reply to ray carroll

[J. Raymond Carroll]

The Rotarian - Jun 1961 - Page 29

Vol. 98, No. 6 - 64 pages - Magazine

To get a Soviet visa, tourists are not required to appear in person, and you can have your papers by mail in less than a week. Contrast that with the difficulties people have encountered when they tried to visit the United States. ...

books.google.com - Magazine overview - Full view - Add to My Library▼

For the benefit of little boys who are experiencing difficulty with comprehension, The Rotarian is comparing the difficulty of obtaining an American tourist visa with the EASE of obtaining a Soviet tourist visa.

If a foreigner calls or writes his local US embassy and asks for a visa application form of some sort, she will almost certainly receive the blank forms in the mail in less than a week, and I have no doubt this was just as true in 1959 as it is today. Even New York's notoriously slow Department of Motor Vehicles will manage the same kind of turnaround. That would be a "dog bites man" kind of story for readers of The Rotarian.

So the Soviet accomplishment in sending out a blank application form in less than a week could hardly be the chief exhibit supporting the Rotarian's message. Everybody knows you can get blank applications for ANYTHING in less than a week.

The story only becomes a "man bites dog" story, and therefore remarkable enough to be printed as useful information, when the reader is given to understand that Soviet Consulates -- unlike their American counterparts -- have the latitude to issue tourist visas virtually on the spot, i.e. received by the applicant in less than a week by mail.

Readers of the Rotarian who were also fans of Alistair Cooke might already have known that. Cooke wrote the introduction to The Bedside Guardian 1959, wherein it is stated that

Ten years ago if you asked the Soviet Embassy in London for a tourist visa they would not even bother to answer your letter. To-day they will give you one the same afternoon, with an effusive smile and a shower of pamphlets. ...

Edited July 3, 2010 by J. Raymond Carroll

[J. Raymond Carroll]

It is increasingly extraordinary the lengths to which Carroll will go....He has tried in this thread to have my posting privileges revoked

Don't believe a word of it.

The record shows that I only asked him to show his true face.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

It is increasingly extraordinary the lengths to which Carroll will go....He has tried in this thread to have my posting privileges revoked

Don't believe a word of it.

The record shows that I only asked him to show his true face.

Yes, because my face will determine whether what I have to say on this topic is accurate, right Ray? Feeble.

It’s equally obvious that those who have a case to make don’t need to stoop to epithets like “little boys” when addressing their adversaries. They rely upon the facts at hand, not ad hominems. But I guess I should consider myself lucky for getting off easy compared to what Ray has apparently doled out in the blameless Michael Hogan’s direction. As desperate as it is despicable.

Ray, let’s cut to the chase here. You’ve mused aloud - as we’ve all done - but you’ve insisted that your musings trump actual documentary evidence. That’s not the way these things work.

When you can demonstrate that a US citizen in 1959 in some city other than Helsinki was given service as expeditious as that which Oswald received, you might have a case to make. (I say “might” for a reason that may or may not prove germane, depending on what you procure . We shall see in the fullness of time.)

Now, that shouldn’t be too hard for you, given your insistence that the Soviets had an all-but open borders policy. Yet you’ve resorted to every feint and dodge imaginable in order to not produce the single thing you need to prove your premise might hold water.

Allow me to suggest that we agree to a cease-fire while you busy yourself looking for that single piece of evidence needed to demonstrate your musings are more than only that. The alternative is for me - and others - to keep rubbing your nose in your failings, and for you to keep digging deeper the hole in which you find yourself. To me, that ceased to seem sporting some number of posts ago.

I don’t see how you can ask for more than a fair chance to make your case, Ray. I’d take the reprieve, were I in your corner about now. This is as sportsmanlike as I know how to be.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray, let’s cut to the chase here. You’ve mused aloud - as we’ve all done - but you’ve insisted that your musings trump actual documentary evidence.

YOUR documentary evidence consists of the musings of your hero, Richard Helms, the well-known perjurer.

Allow me to suggest that we agree to a cease-fire

Why would I agree to that, silly, when I've got you in my cross-hairs?

[Greg Parker]

Ray, let’s cut to the chase here. You’ve mused aloud - as we’ve all done - but you’ve insisted that your musings trump actual documentary evidence.

YOUR documentary evidence consists of the musings of your hero, Richard Helms, the well-known perjurer.

Allow me to suggest that we agree to a cease-fire

Why would I agree to that, silly, when I've got you in my cross-hairs?

Ray,

I have contacted someone who may have also looked into this in depth. Is Mr Wronski going to weigh in?

I assume you believe Oswald had planned all along to go to Russia and defect?

If so, why would he blow $25.00 on a college application?

Why did he blow another $220 on passage to Europe when he could have taken up a fly now-buy later plane ticket for around a tenth of that knowing he'd never be paying the balance?

And why did he purchase the deluxe intourist vouchers @ $30.00 per day instead of one of the cheaper options?

You would have us all in your "cross-hairs" if you have the type of example asked for. If you have such an example, please produce it.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Is Mr Wronski going to weigh in?

I am still hoping that he will, but this is the end of the academic year, so I imagine he has his hands full right now.

I assume you believe Oswald had planned all along to go to Russia and defect?

If so, why would he blow $25.00 on a college application?

Anything I say on that can only be a guess. He may have been in two minds until the last moment.

Why did he blow another $220 on passage to Europe when he could have taken up a fly now-buy later plane ticket for around a tenth of that knowing he'd never be paying the balance?

If you are suggesting that he could have skipped without paying what he owed, I suggest that was not his nature. He was not a thief, which is one reason I do not believe it was Oz who entered the Texas Theatre without paying for a ticket.

And why did he purchase the deluxe intourist vouchers @ $30.00 per day instead of one of the cheaper options?

Peter Wronsky has suggested the answer to that: He wanted to create the impression of a prosperous American tourist with lots of money to spend, so they would have no hesitation in giving him a visa. Show me the money.

[Greg Parker]

Is Mr Wronski going to weigh in?

I am still hoping that he will, but this is the end of the academic year, so I imagine he has his hands full right now.

Okay. Thanks Ray. I have not yet had a reply from the person I contacted.

I assume you believe Oswald had planned all along to go to Russia and defect?

If so, why would he blow $25.00 on a college application?

Anything I say on that can only be a guess. He may have been in two minds until the last moment.

The Albert Schweitzer College was not a bastion of Marxist philosophy.

It pushed free enterprise and individual freedom.

It had ties to the head of the US Treasury, who in turn was the "go to" man for the CIA when it came to setting up front proprietries.

It also had ties to the Theosophist Society.

So what was he in two minds about, do you think?

Why did he blow another $220 on passage to Europe when he could have taken up a fly now-buy later plane ticket for around a tenth of that knowing he'd never be paying the balance?

If you are suggesting that he could have skipped without paying what he owed, I suggest that was not his nature. He was not a thief, which is one reason I do not believe it was Oz who entered the Texas Theatre without paying for a ticket.

Okay, Not a thief. But he could have put off paying legally through that scheme, so why not?

I agree. He did not sneak into the TT. No one did. Postal assumed he must have because she did not see anyone go in. Oswald was already in the theatre. Johnny Brewer did not follow anyone from his shop front. His discription of the person he followed is straight from a would-be B-Grade script writer.

And why did he purchase the deluxe intourist vouchers @ $30.00 per day instead of one of the cheaper options?

Peter Wronsky has suggested the answer to that: He wanted to create the impression of a prosperous American tourist with lots of money to spend, so they would have no hesitation in giving him a visa. Show me the money.

Not quite. The Soviets pushed the Deluxe vouchers, so it is possible they did so chasing extra dollars. However, Oswald's parsimony is now legendary, as is his ability to argue his point. If he had been true to form, he would have argued, and got, cheaper vouchers. Furthermore, making himself appear well-off would be counterintuitive for someone about to defect to the "Worker's Paradise".

A better explanation is that he wanted - needed privacy for his mission. The Deluxe vouchers ensured that. The cheaper ones meant being looked after as part of a group.

Edited July 5, 2010 by Greg Parker

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I agree. He did not sneak into the TT. No one did. Postal assumed he must have because she did not see anyone go in. Oswald was already in the theatre. Johnny Brewer did not follow anyone from his shop front. His discription of the person he followed is straight from a would-be B-Grade script writer.

Someone DID enter without paying, and this brought the cops, as per plan. But it was not Oz.

If he had been true to form, he would have argued, and got, cheaper vouchers. Furthermore, making himself appear well-off would be counterintuitive for someone about to defect to the "Worker's Paradise".

Before he could "defect" he had to gain admission as a tourist. He made the right moves to gain a tourist visa.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Is Mr Wronski going to weigh in?

Mr. Wronski (soon to be Doctor, no doubt) has written to say

This would be best answered by somebody who knows from the inside what Soviet visa procedures really were in the late 1950s.

Unfortunately I am not exactly an expert on Soviet visa procedures

He did share anecdotes about his own experiences in the seventies and eighties.

In 1978 while travelling in Europe I decided I had some time left and wanted to visit the USSR. I went to the Soviet Consulate in Paris to ask for a tourist visa. I was first told “nyet” - that I had to apply for the visa in my home country (Canada) and that it would take approximately two weeks to process there. I cried the blues, chattered at them in Russian, how I only had a week left in Paris, the impossibility of returning to Canada only to turn around and return to USSR, etc, how I was Canadian born of Russian heritage, how I wanted to see the country of my heritage, blah blah blah. The consulate referred me to a travel agent nearby where I purchased an Inturist travel package for Moscow that afternoon, gave the travel agent a “tip” for the ‘consulate coffee fund’, and returned with the receipt in the evening which I handed over to a guard at the gate (the consulate service was closed in the afternoon), and was issued a visa in three days. Just like that! And

that was Paris in ’78. Pretty busy post for the Soviets.

Ten years later in 1988—same thing. Now I wanted to bring a television crew to the USSR from Italy. Same ‘official’ story at the consulate in Rome – I needed to go back to my home country, I need special customs bonds for the tv equipment, I need to get special shooting permits, etc. It would take for all this about two months at the earliest they told me. I sat over a coffee table with two consulate officials (I have no doubt they were KGB officers) and described to them in detail the film that I wanted to make about Soviet underground rock – how it would show the ‘human’ rock’n’roll face of the new Soviet Union under Gorbachev. Same story – that afternoon I was sent to a Soviet TV (Gosteleradio) correspondent in Rome, pitched him my film idea, sat in his apartment in the afternoon and filled out my visa application there and he dropped it off for me at the consulate. He gave me a telex number in Moscow to send my list of equipment and serial numbers and itinerary – a

week later the visas were ready for me and my crew and I had permits for bringing in all the camera equipment, no problems – it was easier then flying into the USA with professional video equipment in those days. A Soviet TV 'minder' met me at the airport -- he had arranged an interview for me to shoot with some Soviet official that they 'suggested' I shoot -- I did -- after that they asked if there was anything else they can do for me -- did I want the minder to stay with us ? -- I said "no thanks" - and never saw him again. (Although I am sure they did not lose sight of me even for a minute over the next seven days.) And this time, not even a bribe was necessary.

[Greg Parker]

Someone DID enter without paying, and this brought the cops, as per plan. But it was not Oz.

Ray, neither Julia Postal nor Butch Burroughs saw anyone. The sole witness is Brewer, and I'd like to know more about the owners of Hardy's Shoe Stores. Brewer got a promotion the day before he testified.

Before he could "defect" he had to gain admission as a tourist. He made the right moves to gain a tourist visa.

By paying more than he actually needed to & giving the impression he was reasonably well off?

I cannot agree with that. He could have gotten cheaper vouchers and stll got in. I believe the real reason he purchased deluxe vouchers was because they provided PRIVACY - no group tours and his personal intourist guide.

He [Peter Wronsky] did share anecdotes about his own experiences in the seventies and eighties [regarding obtaining a visa]

His '78 tactics seem very similar to those employed by "Oswald" in Mexico City... except that PW actually got the visa.

But that, as Peter seems to understand, tells us little about the late '50s.

I again submit that the most authoritative word on that must go to the 1959 Soviet Tourist Guide Book written by two people with vast experience in international affairs.

Edited July 10, 2010 by Greg Parker