If you have nothing to share related to Poyle and Mexico City... don't. Just saying he did "something" related to propaganda related to Oswald and Mexico City is fine...
But it doesn't actually SAY anything.
If you have an issue with SLAWSON stating he heard the tape in Mexico City... take it up with him.
Dallas heard a tape which the FBI agents said was not Oswald... and then they asked that it be forwarded to DC if not sent back to Mexico...
That a tape existed is not questioned... that they were destroyed or erased is. Goodpasture lied again about the tapes being gone...
The FBI has their own agents interacting with the CIA as informants...(Bannister might be considered one) or informants in other agencies who can get the info (Jeff Woosley at I&NS for example).
You asking me for the tapes is like me asking you to post one of your father's photos... If I had the tape I'd make it available...
If you have these amazing photos, sharing one might gain you immeasureable credibility
DJ
Quote:Your evasive answers do not help anyone...
If I were really being evasive, I would simply had never mentioned Poyle, and, bring it all out later providing my evidence, while you're arguing with me, others are looking for what I'm talking about, and they'll find it before you. All I did, was point you in the right direction, what you do with that information is up to you.
Quote:If you have an issue with SLAWSON stating he heard the tape in Mexico City... take it up with him.
I'm not asking them to state their facts, and provide the link and or proof the tape exists, I'm asking you, after all, you said YOU heard the tape. Surely, after, or during you hearing that tape you made a copy of it didn't you? I would have.
I am not arguing with you... I've spent the last two days looking for and asking about Poyle... nothing related to Mexico "propaganda"
Read my lips... I DID NOT HEAR ANY TAPES.. Slawson & the FBI did.
Quote:I'm asking you, after all, you said YOU heard the tape
Slawson was quoted in an interview as saying he heard the tapes...
Dallas FBI wrote reports about having heard these tapes.
I simply posted that info...
Stating "THERE WAS NO TAPE" when the evidence clearly shows there was and it was NOT OSWALD... means you need to prove or disprove the EVIDENCE ...
I have nothing to do with what the Evidence from the WCR and related data says Scott...
Why does Hoover state that his agents who knew Oswald's voice, heard the tapes and stated it was not Oswald. Lies? ok, I'm fine with that.. proof? Goodpasture claims the tapes were erased... how can you erase tapes that never existed yet which people claim to have heard...
Maybe Poyle is Oswald's voice on the tape... don't know yet...
Maybe he worked with OCHOA... again, if Poyle was CIA, OCHOA was an FBI asset... I doubt they would be working together on this.
I'll just wait until you stop all this and publish something concrete.
I think you have very valuable info and anecdotes that I doubt highly you'd fabricate...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/106502071/Poyle was a link from a different one of your threads I believe... which says that Poyle received mail as RICHARD POSADA (should we be looking at THAT name instead?)
Due to very busy work schedule i don't have time to debate on forums but i felt the need to post just this reply regarding Mexico City, Simpich and the Mole hunt.
According to Simpich:
"I offer the hypothesis that David Morales ran a piggy-backed operation on top of an anti-Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation run by CIA officer John Tilton and FBI agent Lambert Anderson, outwitted both Angleton and Goodpasture, brought down the President, and got away with it. Whether or not Bill Harvey was part of this operation, his people were all over it and merit further scrutiny...
Others have argued to me that Angleton and covert action chief David Phillips were part of a plan to kill Kennedy, but my present perspective is that both of them like Goodpasture and operations chief Richard Helms, who I believe were in on the molehunt - were entrapped by the impersonation.
Angleton and Phillips drove the cover-up for their own protection. Otherwise, their careers and reputations would have been ruined, to say nothing of the future of the CIA. Phillips told investigator Kevin Walsh shortly before he died that he believed American intelligence officers were involved in the assassination. Angleton's last words were filled with regret and sorrow. "I've made so many mistakes."
I do not agree with his conclusions. I mean David, you so fiercely defend Armstrong with respect to Harvey and Lee, and you do not do the same when it comes with his Mexico explanation? And you prefer Simpich's thesis that exonerates Angleton and Phillips? Really?
When Newman has presented his view about Angleton and now he is going to after Phillips in his new books? And Lopez and Hardway that investigated it the incident in detail, haven spoken in person to all the players and had access to CIA HQ, why should i believe what Simpich says?
I would agree that a mole hunt was going on, but this does not exclude that Angleton was part of the plot.
Angleton said to Trento that E. H Hunt was sent to Dallas the day of the assassination on orders from a highly ranked KGB mole inside the CIA. Later Trento said that he believed that Angleton was really trying to hide his connection to Hunt and that he had probably sent him down there. Angleton never caught a mole, and later a CIA investigation concluded that maybe Angleton was a mole himself. It seems that Angleton was using his mole hunt as a cover to carry out his own agenda.
Imagine a Congressman asking Angleton what was he involvement down in Mexico. Would he have answered "i was planning to assassinate a US President" or "I was doing a mole hunt"?
So why to believe Simpich and his theory that it was Morales the man who outfoxed the rest of the CIA?
I have Simpich's book in (self-compiled) Word doc form and am preparing to read it, but his argument that Morales pulled a fast one over those sympathetic characters Phillips and Angleton and their CIA buddies does make me raise my eyebrows a tad before I get started - the ending of Newman's revised OSWALD AND THE CIA is particularly compelling in arguing that Angleton was a key part of the early plot.
Simpich's book is very good, but a person can still come to shaky conclusions when - in the end - we don't have a lot of smoking guns, and we have to rely on speculation. IMO, it required a higher-level conspiracy to do the security-stripping in the motorcade, and many other features of the plot.
Scott Kaiser Wrote:I'm asking you, after all, you said YOU heard the tape.
Not my fight, but David said no such thing. You misread it initially and have never corrected YOUR error. In doing so you're undermining your credibility.
26-06-2015, 02:15 AM (This post was last modified: 26-06-2015, 06:40 PM by Scott Kaiser.)
Michael Cross Wrote:
Scott Kaiser Wrote:I'm asking you, after all, you said YOU heard the tape.
Not my fight, but David said no such thing. You misread it initially and have never corrected YOUR error. In doing so you're undermining your credibility.
Okay, I read it wrong he says;
Quote:*In a letter dated December 4, 1992 (published in The Investigator), W. David Slawson wrote: Yes, I listened to the tape of Lee Harvey Oswald s telephone conversations with the Soviet Embassy In Mexico City I did not feel that the voice sounded any different from what I expected his would sound like. Slawson does not go to Mexico City until the mid-70's for the HSCA
I over looked reading *In a letter dated December 4, 1992 (published in The Investigator), W. David Slawson wrote:
When I thought he said; Yes, I listened to the tape of Lee Harvey Oswald s telephone conversations with the Soviet Embassy In Mexico City
You say; In doing so you're undermining your credibility. No, I'm not undermining my credibility because I miss read something, that just means I'm human, and human is to error.
What I do suggest is, don't judge me, no one here knows me, I've already told you that tape never existed, I've told you Poyle was apart of the propaganda of Oswald's phone conversation to the Soviet Embassy, and I told you that Poyle knew about my father having the photos, and was showing them around the Cuban community. Poyle also knew quite a bit about Santo's Trafficante, as it appears the CIA planted him to live across the hall. Tell me, was Poyle's wife also living there too? Then why would Poyle go to Mexico to see his wife when she wasn't there either?
Just because you don't or can't find documents from the CIA stating "Oh, and by the way, us agents used Poyle to help plan an ongoing cover up and propaganda of Oswald's phone" call doesn't mean it didn't happen. I'm sorry if you haven't found anything. I'm on my way to Miami tomorrow, and I have a lot to do including taping some folks.
And, I don't know if Poyle used that name Richard Posada, that name has come up before, and I've heard of it, wondering if there's any relation to Bambi?
I don't know if Poyle is alive or dead. And, my work is cut out for me.
Scott Kaiser Wrote:I know for a fact David you've not listened to any tape Oswald apparently made when the CIA said he called the Soviet Embassy. First off, what I've been telling you, you have elected not to follow though, secondly, what your eyes don't see, and your ears don't hear, means you don't know, there is no tape of Oswald calling the Embassy.
David Phillips says the tape was erased sometime in Oct. 1963, but the CIA also says they gave the tape to the FBI sometime in Nov. so, how could the tape be eased?
I have information from the CIA who I plan on getting on film, that there was never a tape made of Oswald, don't you think that if there was a tape the WC would have made it public and paint Oswald as a Castro sympathist and a lone assassin, however, there was no tape.
Due to very busy work schedule i don't have time to debate on forums but i felt the need to post just this reply regarding Mexico City, Simpich and the Mole hunt.
According to Simpich:
"I offer the hypothesis that David Morales ran a piggy-backed operation on top of an anti-Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation run by CIA officer John Tilton and FBI agent Lambert Anderson, outwitted both Angleton and Goodpasture, brought down the President, and got away with it. Whether or not Bill Harvey was part of this operation, his people were all over it and merit further scrutiny...
Others have argued to me that Angleton and covert action chief David Phillips were part of a plan to kill Kennedy, but my present perspective is that both of them like Goodpasture and operations chief Richard Helms, who I believe were in on the molehunt - were entrapped by the impersonation.
Angleton and Phillips drove the cover-up for their own protection. Otherwise, their careers and reputations would have been ruined, to say nothing of the future of the CIA. Phillips told investigator Kevin Walsh shortly before he died that he believed American intelligence officers were involved in the assassination. Angleton's last words were filled with regret and sorrow. "I've made so many mistakes."
I do not agree with his conclusions. I mean David, you so fiercely defend Armstrong with respect to Harvey and Lee, and you do not do the same when it comes with his Mexico explanation? And you prefer Simpich's thesis that exonerates Angleton and Phillips? Really?
When Newman has presented his view about Angleton and now he is going to after Phillips in his new books? And Lopez and Hardway that investigated it the incident in detail, haven spoken in person to all the players and had access to CIA HQ, why should i believe what Simpich says?
I would agree that a mole hunt was going on, but this does not exclude that Angleton was part of the plot.
Angleton said to Trento that E. H Hunt was sent to Dallas the day of the assassination on orders from a highly ranked KGB mole inside the CIA. Later Trento said that he believed that Angleton was really trying to hide his connection to Hunt and that he had probably sent him down there. Angleton never caught a mole, and later a CIA investigation concluded that maybe Angleton was a mole himself. It seems that Angleton was using his mole hunt as a cover to carry out his own agenda.
Imagine a Congressman asking Angleton what was he involvement down in Mexico. Would he have answered "i was planning to assassinate a US President" or "I was doing a mole hunt"?
So why to believe Simpich and his theory that it was Morales the man who outfoxed the rest of the CIA?
Thanks for the thoughtful post Vasilios
And thanks for picking up the nuances between ALL of a theory and aspects of one. I don't prefer Bill's per se, you shouldn't "believe" anything... you should do what you're doing.
I recommend reading the work. It remains, like H&L, a wonderful launching point. What you find and where it leads is up to you. I don't agree with many Mexico explanations because the info I found suggests that no one took this bus trip at all... that these descriptions are composites of people on buses the witnesses experienced. To me, if no one took a bus, it wasn't Lee on these buses...
If I would guess, he was our Alice TX traveler. For those who think that an H.O. Lee took the Mexico trip... why would Mr. LEE be filed in the records (created by the FBI's assets in Mexico after the fact) between "M" and "P" on one form and "M" and Ou" in another ?
I do not speak for Bill as I don't for John. Bill has been helpful, kind and sincere so I think he approaches his analysis with the same virtues...
My focus was the evidence of his being there at all before and after... If the FBI was indeed involved within this hunt, one can see the motivation to protect the CIA's lies about the trip, among other things.
I follow the Evidence offered and attainable... In many areas it supports H&L and I defend it so. Discussions and writings about what happened in Mexico and why will always be shadowed by "best-guess from the evidence" analysis and corroboration to illustrate a point.
I would need to give State Secret another read to be able to discuss that with you and give you a thoughtful answer - life gets in the way as you elude to at the start of your post - but now you have me interested... :-)
VV - a right answer is very difficult to agree upon... at what level of detail is it left to chance versus a plan so that we may be trying to connect dots that were only created at the moment.
Between Bill and JA there is a mountain of evidence. We will be wrong... I will be wrong. He will have been wrong in a few places...
Tell us a different story... that adds up to the whole
DJ
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
![[Image: icon1.png]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.png){kind=icon}
Edwin Kaiser's address book and Oswald