Did Oswald Go To Mexico City?

[Thomas Graves]

As I've said numerous times, if one wants to believe that all of this evidence - the eyewitness accounts, the physical evidence, the circumstantial evidence - is faked or phony then there's nothing further to discuss.

Whatever evidence is presented that Oswald went to Mexico City can be summarily dismissed as being inauthentic. So where is there to go?

You believe that the Cubans worked with the Soviets on this operation. Yet you believe that Azcue and Duran exposed it by revealing it wasn't Oswald. That makes no sense whatsoever. You say we can't believe the "communists" like Nechiporenko and Kostikov. But then believe the "communists" Azcue and Duran. That's illogical.

And for the tenth or twentieth time: Duran said that the man she met was Oswald. Her description is off but she said and has said repeatedly that the man was Lee Oswald. She testified to this. And has stated it in numerous interviews.

The CIA translators - Boris and Anne Tarasoff - who heard the phone calls from a person identifying himself as Oswald said the person spoken broken Russian. Neither said the person spoke broken English. They head the calls. That is what they testified to. Peter Dale Scott is a radical leftist who thinks the CIA killed JFK (and is the cause of every ill in the world). I find it remarkable that you use as a source someone you think has an anti-CIA bias and should be dismissed.

One can, as I said, look at the totality of evidence and conclude it was Oswald or one can look at the totality of evidence and conclude it was all part of some covert plan to fake the visit. It's a free choice.

Galbraith,

"Communism" had nothing to do with it, except tangentially.

The KGB (and probably the DGI) had everything to do with it.

Was Duran or Azcue KGB?

Where do you think Oswald's passport-sized photos were taken? (Hint: He wore that sweater vest in the USSR.)

Duran described "Oswald" as "cheaply dressed".

Does Oswald look cheaply dressed to you in that photo?

Azcue described "Oswald" as about thirty-five years of age, and not just thin-faced, but "very thin-faced".

Does Oswald look about 35 years old, and very thin-faced?

LOL

Don't run away, again, now ...

--  MWT 

PS  Do you not believe that the FBI visited every photo shop within a five mile radius and that no one said they recognized or remembered Oswald's visiting them on Friday September 27?

[Jerry Freeman]

It is not a case of what I 'believe'. Even J E Hoover thought it might be so. 
Review my reply #409 and respond to that one. Your lovely angel Marina lied...plain and simple.

J. Edgar Hoover's taped conversations with President Johnson dated November 23, 1963:--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LBJ:  Have you established any more about the visit to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico in September?
JEH:  No, that's one angle that's very confusing for this reason. We have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet Embassy, using Oswald's name, That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there was a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there. We do have a copy of a letter which was written by Oswald to the Soviet Embassy here in Washington inquiring as well as complaining about the harassment of his wife and the questioning of his wife by the FBI. Now, of course that letter information, we process all mail that goes to the Soviet Embassy- it is a very secret operation. No mail is delivered to the Soviet Embassy without being examined and opened by us, so that we know what they receive...Now if we can identify this man at the Mexican Embassy, at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City....

[Richard Smith]

It is not a case of what I 'believe'. Even J E Hoover thought it might be so. Go see him about it
Review my reply #409 and respond to that one. Your lovely angel Marina lied...plain and simple.

Ugh.  Again, the point is not what you are claiming or believe.   It is that Oswald's acquisition of a passport and tourist card are not evidence of an imposter as you stated.  The passport was necessary for Oswald to get to Cuba.  The entire purpose of his Mexico visit.  And the tourist card was necessary for him to get to Mexico.  Thus they were necessary for his purposes and not documents that were superfluous to create a paper trail as you falsely claimed.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Yes, I know what you believe but it was based on the false premise that Oswald didn't need to obtain a passport or "visa" for his trip to Mexico.  He needed a passport to get to Cuba.  That was his objective in going to Mexico.  He didn't obtain a visa but turned in an immigration form like everyone else who went to Mexico.  He had to do that to get to Mexico City.  So it is demonstrably false that these documents were not necessary and were obtained by your fantasy impersonator solely to create a paper trail.

"Why would Oswald [who seemed cheap and apparently lazy in every other way] bother to get a visa some 10 days before he actually was supposed to have left?
I suggest that this visa was obtained by an impersonator who had the necessary credentials with the sole and solitary intent of establishing a paper trail that led straight to Oswald/Cuba."

Hoover's suspicion that Oswald was impersonated was expressed in the early days after the assassination and before we (and he) learned all of this additional information from the Cuban officials - the transit visa application, their testimonies - from the Soviet officials, from the eyewitnesses on the bus and from others. Plus the paper trail, some of which the FBI had not yet obtained. Hoover had no access in the immediate aftermath to include this evidence in his views on what happened. We do.

[Jerry Freeman]

Ugh.  Again, the point is not what you are claiming or believe.   It is that Oswald's acquisition of a passport and tourist card are not evidence of an imposter as you stated.  The passport was necessary for Oswald to get to Cuba.  The entire purpose of his Mexico visit.  And the tourist card was necessary for him to get to Mexico.  Thus they were necessary for his purposes and not documents that were superfluous to create a paper trail as you falsely claimed.

I notice that reply 409 is still ignored. So much hinged on Marina's statements and as we see -she lied.
So now we just have a pile of crap papers to rely on. If they support the Report conclusions... they are framed in gold and honored.
If they do not ...they are ignored.
Peradventure that Oswald did go to MC and got his visa to Cuba and went there and survived on his good looks or whatever--and joined Fidel and the Cuban cause....What would have happened to Marina? His daughters? And the pistol and rifle that was supposed to be stashed in Ruth's garage and therefor President Kennedy would not have been shot?...at least not by Lee Harvey Oswald from a high building window.
I believe a 10th grader could see the fallacy of the Oswald did it alone yarn.
 Oswalds here and Oswalds there --


 

[Richard Smith]

I notice that reply 409 is still ignored. So much hinged on Marina's statements and as we see -she lied.
So now we just have a pile of crap papers to rely on. If they support the Report conclusions... they are framed in gold and honored.
If they do not ...they are ignored.
Peradventure that Oswald did go to MC and got his visa to Cuba and went there and survived on his good looks or whatever--and joined Fidel and the Cuban cause....What would have happened to Marina? His daughters? And the pistol and rifle that was supposed to be stashed in Ruth's garage and therefor President Kennedy would not have been shot?...at least not by Lee Harvey Oswald from a high building window.
I believe a 10th grader could see the fallacy of the Oswald did it alone yarn.
 Oswalds here and Oswalds there --

I can't decipher this rambling.  You cited Oswald's acquisition of a passport and "visa" as being evidence of an impersonator because you claimed Oswald did not need these documents and would have been too lazy to obtain them.  I've explained why those documents were necessary for Oswald's trip (i.e. the passport was necessary to get to Cuba and the "visa" was actually a tourist card necessary to travel to Mexico).  So before moving on something else like in a game of whack-a-mole, how about just confirming your prior claim does not support your point?

[Jerry Freeman]

I can't decipher this rambling.  You cited Oswald's acquisition of a passport and "visa" as being evidence of an impersonator because you claimed Oswald did not need these documents and would have been too lazy to obtain them.  I've explained why those documents were necessary for Oswald's trip (i.e. the passport was necessary to get to Cuba and the "visa" was actually a tourist card necessary to travel to Mexico).  So before moving on something else like in a game of whack-a-mole, how about just confirming your prior claim does not support your point?

Why don't you try and make sense.

[Richard Smith]

Why don't you try and make sense.

Oswald's acquisition of a passport and tourist card are not evidence of an imposter as was stupidly suggested.  Rather, they were necessary to accomplish his avowed purpose of traveling to Cuba via Mexico City.  Therefore, your claim contains a false premise (that these documents were not required) and incorrect information (that Oswald obtained a visa):  "I suggest that this visa was obtained by an impersonator who had the necessary credentials with the sole and solitary intent of establishing a paper trail that led straight to Oswald/Cuba."

It's pretty straightforward.