 36,215 10-09-2018, 11:30 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Bill Kelly's Review of David Talbot's "The Devil's Chessboard" Bill Kelly 32 23,604 14-01-2018, 06:33 PM
Last Post: Dawn Meredith
  Bill Turner on Garrison KPFA Jim DiEugenio 2 7,460 10-01-2018, 06:12 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Brainwashed : The Secret CIA Experiments in Canada John Kowalski 0 6,746 18-12-2017, 04:02 AM
Last Post: John Kowalski
  State of Texas vs Lee Harvey Oswald: Autopsy x rays Jim DiEugenio 40 42,575 07-12-2017, 10:00 AM
Last Post: Cliff Varnell

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)