[Mark Ulrik]

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:The House Select Committee on Assassinations wrote the following information request to the CIA:

(Mr. Breckinridge was the CIA coordinator for HSCA information requests)

I'm sure I don't have to remind those reading this that Lee Harvey Oswald was a former Marine who "defected" and worked at the Minsk Radio Plant, and returned to the U.S. with his family. No response by the CIA has been located.

Perhaps not by you.

Nor the HSCA - with the full power of the U.S. Government behind it. But this isn't the only example of a federal agency simply refusing to answer questions in the JFK case.

You don't know what you're talking about. The CIA didn't refuse to accommodate Blakey's request. That you weren't able to locate their response doesn't mean there wasn't any. You probably didn't try very hard.

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:Believers have no response to material like this - which gives the average person credible reason to believe that at the very least, Lee Harvey Oswald was an intelligence asset.

Those interested in more info can find this on pages 92-93 of Larry Hancock's excellent book, "Someone Would Have Talked"

Apparently, the HSCA reviewed the files and found no contact report. Did Larry come to a different conclusion?

The 'conclusions' are crystal clear - the CIA did not want to answer - the reasoning is simple, there was only one former Marine employed in a Minsk Radio Plant who returned in 1962. This makes it extremely obvious that Oswald was, at the very least, an unwitting intelligence asset.

And just as supporters cannot explain the refusal of the Warren Commission to call James Chaney to testify, they cannot explain why the CIA simply refused to provide the contact report which was so concisely pinpointed by someone who'd seen it.

But the HSCA inspected the files and found no contact report. How can you be sure it ever existed?

Ben Holmes Wrote:How can Larry come to any other conclusion? How would you be able to come to any other conclusion? The CIA didn't want to verify a connection with someone accused as a Presidential assassin. No other reason stands the test of credibility.

Which is why, no doubt, you didn't offer any other reason...

But the CIA did cooperate, so what are you really saying? That they made the contact report disappear? I'd still like to know what Larry wrote about this, if you don't mind quoting him.