Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald: Communist/Socialist?


John Dolva

Recommended Posts

Great thread. Just got back from Norway and was unable to contribute earlier. It is also an important subject and have added it to the JFK Index.

I think Oswald’s political development is unconvincing. A study of his “expressed” political views was one of the main factors that convinced me that Oswald was working for the CIA or the FBI (possibly both). Although the people developing Oswald’s “political legend” had a factual understanding of the various strands of Marxism, they had no idea of the philosophical and emotional conflict that took place between the various strands within the revolutionary movement.

Apparently he joined the Young People's Socialist League and became a Marxist in 1956.

John, that's almost right.  On October 3, 1956, Oswald sent the Socialist Party of America an advertisement coupon he had torn out of a magazine, on which he had checked the box "I want more information about the Socialist Party," and enclosed the following letter: "Dear Sirs, I am sixteen years of age and would like more information about your Youth League, I would like to know if there is a branch in my area, how to join. etc. I am a Marxist and have been studying Socialist principles for well over fifteen months. I am very interested in your YPSL." Problem was that the ad clearly indicated you had to be at least 18 to join. His efforts to join the Marines started soon after, and a connection between the two is difficult to rule out.

His letter indicates his interest in Marxist goes back more than 15 months. He is almost 17 at the time of the letter. Likewise, he told McMillan in Moscow his interest commenced at age 15. Going by his own words, his interest coincides with his time in the CAP. As does his interest in joining the Marine Corps.

This is supported by Marguerite, who told the WC he was encouraged to read the Marine Manual and Marxist books by a Marine "recruitment officer" who visited. I could be wrong, but I somehow doubt recruitment officers paid home visits. Someone like Ferrie, however, is known to have encourage CAP members to join the Marines, and he could easily have impersonated a recruitment officer.

Lee, under normal circumstances, should have had great difficulty getting into the USMC based on his hearing loss which is noted in Youth House reports. He'd also had a mastoidectomy at 5. Exceptions with hearing problems are only made for "hard to fill" positions. I'd suggest being capable of some type of low level intelligence work would meet the "hard to fill" requirement.

He later told a friend that his involvement in politics dated back to reading a pamphlet about the execution of Ethel Rosenberg and Julius Rosenberg.

His friend? The person he told was Priscilla McMillan Johnson during her interview with him in Moscow. I don't think she just got lucky with being granted that interview, though...

This is of course possible but highly unlikely. In 1956 very few Americans were very sympathetic to the Rosenbergs.

The (alleged) pamphlet episode did not happen in 1956. It happened while Lee was living in NYC - therefore sometime between Aug, 1952 and early 1954.

At the time it did seem that they were guilty of spying for the Soviet Union. It has to be remembered that this was the height of the Cold War and it was sometime before it was revealed that the Rosenberg’s had been set up by the FBI. Even Hoover was horrified by what he had done when Ethel Rosenberg was actually executed. He had also thought that Ethel and Julius would have named fellow members of the Communist Party in an attempt to save their lives. Of course Hoover was unable to grasp that some people really had political beliefs that were so strong they were unwilling to betray their comrades.

Yep. His ideas on ethics, morality and comradeship were as perverted as his ideas on law enforcement.

There were of course some decent Americans who were able to see through this Cold War propaganda and indeed became politically active as a result of this state murder. However, they tended to become active in “liberal” political organizations. It would be highly unlikely that they would become supporters of the Soviet Union who itself had a terrible record for executing political dissenters.

That's really where it starts to get complicated.

1956 was also the year of the Hungarian Uprising. This was a time when people were leaving the Communist Party in droves. I find it completely unbelievable that anyone developing left-wing opinions in 1956 would be attracted to the “Stalinist” American Communist Party (ACP). As William Sullivan told J. Edgar Hoover at the time, that by the late 1950s there were more FBI undercover agents in the ACP than genuine members.

Well, that was the year Lee was writing to the Socialist Party wanting to join the YPSL despite knowing from the ad that he was too young, and the year he was also making plans -- apparently hatched by a phony recruitment officer in NO -- to join the Marines. But as stated above, it was not when the Rosenberg pamphlet was supposedly given to him. In case you're wondering -- I also have doubts as to whether that really happened.

Hope you don't mind the corrections, John. I don't think they adversely affect your analysis, which nearly always gives fresh insights worthy of further exploration.

It seems clear that at the time Oswald was being given a “communist” legend as part of the plan for him to defect to the Soviet Union. Oswald was one of a small group of defectors who were working as double agents. The Soviets were not fooled by these phoney “communists” (after all it was a strategy that the CIA/FBI had copied from the KGB). After a short spell they returned to the US claiming they were disillusioned by communism (Stalinism).

The problem for Oswald was that he was required by his masters to rediscover his belief in communism. It would not make any sense at all for him to become a supporter of the Soviet Union. However, it was just about feasible for Oswald to become a supporter of Fidel Castro as in the early 1960s some on the left were hoping that Castro would develop a new kind of revolutionary socialism. Castro for example had been making speeches where he had rejected Stalin’s policy of “socialism in one country” theory. This is why JFK and the CIA became so concerned about Castro. Unlike the leadership in the Soviet Union, he was passionate about the need to export revolution.

Oswald’s masters could not make-up its mind what kind of communist they wanted Oswald to be. The shrewd ones wanted to portray him as a Trotskyite supporter of Castro. However, others wanted to link him with the Soviet Union (Tim Gratz is another who is very confused by this and had attempted to portray him at various times as an agent of KGB and the Cuban Secret Service.)

The most foolish thing his masters did was to arrange for Oswald to be photographed carrying a gun and two left-wing newspapers (one Trotskyite and the other Stalinist). This attempt at planting such ridiculous incriminating evidence reveals the stupidity of those attempting to set him up.

Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

John, it is not apparent that Oswald allowed Marina the freedom to see and be with whomever she wished, and that he exerted no control. He resented her seeing certain people who may have been encouraging their seperation, he would not allow her to learn English, and she had to hide the fact that she got their daughter baptised in the Russian Ordodox Church. That's at least, the situation written into the official records. Some, or all of it may be false.

I do believe Marina knows more than she has ever indicated. There are questions she has never faced which she would be hard put explaining in any innocent fashion.

And if James is reading this... do you have any photos of her pre '62 which show her pearly whites? I have some concerns regarding her dental work, and the alleged need for it. The USSR had free dental, and she had easy access to it working in a hospital. The person who suggested that the White Russians organise this work was George DeM associate Col Lawrence Orlov. Orlov was one of the very, very few people who ever came into contact with the Oswalds who was never interviewed by the WC, the FBI or the HSCA.

Speculative in the extreme, but CIA doctor Andrija Puharich invented some kind of tooth radio implant. Interestingly, he was also an associate of Arthur Young.

The questions referred to above however, would relate to her medical conversation which was conducted via written notes with John Pic during the 1962 Oswald reunion. Nothing speculative about that at all. She wrote three words: "morphinum" (Latin for Morphine), "diceiv" (an obvious mispelling of "deceive") and "heroics". So... was she discussing the use of drugs to "deceive" someone into performing "heroic" deeds?

The original Hashishins were drugged, and deceived into believing their heroic deeds would get them into eternal paradise. But somehow I don't think they were having a talk on ancient history.

Pic's side of the conversation is also intriguing.

I am wondering where Marina fits into this. Assuming some degree of involvement with intelligence agencies by Lee. Does it not seem strange that he would marry, have children with and who then accompanies him back to the United States.

If he was a person meant to go to the USSR to come back and then say negative things about the USSR, doesn't a wife implicitly deny this. At least there are some nice women in Communist countries?

How could he if he is an agent also marry someone whom he had known for 3 odd months, and then bring this 'unknown quantity ' back to the US? Further, there seems to be no real control exerted on Marina by Oswald once back in the US. She is left to associate as she wishes. IE.: unknown quantity: freedom. Could be seen as sloppy agent (or outside real control), not agent at all, or some other reason at work?

I am wondering how thoughts such as these are reconciled?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg , food for thought. initial reaction .. why? elaborate, expensive (?) , iffy.

...................

Another thing that seems not quite right to me is again with regards to the NO radis interviews. Oswald has just been arrested. First interview he is allowed to speak freely and is quite provocatively, and given the emotions of people around the Cuba issue, ('irrational' feelings mostly connected with pride and loss, and where that loss is of person, even so far as 'hero worship'. I'd imagine 'latin machismo' may play a part here too?) quite a dangerous position to put himself in.

Further he clearly points the finger at business interests and allies them with criminals. It strikes me that at this point, if being 'handled' it could be argued that this handling is sloppy. How could they rely on Lee staying out of jail or hospital for his date with destiny?

In the second interview Carlos is quite keyed up and disdainful of Lee. Lee however is 'given the floor' and Carlos remains silent throughout. I would have liked to hear more from Carlos. perhaps more of these interviews are available. Anyway, the picture emerges (to me) of a Lee that is NOT being handled. There are too many unpredictable factors and those that stand out are such that the circumstances also reveals the presumed 'handlers'. Again : "sloppy"

It seems that if he was a patsy then becoming one was more of an opportunistic event than a carefully crafted conspiracy. (multiple patsies ?0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

Very perceptive post.

"It strikes me that at this point, if being 'handled' it could be argued that this handling is sloppy. How could they rely on Lee staying out of jail or hospital for his date with destiny?"

and

"It seems that if he was a patsy then becoming one was more of an opportunistic event than a carefully crafted conspiracy."

are key points.

Oswald has left Dallas within days following the assassination attempt on the life of Edwin Walker. This would seem to be a rational thing for a person "on the run" to do. While one might doubt if Oswald did or did not make an attempt on the life of Walker, his putting himself before the press, taking positions that would be in opposition to the positions advocated by Walker could have drawn suspicion to himself. But the connection was never made. Or was it?

I tend to argue that Oswald was an intelligence asset but not an agent who was recruited and trained. He was, I believe, an ususpecting insect used to fertilize the Soviet Union with information that "they" wanted and "we" wanted them to have(Orchid Man).

At the same time "we" were not sure if Oswald was or was not a Soviet Agent. Therefore "we" had a need to monitor his every move, which was in fact being done. (Files moving back and forth between New Orleans and Dallas, trip to Mexico known before the assassination, addresses, associates) All the information about Oswald was being collected and sent to a central location, office of Richard Helms.

I go back to what I consider the "key" to this particular lock, the assassination attempt on the life of Walker. Once again, if "someone" who had access to the information about the movements of Oswald and the "use" of Oswald as an intelligence asset "they" would be high on the intelligence tottum pole. Agreed? But only perhaps one person, maybe a few more, would know if Oswald had met Walker while Oswald was travelling to Helsinki. "That" person would also know where Oswald was at the time of the assassination attempt on Walker, "they" would know when he was in New Orleans, "they" would know what he was doing while in New Orleans, "they" would know when he returned to Dallas, "they" would know where he was working and "they" would have the ability to put the motorcade past the TSBD on Nov. 22, 1963. "They" could surmise that he had a weapon and "they" would know that he was willing to use it if "they" had used Walker to pass information to Oswald while he was traveling from London to Helsinki.

The perfect crime? Setting up a person to "commit" a crime who does not even realize that they are being provided with the "opportunity" to commit the crime that "they" want committed.........just like the insect and the orchid!

On the other hand, as you point out, Oswald had just been arrested and if he continued to provoke the authorities his "date with destiny" could have been put in jepordy. I believe this supports the thoughts above. Oswald was a man who was not "handled" but rather a man who was manipulated into an "opportunistic event" that was not opportunistic at all, rather, I believe, manufactured.

Your second point is what used to keep me from becommin the "conspiracy nut" I have become. Was the assassination "just" "an opportunistic event rather than a carefully crafted conspiracy."

FBI agent Hosty's November 4th note guarentee that the highest eschelons of the intelligence community knew where Oswald was working. The decision to follow the route that was followed was made in Washington. "Someone" decided to drive Kennedy past the TSBD where "someone" knew that Oswald was working. "Someone" knew who Edwin Walker really was. "Someone" knew why Oswald would have been the man who shot at Walker. "Someone" wanted Kennedy eliminated.

I am not yet convinced of a reason why "someone" would do that.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg, I have thought a bit more on what you are saying. With regards to woman in this case. Keeping the times in mind PLUS the fact that Lee is also partially a product of his USSR experience. My understanding is that Soviet stand on womens rights at this time was the more progressive.

He has married a Soviet woman who agrees to travel to the USA with him. I'm assuming here that this was a CHOICE she made. Once back in Lees home turf, was Lee more or less 'sexist' with regards to 'his woman' than the next guy? was Marinas experience one of greater or lesser freedom than her neighbours, than Paine's?

How could he control her when working and living separately? It seems to me that his experience and supposed leftwing face would make him less controlling. So if he was controlling? Then could an argument be made that this facade was just that, a facade? OK : it is a facade. well, He's just undermined his facade. Again. out of control manipulation. Sloppy. Or just a guy making his way. I think Jims sobering anmalysis with regards to how Oswald was managed makes sense. It fits with how the agencies would treat anyone coming or going from the USSR as Lee did. Obviously Kennedy's murder can't have been planned that early. Was Lee 'a sleeper'?

_________________________________________________

Ok , a rough 'timeline'

a difficult child hood perhaps, but he did have family, and people who were concerned for his well being.

At 15 he takes a precocious step of contacting a group on the outside of accepted society. sign of spy qualities or a well developed conscience?

At 17 he joins the marines. gets involved in intelligence issues. ?

At discharge he follows up on age 15 direction. armed now with US army experiences.

He returns home with a wife and child, has another child.

He gets involved with the Cuban issue.

Kennedy is murdered.

There is the fact that humans tend to have dreams. It is highly commendable but rare for someone to really change their direction. Much that appears as a change is merely diversions albeit on many occasions lifelong ones. But often it is said. 'I now can do what I really wanted to do all along'.

Lee strikes me as being precocious. I take this as a sign of above average intelligence. He is young and without some experience but probably with far more than most of his peers. He can act independently and seems quite courageous.

He has 'built' a life that has a logical thread to it. If his leftwing stance is genuine it seems to, as one would expect, become more sophisticated. In Dallas he is probably regrouping for the next phase. Does it make sense that the next step in this life is the grave? If he was as smart as I think he was, is getting caught so easily the next logical event?

More and more I am getting an idea of an Oswald that indeed must have been NUTS on 11/22 in order to kill Kennedy. Was he nuts? If so it seems to me he must have lost it in a very short time.

The unwittingly manipulated or the betrayed participant? or lunatic?

Children are perceptive. Has his girls talked of their last memories of their dad?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The above brings to mind another dimension. Lees little girls.

For Marina, Lee is the father of her two little girls, For the little girls, he is daddy, a big wondrous guy who plays with them. Kids have a pretty simple view on things. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Lee loved his girls. And that they loved, needed him.

Once Lee was arrested, and the whole thing blew up into what it became, Marina now is faced with two dazed and confused children. No doubt there are nights of tears.

Many Americans now realised what Marina and the girls must have been going through, and it is to the DPD's credit that they undertook to forward and contribute to a happier '63 christmas for the girls than what it might otherwise have been.

Kids see and hear what is going on. It's hard to believe that they now did not now become the most important consideration for Marina. She had to get on. Shape a life and have it make sense to her children. In this situation I think part of why there is a feeling that Marina knew more, is the fact that anything she would say would impact on her childrens happiness. A mother in these circumstances makes sacrifices. Perhaps here she chose to sacrifice Lee? Such things however are not forever, hence in time moments arrive when the children can be aware of other things. Therefore, perhaps it could be argued that Marinas later statements are truer?

One might argue that Lee did not love his children enough? Otherwise why subtract himself from their lives? Hence, his 'lone nut assassin' persona. However, there is some telling evidence around that he loved both his children and Marina. Sometimes it's not just the bullet that behaved magically in order to explain the lone assassin. It seems to me that Lee himself was a square peg forced into a round hole.

In simple terms it seems either of two if Lee was the shooter : he was a manipulated agent, or he was a lone NUT. On the whole at this point in this debate I think the unpredictability of Lee in any assassination attempt argues against him being a manipulated agent. There are too many trails leading to possible conspirators. On the other hand his behaviour up till at least around the move to Dallas is too responsible to picture him as an assassin. I actually know little of him as a person during the time in Dallas, so I'll look into that, except to say that the behaviour and words after the assassination seems to be seamlessly sane continuation on from the radio interviews. In other words if there is a break in Lees persona whereby a lone nut becomes arguable then it occurred in a brief space of time. These things doo happen. they can also be made to happen. At this time there was mind control experiments being carried out by the CIA in New Orleans. (see Tom's Tulane posts)

Is it perhaps simplistic at this point to say :

either Oswald was crazy as a result of some deep psychosis manipulated by outside forces to manifest as the assassin,

or

he was innocent.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Tim, for steering the topic back on track.

Gregs response to John's post has made me look into even earlier formative years.

In the period of Lees puberty, he started looking at joining organisations. he looked at an astronomy club. And he looked at CAP. The Civilian Air Patrol. CAP had a significant history as the civilian arm of the Air Force.. Not only had it during WWII been responsible for the sinking of subs, it had also been involved in Texas in the surveilance field, namely on the lookout for spy's and saboteurs. This was around the time when Lee was around 4. After the war, CAP was reorganised with a charter giving it a role perhaps not unlike a fire service, something benevolent and useful.

This seems to have an appeal to a boy set on adventure. I find the idea of Lee 'boy-wonder spy' a bit farfetched. The idea of a boy with a social consciousness at this point makes more sense.

However. This was also the time of the great anti communist drives. Was Lee someone who wanted to 'do his bit for queen and country' and thus set his mind on becoming a master spy op. Or was he reacting against the system, and decided as a 'marxist' to infiltrate the 'system to do his bit for the revolution?

Great thread. Just got back from Norway and was unable to contribute earlier. It is also an important subject and have added it to the JFK Index.

I think Oswald’s political development is unconvincing. A study of his “expressed” political views was one of the main factors that convinced me that Oswald was working for the CIA or the FBI (possibly both). Although the people developing Oswald’s “political legend” had a factual understanding of the various strands of Marxism, they had no idea of the philosophical and emotional conflict that took place between the various strands within the revolutionary movement.

Apparently he joined the Young People's Socialist League and became a Marxist in 1956.

John, that's almost right.  On October 3, 1956, Oswald sent the Socialist Party of America an advertisement coupon he had torn out of a magazine, on which he had checked the box "I want more information about the Socialist Party," and enclosed the following letter: "Dear Sirs, I am sixteen years of age and would like more information about your Youth League, I would like to know if there is a branch in my area, how to join. etc. I am a Marxist and have been studying Socialist principles for well over fifteen months. I am very interested in your YPSL." Problem was that the ad clearly indicated you had to be at least 18 to join. His efforts to join the Marines started soon after, and a connection between the two is difficult to rule out.

His letter indicates his interest in Marxist goes back more than 15 months. He is almost 17 at the time of the letter. Likewise, he told McMillan in Moscow his interest commenced at age 15. Going by his own words, his interest coincides with his time in the CAP. As does his interest in joining the Marine Corps.

This is supported by Marguerite, who told the WC he was encouraged to read the Marine Manual and Marxist books by a Marine "recruitment officer" who visited. I could be wrong, but I somehow doubt recruitment officers paid home visits. Someone like Ferrie, however, is known to have encourage CAP members to join the Marines, and he could easily have impersonated a recruitment officer.

Lee, under normal circumstances, should have had great difficulty getting into the USMC based on his hearing loss which is noted in Youth House reports. He'd also had a mastoidectomy at 5. Exceptions with hearing problems are only made for "hard to fill" positions. I'd suggest being capable of some type of low level intelligence work would meet the "hard to fill" requirement.

He later told a friend that his involvement in politics dated back to reading a pamphlet about the execution of Ethel Rosenberg and Julius Rosenberg.

His friend? The person he told was Priscilla McMillan Johnson during her interview with him in Moscow. I don't think she just got lucky with being granted that interview, though...

This is of course possible but highly unlikely. In 1956 very few Americans were very sympathetic to the Rosenbergs.

The (alleged) pamphlet episode did not happen in 1956. It happened while Lee was living in NYC - therefore sometime between Aug, 1952 and early 1954.

At the time it did seem that they were guilty of spying for the Soviet Union. It has to be remembered that this was the height of the Cold War and it was sometime before it was revealed that the Rosenberg’s had been set up by the FBI. Even Hoover was horrified by what he had done when Ethel Rosenberg was actually executed. He had also thought that Ethel and Julius would have named fellow members of the Communist Party in an attempt to save their lives. Of course Hoover was unable to grasp that some people really had political beliefs that were so strong they were unwilling to betray their comrades.

Yep. His ideas on ethics, morality and comradeship were as perverted as his ideas on law enforcement.

There were of course some decent Americans who were able to see through this Cold War propaganda and indeed became politically active as a result of this state murder. However, they tended to become active in “liberal” political organizations. It would be highly unlikely that they would become supporters of the Soviet Union who itself had a terrible record for executing political dissenters.

That's really where it starts to get complicated.

1956 was also the year of the Hungarian Uprising. This was a time when people were leaving the Communist Party in droves. I find it completely unbelievable that anyone developing left-wing opinions in 1956 would be attracted to the “Stalinist” American Communist Party (ACP). As William Sullivan told J. Edgar Hoover at the time, that by the late 1950s there were more FBI undercover agents in the ACP than genuine members.

Well, that was the year Lee was writing to the Socialist Party wanting to join the YPSL despite knowing from the ad that he was too young, and the year he was also making plans -- apparently hatched by a phony recruitment officer in NO -- to join the Marines. But as stated above, it was not when the Rosenberg pamphlet was supposedly given to him. In case you're wondering -- I also have doubts as to whether that really happened.

Hope you don't mind the corrections, John. I don't think they adversely affect your analysis, which nearly always gives fresh insights worthy of further exploration.

It seems clear that at the time Oswald was being given a “communist” legend as part of the plan for him to defect to the Soviet Union. Oswald was one of a small group of defectors who were working as double agents. The Soviets were not fooled by these phoney “communists” (after all it was a strategy that the CIA/FBI had copied from the KGB). After a short spell they returned to the US claiming they were disillusioned by communism (Stalinism).

The problem for Oswald was that he was required by his masters to rediscover his belief in communism. It would not make any sense at all for him to become a supporter of the Soviet Union. However, it was just about feasible for Oswald to become a supporter of Fidel Castro as in the early 1960s some on the left were hoping that Castro would develop a new kind of revolutionary socialism. Castro for example had been making speeches where he had rejected Stalin’s policy of “socialism in one country” theory. This is why JFK and the CIA became so concerned about Castro. Unlike the leadership in the Soviet Union, he was passionate about the need to export revolution.

Oswald’s masters could not make-up its mind what kind of communist they wanted Oswald to be. The shrewd ones wanted to portray him as a Trotskyite supporter of Castro. However, others wanted to link him with the Soviet Union (Tim Gratz is another who is very confused by this and had attempted to portray him at various times as an agent of KGB and the Cuban Secret Service.)

The most foolish thing his masters did was to arrange for Oswald to be photographed carrying a gun and two left-wing newspapers (one Trotskyite and the other Stalinist). This attempt at planting such ridiculous incriminating evidence reveals the stupidity of those attempting to set him up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, your last question may be the penultimate one.  I find it most interesting that one of Oswald's favorite television programs was "I Led Three Lives" about an anti-Communist spy.

I agree, this was a time when he 'broke free' from his old life and set off into his own. Exactly what he might have choosen is what I'm currently trying to figure out. I think that he only had a vicarious awareness of his father from his brother Roberts stories of a wonderful Dad is probably an important factor.

Heres a brief visual timeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the caveat that I now believe LHO may have been nothing but a patsy, I once read that every presidential assassin came from a fatherless home.

Considering that Marina reportedly made the statement that she, not unlike LHO was an illigitiment offspring, then LHO could have been the only one to transmit such information to her.

Perhaps a lie on the part of LHO, perhaps not!

Perhaps merely one of those language/understanding problems.

Perhaps the truth?

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the caveat that I now believe LHO may have been nothing but a patsy, I once read that every presidential assassin came from a fatherless home.

Considering that Marina reportedly made the statement that she, not unlike LHO was an illigitiment offspring, then LHO could have been the only one to transmit such information to her.

Perhaps a lie on the part of LHO, perhaps not!

Perhaps merely one of those language/understanding problems.

Perhaps the truth?

Tom

My understanding on this issue is so far.

Lee had two brothers, John, a half brother, son of previous marriage to a Mr Pic. and Robert, same father, as Lee, whom Robert knew for 5 1/2 years before he died two months previous to Lee being born.

Lee was put in a home with his two brothers when Lee was 3. These two brothers in this situation became his protectors. For example John would be the one to change Lee's clothes and clean him up. And John was the overall big brother and both John and Robert were the main males in Lees life. Then Lee went to live alone with his mother and her new husband.

So, before becoming either 'a boy spy' or a 'soldier for the revolution, at about 15. Lee had lived first with a legendary father described to him in stories by his brother Robert, and the father that John remembered (which must have been a bit confusing to Lee at age 3),secondly with his two older brothers, thirdly with new father alltogether, in a way the 'first' real father.

lastly came then the hierarchy of leadership in the organisations he joined. Added to this is the awareness of great ancestors. (this is one area where Tom's input has been particularly enlightening)

Then in Dallas came to visit one of the 'Great Fathers'?

The literature available to me does not give any concrete guide to how this would shape a boy. In fact if anything it's highly contradictory.

Lee was without doubt intelligent. He had wide and varied experiences. I don't know how much he could be expected to have sorted things out (or even if he really had issues to 'sort out') at the time of his death.

I'm trying to work out if there is any clear indicator as to his own private self that would answer whether or not he was an infiltrator of the 'Capitalist' intelligence community or an infiltrator of the 'Communists' on their behalf.

One factor as alluded to by Tim is his choice of TV programs, also he liked the usual wild west fare. On the one hand his daring to take an unpopular position could be seen as an indicator he was capable of trancending the status quo and be a genuine marxist. On the other hand one could speculate that becoming a gung ho agent for the powers ,that are theorised as his control, is an expression of a burning need to be one of the good ole' boys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

and continuing on after another year of reading/thinking/learning:: I incline towards the latter

I wouldn't call Lees pants tight, nor would I call them baggy. In the left pocket, as he sat for the interview with his hands manacled behind his back were a key, a bus pass and five bullets. On request the handcuffs were shifted to his front. The bullet ouline in his pants were not noted.

Thes five bullets were found while he was waiting to be in the lineup at 4.30+.

yet:

"2:15 P.M. Taken into Police Dept.

2:15 - 2:20 P.M. - "Talked to" by officers Guy F. Rose and Richard S. Stovall. No notes.

2:25 - 4:04 P.M. Interrogation of Oswald, Office of Capt Will Fritz

"My name is Lee Harvey Oswald . . . I just had them in there," when asked why he had bullets in his pocket."

4.30 P.M. (to lineup)

The bullets had, according to the person who found them while searching him outside the lineup room at 4.30+, not been found by the time of this interview.

I think the key and buspass being flat were found at the linup search. The bullets were not 'found' until the correct revolver was confirmed as in the loop. He was not asked about the bullets again after they really had been 'found'. The revolver was 'drop gun' substituted for the one he was carrying. It was the one he had bought, but never had. The one he had which had been switched for the one he bought before he picked it up was found the next day in a bag a few blocks away by an unknown Willie Flat. (interestingly there is an order by Ruby on behalf of a 'L.S. McWillie' for a .38 snubnose that was never delivered)

The notion of "Oswald as Communist" does not gel with his statements that he turned to Communism after reading Das Kapital, while elsewhere saying no, and laughing at the idea, to a question if he had studied political economy in the US.

Das Kapital is basically a book on Political Economy. "In this book, you will find basic concepts of labour theory of value (what determines the value of a commodity); monetary theory (the evolution of money); the Theory of Surplus Value (what is profit and how does it come about - .. and lastly, the mechanism of production."- Review Written by O. B. Makhubela (amazon)

Someone wanting to pass themselves off as communist and who had not read Das Kapital yet knew its importance to Communist ideology may make such a mistake. Had he read it he would for consistency sake say he had studied political economy. Had he really known what he was talking about and had not read Das Kapital the correct book would be the Communist Manifesto or perhaps the very easy and clear "What is socialism?" by the SWP. IOW he was attempting to pass himself off as a Communist in a way that made sense to him as a right winger. He was at the very least a lazy study. However, there are anectotes that belie that. The simple explanation is : he was a Communist Pretender, coming at it from a world view that was informed according to a right winger.

The idea of the "Communist Pretender" gels with this mistake and with his expressed admiration for the Minutemen, and with him finding Soviet life too booring to put up with. I've come across 'wreckers' of this kind, so Lee as such is not that farfetched to me.

The particular matter which he expressed admiration for the Minutemen over was in the idea of bringing things to a head. Doing things that amplified contradictions. So him (acting under orders?) to shoot at and miss Walker may not be so contradictory at all.

What it would do is set him up as the fall guy for the Kennedy assassination. Not that he had any idea that things would turn out like this. Did the German-Walker interview become known after Oswald was silenced? Was he at any time during his interviews asked about Walker? According to Mae: no. So then, until he was done away with he must also be kept quiet, ie. if he knew he had been connected with the Walker incident he would also know without doubt he was being hung out to dry and would have started singing. (speculation of course) The Walker shooting-Oswald link was only made after he was dead. It did load the case against the now dead assassin.

It seems to me that the irrgualrities started with going to Russia. It seems that something made this 'the plan' of which the numerous slips merely point to the unprofessional approach. Not exactly what one might expect from a 'master spy' but rather born of following instructions from someone that he placed his trust in judgement while this someone left the preparations incomplete. Lunacy, really. I'd look to a zealot outside the usual agencies.

Before during or after arrest Oswald had no signs of drug use like dilated pupils or sweating, or erratic enhanced reactions, so that wasn't a factor.

Patsy doesn't only mean scapegoat, but also 'cheated' or 'betrayed'. His inconsistencies tell of peripheral involvement. Not as he thought when starting to play with the big boys, but used and dumped. Therefore killing him was essential before he realised just how much he had been left out in the cold.

As far as Lee knew he was'covered' as far as the Walker shooting went. The police were looking for two and a car, and they had a steel jacketed bullet which was far too mangled to match any particular rifle.

Lee played with the big boys and got burnt. They knew all along he was going to burn. They could hardly give him any inkling of that however, quite the contrary. Not until sitting in the Theatre did it begin to dawn on him what was going down. He still wasn't sure however, as he had no idea of any cop being killed. This he found out later.

His white supremacy shackled-fist salute was an ID in preparation to going to jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...