Post by Rob Caprio on Dec 8, 2018 21:51:45 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Marina_Lee_Oswald.jpg
assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2014/4/8/5/4/c/54c085fa-bf52-11e3-9bdd-34641bda4e1c.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) said Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) used an alias, A. J. Hidell, to purchase the weapon that allegedly killed President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. What evidence do they have to show this is the case?
We will look at this in this post.
********************************
We looked at LHO’s arrest in New Orleans on August 9, 1963, in post #101 of this series, and under question 3 we saw the following evidence of what LHO had in his wallet at this time.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pages/WH_Vol23_0385a.gif
1) Social Security card bearing #433-54-3937 in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald;
2) Selective Service draft card in the NAME OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD bearing #41-114-395-32, classification—4A;
3) Card bearing name Lee Harvey Oswald reflecting he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee; address listed as 799 Broadway, New York 3, New York, telephone #0Ragon 4-8295, headquarters for Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Card was signed by V.T. Lee, Executive Secretary; card issued 5/28/63.
4) Card for the New Orleans Chapter of Fair Play for Cuba Committee in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald, signed by A.J. Hidell, Chapter President, issued June 6, 1963.[/b] (Commission Exhibit (CE) 1942, pp. 365-366)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0385a.htm
Quote off
IF LHO was in the habit of using “A.J. Hidell” as claimed by the WC, why was there NO evidence for this on August 9, 1963, when he was arrested in New Orleans?
What we also saw in post #101 was the comment by LHO that he was CONTACTED by Hidell so it gives the impression this was NOT his alias.
Quote on
I found more information on the discussion between LHO and the FBI Agent in the New Orleans jail. It is contained in the book The Man Who Knew Too Much by Dick Russell. On page 252 he writes the following.
Quote on
At the close of the interview [with Martello], Oswald requested to speak to a representative of the FBI. Martello called over, telling the FBI that Oswald “was desirous of seeing an agent and supplying to him information with regard to his activities with the FPCC in New Orleans.” [FBI item #100-16601-18; declassified 1977] FBI Special Agent John Quigley then spent an hour and a half talking with Oswald on a sweltering Saturday morning at the police station.
Oswald told the FBI man that “A.J. Hidell” had ASKED HIM to distribute FPCC literature two days before the street incident.* Quigley later maintained that he had never heard of Oswald before. Yet in 1961, after Oswald’s “defection” to the USSR, his Navy file had been reviewed by the FBI in New Orleans, where he was born. JOHN QUIGLEY HAD HANDLED THE CASE. (Emphasis mine)
Quote off
*Quigley report on LHO: FBI file # 100-16601 (CE826). LHO showed Quigley his FPCC charter card, which falsely listed the membership number at 33. LHO had said he had NEVER SEEN “A.J. Hidell” IN PERSON but that Hidell CONTACTED HIM by letter or by phone to let him know the agenda of political activities and the time and place of meetings.
The Quigley report stated:
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0393a.jpg
“Last Wednesday, August 7, 1963, Oswald said that he had received a note through the mail FROM Hidell. The note asked him if he had time would he mind distributing some Fair Play for Cuba Committee literature in the downtown area of New Orleans. He said that Hidell knew that he was NOT working and probably had time. Hidell also knew that he had considerable literature on the committee which had been furnished to him by the national committee in New York. (Citation for * above from The Man Who Knew Too Much, page 518)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0393a.htm
Quote off
Why would LHO be contacting himself? Does this make any sense to you? I know the WC defenders will pull out their “LHO is lying” card for this, but let’s be honest, in fifty-five years they have NOT showed LHO lied about anything he said while in custody, so why would he be lying here?
In post #58, question 15, we saw LHO listed a man with the name Hidell as a REFERENCE on a job application!
Quote on
On his application for employment for the William B. Reilly Coffee Company LHO listed a number of references. In a FBI report (CE 1894) you can find these.
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pages/WH_Vol23_0364b.gif
The document we are looking at is on the right side of the page. The second character reference he lists is:
Quote on
Sgt. Robert Hidell, Active Duty, U.S.M.C. (CE 1894, p. 696)
Quote off
Quote off
Could this “Robert Hidell” be the person contacting LHO? Or did someone like David Atlee Phillips use this alias? When LHO rented a room in October 1963 he used O.H. Lee, and NOT A.J. Hidell. Here is what the owner of the romminghouse testified to.
Mr. BELIN. Now, sometime last fall, a person came to your house to rent a room who you knew by the name of O. H. Lee. Is that correct?
Mr. JOHNSON. That's right.
Mr. BELIN. All right. In any case, this man, O. H. Lee, came to rent a room from you or from your wife?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.
His wife would testify to the same thing.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was?
Mrs. JOHNSON. O.H. L-e-e [spelling].
Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.
Mr. BALL. May I see it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.
Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?
Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.
We see again that LHO did NOT use the A. J. Hidell alias for this room. Why not? Final confirmation comes from the housekeeper Mrs. Roberts.
Mrs. ROBERTS. The day he came in and rented the room--the 14th of October.
Mr. BALL. Had you ever heard of the man before?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No, and he didn't register as Oswald---he registered as O. H. Lee.
Mr. BALL. Did he sign his name?
Mrs. ROBERTS. O. H. Lee.
Mr. BALL. Did he sign his own name that way?
Mrs. ROBERTS. O. H. Lee---that's what he was registered as.
Why did he NOT use the Hidell alias since the WC claimed he used this for the weapons order? Marina would claim LHO was NOT very job motivated as she said this early in her WC testimony.
Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband do anything around the house or did he seek work right away?
Mrs. OSWALD. For about a week he was merely talking and took a trip to the library. That is it.
Mr. RANKIN. Then did he seek work in Fort Worth?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And when did he find his first job there?
Mrs. OSWALD. While we were with Robert. It seems it was at the end of the second month that Lee found work. But at this time I don't remember the date exactly but his mother who lived in Fort Worth at that time rented a room and she proposed that we spend some time with her, that we live with her for some time.
She said it took nearly two months for LHO to find work, but as we saw in post #170 LHO was looking for other work while he was at the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). We have also seen he had a chance for a permanent and better paying job at the airport (Love Field) before he took the temporary job at the TSBD, but he was NEVER told about this opportunity.
Émigré George Bouhe would say LHO said he worked in “Minsk, Russia” last when he would apply for a job.
Mr. BOUHE - …Well, his handicap was, he never had any skill. That is true. Marines, no skill. Sheet-metal work, I don't know if that was true in Russia. He didn't know anything. I understood from other people that when he went to the Texas Employment Commission in Fort Worth to ask for a job and they said what can you do---nothing. Where did you work last--Minsk. Let's call it off. He couldn't progress. He couldn't get any place. So this is maybe facetious on my part and I admit it, but my policy in this thing was substantially the policy of the U.S. Government as I see it.
Why would LHO say this when he had worked at places in the U.S. upon his return? Why would LHO do this UNLESS he did NOT want that particular job? Bouhe said the Russian community also thought LHO was a Russian agent.
Mr. LIEBELER - Now did other members of the Russian colony express to you the thought that Oswald might have been a Russian agent?
Mr. BOUHE - I would say, based on pure emotions and bred-in suspicions, yes.
Mr. LIEBELER - Can you tell me who expressed those thoughts to you?
Mr. BOUHE - Well, I don't know who said that, but I really don't remember who said that, because there was so much talk. But probably it was mentioned.
As we have seen in this series there is evidence that shows LHO could have been an agent, but I doubt he was a “Russian agent” unless this is NOT the LHO that was born in New Orleans.
No other time outside the alleged ordering of the Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C) and the Smith & Wesson .38 Special (and even then the order form shows a 36” Carbine) is the name A.J. Hidell seen in use by LHO. John Newman showed in his book Oswald And The CIA that he did NOT even use it on the handbills he passed out for the Fair Play For Cuba Committee he was part of.
Quote on
On June 8, 1963, Oswald was trying out his new stamp kit. It was a ninety-eight-cent Warrior Rubber Stamping Kit, a picture of which was published in volume XVI of the Warren Commission exhibits. This exhibit includes a piece of paper on which Oswald practiced stamping. Neither the Hidell alias nor the false (30016) post office box appear on this document. (Oswald And The CIA, John Newman, p. 307)
Commission Exhibit (CE) 116:[/b] www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pages/WH_Vol16_0255b.jpg
Quote off
Again, we see LHO did NOT use the Hidell name. There is NO evidence showing he ever used it before or after the alleged weapons order. So where did this information come from? It came from Military Intelligence located in San Antonio, Texas.
Colonel Robert Jones of the 112th Military Intelligence Group (MIG) located at Fort Sam Houston contacted the FBI offices in San Antonio and Dallas to provide them with the information regarding LHO and his alleged alias A.J. Hidell. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) claimed these files were opened because LHO had been suspected of being a possible counterintelligence threat and NOT because he was some agent of the military or some other group. How can a “lone nut” be a “counterintelligence threat” is beyond me. Col. Jones claimed LHO came to his attention after his arrest in New Orleans for the handing out of FPCC literature. IF this is so, then we did NOT have FREE SPEECH in 1963 either.
It goes on to say files were opened on LHO and A.J. Hidell, but does NOT mention why the CONNECTION was made between the two men. Possibly because there was a Hidell tied to the FPCC as well, but if he had bothered to read what was said to Lt. Martello and FBI Agent John Quigley he would have seen LHO said Hidell CONTACTED him with orders. Clearly, LHO was saying Hidell was a different person.
On November 22, 1963 Jones said it came to his attention that a “A.J. Hidell" had been arrested or had come to the attention of the law enforcement authorities. It went on to say this:
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pages/HSCA_Report_0126b.gif
Jones checked the MIG indexes, which indicated that there was a file on Lee Harvey Oswald, also KNOWN BY THE NAME A.J. Hidell. Pulling the file, he telephoned the FBI office in San Antonio to notify the FBI that he had some information. He was soon in contact with the Dallas FBI office, to which he summarized the documents in the file. He believed that one person with whom he spoke was FBI-Special-Agent-in-Charge J. Gordon Shanklin. He may have talked with the Dallas FBI office more than one time that day. [HSCA Report, p. 222) (Emphasis added)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0126a.htm
Quote off
What caused the claim of LHO being "also known as A.J. Hidell?" Who knew him by that name beyond the 112th MIG? Of course the HSCA said this about his comments.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pages/HSCA_Report_0127a.gif
The committee found Jones' testimony to be credible. (HSCA Report, p.223)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0127a.htm
After saying they found Col. Jones’ comments credible they then wrote this!
Quote on
His statements concerning the contents of the Oswald file were consistent with FBI communications that were generated as a result of the information that he initially provided. Access to Oswald's military intelligence file, which the Department of Defense never gave to the Warren Commission, was not possible because the Department of Defense had destroyed the file as part of a general program aimed at eliminating all of its files pertaining to nonmilitary personnel.
In response to a committee inquiry, the Department of Defense gave the following explanation for the file's destruction:
1. Dossier AB 652876, Oswald, Lee Harvey, was identified for deletion from IRR (Intelligence Records and Reports) holdings on Julian date 73060 (1 March 1973) as stamped on the microfilmed dossier cover. It is not possible to determine the actual date when physical destruction was accomplished, but is credibly surmised that the destruction was accomplished within a period not greater than 60 days following the identification for deletion…
2. It is not possible to determine who accomplished the actual physical destruction of the dossier. The individual identifying the dossier for deletion can be determined from the clerk number appearing on the available deletion record. The number indicates that Lyndall E. Harp was the identifying clerk. Harp was an employee of the IRR from 1969 until late 1973, at which time she transferred to the Defense Investigative Service, Fort Holdbird, Md., where she is still a civil service employee. The individual ordering the destruction or deletion cannot be determined. However, available evidence indicates that the dossier was identified for deletion under a set of criteria applied by IRR clerks to all files. The basis for these criteria were [sic] established in the 1 June 1971 letter.
There is no indication that the dossier was specifically identified for review or deletion. All evidence shows that the file was reviewed as part of a generally applied program to eliminate any dossier concerning persons not affiliated with DOD.
3. The exact material contained in the dossier cannot be determined at this time. However, discussions with all available persons who recall seeing the dossier reveal that it most probably included: newspaper clippings relating to pro-Cuban activities of Oswald, several Federal Bureau of Investigation reports, and possibly some Army counterintelligence reports. None of the persons indicated that they remember any significant information in the dossier.
Upon receipt of this information, the committee orally requested the destruction order relating to the file on Oswald. In a letter dated September 13, 1978, the General Counsel of the Department of the Army replied that no such order existed:
Army regulations do not require any type of specific order before intelligence files can be destroyed, and none was prepared in connection with the destruction of the Oswald file. As a rule, investigative information on persons not directly affiliated with the Defense Department can be retained in Army files only for short periods of time and in carefully regulated circumstances. The Oswald file was destroyed routinely in accordance with normal files management procedures, as are thousands of intelligence files annually.(227)
The committee found this "routine" destruction of the Oswald file extremely troublesome, especially when viewed in light of the Department of Defense's failure to make this file available to the Warren Commission. Despite the credibility of Jones' testimony, without access to this file, the question of Oswald's possible affiliation with military intelligence could not be fully resolved. (HSCA Report, pp. 223-224)
Quote off
So despite NO file to look at and the fact NO one asked or found out why a link between LHO and A.J. Hidell existed on November 22, 1963, by the MIG we are left with the HSCA finding Jones’ testimony “credible.” Why is that?
We have seen in numerous posts in this series that the Dallas Police Department (DPD) was totally unaware of this connection as the ONLY alias listed for LHO on November 22, 1963, was “O.H. Lee”. When asked about aliases Chief Jesse Curry said he knew of only “O.H. Lee” so if Jones had passed this on to the FBI, why were they NOT passing this on to the people with the JURISDICTION on November 22, 1963, the DPD?
Isn’t it interesting that the ONLY link between LHO and A.J. Hidell is some Military Intelligence file that NO longer exists! And the WC relied on this connection when it had NO evidence behind it, but isn’t that what they did in this WHOLE case? Yes is the answer.
Again, we see the evidence in the twenty-six volumes and how the WC irresponsibly handled this case sink their conclusions.
www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Marina_Lee_Oswald.jpg
assets.catawiki.nl/assets/2014/4/8/5/4/c/54c085fa-bf52-11e3-9bdd-34641bda4e1c.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) said Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) used an alias, A. J. Hidell, to purchase the weapon that allegedly killed President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. What evidence do they have to show this is the case?
We will look at this in this post.
********************************
We looked at LHO’s arrest in New Orleans on August 9, 1963, in post #101 of this series, and under question 3 we saw the following evidence of what LHO had in his wallet at this time.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pages/WH_Vol23_0385a.gif
1) Social Security card bearing #433-54-3937 in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald;
2) Selective Service draft card in the NAME OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD bearing #41-114-395-32, classification—4A;
3) Card bearing name Lee Harvey Oswald reflecting he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee; address listed as 799 Broadway, New York 3, New York, telephone #0Ragon 4-8295, headquarters for Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Card was signed by V.T. Lee, Executive Secretary; card issued 5/28/63.
4) Card for the New Orleans Chapter of Fair Play for Cuba Committee in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald, signed by A.J. Hidell, Chapter President, issued June 6, 1963.[/b] (Commission Exhibit (CE) 1942, pp. 365-366)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0385a.htm
Quote off
IF LHO was in the habit of using “A.J. Hidell” as claimed by the WC, why was there NO evidence for this on August 9, 1963, when he was arrested in New Orleans?
What we also saw in post #101 was the comment by LHO that he was CONTACTED by Hidell so it gives the impression this was NOT his alias.
Quote on
I found more information on the discussion between LHO and the FBI Agent in the New Orleans jail. It is contained in the book The Man Who Knew Too Much by Dick Russell. On page 252 he writes the following.
Quote on
At the close of the interview [with Martello], Oswald requested to speak to a representative of the FBI. Martello called over, telling the FBI that Oswald “was desirous of seeing an agent and supplying to him information with regard to his activities with the FPCC in New Orleans.” [FBI item #100-16601-18; declassified 1977] FBI Special Agent John Quigley then spent an hour and a half talking with Oswald on a sweltering Saturday morning at the police station.
Oswald told the FBI man that “A.J. Hidell” had ASKED HIM to distribute FPCC literature two days before the street incident.* Quigley later maintained that he had never heard of Oswald before. Yet in 1961, after Oswald’s “defection” to the USSR, his Navy file had been reviewed by the FBI in New Orleans, where he was born. JOHN QUIGLEY HAD HANDLED THE CASE. (Emphasis mine)
Quote off
*Quigley report on LHO: FBI file # 100-16601 (CE826). LHO showed Quigley his FPCC charter card, which falsely listed the membership number at 33. LHO had said he had NEVER SEEN “A.J. Hidell” IN PERSON but that Hidell CONTACTED HIM by letter or by phone to let him know the agenda of political activities and the time and place of meetings.
The Quigley report stated:
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0393a.jpg
“Last Wednesday, August 7, 1963, Oswald said that he had received a note through the mail FROM Hidell. The note asked him if he had time would he mind distributing some Fair Play for Cuba Committee literature in the downtown area of New Orleans. He said that Hidell knew that he was NOT working and probably had time. Hidell also knew that he had considerable literature on the committee which had been furnished to him by the national committee in New York. (Citation for * above from The Man Who Knew Too Much, page 518)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0393a.htm
Quote off
Why would LHO be contacting himself? Does this make any sense to you? I know the WC defenders will pull out their “LHO is lying” card for this, but let’s be honest, in fifty-five years they have NOT showed LHO lied about anything he said while in custody, so why would he be lying here?
In post #58, question 15, we saw LHO listed a man with the name Hidell as a REFERENCE on a job application!
Quote on
On his application for employment for the William B. Reilly Coffee Company LHO listed a number of references. In a FBI report (CE 1894) you can find these.
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pages/WH_Vol23_0364b.gif
The document we are looking at is on the right side of the page. The second character reference he lists is:
Quote on
Sgt. Robert Hidell, Active Duty, U.S.M.C. (CE 1894, p. 696)
Quote off
Quote off
Could this “Robert Hidell” be the person contacting LHO? Or did someone like David Atlee Phillips use this alias? When LHO rented a room in October 1963 he used O.H. Lee, and NOT A.J. Hidell. Here is what the owner of the romminghouse testified to.
Mr. BELIN. Now, sometime last fall, a person came to your house to rent a room who you knew by the name of O. H. Lee. Is that correct?
Mr. JOHNSON. That's right.
Mr. BELIN. All right. In any case, this man, O. H. Lee, came to rent a room from you or from your wife?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.
His wife would testify to the same thing.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was?
Mrs. JOHNSON. O.H. L-e-e [spelling].
Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.
Mr. BALL. May I see it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.
Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?
Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.
We see again that LHO did NOT use the A. J. Hidell alias for this room. Why not? Final confirmation comes from the housekeeper Mrs. Roberts.
Mrs. ROBERTS. The day he came in and rented the room--the 14th of October.
Mr. BALL. Had you ever heard of the man before?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No, and he didn't register as Oswald---he registered as O. H. Lee.
Mr. BALL. Did he sign his name?
Mrs. ROBERTS. O. H. Lee.
Mr. BALL. Did he sign his own name that way?
Mrs. ROBERTS. O. H. Lee---that's what he was registered as.
Why did he NOT use the Hidell alias since the WC claimed he used this for the weapons order? Marina would claim LHO was NOT very job motivated as she said this early in her WC testimony.
Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband do anything around the house or did he seek work right away?
Mrs. OSWALD. For about a week he was merely talking and took a trip to the library. That is it.
Mr. RANKIN. Then did he seek work in Fort Worth?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And when did he find his first job there?
Mrs. OSWALD. While we were with Robert. It seems it was at the end of the second month that Lee found work. But at this time I don't remember the date exactly but his mother who lived in Fort Worth at that time rented a room and she proposed that we spend some time with her, that we live with her for some time.
She said it took nearly two months for LHO to find work, but as we saw in post #170 LHO was looking for other work while he was at the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). We have also seen he had a chance for a permanent and better paying job at the airport (Love Field) before he took the temporary job at the TSBD, but he was NEVER told about this opportunity.
Émigré George Bouhe would say LHO said he worked in “Minsk, Russia” last when he would apply for a job.
Mr. BOUHE - …Well, his handicap was, he never had any skill. That is true. Marines, no skill. Sheet-metal work, I don't know if that was true in Russia. He didn't know anything. I understood from other people that when he went to the Texas Employment Commission in Fort Worth to ask for a job and they said what can you do---nothing. Where did you work last--Minsk. Let's call it off. He couldn't progress. He couldn't get any place. So this is maybe facetious on my part and I admit it, but my policy in this thing was substantially the policy of the U.S. Government as I see it.
Why would LHO say this when he had worked at places in the U.S. upon his return? Why would LHO do this UNLESS he did NOT want that particular job? Bouhe said the Russian community also thought LHO was a Russian agent.
Mr. LIEBELER - Now did other members of the Russian colony express to you the thought that Oswald might have been a Russian agent?
Mr. BOUHE - I would say, based on pure emotions and bred-in suspicions, yes.
Mr. LIEBELER - Can you tell me who expressed those thoughts to you?
Mr. BOUHE - Well, I don't know who said that, but I really don't remember who said that, because there was so much talk. But probably it was mentioned.
As we have seen in this series there is evidence that shows LHO could have been an agent, but I doubt he was a “Russian agent” unless this is NOT the LHO that was born in New Orleans.
No other time outside the alleged ordering of the Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C) and the Smith & Wesson .38 Special (and even then the order form shows a 36” Carbine) is the name A.J. Hidell seen in use by LHO. John Newman showed in his book Oswald And The CIA that he did NOT even use it on the handbills he passed out for the Fair Play For Cuba Committee he was part of.
Quote on
On June 8, 1963, Oswald was trying out his new stamp kit. It was a ninety-eight-cent Warrior Rubber Stamping Kit, a picture of which was published in volume XVI of the Warren Commission exhibits. This exhibit includes a piece of paper on which Oswald practiced stamping. Neither the Hidell alias nor the false (30016) post office box appear on this document. (Oswald And The CIA, John Newman, p. 307)
Commission Exhibit (CE) 116:[/b] www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pages/WH_Vol16_0255b.jpg
Quote off
Again, we see LHO did NOT use the Hidell name. There is NO evidence showing he ever used it before or after the alleged weapons order. So where did this information come from? It came from Military Intelligence located in San Antonio, Texas.
Colonel Robert Jones of the 112th Military Intelligence Group (MIG) located at Fort Sam Houston contacted the FBI offices in San Antonio and Dallas to provide them with the information regarding LHO and his alleged alias A.J. Hidell. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) claimed these files were opened because LHO had been suspected of being a possible counterintelligence threat and NOT because he was some agent of the military or some other group. How can a “lone nut” be a “counterintelligence threat” is beyond me. Col. Jones claimed LHO came to his attention after his arrest in New Orleans for the handing out of FPCC literature. IF this is so, then we did NOT have FREE SPEECH in 1963 either.
It goes on to say files were opened on LHO and A.J. Hidell, but does NOT mention why the CONNECTION was made between the two men. Possibly because there was a Hidell tied to the FPCC as well, but if he had bothered to read what was said to Lt. Martello and FBI Agent John Quigley he would have seen LHO said Hidell CONTACTED him with orders. Clearly, LHO was saying Hidell was a different person.
On November 22, 1963 Jones said it came to his attention that a “A.J. Hidell" had been arrested or had come to the attention of the law enforcement authorities. It went on to say this:
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pages/HSCA_Report_0126b.gif
Jones checked the MIG indexes, which indicated that there was a file on Lee Harvey Oswald, also KNOWN BY THE NAME A.J. Hidell. Pulling the file, he telephoned the FBI office in San Antonio to notify the FBI that he had some information. He was soon in contact with the Dallas FBI office, to which he summarized the documents in the file. He believed that one person with whom he spoke was FBI-Special-Agent-in-Charge J. Gordon Shanklin. He may have talked with the Dallas FBI office more than one time that day. [HSCA Report, p. 222) (Emphasis added)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0126a.htm
Quote off
What caused the claim of LHO being "also known as A.J. Hidell?" Who knew him by that name beyond the 112th MIG? Of course the HSCA said this about his comments.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pages/HSCA_Report_0127a.gif
The committee found Jones' testimony to be credible. (HSCA Report, p.223)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0127a.htm
After saying they found Col. Jones’ comments credible they then wrote this!
Quote on
His statements concerning the contents of the Oswald file were consistent with FBI communications that were generated as a result of the information that he initially provided. Access to Oswald's military intelligence file, which the Department of Defense never gave to the Warren Commission, was not possible because the Department of Defense had destroyed the file as part of a general program aimed at eliminating all of its files pertaining to nonmilitary personnel.
In response to a committee inquiry, the Department of Defense gave the following explanation for the file's destruction:
1. Dossier AB 652876, Oswald, Lee Harvey, was identified for deletion from IRR (Intelligence Records and Reports) holdings on Julian date 73060 (1 March 1973) as stamped on the microfilmed dossier cover. It is not possible to determine the actual date when physical destruction was accomplished, but is credibly surmised that the destruction was accomplished within a period not greater than 60 days following the identification for deletion…
2. It is not possible to determine who accomplished the actual physical destruction of the dossier. The individual identifying the dossier for deletion can be determined from the clerk number appearing on the available deletion record. The number indicates that Lyndall E. Harp was the identifying clerk. Harp was an employee of the IRR from 1969 until late 1973, at which time she transferred to the Defense Investigative Service, Fort Holdbird, Md., where she is still a civil service employee. The individual ordering the destruction or deletion cannot be determined. However, available evidence indicates that the dossier was identified for deletion under a set of criteria applied by IRR clerks to all files. The basis for these criteria were [sic] established in the 1 June 1971 letter.
There is no indication that the dossier was specifically identified for review or deletion. All evidence shows that the file was reviewed as part of a generally applied program to eliminate any dossier concerning persons not affiliated with DOD.
3. The exact material contained in the dossier cannot be determined at this time. However, discussions with all available persons who recall seeing the dossier reveal that it most probably included: newspaper clippings relating to pro-Cuban activities of Oswald, several Federal Bureau of Investigation reports, and possibly some Army counterintelligence reports. None of the persons indicated that they remember any significant information in the dossier.
Upon receipt of this information, the committee orally requested the destruction order relating to the file on Oswald. In a letter dated September 13, 1978, the General Counsel of the Department of the Army replied that no such order existed:
Army regulations do not require any type of specific order before intelligence files can be destroyed, and none was prepared in connection with the destruction of the Oswald file. As a rule, investigative information on persons not directly affiliated with the Defense Department can be retained in Army files only for short periods of time and in carefully regulated circumstances. The Oswald file was destroyed routinely in accordance with normal files management procedures, as are thousands of intelligence files annually.(227)
The committee found this "routine" destruction of the Oswald file extremely troublesome, especially when viewed in light of the Department of Defense's failure to make this file available to the Warren Commission. Despite the credibility of Jones' testimony, without access to this file, the question of Oswald's possible affiliation with military intelligence could not be fully resolved. (HSCA Report, pp. 223-224)
Quote off
So despite NO file to look at and the fact NO one asked or found out why a link between LHO and A.J. Hidell existed on November 22, 1963, by the MIG we are left with the HSCA finding Jones’ testimony “credible.” Why is that?
We have seen in numerous posts in this series that the Dallas Police Department (DPD) was totally unaware of this connection as the ONLY alias listed for LHO on November 22, 1963, was “O.H. Lee”. When asked about aliases Chief Jesse Curry said he knew of only “O.H. Lee” so if Jones had passed this on to the FBI, why were they NOT passing this on to the people with the JURISDICTION on November 22, 1963, the DPD?
Isn’t it interesting that the ONLY link between LHO and A.J. Hidell is some Military Intelligence file that NO longer exists! And the WC relied on this connection when it had NO evidence behind it, but isn’t that what they did in this WHOLE case? Yes is the answer.
Again, we see the evidence in the twenty-six volumes and how the WC irresponsibly handled this case sink their conclusions.