The Real Ruth and Michael Paine

[Sandy Larsen]

The fact that LHO never acted alone in ANYTHING was exactly what the Warren Commission was terrified would leak out.

It's our job to find the Accomplices of LHO in the JFK murder -- and the US Government is still hiding vital evidence.

Paul,

In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that?

[Greg Parker]

The fact that LHO never acted alone in ANYTHING was exactly what the Warren Commission was terrified would leak out.

It's our job to find the Accomplices of LHO in the JFK murder -- and the US Government is still hiding vital evidence.

Paul,

In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that?

I would say he believes it in a rather twisted fashion, Sandy. It is really the only way one could believe it.

[Sandy Larsen]

Paul,

In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that?

I would say he believes it in a rather twisted fashion, Sandy. It is really the only way one could believe it.

LOL... okay, so my question is a little ambiguous. I hope Paul gets it the other way.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul,

In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that?

I would say he believes it in a rather twisted fashion, Sandy. It is really the only way one could believe it.

LOL... okay, so my question is a little ambiguous. I hope Paul gets it the other way.

Well, Sandy, it's somewhat of an ambiguous issue, so the question is understandably ambiguous. But I understand your intent. Here's my answer:

LHO's own words were, "I'm just a PATSY!"

Now, by definition, a Patsy is involved with people who don't respect him (or her) in the slightest, and will sacrifice him (or her) in a heartbeat.

Usually this involves some kind of crime. In this case, the murder of JFK.

Now -- the fact is, a Patsy has been associating with criminals. The Patsy may or may not have knowledge of the crime they are about to commit, but the Patsy is still their FRIEND.

Gerry Patrick Hemming told A.J. Weberman that he called LHO on 11/21/1963 from Miami, and offered LHO double the price of his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle if only LHO would hand it over to one of his pals at the TSBD in the morning.

Evidently, according to Gerry Patrick Hemming, who was a mercenary on contract to assassinate Fidel Castro, LHO accepted his deal, and took his rifle to the TSBD on 11/22/1963. LHO evidently handed it to somebody in the parking lot, because witnesses tend to agree that LHO didn't take any package into the building with him.

There's my point. LHO was *cooperating* with the JFK Killers. LHO *trusted* the JFK Killers enough to hand over his rifle to them.

LHO didn't know they were going to Kill JFK and blame him -- but he probably knew that it was for some Underground or criminal activity, otherwise, why the high price and the secret handoff? So, LHO was cooperating with criminals -- and he KNEW it.

That's a CLASSIC definition of a Patsy. Trust of the criminals, and doing something stupid for them.

Without the rifle in their possession, the JFK Killers could hardly have blamed LHO for the JFK murder. With LHO's rifle in their possession, the JFK Killers had an open-and-shut case. Henry Wade said, "I've sent men to the electric chair on less evidence than this!"

So, Sandy, that's what I mean. Even though LHO was totally innocent of killing JFK, nevertheless, he let himself become the PATSY of the JFK Killers, and that made him an Accomplice. Yes, a Patsy is the lowest form of Accomplice, but still.

Also, once LHO realized he was a Patsy, as he openly stated, then he could have and should have named names to the Press right then and there. But he didn't. LHO calmed down and kept playing the "Red Maverick" card, and demanded to see New York sedition attorney John Abt, and kept boasting that he was a supporter of the FPCC and that he had lived in Russia.

This means, IMHO, that LHO was still hoping that the criminals whom he trusted would "come forward and give me legal assistance."

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 29, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Jon G. Tidd]

Paul Trejo,

Please don't believe what Hemming says. You're too good for that.

Why do I trash Hemming? He purports to provide inside information. I say, let him produce facts. Facts meaningful to the JFK assassination.

Why am I so harsh? I spent part of 1971 monitoring III Corps in Viet Nam. So what, one might ask.

I am familiar with individuals who tell untruths. And with individuals who tell truths.

Paul, most individuals tell untruths if they think they will profit from it.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul Trejo,

Please don't believe what Hemming says. You're too good for that.

Why do I trash Hemming? He purports to provide inside information. I say, let him produce facts. Facts meaningful to the JFK assassination.

Why am I so harsh? I spent part of 1971 monitoring III Corps in Viet Nam. So what, one might ask.

I am familiar with individuals who tell untruths. And with individuals who tell truths.

Paul, most individuals tell untruths if they think they will profit from it.

Well, Jon, nobody is so naïve as to believe everything that Gerry Patrick Hemming ever said.

But it would be just as naïve to simply DISMISS everything that Gerry Patrick Hemming ever said.

A.J. Weberman did some GREAT research for the JFK CT community, and he remains certain to this very day that Gerry Patrick Hemming knew more about the JFK murder than anybody who ever spoke out.

Yes, Gerry Patrick Hemming deliberately added 50% lies to his 50% truths. This was to protect himself he said.

On this very FORUM, in the 1990's, Gerry Patrick Hemming explained why he could not tell the full and direct truth. The JFK Killers didn't do it for money, but for honor. But they also had countless slime-balls surrounding them all the time -- and these slime-balls would go to rich people (like Mafia bosses, oil barons and JBS bigwigs) and promise to kill JFK if they would only "donate." Then, after JFK was killed, these same slime-balls would go back to the people who donated money, and say, "If you don't give me more money, I'll tell the world that you had JFK killed."

So, said Gerry Patrick Hemming (and this I do believe) there were countless people who threw money at anybody who said they would kill JFK, and they were now very nervous, and many of them were being blackmailed -- and as a result, Mafia hitmen had plenty of work to do in those early days, and long after.

Anybody who even *hinted* at talking could become the target of a Mafia hit, even though the Mafia itself had nothing to do with the JFK murder. Paranoia ran very high, for a good reason. This is because countless people *believed* that they had been part of the plot to Kill JFK, when actually they were only part of a Scam.

Gerry Patrick Hemming cannot be believed 50% of the time. Yet it's up to the discerning CT researcher to decide which 50% that would be.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 29, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[David Andrews]

I missed something in all the hubbub. How are people who would talk about their supposed bankrolling of a JFK assassination plot liable to be hit by the mob? Are Walker and the JBS working with the mob? Isn't that something the CIA did?

[Sandy Larsen]

Paul,

In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that?

I would say he believes it in a rather twisted fashion, Sandy. It is really the only way one could believe it.

LOL... okay, so my question is a little ambiguous. I hope Paul gets it the other way.

Well, Sandy, it's somewhat of an ambiguous issue, so the question is understandably ambiguous. But I understand your intent. Here's my answer:

LHO's own words were, "I'm just a PATSY!"

Now, by definition, a Patsy is involved with people who don't respect him (or her) in the slightest, and will sacrifice him (or her) in a heartbeat.

Usually this involves some kind of crime. In this case, the murder of JFK.

Now -- the fact is, a Patsy has been associating with criminals. The Patsy may or may not have knowledge of the crime they are about to commit, but the Patsy is still their FRIEND.

Gerry Patrick Hemming told A.J. Weberman that he called LHO on 11/21/1963 from Miami, and offered LHO double the price of his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle if only LHO would hand it over to one of his pals at the TSBD in the morning.

Evidently, according to Gerry Patrick Hemming, who was a mercenary on contract to assassinate Fidel Castro, LHO accepted his deal, and took his rifle to the TSBD on 11/22/1963. LHO evidently handed it to somebody in the parking lot, because witnesses tend to agree that LHO didn't take any package into the building with him.

There's my point. LHO was *cooperating* with the JFK Killers. LHO *trusted* the JFK Killers enough to hand over his rifle to them.

LHO didn't know they were going to Kill JFK and blame him -- but he probably knew that it was for some Underground or criminal activity, otherwise, why the high price and the secret handoff? So, LHO was cooperating with criminals -- and he KNEW it.

That's a CLASSIC definition of a Patsy. Trust of the criminals, and doing something stupid for them.

Without the rifle in their possession, the JFK Killers could hardly have blamed LHO for the JFK murder. With LHO's rifle in their possession, the JFK Killers had an open-and-shut case. Henry Wade said, "I've sent men to the electric chair on less evidence than this!"

So, Sandy, that's what I mean. Even though LHO was totally innocent of killing JFK, nevertheless, he let himself become the PATSY of the JFK Killers, and that made him an Accomplice. Yes, a Patsy is the lowest form of Accomplice, but still.

Also, once LHO realized he was a Patsy, as he openly stated, then he could have and should have named names to the Press right then and there. But he didn't. LHO calmed down and kept playing the "Red Maverick" card, and demanded to see New York sedition attorney John Abt, and kept boasting that he was a supporter of the FPCC and that he had lived in Russia.

This means, IMHO, that LHO was still hoping that the criminals whom he trusted would "come forward and give me legal assistance."

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Thanks Paul, for for the thorough explanation.

[Paul Trejo]

I missed something in all the hubbub. How are people who would talk about their supposed bankrolling of a JFK assassination plot liable to be hit by the mob? Are Walker and the JBS working with the mob? Isn't that something the CIA did?

No, that's the beauty of it, David.

The people who "donated" money to the JFK murder were always donating to SCAMs. This had NOTHING to do with the Real JFK Killers. NOTHING. But they didn't know that!

However, *after* JFK was killed, the SCAMMERS then went back to their donating victims, and attempted to BLACKMAIL them to get more money.

Therefore, said Gerry Patrick Hemming, the victims of these SCAMS would hire Mafia Hit Men to murder their slime-ball Blackmailers.

See? It had NOTHING to do with the Real Killers. It was totally on the Sidelines.

HOWEVER -- according to Gerry Patrick Hemming -- there were SO MANY of these victims, and they were so terrified of being EXPOSED for having contributed money to what THEY BELIEVED was the true, successful JFK murder, that they were in a panic, so Mafia hit-men got all these new contracts like a windfall.

In other words, they actually BELIEVED that they were part of the JFK Murder, even though they NEVER WERE. And now they BELIEVED they were about to be EXPOSED. So, these donating victims panicked, and they went to the Mafia (which they would ordinarily never do) and they paid to have their Blackmailers rubbed out.

This was all a separate world -- far away from the actual JFK Killers, who were really political activists.

Gerry Patrick Hemming said that this scenario was SO COMMON that he himself was afraid that people like that would put a contract out on HIM, if he ever made public that he was going to FULLY cooperate with a journalist one day. So he ALWAYS mixed Lies in with the Truth. That was his PROTECTION.

I hope that's clearer now.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 29, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

OMG!

Hemming and Weberman?

This is really getting funny now. You should have heard Fonzi on Hemming.

[Paul Brancato]

Uh - Paul - who said anything about the CIA killing Kilgallen, or disappearing a 'secret manuscript'? You did.

[Paul Trejo]

Uh - Paul - who said anything about the CIA killing Kilgallen, or disappearing a 'secret manuscript'? You did.

So, Paul B., what's YOUR theory about the death of Dorothy Kilgallen?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Paul Brancato]

No thanks Paul. I don't claim to know who killed her. What I do know, and what we all know, is that whatever info she had written down about her Ruby interview never surfaced, and that my friend is reason to be suspicious. I think your just being difficult now, like a petulant child. My bet is you are suspicious of her death too but because you think someone is blaming it on the CIA you are taking the opposite position. That is because you are wedded to your own theories. When you take in new information you just weld it to your own theory regardless of how poorly it fits. Good example - David Morales. A career CIA man, top operational level, taking orders from top guns at the agency, doing the dirtiest of dirty work. Once you were convinced that he was very likely involved in the assassination of JFK you decided he was acting rogue and working with your bad guys. Suddenly his CIA career meant nothing, and in fact needed to be ignored or otherwise explained lest you might have to consider a possible conspiracy involving some of your sacred cows.

Now, because of the obvious links between Ruth Paine and CIA you choose to define her as a charitable Quaker rather than consider the impossibly weird 'coincidences' surrounding her in her life both before and after 1963. You will explain away every inconsistency, such as her estrangement from the object of her charity, Marina Oswald. You even state that Michael Paine had some explaining to do which he never did. Why? He wasn't a Quaker?

Please don't go into your usual repetition of everything. Just think about it a little bit and let this post stand. It is not an attempt to rally behind Ms Hewitt or those you so uncharitably call her minions. I couldn't give a hoot about that. I don't need to worship a researcher to appreciate the oddness of Ruth Paine. My own opinion on the matter, if you care, is that she played ball beforehand never dreaming where it was going to end up, and played ball afterwards under duress.

[Paul Trejo]

No thanks Paul. I don't claim to know who killed her. What I do know, and what we all know, is that whatever info she had written down about her Ruby interview never surfaced, and that my friend is reason to be suspicious. I think your just being difficult now, like a petulant child. My bet is you are suspicious of her death too but because you think someone is blaming it on the CIA you are taking the opposite position. That is because you are wedded to your own theories. When you take in new information you just weld it to your own theory regardless of how poorly it fits. Good example - David Morales. A career CIA man, top operational level, taking orders from top guns at the agency, doing the dirtiest of dirty work. Once you were convinced that he was very likely involved in the assassination of JFK you decided he was acting rogue and working with your bad guys. Suddenly his CIA career meant nothing, and in fact needed to be ignored or otherwise explained lest you might have to consider a possible conspiracy involving some of your sacred cows.

Now, because of the obvious links between Ruth Paine and CIA you choose to define her as a charitable Quaker rather than consider the impossibly weird 'coincidences' surrounding her in her life both before and after 1963. You will explain away every inconsistency, such as her estrangement from the object of her charity, Marina Oswald. You even state that Michael Paine had some explaining to do which he never did. Why? He wasn't a Quaker?

Please don't go into your usual repetition of everything. Just think about it a little bit and let this post stand. It is not an attempt to rally behind Ms Hewitt or those you so uncharitably call her minions. I couldn't give a hoot about that. I don't need to worship a researcher to appreciate the oddness of Ruth Paine. My own opinion on the matter, if you care, is that she played ball beforehand never dreaming where it was going to end up, and played ball afterwards under duress.

So, Paul B., you says that what you "do know" and "all we can know" is that "whatever info she had written down about her Ruby interview never surfaced."

But in fact you don't know any details whatsoever. You don't know if she wrote them on a napkin. You don't know if her husband tossed them out with the trash -- or had the notes (if they ever existed) buried with her. You don't even know that SHE HAD ANY NOTES AT ALL.

This is all guess-work on your part. Just like 99.99% of all CIA-did-it fairy tales.

You say that your "bet is you are suspicious of her death, too," so you haven't been reading very carefully.

I said that I maintain that the death of journalist Dorothy Kilgallen was ACCIDENTAL because that's what the FACTS show. She was mixing drugs and alcohol and she was over fifty. THOSE are the FACTS.

If she wrote anything down about Jack Ruby we have NO EVIDENCE and therefore no FACTS to go on.

The CIA-did-it community must "make stuff up" just to get through one single post.

As for David Morales, who confessed to a role in the JFK murder -- and who was also named by Howard Hunt, who also confessed, we have FACTS and so we can't ignore them. Yet Bill Simpich also provided FACTS, namely, that the CIA started a Mole Hunt on October 1, 1963, because they didn't know David Morales was *impersonating* Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City.

Those FACTS scream loudly that David Morales was off the reservation. He only took orders from above -- so in this case it was from civilian Anticommunist leaders like Guy Banister.

You still refuse to accept the basic FACTS, Paul B.

As for E. Howard Hunt, his confession also included the FACT that he played a minor role, "on the sidelines." So, you don't have enough FACTS for a CIA-did-it plot, Paul B., and you need to keep "making stuff up."

You claim that there is are "obvious links between Ruth Paine and the CIA" but you never say what those links are. The most frequently cited "link" here is that Ruth's mother-In-law had a childhood friend who was the lover of Allen Dulles. Can't you see how shallow that argument is?

You still can't make a case for your position, Paul B., so why not just admit it for a change?

You claim that Ruth Paine "played ball beforehand never dreaming where it was going to end up," but that is actually meaningless, unless you add some FACTS to it, which you never do. You're a True Believer in the CIA-did-it nonsense that has wasted our time for 50 years. Give it up.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 30, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Ed LeDoux]

Paul,

In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that?

I would say he believes it in a rather twisted fashion, Sandy. It is really the only way one could believe it.

LOL... okay, so my question is a little ambiguous. I hope Paul gets it the other way.

Well, Sandy, it's somewhat of an ambiguous issue, so the question is understandably ambiguous. But I understand your intent. Here's my answer:

LHO's own words were, "I'm just a PATSY!"

Now, by definition, a Patsy is involved with people who don't respect him (or her) in the slightest, and will sacrifice him (or her) in a heartbeat.

Usually this involves some kind of crime. In this case, the murder of JFK.

Now -- the fact is, a Patsy has been associating with criminals. The Patsy may or may not have knowledge of the crime they are about to commit, but the Patsy is still their FRIEND.

Gerry Patrick Hemming told A.J. Weberman that he called LHO on 11/21/1963 from Miami, and offered LHO double the price of his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle if only LHO would hand it over to one of his pals at the TSBD in the morning.

Evidently, according to Gerry Patrick Hemming, who was a mercenary on contract to assassinate Fidel Castro, LHO accepted his deal, and took his rifle to the TSBD on 11/22/1963. LHO evidently handed it to somebody in the parking lot, because witnesses tend to agree that LHO didn't take any package into the building with him.

There's my point. LHO was *cooperating* with the JFK Killers. LHO *trusted* the JFK Killers enough to hand over his rifle to them.

LHO didn't know they were going to Kill JFK and blame him -- but he probably knew that it was for some Underground or criminal activity, otherwise, why the high price and the secret handoff? So, LHO was cooperating with criminals -- and he KNEW it.

That's a CLASSIC definition of a Patsy. Trust of the criminals, and doing something stupid for them.

Without the rifle in their possession, the JFK Killers could hardly have blamed LHO for the JFK murder. With LHO's rifle in their possession, the JFK Killers had an open-and-shut case. Henry Wade said, "I've sent men to the electric chair on less evidence than this!"

So, Sandy, that's what I mean. Even though LHO was totally innocent of killing JFK, nevertheless, he let himself become the PATSY of the JFK Killers, and that made him an Accomplice. Yes, a Patsy is the lowest form of Accomplice, but still.

Also, once LHO realized he was a Patsy, as he openly stated, then he could have and should have named names to the Press right then and there. But he didn't. LHO calmed down and kept playing the "Red Maverick" card, and demanded to see New York sedition attorney John Abt, and kept boasting that he was a supporter of the FPCC and that he had lived in Russia.

This means, IMHO, that LHO was still hoping that the criminals whom he trusted would "come forward and give me legal assistance."

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

"Now, by definition, a Patsy is involved with people who don't respect him (or her) in the slightest, and will sacrifice him (or her) in a heartbeat."

"LHO was cooperating with criminals -- and he KNEW it"

Paul ... he was cooperating with the Dallas Police.