From: john.mcadams@marquette.edu (John McAdams)
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk,alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Questions for the LaFontaines - 4
Approved: jmcadams@shell.core.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Here is the fourth one:

In OSWALD TALKED, p. 234, you dicuss Oswald after he had returned to
Dallas from Mexico City, and particularly your theory that Oswald was
being run as an agent by the FBI, and particularly by James Hosty.

You say:

-------------------------------------------------------------

In Hosty's mind, the ex-Marine would have been an asset experienced in
mixing with Cuban exiles, and quite possibly the best one to involve in a
street-level search for [George] Perrel.

----------------------------------------------------------------

The description of Oswald as "experienced in mixing with Cuban exiles"  
seems strange to me.  In fact, it seems a bit like describing Gen. Custer,
had he somehow magically survived Little Big Horn, as "experienced in
Indian fighting."

Oswald's two amateurish and transparent appearances at the Casa Roca could
be viewed as "experience," I suppose.  But they would seem to indicate
incompetence.  He fooled nobody, and only generated suspicion.

Worse is the fact that Oswald had been "outed" as a pro-Castro leftist in
New Orleans.  Any theory of Oswald "infiltrating" Dallas-area exile groups
has to assume that the Cuban exile communities of Dallas and New Orleans
were so isolated and separated from each other that word of Oswald's
exploits would not make it to Dallas.

What is your basis for believing this?

Worse is the notion that the FBI could not recruit an informant with an
Hispanic background who spoke Spanish.  This would have seemed almost a
necessity for infiltration of the Cuban exile community.  Why use Oswald?

.John