The Central Intelligence Agency advised that on October 1, 1963, an extremely sensitive source had reported that an individual identifying himself as Lee Oswald contacted the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City inquiring as to any messages. Special Agents of this Bureau, who have conversed with Oswald in Dallas, Texas, have observed photographs of the individual referred to above and have listened to a recording of his voice- These Special Agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald.
Gordon Shanklin immediately wrote a memo "correcting" the Director, a rare display of cajones for any member of the Bureau, stating that the agents has read transcripts, not listened to recordings. The CIA, led by the ubiquitous David Atlee Phillips, would claim that the tapes of Oswald's conversations were "routinely destroyed" prior to the assassination. But a few years ago, a few slips of the tongue led to some remarkable information, that Warren Commission staff had listened to recordings of "Lee Oswald's"conversations with the Soviet Embassy. In a letter dated December 4, 1992 (published in The Investigator), W. David Slawson wrote:
Yes, I listened to the tape of Lee Harvey Oswald s telephone conversations with the Soviet Embassy In Mexico City I did not feel that the voice sounded any different from what I expected his would sound like.In evaluating anyone's claims that the voice on the tape is sufficiently different from Oswald's to raise a reasonable doubt that it was he talking, you should keep several things in mind. One, since Oswald was killed only two days after the assassination, of course he was not around, still talking. No one, therefore, can honestly claim to have compared his voice on this tape or anyplace else with what he actually sounded like. Two, wiretaps, In the early 1960's at least, commonly did not give good sound reproductions They were scratchy and full of static. Three, Oswald, like anyone else, presumably sounded slightly different under different circumstances, and he undoubtedly was under severe stress while he was in Mexico City. Fourth, under the circumstances he might well have been intentionally disguising his voice. We had evidence that he had been repeatedly warned by the Soviet Official with whom he talked that their telephone wires were probably tapped, so that he should assume that the CIA was listening.
Note that Slawson lists four reasons why the person on the recordings may not sound like Lee Oswald. Sort of makes you wonder...
The Lopez Report has the following to say about voice comparisons:
Can't read it? Do not adjust your monitor; the problem is your government.... It's all redacted. Sort of makes you wonder just a little bit more.... (From other parts of the Report and from other documents, we have an idea of at least part of what's been redacted, but that's for another time.) Trying to keep a straight face about it, let's say there are a few unanswered questions about the recordings. For example, why didn't Slawson (and Coleman, who also acknowledges that he heard the recordings) tell the HSCA about the recordings? Or did they? And if they did, why didn't the HSCA mention it? And so on....
We do know what was in the conversations even if we don't know who was doing the talking. You might think that the transcripts of the conversations would support the Official Story. [All quotations from the Lopez Report.] At first glance, the record is so confusing that it's hard to tell, but when examined in detail, well, you decide:
1. 9/27 10:30
"At or about 10:30 a.m. an unidentified man called the Soviet Military Attaché looking for a visa to Odessa. He was referred to the Consulate. The man then asked for and was given directions to the Consulate office. The directions were not noted by the transcriber. The entire conversation was transcribed in Spanish."
2. 9/27 10:37
"At 10:37 a.m. a man called the Soviet Consulate and asked for the Consul. He was told that the Consul was not in. The man outside stressed that it was necessary for him to get a visa to Odessa. He was told to call back at 11:30. This conversation was also transcribed in Spanish."
We can be virtually certain this is not LHO. (There is, of course, the remote possibility that LHO is playing games and has abilities -- speaking Spanish -- that we do not know about. For simplicity, I will not list every possible combination and will assume certain commonly accepted characterizations of LHO. The world is tricky, however.) Indeed, the real question is if these calls are linked to the person described as LHO in the subsequent calls. If they are, we can conclude an impostor.
Problems
· Conversation is in Spanish.
· Visa request is for Odessa.
· The time of the calls is difficult to reconcile with LHO checking in at the hotel.
· The information received by the caller is inconsistent with subsequent calls; LHO/"LHO" would be remarkably dense (this pattern of a "steep learning curve" repeats itself throughout the various phone conversations however).
· The 10:37 call is part of the record and was included in initial cable traffic; calls 1 & 3 were not. Gets a bit speculative trying to find reasons for this.
· Win Scott makes the following statement in his manuscript:
During my thirteen years in Mexico, I had many experiences, some of which I can write in detail. One of these pertains to Lee Harvey Oswald and what I know [emphasis in original] of his activities from the moment he arrived in Mexico, his contacts by telephone and his visits to both the Soviet and Cuban Embassies and his requests for assistance from these two Embassies in trying to get to the Crimea with his wife and baby. [emphasis in original]."
It may be stressing one word too much, but Odessa, of course, is located in the Crimea (and Minsk is not). Also, if taken at face value, the implications are somewhat astounding. If indeed Mexico City Station was aware of LHO "from the moment he arrived in Mexico", it's hard to avoid thinking that LHO was (knowingly or unknowingly) part of a CIA operation. (see additional references to this at p. 114 and p. 176).
3. 9/27 1:25
"At 1:25 an unidentified man called the Soviet Consulate and asked for the Consul. The man was told that the Consul was not in. The man outside asked, 'when tomorrow?' The Soviet official told him that on Mondays and Fridays the Consul was in between four and five. This conversation was also in the Spanish transcriptions."
· Again, the conversation is in Spanish, virtually excluding LHO. Without the recordings, it's hard to determine the significance. The call is consistent with the person who made the previous calls. (Weak circumstantial evidence linking this call to subsequent call is caller is told to call between 4 & 5 and calls at 4:05.) The only thing that's clear is that it's not LHO (if LHO didn't speak Spanish).
· What's remarkable is that according to Nechiporenko, LHO visits the Soviet Embassy at 12:30 in a meeting that lasted for approximately one hour....
4. 9/27 4:05
"At approximately 4:05 p.m., Silvia Duran called the Soviet Embassy. She told the person at the Embassy that an American citizen seeking a visa was at the Cuban Consulate. Silvia explained that the American citizen wanted to know the name of the official he had dealt with at the Soviet Embassy. Silvia had sent the American to the Soviet Embassy, stating that his acquiring a Cuban visa was contingent on his previously acquiring a Soviet visa. Silvia explained to the Soviet official that the American had stated that he was assured that there would be no problem. At that point, the Soviet official put another official on the phone, causing Silvia to repeat the story. The official then asked Silvia to leave her name and number so he could call later. This conversation was also in Spanish."
5. 9/27 4:26
"At 4:26 p.m., an unidentified Soviet official called Silvia Duran inquiring whether the American citizen had been to the Cuban consulate office. Silvia responded affirmatively, stating the American was at the office at that time. The Soviet official told Silvia that when the American visited the Soviet Consulate office he had displayed papers from the Soviet Consulate in Washington. He also had a letter stating that he was a member of an organization that favored Cuba. The American wanted to go to the U.S.S.R. with his Russian wife and remain there a long time. The Soviet official had not received an answer from Washington to the American's problem. The problem traditionally took four to five months to resolve because Washington had to secure authorization from the U.S.S.R. The Soviet official added that the American's wife could get a visa in Washington very quickly and she could have it sent anywhere, but he felt that the American would not get a visa soon. Silvia said that the Cuban government could not give the American a visa because he had neither friends in Cuba nor authorization for a visa from the U.S.S.R. The Soviet official added that the Soviets could not give the American a letter of recommendation because they did not know him. This conversation was also in the Spanish transcripts."
· Calls 4 & 5 are not LHO/"LHO" calls but are included to keep the chronology straight.
6. 9/28 11:51
"At 11:51 a.m. Silvia Duran called the Soviet Consulate. She said that there was an American citizen at the Cuban Consulate who had previously visited the Soviet Consulate. The Soviet asked Silvia to wait a minute. Upon his return to the telephone, Silvia put the American on the line. At first the American spoke in Russian and the Soviet spoke English. The conversation then proceeded in English until the Russian discontinued it and put another Soviet on the line. The Soviet spoke in English, but the American, speaking in broken Russian, asked him to speak Russian. The conversation resumed in Russian at that point. It also became incoherent [emphasis added] and is thus quoted in its entirety:
Russian: What else do you want?
American: I was just now at your Embassy and they took my address.
Russian: I know that.
American: /speaks terrible, hardly recognizable Russian/ I did not know it then. I went to the Cuban Embassy to ask them for my address, because they have it.
Russian: Why don't you come again and leave your address with us; it is not far from the Cuban Embassy.
American: Well, I'll be there right away."
· Problems:
· "terrible, hardly recognizable Russian" is inconsistent with LHO. Granted that this is a subjective evaluation, from context of interviews, etc., it isn't consistent with LHO even if he wasn't the "native speaker" as described by Marina.
· The time is wrong, if Nechiporenko's description is correct. According to Nechiporenko, LHO is talking to them just about now.... It is also inconsistent with other statements by Nechiporenko -- which we'll come to later.
· The conversation is not incoherent but certainly it is strange. What LHO/"LHO" is saying is that he does not remember his address and had to go to the Cuban Consulate in order to get it.
· There is an element of cognitive dissonance here: the impersonation of LHO is so bad that "LHO" can't speak Russian worth a damn and can't even remember LHO's address that one is inclined to think it must be LHO for no other reason than "They" couldn't have done such a remarkably inept job at impersonating LHO.
7. 10/1 10:31
"At 10:31 a.m. an unidentified man called the Soviet Military Attaché and, in broken Russian, said that he had visited the Consulate the previous Saturday and had spoken to the Consul he man wanted to know if the Soviets had received an answer from Washington. At that point, the Soviet official gave the man the Consulate phone number and asked him to call there. This conversation is in the English transcripts, indicating the man spoke in either Russian or English."
· Again the problem of the quality of the Russian spoken. Also, the call to Soviet Military Attaché doesn't make much sense. You'd think LHO would have learned by now who to call....
8. 10/1 10:45
"At 10:45 a.m. a man who, according to the translator's comment, had phoned a day or so before and had spoken in broken Russian, called the Consulate and spoke to an employee named Obyedkov. The man calling introduced himself as `Lee Oswald' and stated that he visited the Soviet Consulate the previous Saturday. He told Obyedkov that he spoke with the Consul on that day. Oswald added that the Consul had stated that they would send a telegram to Washington and he wanted to know if they had received an answer. Oswald also said that he did not remember the name of the Consul with whom he had spoken. Obyedkov asked if it had been Kostikov and described him as `dark.' The man outside replied affirmatively and repeated that his name was Oswald. Obyedkov asked Oswald to hold on a minute while he inquired. When Obyedkov resumed the conversation, he stated that the Soviet Consul had not yet received an answer but the request had been sent. Obyedkov then hung up the telephone as Oswald began another sentence with the words `and what.' This conversation is in the English transcripts."
· Again, the problem of the quality of Russian and LHO's problem with remembering Kostikov's name (he won't even get the name right in the letter to the Soviet Embassy so perhaps it's just one more quirk....).
10/3 ?
"An unidentified man called the Soviet Military Attaché and spoke in broken Spanish and then in English. When the man inquired about a visa to Russia, he was given the Consulate phone number. The man then inquired if they issued visas at the Consulate. The Soviet stated that he was not certain but that the caller should call the Consul nonetheless."
· It's unlikely that this conversation is relevant. It's certainly not LHO (It's in Spanish and LHO be gone) but there's no compelling reason to connect it to the sequence of events.
Additional Comments:
There's considerable evidence for a "missing" conversation (independent testimony from Duran, translator, and Win Scott -- all alluding to a request for assistance from the Soviets). It's unknown if this conversation is "in addition" to the above. For a variety of reasons, the conversation of 9/28 may well be manufactured. Since the "missing conversation" involved Duran, it's possible that the 9/28 conversation "replaced" the missing one, i.e., substitution rather than deletion.
Trivia just for the hell of it: the rather strange dating method (European style mixed with Roman numerals, "5/IV/63") on the back of the DeM. copy of the backyard photos shows up in the Lopez report on a note by Win Scott -- "... on 23/ XI" (footnote 679, p. 46, CIA pagination 347).
Some comments on Nechiporenko's story (also see EA #4):
Explicit bias: Unlike some distinguished members of the research community, I don't have much faith in the Nechiporenko's story for a number of reasons, especially after reading his book. That skepticism, however, is not because his version of events supports the Official Story. It does not, though many people have ignored the conflicts between the two stories. Nechiporenko's descriptions of LHO in USSR and Mexico City do not wash. This bias is based on inconsistencies, absurdities, and things he has "lifted" from Western sources and published in his book, not because it affects a particular view of the assassination one way or the other. His story is simply not believable in certain areas. That doesn't mean, of course, that everything is false. The problem is one doesn't know what is accurate and what is not. (It's pointless to worry if there are sinister meanings to the inaccuracies -- it simply doesn't matter.)
Some of the obvious conflicts:
· 9/27 phone conversations inconsistent with Nechiporenko's story. According to him, LHO visited Soviets at 12:30 for approximately an hour, making the 1:25 phone call pretty weird, both in timing and content.
· The description of LHO on 9/27 is inconsistent with the description in the Official Story -- he was not dressed in a suit. (That the clothing doesn't match doesn't surprise me in the least, but it is Duran's description and necessary to preserve the visa photo fiction.)
· The major unequivocal conflict is that Nechiporenko is adamant that Soviets had no further contact with LHO after the meeting Saturday morning and explicitly denies the 9/28 11:51 call took place.
So, did someone impersonate Lee Harvey Oswald at the Cuban Consulate? Certainly sounds like it...
* * *