According to a telephone conversation with Gerald Patrick Hemming today, the men who visited Mrs. Odio were:

(1) Angelo Murgado, who had been close to the Kennedys for a number of years.

(2) Leopoldo was Bernardo de Torres. de Torres was being controlled by Charles Siragusa, who, Hemming says, was involved in foreign assassinations. de Torres had been given the assignment to watch Oswald.

(3) LHO.

Also according to Mr. Hemming, they visited Mrs. Odio because of her JURE connections and their ultimate objective was to find assets in Cuba to kill Fidel.

I have wondered whether what was going on in Mexico City was an attempt to put someone into Cuba (either LHO or someone using his name) to kill Fidel.

If I recall right, the HSCA indicated LHO could have visited Odio and still been in Mexico City if he had private transportation available.

Also according to Hemming LHO was loyal to our side; his involvement with American intelligence, then, necessitated the cover-up.

Comments?

Hi Tim,

Angelo Murgado is a new name for me.

Charles Siragusa is an interesting character though. The following is from one of A.J. Weberman's Nodules.

James

*****************


CHARLES SIRAGUSA: THE CIA'S HITMAN

The CIA's initial efforts to form an assassination section involved Charles Siragusa. Siragusa (born October 28, 1913; died April 17, 1982, Office of Security # 41 82) was raised amid mob violence in New York City's Little Italy. He worked under ANGLETON in the OSS (March 1944 to December 1945), and then was an official of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. [Winks Cloak and Gown p363] He was sent to Italy in 1951 to neutralize "Lucky" Luciano, who was sending heroin shipments to New York. [Sterling, C. Octopus p79] Charles Siragusa was attached to the U.S. Embassy, Rome, where he worked with the CIA Station. A CIA document revealed: "Siragusa was of liaison interest to various components of this Agency from 1961 to 1967, including the Behavioral Activities Branch of the Technical Services Division." [HSCA Gambino/Carpenter 2.28.78] In May 1967 Charles Siragusa supplied the CIA with biographic data that stated he had been employed by the Illinois Crime Commission since 1963. As head of the Commission, Siragusa was instrumental in solving the $4.3 million Purolator theft in 1974 by planting a snitch in the suspected burglary gang. In 1974 the name of Charles Siragusa was given to the Central Cover Staff in response to a request from an individual who might work for a pharmaceutical firm as an investigator.

In October 1977, Charles Siragusa told Senator Edward Kennedy "that he was approached by a CIA employee in 1960 or 1961 who he recalls was Mr. Vincent Thill, who sought Mr. Siragusa's assistance to recruit underworld figures for assassination purposes. Mr. Thill is alleged to have said that one million dollars would be paid for a successful assassination. Mr. Siragusa also stated that in addition to Mr. Thill, he had contact with the following former CIA employees: Sheffield Edwards, JAMES ANGLETON, John Mertz and Robert Bannerman. As related to the CIA, the context of their relationship with Mr. Siragusa was not given. The SSCIA was informed of Mr. Siragusa's allegation. Mr. William Miller, SSCIA, suggested to Commander Bernard McMahon, Executive Assistant to the Director of the CIA, and Mr. John Waller, Inspector General, that CIA investigate the allegation. The Agency has initiated an investigation; following are the results to date: (Deleted)."

CHARLES SIRAGUSA AND VINCENT THILL

Charles Siragusa told journalist Jack Anderson: "After a few minutes of chitchat, the CIA man [Vincent Thill] made this startling suggestion: that Siragusa, drawing on his underworld knowledge and contacts, recruit a crew of mafia torpedoes for standby assassination duty. They would be paid $1 million in fees and expenses for each kill. The CIA would assign the missions and underwrite the payoffs from secret funds." Siragusa, who had underworld and mafia connections because of his position with the Bureau of Narcotics, said that he refused to cooperate. Some evidence, however, indicated Charles Siragusa proposed that narcotics traffickers be utilized as assassins. On December 19, 1960, Harold Meltzer was considered as a possible CIA assassin. Meltzer was an associate of Meyer Lansky. The CIA: "Attached is a rather comprehensive six page biographical history which supplies not only all the information you requested, but many additional facts which will facilitate your evaluation of his potential. Meltzer owns and operates Fried Sportswear Company, Los Angeles, California. On August 3, 1959 he was convicted at Federal Court at Los Angeles for failure to register as a previously convicted narcotics law violator at the time of his travel abroad. He was fined $1,000 and placed on three years probation. Meltzer appeared before a Federal Grand Jury at Los Angeles on March 24, 1960, under subpoena, but invoked the Firth Amendment throughout questioning. Although he was threatened with contempt proceedings, this action never materialized. In the Spring of 1959 he furnished information to our California Office, but has not since cooperated with us. He has the background and talent for the matter we discussed but it is not known whether he would be receptive. Also attached is a copy of his FBI criminal record and an old Wanted Notice which bears a good likeness of him. I have never met Meltzer." [Los Angeles Times 5.3.78; CIA Enc. 12.1960

JAMES ANGLETON AND CHARLES SIRAGUSA

JAMES ANGLETON was interviewed on October 13, 1977, regarding his relationship with Charles Siragusa: "He knows Siragusa from World War II days. Following the war, during the 1950's, Mr. Siragusa was assigned to Rome as the U.S. representative on narcotics matters for Western Europe. ANGLETON had several official contacts with him but none since. Mr. ANGLETON states he was never associated with assassination plotting."

CHARLES SIRAGUSA AND JOHN MERTZ

When CI Director JAMES ANGLETON wanted his own Counter-Intelligence shop in Vietnam he ordered former Pretoria Chief of Station, John Mertz, to set one up. John Mertz told this researcher: "During World War II when ANGLETON was in Italy working for Allen Dulles he made an arrangement where he ran a Counter-Intelligence Unit in Italy. These men were in uniform, and did not report to the military. That was a peculiar situation in Italy for a short period of time. In July 1965 ANGLETON got the idea that he could do the same in Vietnam. They knew at that time that the American forces were thoroughly penetrated by the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong. He sent me over to talk to General Joseph A. McChristian. He was top intelligence officer in Vietnam. [McChristian was General Westmoreland's intelligence chief from 1965 to 1967.] He later became DIA Chief, when he came back to the States. McChristian sent me over to confer with him to see if it would be possible for the Agency to set up a Counter-intelligence Unit in uniform, not reporting to the military. McChristian kicked me out the country. He said, 'No way, get the hell out of here. Tell ANGLETON, no.' Our Chief of Station was Gordon L. Jorgensen. I came back and made a report to ANGLETON. He sent a couple a guys over there and they got kicked out. [Gordon Jorgensen was succeeded as Chief of Station of Saigon by John Limond Hart.] That's as far as that went. I went to Africa a year and a half after that."

Mr. John Mertz was interviewed at his retirement home in Florida on October 6, 1977 in regard to Charles Siragusa's allegations. "Mr. Mertz related the following regarding his contacts with Mr. Siragusa. In 1960 or 1961, three CIA employees were arrested in Havana, Cuba, while engaged in an intelligence audio operation directed at a third country. They were tried, convicted and sentenced to ten years in prison. Their CIA affiliation was not revealed. Mr. Mertz was tasked with devising a means to free the prisoners. Mr. ANGLETON was Siragusa's OSS Supervisor in Italy during World War II, and suggested to Mr. Mertz that he contact Siragusa...Mr. Mertz states he was never associated with assassination plotting nor did he deal with Mr. Siragusa on any matters other than those discussed above...Mertz says he was never associated with assassination plotting."

CHARLES SIRAGUSA AND ROBERT BANNERMAN

Robert Bannerman, who was Deputy Director, Office of Security, during the early 1960's, and later the Director of the Office of Security "remembers Siragusa as a Office of Security covert contact/informer. He says that when an Office of Security investigation turned up information related to narcotics, Siragusa might be contacted to see if he could provide assistance. Bannerman says he is not aware of any other contacts with Siragusa nor was he involved in any assassination plotting. He says he now knows that Sheffield Edwards was involved in Castro assassination plotting, but was not aware of it at the time." [CIA OGC 77-6457 10.11.77 Robert S. Young]

The Office of the Inspector General of the CIA determined that there was no basis for Siragusa's allegations. William K. Harvey took over the assassination project from Charles Siragusa. Notes on ZR/RIFLE stated: "Maximum security. Kubark [CIA Station] only. e.g. What does Siragusa now know?"

Hemming said most definitely that Siragusa was involved in foreign assassinations. As James posting indicates, Harvey took over ZR rifle from Siragusa.

According to several sources, shortly after the assassination, RFK called Harry Williams and asked him accusingly, "One of your guys did it". According to Gerry Hemming, RFK made that statement (question) because he thought LHO did it and because of the association of LHO with the anti-Castro Cubans.

Speculation of course but query whether the CIA was trying to get LHO into Cuba so he could kill Castro (or perhaps someone posing as LHO)--using LHO's leftist credentials. It is also possible (again speculative) whether the CIA sent LHO or an LHO imposter into the embassies in Mexico City to determine if there was a Castro plot against JFK in the works.

Tim, here’s my coffee-fueled two cents in response to your posts. Good to hear you are talking to GPH. He and Tosh have been a great help to me. I never know what to make of all the fascinating stuff I hear. Digesting takes a while, no?

No matter who “did it” in Dallas, the gun experts on this forum (Carrier and others) have me convinced of the stupidity of the lone gunman scenario. Snipers near and far don’t believe it either—I’m with the experts. I stood in the window at Sixth Floor Museum and it looked like a long shot to me, one guy, crappy weapon... But I know nothing of guns.

We know Dallas FBI knew of LHO-- Shanley, Hosty or whomever-LHO was a tailed man. LHO was in midst of something FBI wanted to know about and had an inkling. FBI knew so much about Castro ops by then. Our families have collected reams to prove it. We knew firsthand of the counterrev. activities.

Everybody knew Kennedy was being stalked. Kennedy knew himself. A brave fellow to go to Dallas (earlier facing off in Miami) in ’63 he was a leader. I wish he had worn that hat the Texans gave him. Perhaps it would have saved his life, but JFK said he’d wear it “next time.”

CIA knew of LHO in Russia and beyond. At home, Joannides is close to the NO incident and a powerhouse of exiles. He is CIAs man among others in exile community. Joannides later reports to duty for the HSCA along with Billings and Life who tucked away Zapruder film for all those years. Facts all and just part of story.

The Military knew LHO. They had all his records. Gerry has him at Odio’s (and in California around Cubans) inquiring about her dad, Castro’s prisoner and exile hero. Tosh places LHO at an airfield in Texas and at Nags Head counterintelligence training. LHO’s in HI with Roscoe if I’m not mistaken from Tosh’s account. LHO is from base at Atsugi with minor clearances. Newman and Melanson place LHO smack in US intelligence. Paines and their relationship to Russian and US Intel community notwithstanding, LHO was everywhere you could say. A real intelligence genius, I think. In some ways he was truly a “lone” operator, going rather bravely to his grave giving only a hint of his involvement.

Tosh and Gerry both agree I think that there were operations in Dallas going on concurrent to assassination. The US was not done dealing with Castro. Men that died like my father, many others BOPs vets, and among them Rorke and Sullivan, Swanner/Thompson were precursor of things to come. Add the strange death of Lisa Howard the handpicked go between with Atwood. Walt Brown has me convinced that there was ongoing operation in the works. Cuba was definitely a “Line in the Sand” in 1963.

CIA and its LHO had a Mexico Story and the Cuba connection and some strange “Russian” photographed coming out of embassy. It was a bind CIA found itself in when the tracing was afoot, congress went snooping. The CIA station chief Win Scott had his memoirs confiscated by Angleton while a grieving family looks on. Too much there to be ignored. June Cobb and Juan Orta are figures in Havana and Mexico City. Duran all of this is not to be taken lightly in intelligence part of investigation.

LHO didn’t actually defect in Russia. Try as he did, his passport was returned and he came home with a stipend and a pretty Russian with her own intelligence story. He was given connections to make in US before he left. He was there on the heels of some very interesting political events: the Penkovsky incident and Powers shoot down. He resurfaces among the next hotspot in US political events? The dog doesn’t hunt and the glove doesn’t fit.

After the criminal investigation was cut short by the mobster Cuban operator Ruby. The cover up was in place more to protecting missions and methods I think. US was still hot on the Castro trail and Kennedy’s were in it too. It didn’t go away in 1959 post Castro victory but deepened in Washington.

This is the confusion in the murder of Kennedy IMHO. Perhaps the cover up is the key to understanding the US offical involvement in Dealey. What was happening in covert operations involving the Kennedys at the time? Kennedy’s secret meetings with Castro and such? The Kennedy brothers were players as they were victims in the end of a dangerous deal. Perhaps in understanding the records we have to accept CIA found itself revealing too much relating to all this Dallas/Cuba stuff that others like the Joannides FOIA case are still fighting to reveal. Truly self-preserving on intelligence part.

About James photo of “Conein and GPH.” What does Gerry say to this?

As noted above, Gerry Hemming told us a few weeks ago that the Angel who visited Odio with Leopoldo (who he identified as Bernardo de Torres) was Angelo Murgado who later changed his name to Angelo Kennedy. We believe we found a reference to Angelo Murgado in Russo's "Live By the Sword". Russo calls him Angelo Kennedy; herein I will call him Murgado, which was obviously still his name in 1963. Murgado was a close aide to Manuel Artime. In a 1997 interview with Russo, Murgado (then Kennedy) stated that he was with Artime in early 1963 when Artime received a call from the White House. Murgado sat in the ante room of the Oval Office while Artime met privately with President Kennedy (not clear how many others were present). Murgado knew the topic of discussion was the authorization to train a new invasion force. When Artime emerged from the meeting he hugged Murgado and said, "We got it! We got everything!" (Everything Artime had requested of JFK.)

JFK has, of course, met Artime at the Brigade rally at the Orange Bowl in late December of 1962.

Apparently RFK was not in the meeting because JFK told Artime to contact RFK. According to Murgado, by January of 1963 Artime and other exile leaders were being treated to ski vacations in New Hampshire with RFK. Murgado says that Artime and Bobby became so close that Artime stayed at RFK's house in McLean, VA ("Hickory Hill") so frequently he wondered if Artime even keys to Hickory Hill.

Hemming suggested to us that RFK may very well have known Oswald's name and even seen his photograph, which is certainly possible if LHO was "hanging" with one of Artime's closest aides. That, Hemming suggested, may explain a call Hemming made to another Cuban exile Harry Williams after he learned of his brother's assassination and said to the newsman who was with Williams, "One of your guys did it!" It is easy in retrospect to attribute this remark to a conspiracy. At the time it may have only been that RFK recognized Oswald's name as an associate of the anti-Castro Cubans (assuming his call came after the arrest of Oswald.)

Does anyone have any other information re Murgado/Kennedy?

It is also interesting that Artime died at a very early age in November of 1977 (in the middle of the HSCA investigation) two weeks after being diagnosed with cancer. It perhaps seems hard to characterize Artime's death as "mysterious" but he certainly died at a young age.

There is a performing arts center in Miami named after Artime.

Angelo Kennedy who apparently is also known as Angelo Murgado is very prominent in a group called the Bay of Pigs Dead and Missing in Action Recovery Committee. Another member within this group is Alfredo Duran.

In this image below, that is Angelo Kennedy on the far right.

James

I need to correct my post above.

Of course Artime met JFK at the Orange Bowl rally for the returned BOP prisoners.

But there is information that JFK had met Artime even before his election as president. I have read this before and was reminded of it when I read John's "page" on Artime which states that JFK (first?) met Artime at the 1960 Democrat National Convention in LA.

See John's Artime page (Artime is under "Suspects") for a good photo of Artime with JFK at the Orange Bowl rally.

Tim

CHICAGO TRIBUNE, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26,1963

MEXICO PAPER
SAYS OSWALD WENT TO REDS

Reveal Visit to Russ,
Cuban Consulates

MEXICO CITY, Nov. 25
{UPI} - The newspaper Excelsior said today Lee Harvey Oswald
spent several days in Mexico City in late September, calling on
consulates of the Soviet Union and Cuba.
Excelsior said Oswald crossed the border at Larado,Tex,on September
26 {AND DROVE TO MEXICO CITY} ,where on Sept.28 he called on the consulate
general of Cuba and ask for a transit visa to Moscow via Havana.
The United States customs service at Larado confirmed the crossing. A
spokesman said, "There are records to establish this" The records also showed Oswald reentered the United States Oct.3.

What was the actual original source of the Odio story? Was it Clare Boothe Luce - or did she just add wood to the fire?

Long story--but I'll get to it tomorrow night unless someone beats me tuit!

CHARLES SIRAGUSA AND ROBERT BANNERMAN

Robert Bannerman, who was Deputy Director, Office of Security, during the early 1960's, and later the Director of the Office of Security "remembers Siragusa as a Office of Security covert contact/informer. He says that when an Office of Security investigation turned up information related to narcotics, Siragusa might be contacted to see if he could provide assistance. Bannerman says he is not aware of any other contacts with Siragusa nor was he involved in any assassination plotting. He says he now knows that Sheffield Edwards was involved in Castro assassination plotting, but was not aware of it at the time." [CIA OGC 77-6457 10.11.77 Robert S. Young]

The Office of the Inspector General of the CIA determined that there was no basis for Siragusa's allegations. William K. Harvey took over the assassination project from Charles Siragusa. Notes on ZR/RIFLE stated: "Maximum security. Kubark [CIA Station] only. e.g. What does Siragusa now know?"


End quote


This is intriguing. I re-read the 1967 IG report on the attempts on Castro only yesterday, and Bannerman was listed as one of those in the loop. When it came time to pay Varona, it turned out O'Connell had no budget to do so, so they briefed Esterline so he could take the money from the Bay of Pigs project, and went to Edwards to okay the money, only Edwards was out of town, so they briefed his assistant Bannerman, and got the money. Or something like that. Anyhow, the top secret 67 report said that Bannerman was in the loop, and here he lied about it ten years later.

Greetings
According to tony summers,When the odio sister's saw Oswald on tv after
being arrested, it scared the bejaysus out of them,& they agreed not to mention
the visit to the authorities.Sylvia however confided in a friend, who reported
it to the FBI.They took a suspiciously long time to investigate(July 1964 if
memory serves)

Thanks, guys. I should brush up on that.

Sylvia Odio was born in Cuba in 1937. Her father was involved in the struggle against Fulgencio Batista. However, he disagreed with Fidel Castro about certain issues and in 1962 he was arrested and sent to the Isle of Pines. Soon afterwards Odio left Cuba and settled in Dallas. Odio became active in the anti-Castro movement and helped form an organization called Junta Revolucionaria.

On 25th September, 1963, Odio had a visit from three men who claimed they were from New Orleans. Two of the men, Leopoldo and Angelo, said they were members of the Junta Revolucionaria. The third man, Leon, was introduced as an American sympathizer who was willing to take part in the assassination of Fidel Castro. After she told them that she was unwilling to get involved in any criminal activity, the three men left.

Odio became convinced that after the assassination of John F. Kennedy that Leon was Lee Harvey Oswald. Odio gave evidence to the Warren Commission and one of its lawyers commented: "Silvia Odio was checked out thoroughly... The evidence is unanimously favorable... Odio is the most significant witness linking Oswald to the anti-Castro Cubans."

Research carried out by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of the Warren Commission suggested that the three men were Loran Hall, William Seymour and Lawrence Howard. These were all members of Interpen. Hall later claimed Leon was not Lee Harvey Oswald.

The author, Anthony Summers, suggests that the visit had "been a deliberate ploy to link Junta Revolucionaria, a left-wing exile group, with the assassination". However, G. Robert Blakey interviewed Loran Hall, William Seymour and Lawrence Howard and claims that they did not visit Odio.

Loran Hall gave evidence before the Select House Committee on Assassinations and denied he had told the FBI that he had visited Odio on 25th September, 1963.

This is what John Kelin had to say about it in the Fair Play Magazine (November, 1994)

Many readers are no doubt familiar with the Silvia Odio story, but a short refresher is still in order. Briefly, Silvia Odio was the daughter of a prominent anti-Castro activist who was jailed in Castro's Cuba. In September of 1963 she was living in Dallas when three men, whom she did not know, came to her apartment out of the blue one evening. They told her they too were involved in the anti-Castro movement and wanted her help. Two of the men, Odio later said, appeared to be Cuban or Mexican, and identified themselves by their "war names," Leopoldo and Angelo (or Angel). The third was an American introduced as Leon Oswald.

Uneasy with these men, Silvia Odio declined any involvement with them, and sent them away. A day or two later, Leopoldo called her on the phone and, among other things, said that Leon Oswald was a former marine, a crack shot - and that he thought President Kennedy should be assassinated.

After the President was indeed slain, Silvia Odio was horrified to recognize Lee Harvey Oswald as the same "Leon Oswald" who had been outside her apartment. This identification was corroborated by her sister Annie who also saw and spoke with the three strangers.

Silvia Odio gave this story to the Warren Commission. But the Commission decided she was mistaken in her identification of Oswald, in part because Oswald was, by the Commission's reckoning, in Mexico City at the time Odio said she was visited.

This story - the conventional "Odio incident" - is explosive enough, tying Oswald to the idea of killing Kennedy several months before it happened. Sylvia Meagher called it "the proof of the plot." Anthony Summers said it represents "the strongest human evidence." And Gaeton Fonzi, who investigated this episode for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, wrote that "the Odio incident absolutely cries conspiracy."

However, G. Robert Blakey interviewed Loran Hall, William Seymour and Lawrence Howard and claims that they did not visit Odio.

Ive always been wondering where William Seymour's testimony/interview has been??? anyone know where I could find this?

Ive always been wondering where William Seymour's testimony/interview has been??? anyone know where I could find this? (Ryan Crowe)

That's a very good question, Ryan. I am under the impression that Seymour's testimony has not been released which is curious in itself.

It is also curious that a CIA summary file indicates that the Agency possessed a 'soft file' on Seymour.

It would also be interesting to know the individual who was running that file. More questions than answers I'm afraid.

James

Re how the FBI found out about the Odio matter, below is an excerpt from Gaeton Fonzi (from the cuban-exile web-site):


Also of special relevance, I thought, was the fact that the FBI found out about the visit only inadvertently. Both Silvia and Annie had immediately decided that day in the hospital room not to say anything to anyone about what they knew. "We were so frightened, we were obsoletely terrified," Silvia remembered. We were both very young and yet we had so much responsibility, with so many brothers and sisters and our mother and father in prison, we were so afraid and not knowing what was happening. We made a vow to each other not to tell anyone." And they did not tell anyone they did not know and trust. But their sister Sarita told Lucille Connell and Connell told a trusted friend and soon the FBI was knocking on Silvia Odio's door. She says it was the last thing in the world she wanted but when they came she felt she had a responsibility to tell the truth. Even before I met Silvia and Annie Odio and had the, opportunity to evaluate their credibility, in reviewing all the FBI documents and the Warren Commission records of the Odio incident, I was especially intrigued by two aspects of it: One was that it seemed to contain the potential of something of keystone significant in any attempt to grasp the truth about Lee Harvey Oswald and the John F. Kennedy assassination. If the incident did occur as Odio contended, then no theory of the assassination would stand unassailable if it did not somehow account for it. Secondly, that was the very point the Warren Commission itself quickly recognized and was therefore forced, by its own conclusions, to pummel the facts about its investigation of the incident into conforming lies.

There is even more to it. As I recall, it started out with one school-child telling a story about his or her parent working in a law firm and Ruby had visited th law firm to make a will or change a power of attorney or something like that shortly before the asssassination. Turns out one of the classmate's parents was a FBI agent. So the FBI started to investigate the Ruby story and somehow that led them to Connell who then relayed to them Silvia Odio's story. Sometimes that is how the truth comes out.

I understand several Forum members seem to dislike whenever I post a suggestion of Cuban or Soviet involvement in the assassination but I do think we need to try to track down all leads if we are dedicated to finding the truth. In addition, the Forum can provide an avenue for "closing" loose ends. so in that regard I request comments or new information on this from Footnote 19 to Chapter XXI of Dick Russell's book.

(I know some of you are thinking of Ronald Reagan's famous phrase: "There he goes again!) Oh, well:

Russell states that he interviewed Blakey in 1980 and Blakey told him "we concluded there were three people that Angel and Leopoldo could have been [more gramatically: that could have been Angel and Leopoldo-TIM], but Mrs. Odio did not recognize any of them. . . The question is, on whose behalf were they acting? The report we got from the CIA indicated the background of the three possibilities was Cuban intelligence."

Does anyone know why Blakely and/or his staff had focosed on these three individuals, and who they were?

The Odio incident is so important that I think an evaluation of Blakey's statement merits our consideration.

To Robert Charles-Dunne:

Good to hear from you again. I suspected you would reply to that post.

I think you are incorrect that the CIA supplied Blakey with the three possibilities he suggested might be Angel and Leopoldo. The impression I got from Russell's footnote was that somehow the HSCA had focused on those three Cubans and the CIA then informed Blakey of its opinion that they were connected to Cuban intelligence.

I was hoping someone might know why Blakey had focused on these three; who they were; and that someone might have information why the CIA suggested they were associated with Cuban intelligence. Castro did have agents in South Florida; I hope you would admit that.

I have a somewhat different perspective on the Odio story. If Oswald was indeed at Odio's door, that fact in itself is not, in my opinion, sufficient to establish a conspiracy, despite that is what many people think. Suspend disbelief and try to adopt the position that LHO was a "lone nut", associating with both pro and anti Castro Cubans for his own agenda, whatever that might be. So he tells his anti-Castro Cuban colleagues that the Cubans had no guts or they would have shot Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs. So for whatever reason Leopoldo calls Silvia Odio to tell her that LHO is a little nuts and has made extremist statements. The mere fact that LHO was hanging out with anti-Castro Cubans does not preclude the possibility that he shot the president by himself for reasons known only to him.

Understand that I am as much an adherent to the conspiracy theory of the assassination as anyone on this forum. All I am trying to say is that if you take the Odio story at face value it is not inconsistent with the WC theory.

What screams of conspiracy, in my opinion, is if it was not LHO himself at Odio's door but a deliberate LHO impersonator, and the whole visit was staged so violent anti-Kennedy statements could be falsely attributed to Oswald. I.e., it was part of the frame. This is why the fact that the Odio visit occurred at a time when LHO was supposed to be someplace else so frightened the WC, in my opinion. Because if it was not LHO at Odio's door, and if she was telling the truth except she did not discern the impersonification of LHO, then clearly the Odio incident was being staged as part of the frame of the patsy. Ergo, a conspiracy.

But if it was anti-Castro Cubans (or the CIA) behind the assassination, why would they frame LHO by having the false Oswald associate with people who claimed to be anti-Castro? Most people who posit CIA involvement suggest the idea was to falsely connect the assassination to a pro-Castro activist and perhaps even blame Castro for the assassination, prompting, so they hoped, a full-fledged invasion of Cuba. In this scenario, parading a false Oswald in front of Odio with proclaimed anti-Castro Cubans makes no sense at all.

If the Odio incident was part of a plot, the plot was, apparently, to link a man who had made violent suggestions about the President with anti-Castro Cubans. The clear inference, then, is that the people who staged the Odio incident were pro-Castro.

If LHO was working for some agency of American intelligence, and the Castro forces knew that, then it would be clever indeed to find a way to link LHO with anti-Castro Cubans as part of a plot against Kennedy by Cuban intelligence.

What sense does it make if anti-Castro forces were behind the assassination to parade Oswald before Odio and then tell her that Kennedy should have been shot because he had betrayed the anti-Castro forces by his decisions re the Bay of Pigs? Were the anti-Castro forces trying to create a record to prove their involvement in the assassination?

Is it not logical that if the Odio incident was part of the "set-up" for the assassination, then the people at Odio's door were not anti-Castro as they told her, but pro-Castro?

I would also point out that Blakey did not want to suggest a foreign conspiracy any more than he wanted to credit a CIA conspiracy.

Therefore, the LAST thing he would have wanted to put in the HSCA report would be that the HSCA had narrowed the possibilities of Angel and Leopoldo to three Cubans all of whom, it was suspected, had ties to Cuban intelligence. I found it interesting he even admitted this to Dick Russell.

Re Robert’s post above:

As I recall the Odio story, Oswald did not announce his intention to kill anyone. He said that Cubans should have shot Kennedy in response to the Bay of Pigs disaster. Am I correct? This is different than an Oswald statement that he himself wanted to kill Kennedy, or intended to do so.

One could imagine a scenario that if LHO was indeed a Castro supporter and Castro wanted JFK killed, LHO could have been “taunting” the anti-Castro exiles to kill Kennedy by calling them cowards, etc.

I do not think this is what was happening because I suspect that LHO had some connection to a U.S. intelligence organization and I tend to agree with Robert that Leopoldo, whoever he might be, was putting words in Oswald’s mouth.

Robert says that the Odio incident might have been staged to blame the left-wing JURE organization for the Kennedy assassination. But stop and think this one through. Would the plotters expect Odio to come forward after the assassination and say, “Well, fellows, I guess my father’s organization must have done it because when Oswald came to my door he was with members of JURE.” Of course not. It is nonsensical to think Odio would implicate the organization her father started. And, of course, in the event she did not come forward. The Odio incident was discovered almost by accident. So it was clearly not an attempt to frame JURE for the assassination.

Through Odio, Oswald was connected to two anti-Castro Cubans. If it was a set-up, logic compels the conclusion that it was not engineered by anti-Castro Cubans. If anything, it was an attempt to link Oswald with the anti-Castro community before the assassination. Now who would have a motive to do that?

Robert wrote:

Blakey never "focussed" on anyone connected with Odio, as Fonzi - who bore the responsibility of interviewing her - makes clear.

However, I think Robert is mistaken about this. Below is language from the staff report on on the Odio incident, which was generated by Fonzi:


Finally, the committee requested the CIA to run a check on all individuals who used the "war names" of "Leopoldo" and "Angelo" during the period of interest. The CIA response resulted in the photographs of three individuals who might have been in Dallas in September 1963. [Photos of these three were shown to Odio and she stated she did not
recognize them.]

These had to be the three people Blakey refered to in his interview with Dick Russell. My point in this post is that it would be interesting to know the identity of these three individuals. Someone, whether Gerry Hemming, or James Richards, might have further information regarding them.

It is difficult to make sense of the Odio incident. If it was staged, it would appear it was an attempt to link Oswald to the anti-Castro Cubans.

Tim,

Manola Ray was not popular with other exile groups. Seen as Castro Lite. Not popular with CIA. JURE not only Socialist, but also eschewed CIA/USG intervention. Motive in either case to attempt to implicate (and thus destroy) the group, or to infiltrate it.

But the following is what I lean to...

A few months earlier, Odio had been "trying to establish a contact in Dallas with Mr. Johnny Martin, who is from Uruguay". When she did, he told her that "if he were in contact with one of our chief leaders of the underground, he would be able to sell him second-hand arms that we could use in our revolution."

A case could be made, despite Odio's denial, that Martin was none other than John Martino. Martino would have loved to make a connection with the Cuban underground. Odio said in testimony that her attempts to reach Martin culminated in a meeting on June 28, 1963 - we don't know how long she had been trying to reach that point. Operation Tilt was launched on June 8. Martino may have wanted to contact the underground to find out Pawley's fate, and to put his personal stamp on any attempts by JURE to start a counter-revolution. In any case, if there was a washateria owner in Dallas named "Johnny Martin" who ran guns on the side, why would Odio have had any difficulty in contacting him? Indeed, why has noone in the past 40 years found him for an interview?

Put Martino in the "Odio Incident" mix, along with Oswald as gun-running investigator and see what bakes.

I thought Gerry identified Leopoldo as Bernie De Torres?

Robert,

I think the Odio incident remains a puzzle.

I agree with you that Leopoldo might have been putting words into Oswald's mouth. On the other hand, it is certainly possible that Oswald was "taunting" anti-Castro Cubans to kill Kennedy.

Re associating Oswald with JURE not necessarily to link JURE to the assassination, but merely to "muddy" JURE, my point was that the plotters could certainly not expect Odio to come forward with the information about Oswald, and indeed she did not.

The Odio incidenmt, in my opinion, does not easily fit anyone's scenario re the assassination. It was clearly not an effort to link Oswald to Castro. Also, if Leopoldo was really trying to frame Oswald, why did he not put words into Oswald's mouth about Oswald's wanting to kill Kennedy? The words he attributed to Oswald were not as incriminating as he could have made them.

Unlike Posner, I am sure we all agree the Odio incident did occur. I just don't think anyone (myself included) has come up with a good explanation of what it was intended to accomplish.

To David:

Yes, Hemming states deTorres was Leopoldo, and Angel was Angel Murgado, who was very close to Manuel Artime and in fact changed his last name to Kennedy after the assassination of Robert Kennedy--suggesting, of course, that Angel was not involved in any plot to kill JFK.

Robert, I'm glad you detailed out the Parrot Jungle incident, I view it as
extremely key in lining out the real source of the conspiracy - perhaps
even more key than the Odio visit.

It's way too long to go into detail here, but my Lancer 04 presentation dealt
with what I feel to be a common link between the Parrot Jungle leak, the
leak (gossip) that Echevarria heard in Chicago and very possibly the same
source as related to the Kirknewton intercept incident and (remotely possible
at least) the Dinkin rumor.

At this point in time I'm putting forth the premise that Victor Hernandez may well have been the common source for all this gossip.

At this point in time I'm putting forth the premise that Victor Hernandez may well have been the common source for all this gossip. (Larry Hancock)

I have to agree with you, Larry.

Add that Hernandez was training at Belle Chase, his possible connection to Operation 40 and his participation within an assassination team which successfully targeted leaders of Batista's regime, and this character was right amongst the action.

There are connections to Rich Lauchli and Chicago based sources for weaponry which places him to hear the threats made by Homer Eschevarria.

If we are looking for a candidate who was 'Angel', one of the men who visited Sylvia Odio, this is the guy.

IMO of course.

James

Re Robert's post above:
I wrote:
I agree with you that Leopoldo might have been putting words into Oswald's mouth.

Robert replied:
There's no "might" about it. Oswald never said anything about the Cubans lacking guts or that they should kill Kennedy. These things were said for him, not by him. And not just on Odio's doorstep.

Robert, with all due respect, you cannot possibly know for a CERTAINTY that Oswald did not make that remark. You may strongly infer that Leopoldo made it up (in part because it is consistent with your scenario) but there is no way you can say it with a certainty. I mean, if Oswald was alive, and both Oswald and Leopoldo (whoever he was) were testifying in court, and Leopoldo testified that Oswald had said that and Oswald denied it, you still could not know with a certainty who was telling the truth, although at least in that case you could judge the demeanor of the two witnesses.

Like I said, I tend to agree with you it was a statement planted on Oswald, but neither you nor I nor anyone else can know that with certainty.

I wrote:

On the other hand, it is certainly possible that Oswald was "taunting" anti-Castro Cubans to kill Kennedy.

Robert replied:

To what end? Oswald, himself, never displayed any animus toward Kennedy. One could hypothesize that Oswald anticipated a radical departure in foreign policy should Kennedy be killed. However, when Oswald was in DPD custody and asked by Fritz what changes would result from Kennedy's death, Oswald stated he thought Johnson would carry on the same policies.

Oswald never displayed any animus toward Kennedy? How about Kennedy's policies, my friend? Whether or not correct, Oswald's public stance was as a Castro supporter and organizer of a Fair Play for Cuba Committee. The FPCC, of course, condemned Kennedy's POLICIES against Cuba. And Castro himself expresed personal hatred toward Kennedy, calling him, at various times, "a cretin", "a gangster", "a modern day Batista", etc etc. There were anti-Kennedy posters throughout Havana. We may very well agree that Oswald was not in fact pro-Castro, but we do not know that with certainty either. If Oswald was indeed a sympathizer with Castro, he certainly must have had an animus toward Kennedy's policies at least.

Castro certainly had reason to kill Kennedy. As has been discussed above, not only was the Cubela plot ongoing on November 2nd, RFK was also involved with a diferent Castro dissident to start a coup against Castro within weeks of November 22nd. It would have been a stroke of genius if Castro had used Oswald to inspire his enemies in the United States to kill Kennedy on his behalf.

And if as many think anti-Castro Cubans were involved in the assassination, who is to say that they were not inspired to act against Kennedy by a double agent in their midst? The flip side of the coin is that if anti-Castro Cubans wanted Kennedy dead, and if Oswald was indeed pro-Castro, the anti-Castro Cubans could have inspired Oswald to act by, for instance, revealing to Oswald the ongoing Cubela plot to kill Castro.

One of the things that makes the case baffling is that Castro and his suporters had reason to seek the death of Kennedy. Many of the anti-Castro Cubans also had reason to think Kennedy's death would advance their cause (I would argue they were wrong, because they did not know what the Kennedys were ploting against Castro without their knowledge). Therefore, the trigger could have been pulled by an anti-Castro Cuban, but prompted by a Castro sympathizer, or by a pro-Castro Cuban, but inspired by someone whose agenda was indeed anti-Castro. This situation exists precisely because both sides had reason to believe their position would be advanced by the death of Kennedy.

And in the event it is clear that it was the pro-Castro side that benefited from Kennedy's death. There can be no dispute that LBJ wound down the war against Castro (even if, as you have argued, perhaps in violation of LBJ's policies the CIA still pursued an ocasional anti-Castro plot. We have previously seen that several of the prominent anti-Castro Cubans who were privy to what the Kennedys were doing knew that their cause had indeed ended with the death of Kennedy.

As you stated, Oswald might have anticipated a "radical departure in foreign policy should Kennedy be killed." If he did, he was prescient because the US war against Castro did effectively end with the death of Kennedy. LBJ was more interested in fighting the Communists 10,000 miles away than the ones in power ninety miles south of Key West.

I wrote:

Also, if Leopoldo was really trying to frame Oswald, why did he not put words into Oswald's mouth about Oswald's wanting to kill Kennedy? The words he attributed to Oswald were not as incriminating as he could have made them.

Robert wrote:

It was necessary to strike a delicate balance, and avoid any language that was too incendiary. Had Leopoldo told Odio "Oswald says he will kill Kennedy," it created the risk that Odio may prematurely pick up the phone and inform authorities. That would have defeated the purpose of the exercise.

Robert, in this case I believe your response makes an effective point. Although I argued above that we do not know it to a certainty, we agree that it is most likely that Leopoldo planted the words on Oswald. Your point that the operation may have been revealed had a statement been attributed to Oswald that was perceived as a direct threat against the President is, I think, well-taken.

I continue to think that the point of the exercise was not to link Oswald to JURE. JURE may have been left-of-Center, but it was certainly not pro-Communist or pro-Castro. To posit that the plan was to portray the killer as pro-Castro, pro-JURE makes no sense, I think. If Oswald was indeed pro-Castro he was anti-JURE (remember Castro was jailing Odio's parents); if he was pro-JURE he was by definition anti-Castro. Couldn't be both. Had someone tried to portray him as both it would have destroyed the plot.

It may be worthwhile to consider that the first objective of the visit was to persuade Sylvia to wrote some fund raising leaders for her visitors. And the visitors represented themselves as JURE connected. And they had gone to some trouble to get background info on her father including his closely kept war name.

If the letters were the primary objective, the phone call back to Sylvia may have been a fall back developed after they failed to get letters from her.

In that case, the main goal would have been letters referencing JURE and signed by a JURE member with high level ties to Rey.

If such letters were planted along with a patsy after either an attempt or an actual assassination of JFK they could have been used to associate a Cuban sponsored assassin with JURE...many right wing exiles were constantly painting JURE with a pink brush anyway. Net result, get rid of Castro, get back into Cuba, eliminate JURE and Rey as a contender for power in a "free" Cuba. Nice neat package.

...except Sylvia didn't buy it....she thought the vistiors were suspicious, maybe even Castro agents.....which with the phone call afterwards would still have served to tie Oswald with possible Cuban agents if Sylvia had gone to the FBI
or Police the afternoon of Nov. 22.

Just think what a report like that from Odio would have done when combined with the Kostikov and Cuban embassy visit in Mexico City...and then Gilberto Alvardo shows up to close the loop.....still a nice package.

....excpept Sylvia didn't report it....by the time her information got in the loop the fix was in....no conspiracy, Lone Nut.

Larry's point is very interesting and makes sense, that the original attempt was simply to get Silvia Odio to sign some fund-raising letters for use in whatever purpose.

I continue, however, to doubt whether it would have been possible to link JURE with an alleged Cuban plot to kill Kennedy. No question JURE's policies were left-of-center but I consider it doubtful anyone would reasonably believe that JURE and Castro had allied to kill Kennedy. As Robert pointed out, the Kennedys were supporters of Ray and JURE over the right-wing Cubans. So why would JURE conspire to kill Kennedy?

Tim, this is pure speculation of course, but I'm not sure the thought at that point would have been to associate JURE with the assassination. It could have been as simple as associating JURE with a Castro advocate and Russian defector like Oswald.

That sort of political ploy would have worked well against Rey and JURE even short of an assassination, say if Oswald had agreed to participate in some sort of demonstration or incident like the one that may well have been planned for the D.C. area (keep in mind his burst of letters just before leaving New Oreleans - all about moving somewhere in the NorthEast, possibly Baltimore). Nobody has ever really explained that and it has to be considered in any theory of the overall conspiracy that used him.

If my scenario is correct, the initial goal could have been as simple as a political stroke against Rey. Its important that the political in-fighting among the exiles was just about as animated as their efforts against Castro.

The ongoing line against Rey - used by virtually all the right wing parties - was that Rey was putting on a front and was to be distrusted as much as Castro, he would turn Commie after getting in power just like Castro had.

At this distance being able to separate short term / political objectives from things related to the actually conspiracy that played out on Nov. 22 is a real challenge. Hemming has reminded us all before that there were lots of players and lots of agendas, viewing them all against Nov. 22 os always tempting but probably not accurate.

Larry, as usual with you a very astute analysis. If I read you correctly, the Odio incident may have been a ploy to smear JURE but not associated with the assassination. You are correct that after the assassination it is easy to relate all incidents to it. I myself had never seen the Odio incident as a prof of the conspiracy, as Fonzi puts it (as much as I othewrwise admire Fonzi) unless it was proof that someone was impersonating Oswald.

The WC's portrayal of Oswald as a "lone nut" was of course wrong. But the mere fact that Oswald associated with pro and anti Castro Cubans in and of itself does not prove a conspiracy--of course.

Similarly, although so many people believe that Oswald's trip to Mexico City was also somehow related to the conspiracy (whether the plotters were pro-Castro or anti-Castro it matters not) that may simply be a false, if easy, assumption. Oswald may, for instance, have been sent on an intelligence mission simply to se how the Cubans and Soviets would handle him, but that mission might have no relationship to the assassination. (I think you sugested this to me once.)

So clearly the Odio incident shows there was more to Oswald than his portrayal in the Warren Commision, but it does not necessarily establish a conspiracy to kill Kennedy. Angel and Leopoldo may have ben on a mission to besmirch JURE without any knowledge that two months later their stooge Oswald would be implicated in the assassination.

An interesting perspective on the Odio incidednt!

Hi, James

Along the line of Oswald playing both sides, pro-Castro and anti-Castro I am reminded of the time after being appointed acting secretary of Fair Play for Cuba Committee in Chicago by Communist Party, and 26th Of July Movement leaders this while I was reporting to the local FBI, they then later assigned to me the task of infiltrating the opposition anti-Castro CIA combine in order to discover when the attack/invasion of Cuba that was soon to take place. I was instructed to renounce the Fair Play For Cuba Committee, the 26th Of July Movement and other connections. I was also instructed to enlist with the combine as a volunteer, pilot or other. No 'exact' info. resulted from this effort. A short time later the invasion took place, and I was then distributing pro-Castro anti-invasion 'Hands Of Cuba' leaflets on the streets of Chicago, and continued reporting to the Bureau.
Harry

Hi, James

Along the line of Oswald playing both sides, pro-Castro and anti-Castro I am reminded of the time after being appointed acting secretary of Fair Play for Cuba Committee in Chicago by Communist Party, and 26th Of July Movement leaders this while I was reporting to the local FBI, they then later assigned to me the task of infiltrating the opposition anti-Castro CIA combine in order to discover when the attack/invasion of Cuba that was soon to take place. I was instructed to renounce the Fair Play For Cuba Committee, the 26th Of July Movement and other connections. I was also instructed to enlist with the combine as a volunteer, pilot or other. No 'exact' info. resulted from this effort. A short time later the invasion took place, and I was then distributing pro-Castro anti-invasion 'Hands Of Cuba' leaflets on the streets of Chicago, and continued reporting to the Bureau.
(Harry Dean)

Interesting, Harry.

There seemed to be a fair bit of flipping sides during this period. Did you find that mistrust was the general atmosphere amongst the Cubans?

Can you say who in the FBI was running the show in Chicago?

Thanks as always.

James

Tim,

As with Larry, Robert was not saying the Odio incident was assassination related.

Your concern, though based on a false premise, does remind me of the conundrum arising out of Oswald displaying both Militant and Worker newspapers in the BY photos.

On a side issue, anyone like the coincidence of Oswald allegedly making remarks about Cubans lacking guts, and Ruby's alleged remarks about wanting to show Jews have guts?

Tim,




What if LHO was serving as an agent provocateur?

The COINTELPRO papers are full of agent provocateurs urging others to commit acts of violence.

Steve Thomas

James

There were always 'some' viciously pro-Castro persons in the 26 Of July Movement threatening and suspicious of other members who might betray the cause, moreso as the 'expected invasion' of Cuba drew near.

Raul Roa had earlier exposed the 'entire' invasion scheme to the United Nations.

Re; the FBI, Chicago, I only knew that Director Hoover made the Castro/Fair Play For Cuba Comm. et.al. top concern for the Bureau. I met with agents only at various pre-arranged places or via two way phone calls re; information, never at hdqrts. I would say it was the cointelpro{spelling} program?

Harry

James I should have made it clear in the above post that it was the
26th and Communist leaders that gave me instructions to join the CIA anti- Castro
group,and was not a request by Bureau agents. (Harry Dean)

Thanks, Harry.

Did you ever get any sense as to how the Communist leaders viewed Manuel Ray? Even though he was anti-Castro, did they see him as being different than contemporaries like Jose Miro Cardona and Tony Varona?

I ask as it relates to how right minded CIA guys like Morales and Phillips saw Manuel Ray, and what they could do to agitate the widening divide.

James

James

The 26th Of July Movement, with the Communist Party leaders in Chicago and elsewhere, were only concerned with pushing the 'powerful' Fair Play For Cuba Committee agenda, confident that it, they, and Castro would succeed. There were no statements from them to my knowledge re; Manuel Ray in particular. They grouped all anti-Castro movements as the common enemy.

Harry

The 26th Of July Movement, with the Communist Party leaders in Chicago and elsewhere, were only concerned with pushing the 'powerful' Fair Play For Cuba Committee agenda, confident that it, they, and Castro would succeed. There were no statements from them to my knowledge re; Manuel Ray in particular. They grouped all anti-Castro movements as the common enemy. (Harry Dean)

Thanks, Harry. Appreciated as always.

James

Re Steve's Post #43.

This is a VERY interesting thought.

I, like many others, suspect LHO was acting in some capacity for US intelligence.

Our country was by the fall of 1963 concerned about violence from both pro and anti Castro Cubans.

What if Oswald had indeed made the remark attributed to him, that anti-Castro Cubans should have shot Kennedy over the BOP? Perhaps, as Steve suggests, he was an agent provocateur, trying to "flush out"anti Castro Cubans who might take violent actions against Kennedy.

I believe Gerry Hemming has stated that at least one occasion he was requested to kill Kennedy but he was convinced it was a "set up".

If indeed LHO was acting for the US, Steve's suggestion is perfectly logical and makes sense of the Odio incident.

It is at least a possibility deserving serious consideration.

I don't think anyone else has suggested this possibilty before.

Good thinking, Steve!

Tim,