Oswald's CIA 201 File

Mon 06 Nov 2017, 2:24 am

Oswald's CIA 201 File

The concern over Oswald's CIA 201 file grows with the newly released documents. First and foremost is the now established fact that 37 documents recorded as part of the file, were removed, lost or destroyed before 20 Feb. 1964. This fact was presented to the WC by Richard Helms, in his response to the WC on the contents of this file. There were 2 dispatches, 7 FBI memos, 1 CSCI,2 State Department docs and 25 cables, missing. In the submitted 201 file to the WC there were 7 FBI docs,10 USDS docs,2 Dept Navy, I from INS, 4 newspaper clippings, 5 CIA notes and one CIA report
to the Warren Commission.

The missing documents are indeed of interest, but there is little chance that they will ever see the light of day. So we need to consider all aspects of conspiracy as well as stupidity. The 201 file was presented as being created on 9 December, 1960. Which would be a year after the first submitted document, for inclusion into the file and the grounds for opening the file in the first place. It might have taken 30 days or more to create the file, but there is a major problem with that consideration. That problem maybe Elizabeth Ann Egerter, who was tasked to create a "P" file on Oswald in a classified message on 11 October 1963. The problem is she is listed as the CI/SIG in association with the first document of the 1960 201 file, she was also responsible for creating. That document is from 9 November, 1959 and as do others included, concern Lee Harvey Oswald, not Lee Henry Oswald. The name Henry does not appear on any of the documents seen as of this time dealing with what has been
recently released. Beyond the Harvey vs Henry concern is another fact to consider.

In the 1960 201 File there were 4 WATCH LIST cards one dated 20 November, 1959 was "deleted" 28 May, 1962. This establishes in fact that there was interest or action concerning LHO by the CIA in 1962 and documents from this file were being officially deleted...jko

Mon 06 Nov 2017, 9:13 am

Jim, are you aware of the theory that the insertion of mistakes in the name were deliberately done as part of Angleton's mole hunt? I don't have an opinion as I don't see the mole hunt, even if it utilized Oswald and/or his file, as having any significance to the assassination.

Mon 06 Nov 2017, 10:03 am

Greg: I'm aware that theory and it is much more evident in my recent work
on Maurice Bishop and his alias, which I plan to post soon. I was thinking of running it thru Jeff Morley first, since he's done alot on Bishop and this
new research can become time consuming to say the least.
As to the Henry vs Harvey aspect of the 201 file, I'm open to all considerations, since I have not reached any conclusions on how the use of Henry fits into the box. Unless something comes up with further research I don't feel that the use of Henry has a clear significance other than its part of the official record, that we already know about.

My main concern at this time is why there are 37 missing documents from the file and that this information was known to the WC and little or no effort was made to assemble data on them. For example the May 62 delete. The CIA knew on 13 May 62, the Dutch issued Marina a transit visa, but no record of Lee getting one. It makes no sense to delete anything during that period of time by the CIA.

Mon 06 Nov 2017, 10:32 am

Jim Olmstead wrote:The CIA knew on 13 May 62, the Dutch issued Marina a transit visa, but no record of Lee getting one. It makes no sense to delete anything during that period of time by the CIA.

Don't know about that. Not sure what to make of it it either.

Mon 06 Nov 2017, 2:41 pm

Greg: Further research on this by myself and anyone interested should consider the following:

Thomas B. Cassin mentions a few unknown facts relating:

REDWOOD (?) had OI (?) interest in LHO in summer of 1960 connected to KUJUMP (?).

I believe KUJUMP deals with CIA interest in the factory that Lee worked in Minsk and that he should not be scared off in providing details. History shows
us that LHO wrote a very detailed account of his "work" in Minsk and that would be of interest to CIA
upon his return. So if LHO was returning, any material relating to his return does not seem to be
material that would be deleted before his return.

Mon 06 Nov 2017, 2:54 pm

James K. Olmstead wrote:Greg: Further research on this by myself and anyone interested should consider the following:

Thomas B. Cassin mentions a few unknown facts relating:

REDWOOD (?) had OI (?) interest in LHO in summer of 1960 connected to KUJUMP (?).

I believe KUJUMP deals with CIA interest in the factory that Lee worked in Minsk and that he should not be scared off in providing details. History shows
us that LHO wrote a very detailed account of his "work" in Minsk and that would be of interest to CIA
upon his return. So if LHO was returning, any material relating to his return does not seem to be
material that would be deleted before his return.

Jim, others have put in a lot of work on the crypts in your absence.

KUJUMP was the CIA Office of Operations. It "handled all OVERT collection functions" so it is more than possible they had an interest in Oswald's "The Kollective" about the factory.

REDWOOD was a SR Division action indicator.

Tue 07 Nov 2017, 6:16 am

Thanks Greg......I feel like a newbie having been out of this case for so long. I'm glad that this might fit into Overt Intelligence vs covert. It fits better
into my earlier work dealing with Radar Defectors and
Oswald in the USSR dealing with LHO as a unknown openly being used mutually by the USSR and the USA.

After thinking about things I remembered that Marina's entry to the US was under the guidelines established under the CIA Act of 1948 and the deletion might have had some connection to that consideration to protect assets used in getting people out of the USSR.

Tue 07 Nov 2017, 8:40 am

James K. Olmstead wrote:Thanks Greg......I feel like a newbie having been out of this case for so long. I'm glad that this might fit into Overt Intelligence vs covert. It fits better
into my earlier work dealing with Radar Defectors and
Oswald in the USSR dealing with LHO as a unknown openly being used mutually by the USSR and the USA.

After thinking about things I remembered that Marina's entry to the US was under the guidelines established under the CIA Act of 1948 and the deletion might have had some connection to that consideration to protect assets used in getting people out of the USSR.

Jim, yes, overt definitely works better.

My "take" on Lee in the USSR will be published soon on the web, along with the rest of my research.

Tue 07 Nov 2017, 8:43 am

Jim Olmstead wrote:After thinking about things I remembered that Marina's entry to the US was under the guidelines established under the CIA Act of 1948 and the deletion might have had some connection to that consideration to protect assets used in getting people out of the USSR.

Interesting thought...

Wed 08 Nov 2017, 1:37 am

Sorry its the CIA Act of 1949 not 1948..jko

Wed 08 Nov 2017, 10:46 am

Jim, wasn't there also some discussion between Nixon and his USSR counterpart during his '59 visit about the problem of bringing spouses to either country, and how that should be made simpler?

Wed 08 Nov 2017, 1:49 pm

I would have to ck...I believe Nixon helped paved the way for LHO to enter.

Fri 10 Nov 2017, 10:56 am

greg parker wrote:Jim, are you aware of the theory that the insertion of mistakes in the name were deliberately done as part of Angleton's mole hunt? I don't have an opinion as I don't see the mole hunt, even if it utilized Oswald and/or his file, as having any significance to the assassination.

Actually Greg, I think Simpich makes a great argument that the Mole Hunt could've been intentionally used by Harvey/Morales, etc, to cover their own asses essentially as well as to frame/implicate LHO in Mexico City. How do you feel about that theory?

Fri 10 Nov 2017, 11:09 am

BC_II wrote:

greg parker wrote:Jim, are you aware of the theory that the insertion of mistakes in the name were deliberately done as part of Angleton's mole hunt? I don't have an opinion as I don't see the mole hunt, even if it utilized Oswald and/or his file, as having any significance to the assassination.

Actually Greg, I think Simpich makes a great argument that the Mole Hunt could've been intentionally used by Harvey/Morales, etc, to cover their own asses essentially as well as to frame/implicate LHO in Mexico City. How do you feel about that theory?

Bill usually does make a strong case (except when defending his witness list!).

If Oswald was being used in a mole hunt (and possibly he was) I don't think it had anything to do with the assassination, although (again - possibly) it was something utilized post-assassination in the manner you outline.

It's all a bit airy-fairy for my liking, and substantially based on misspelllings/wrong names in files - a phenomenon that is rife throughout all of the documentation with countless people and therefore hard to single out as rare examples of how a mole hunt operated.

Mon 13 Nov 2017, 9:04 am

greg parker wrote:

BC_II wrote:

greg parker wrote:Jim, are you aware of the theory that the insertion of mistakes in the name were deliberately done as part of Angleton's mole hunt? I don't have an opinion as I don't see the mole hunt, even if it utilized Oswald and/or his file, as having any significance to the assassination.

Actually Greg, I think Simpich makes a great argument that the Mole Hunt could've been intentionally used by Harvey/Morales, etc, to cover their own asses essentially as well as to frame/implicate LHO in Mexico City. How do you feel about that theory?

Bill usually does make a strong case (except when defending his witness list!).

If Oswald was being used in a mole hunt (and possibly he was) I don't think it had anything to do with the assassination, although (again - possibly) it was something utilized post-assassination in the manner you outline.

It's all a bit airy-fairy for my liking, and substantially based on misspelllings/wrong names in files - a phenomenon that is rife throughout all of the documentation with countless people and therefore hard to single out as rare examples of how a mole hunt operated.

Ahhh gotcha and thanks for the insight!

Mon 13 Nov 2017, 12:23 pm

The concerns here are not limited to LHO. Took me
awhile to find the sections of note in the HSCA investigation. There is concern dealing with the FPCC in this in LA and Tampa and travel to Cuba,
that I'm revisiting. But it helps illustrate a point
on wrong numbers, locations as well as names,
mole hunt or not.....jko

(e) Gilberto Policarpo Lopez allegation
vs Eusebio Azcue Lopez

According to the account, Lopez obtained a tourist card in Tampa, Fla., on November 20, 1963, entered Mexico at Nuevo Laredo on November 23, and flew from Mexico City to Havana on November 27. (12O)
*****
11The committee noted the discrepancies in this message, as follows: the spelling of Lopes, for Lopez; the November 13 date and passport number 319962, issued July 13, 1960; and Lopez entering Mexico on foot.

In its 1977 Task Force Report, the CIA cited the several "inaccuracies," as they had been repeated in the report of the Senate Select Committee, as reason to refute the report itself. The TFR pointed out that Lopez' name had been misspelled "Lopes," that it had Lopez entering Mexico on foot, when the CIA had information that he had traveled by automobile; that it listed incorrect digits for Lopez' passport number; that it stated that Lopez' Mexican tourist visa had been issued in Nuevo Laredo, not Tampa; and it reported that he had stayed at the Cuban Embassy. Based on these inaccuracies, the TFR concluded, "the source was patently and extensively misinformed." The TFR therefore discounted the March cable that held that the information "jibed" with what the CIA's source had earlier reported. (131)

U.S. passport 319962
U.S. passport number was 310162

310162 correct number for passport

Mexican travel form B24553
tourist card No. 24553

correct number M8-24553

Wed 06 Dec 2017, 2:19 am

James K. Olmstead wrote:
I believe KUJUMP deals with CIA interest in the factory that Lee worked in Minsk and that he should not be scared off in providing details. History shows
us that LHO wrote a very detailed account of his "work" in Minsk and that would be of interest to CIA
upon his return.

James,

I had occasion to look closely at Oswald's diary for a different reason, and I was struck by the fact that he did not relate in his diary what he actually did at the factory, nor did he really describe what the experimental shop did.
He talked a lot about the number of workers, and the working conditions, and the political commissars, etc., but he never did spell out exactly he, Lee Harvey Oswald did there. I was looking specifically for that information.

The closest I saw were these two lines:

"I worked for 23 months at this plant, a fine example of average and even slightly better than average working conditions."

"In the shop where I worked, the experimental shop, of the Minsk Radio and Television factory, there were 58 workers... At 8:00 sharp, all the workers have arrived and at the sound of a bell sounded by the duty orderly..., they file upstairs, except for 10 turners and lath operators whose machines are located on the first floor.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/thecollective.htm

Steve Thomas

Wed 06 Dec 2017, 10:46 am

Steve: Lee wrote a very detail account of the factory.

That in my opinion was 'his job' while in Minsk, I'm sorry if you thought I meant he described his daily 9-5 ...jko

Wed 06 Dec 2017, 11:52 am

James K. Olmstead wrote:Steve: Lee wrote a very detail account of the factory.

That in my opinion was 'his job' while in Minsk, I'm sorry if you thought I meant he described his daily 9-5 ...jko

I agree, Jim.

In my opinion, he was allowed to go there and report on the factory in exchange for the blueprints he gave the Soviets through his devious back-channel pose as a would-be defector - the purpose of which was to save the test ban talks.

Wed 06 Dec 2017, 11:58 am

Steve Thomas wrote:

James K. Olmstead wrote:
I believe KUJUMP deals with CIA interest in the factory that Lee worked in Minsk and that he should not be scared off in providing details. History shows
us that LHO wrote a very detailed account of his "work" in Minsk and that would be of interest to CIA
upon his return.

James,

I had occasion to look closely at Oswald's diary for a different reason, and I was struck by the fact that he did not relate in his diary what he actually did at the factory, nor did he really describe what the experimental shop did.
He talked a lot about the number of workers, and the working conditions, and the political commissars, etc., but he never did spell out exactly he, Lee Harvey Oswald did there. I was looking specifically for that information.

The closest I saw were these two lines:

"I worked for 23 months at this plant, a fine example of average and even slightly better than average working conditions."

"In the shop where I worked, the experimental shop, of the Minsk Radio and Television factory, there were 58 workers... At 8:00 sharp, all the workers have arrived and at the sound of a bell sounded by the duty orderly..., they file upstairs, except for 10 turners and lath operators whose machines are located on the first floor.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/thecollective.htm

Steve Thomas

Steve,

as follow-on to my reply to Jim, I think he was placed in the experimental factory to help with making the atomic blast detection device he provided blue prints for - much the same as Webster was put to work to help make the plastic spray guns used to spray heat resistant material onto space craft. In both cases, they were said to be no good at that work, and removed to other areas. But at least in Oswald's case, if not in both, the real interest on the US side was in getting the type of data provided by Oswald. If this had been electronic intel, it would be considered prime meta-data from which all sorts of extrapolations can be made.

Wed 06 Dec 2017, 6:03 pm

To James and Greg,

In reading through his "Collective", I was astounded that the Soviets would have allowed Oswald to leave the USSR with that detailed, or specific amount of information about the factory in written form. I mean he's got down the number of soldiers who worked there, the geographic information about where it was located, the names of the foremen, etc. This would be prime targeting information in case of war or invasion.
You would think that the Soviets would have searched his bags before he was allowed to leave, and somebody going, "Hey, What's this"?

On a completely different note, yesterday I was wondering about the idea of LHO going incommunicado for the six weeks of November 16 - December 30, 1959.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_24.pdf

In his "diary", he says that he spent his time reading Russian language books, but for all intents and purposes, he has gone "dark". He doesn't see anybody, and nobody sees him except for occasional visits from his interpreter.
Put yourself in the hotel manager's shoes. You got a guy living there with no money. (LHO says that he was down to his last $28.00), but the hotel let's him live there for six weeks because the interpreter says he's expecting a lot of money from the USA. He's just attempted suicide and has been put in a psychiatric ward for a while.

I don't know. Something just doesn't sound right.

Steve Thomas

Thu 07 Dec 2017, 4:04 am

Steve Thomas wrote:

I had occasion to look closely at Oswald's diary for a different reason, and I was struck by the fact that he did not relate in his diary what he actually did at the factory, nor did he really describe what the experimental shop did.
He talked a lot about the number of workers, and the working conditions, and the political commissars, etc., but he never did spell out exactly he, Lee Harvey Oswald did there. I was looking specifically for that information.

Current Section: CE 977 - Foreign Service despatch from the American Embassy in Moscow to the Department of State, dated July 11, 1961.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135#relPageId=392&tab=page

Oswald appeared at the Embassy on July 8, 1961 in connection with his desire to return to the U.S.
He was questioned extensively about his time in the USSR.
Oswald said he'd been employed at the Minsk factory "where he works as a metal worker in the research shop".

Steve Thomas

Thu 14 Dec 2017, 6:39 am

Steve Thomas wrote:

James K. Olmstead wrote:
I believe KUJUMP deals with CIA interest in the factory that Lee worked in Minsk and that he should not be scared off in providing details. History shows
us that LHO wrote a very detailed account of his "work" in Minsk and that would be of interest to CIA
upon his return.

James,

I had occasion to look closely at Oswald's diary for a different reason, and I was struck by the fact that he did not relate in his diary what he actually did at the factory, nor did he really describe what the experimental shop did.
He talked a lot about the number of workers, and the working conditions, and the political commissars, etc., but he never did spell out exactly he, Lee Harvey Oswald did there. I was looking specifically for that information.

The closest I saw were these two lines:

"I worked for 23 months at this plant, a fine example of average and even slightly better than average working conditions."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/thecollective.htm

Steve Thomas

Oswald was hired at the Minsk plant on January 13, 1960 and left on May 18, 1962.
By my count, that's two years and five months, or 29 months. So, either we've got six months missing there, or LHO couldn't count.

In his letter of resignation addressed to the Director of the Minsk Plant dated May 18, 1962, LHO identified himself as, “The Locksmith of the Experimental Plant.”
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=516&tab=page
p. 486

In his employee workbook, LHO gave his job title as “Adjuster”
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=95&tab=page
p. 65.

So far, I've seen him called an Assembler, a Regulator, an Adjuster, and a Locksmith.

Steve Thomas

Fri 15 Dec 2017, 1:48 am

Hmm, four seemingly very different jobs held during that period.

Rather than miscounting, perhaps he simply accounted for the time for the jobs he could talk about. Perhaps the six-month period was for another job that went without saying?

Hell, I don't know, just tossing out an idea.

Fri 15 Dec 2017, 3:52 am

Terry W. Martin wrote:Hmm, four seemingly very different jobs held during that period.

Rather than miscounting, perhaps he simply accounted for the time for the jobs he could talk about. Perhaps the six-month period was for another job that went without saying?

Hell, I don't know, just tossing out an idea.

Terry,

That's what's got me puzzled. His Employment Record book
CE 985 p. 435
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&search=%22Harvey_Lee+Oswald%22#relPageId=449&tab=page
doesn't show any transfers or promotions.

In his own Employee workbook:
CE 1108 pp. 65-66
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=95&tab=page
he lists his job title as Adjuster and also doesn't show any transfers.

Steve Thomas

Oswald's CIA 201 File

Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File

Re: Oswald's CIA 201 File