Lee Harvey Oswald was not under Surveillance
- Fred Litwin
- Jul 30
- 9 min read
So let’s take a closer look at the six CIA operations that involved the man who would become known the “lone gunman.” What meets the eye when we open the Oswald file?
Here are the six operations:
HTLINGUAL
Morley says that "Angleton ordered Oswald’s correspondence to be open and copied when he was living in the Soviet Union November 1959 and May 1962." But that's not really true. The CIA ran a program called HT-Lingual which intercepted some mail going to and coming from the Soviet Union. On November 9, 1959, Lee Harvey Oswald's name was added to the watch list because of his defection to the Soviet Union. The Church Committee estimated that 75% of the letters that were opened were chosen at random, not because the name was on the watch list. The program intercepted a letter from Marguerite Oswald to her son and that was it. After the assassination, additional items of potential relevance to the assassination investigation were recovered from the HT-Lingual files, but those additional items did not include any correspondence to or from Oswald himself.
Morley claims that an informant allowed the FBI to photograph the Fair Play for Cuba Committee's files in New York. But AMSANTA was a CIA operation. I am not sure how this operation pertains to Oswald.
AMSPELL
AMSPELL was the CIA cryptonym for the DRE. I have written about this over and over again. Carlos Bringuier was the DRE delegate in New Orleans, but he was not paid, and he was not directed by the DRE in Florida. Morley writes that "Multiple FBI reports on Oswald’s ensuing arrest and his FPCC activism were sent to the Counterintelligence Staff." But so what? This is not surveillance. This is reporting.
LIEMPTY sent a photograph of a man they thought was Oswald visiting the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. This is not surveillance of Oswald, but surveillance of the Soviet Embassy.
LIENVOY
LIFEAT was a wide ranging teltap operation, i.e. CIA was listening in on people’s telephone conversations. The taps were in Mexico City. LI is a digraph code, indicating Mexico related. FEAT is a randomly chosen codeword.
There were two major CIA teltap operations in Mexico City in the early 1960s: LIFEAT and LIENVOY.
LIENVOY was a joint operation with the Mexican government, proposed and put into place by the then president of Mexico Mateos-Lopez. This was one of the great secrets that CIA concealed for as long as it could. LIENVOY tapped the lines of Cuban and Soviet Russian diplomatic facilities, and was highly regarded by both U.S. and Mexican governments for the type of information the operation provided.
It was the LIENVOY tap which recorded a phone call to the Russian embassy from someone who identified himself as Lee Oswald. As one might expect, this call and several others which the CIA later determined were related to Oswald, was an important part of the Warren Commission investigation into President Kennedy’s death, and perhaps an even MORE important part of the HSCA re-investigation of the JFK assassination.
Morley writes that "The LIENVOY intercept of Oswald was immediately passed to the Counterintelligence Staff." Again, this not surveillance of Oswald, but surveillance of the Russian embassy.
LCIMPROVE
The CIA defined LCIMPROVE as " counter espionage involving Soviet intelligence services." Winston Scott, head of the CIA station in Mexico City, used this moniker when reporting on Oswald. But so what? One would expect he would report back, and that is not surveillance.
As you can see, these operations were not designed to surveil Oswald. But Oswald brushed against American intelligence in his defection to the Soviet Union in 1959 and his visit to the Soviet and Cuban embassies in Mexico City in 1963.
Of course, Oswald would have a file at the CIA before the assassination. Morley is surprised by this:
So after four years of surveillance, the six CIA operations served up detailed and timely intelligence on the unknown Oswald that was delivered to senior officials. By November 21, 1963, the Oswald file ran to 194 pages, including 12 State Department cables, 12 FBI reports, 11 CIA memoranda, along with references to Oswald’s intercepted correspondence.
But if we look at the documents that were in the possession of the CIA before the assassination, we find:
Telegrams from the State Department regarding his defection.
Newspaper articles about Oswald's defection.
Foreign Service Dispatches on Oswald.
An FBI report about Marguerite Oswald wiring money to her son in Russia.
Letters between the State Department and the CIA concerning defectors.
Department of State memo concerning a discussion with Marguerite Oswald.
Letter to Oswald from the State Department about visit American Embassy in Moscow.
FBI memos on Oswald's defection.
A letter Marguerite wrote to her son in Minsk.
FBI report about an interview with Oswald in 1962.
Why is any of this controversial? Would anybody expect this stuff to NOT be in a CIA file?
Morley then goes on to accuse two CIA directors of lying:
In an affidavit, McCone stated unequivocally that Oswald “was not an agent, employee, or informant of the CIA, that the Agency never communicated with him in any manner or furnished him any compensation, and that Oswald was never directly or indirectly associated with the CIA.” Deputy director Richard Helms testified the CIA’s pre-assassination information about Kennedy’s accused killer was “probably minimal.”
But McCone was right -- Oswald not an agent, employee, or informant of the CIA. And I've blogged several times that Richard Helms only said the information from the State Department was minimal.
What I also find frustrating about Morley's language is his use of factoids that just aren't true:
The Oswald file is not proof of a criminal conspiracy to kill the president, not quite. But it does debunk the theory of a “lone gunman.” The file shows definitively that Oswald was not “lone” in the sense his actions were unobserved by the U.S. authorities. To the contrary, his actions interested to top counterintelligence officers at CIA headquarters and their interest grew stronger in late 1963.
If Oswald was the gunman who killed Kennedy, he was not “lone” but known, known to a small group of intelligence professionals, some of whom ran assassination operations. And if Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy that group had even more to hide.
The story of “lone gunman,” the Oswald file tell us, was a cover story. It covered the CIA’s counterintelligence interest in Oswald from public view for six decades. Now that the Oswald file is in the public domain, the story of the "lone gunman” is no more.
But no one except Jefferson Morley makes the claim that Oswald's "actions were unobserved by U.S. authorities." The CIA files does NOT tell us that the story of the "lone gunman was a cover story.
Except, of course, to Jefferson Morley.
Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony
An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings
An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion.
Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA.
Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK.
Additional documents relevant to Part Three.
Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen.
Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans
Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley
Morley claims the SpyTalk authors are working as pro bono lawyers for the CIA.
The CIA was just quoting from a State Department memo.
SpyTalks replies to Jefferson Morley.
Gerald Posner on the Joannides' file.
Fact Checking Morley's Fact Check
Morley's Fact Check on SpyTalk needs a fact check.
Gus Russo and Michael Isikoff on the Joannides' personnel file.
Now that the entire personnel file of George Joannides has been released, Jefferson Morley has now published his unified theory of nothingness.
More Morley Nothingburgers on the way
Morley is requesting more documents -- they will reveal nothing about the assassination.
Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story.
Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA.
There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file.
Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland.
A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley.
Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't.
Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo.
Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files.
Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson.
Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination.
An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see.
Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me.
It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley.
Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki.
He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers.
Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts.
There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination.
There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo.
Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong.
Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic.
Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo.
The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination.
Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition.
There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document.
Kilgallen had nothing to tell.
An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald.
Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings.
Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot.
A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist.
A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?
There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963.
Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't.
Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong.
Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply.
W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles.
Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose.
And a response from me.
There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial.
There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case.
Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation.
An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents.
Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison.
Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits."
Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available.
Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.
