Jump to content
The Education Forum
Steve Thomas

How did Hosty expect to talk to Marina?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:

Two questions:

Jeanne DeM asks Marina to show her around her and Lee's apartment and after opening a closet door she sees a high powered rifle with a scope?

Marina admits it's Lee's?

Paul, is this the same rifle you claim Oswald used on Walker? If so, how did non-driving, no car owning Oswald get the rifle back home to this apartment from Walker's residence?

Obviously not on any bus night or day. Obviously not by walking home with it during the day.

Did he simply run home with this in the dark cover of night? How far away was Walker's residence from Lee's?

 

Joe,

 

Marina said that Lee told her he had buried it.

I can't speak to other occasions when Marina testified to the authorities, but things get really hinky when Marina is testifying about the rifle.

 

Over the course of time, I've been jotting down notes:

Warren Commission testimony of Marina Oswald February 3, 1964,

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm


 

Mrs. OSWALD. Of course in the morning I told him that I was worried, and that we can have a lot of trouble, and I asked him, "Where is the rifle? What did you do with it?"
He said, that he had left it somewhere, that he had buried it, it seems to me, somewhere far from that place, because he said dogs could find it by smell. I don't know---I am not a criminologist.

 

After this had happened, people thought that he had a car, but he had been using a bus.

 

I know that on a Sunday he took the rifle, but I don't think he fired on a Sunday. Perhaps this was on Friday. So Sunday he left and took the rifle.

 

Mr. RANKIN. If the Walker shooting was on Wednesday, does that refresh your memory as to the day of the week at all?
Mrs. OSWALD. Refresh my memory as to what?
Mr. RANKIN. As to the day of the shooting?
Mrs. OSWALD. It was in the middle of the week.

 

Where was the rifle between Sunday and Wednesday – the day of the shooting?

 

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever observe your husband taking the rifle away from the apartment on Neely Street?
Mrs. OSWALD. Now, I think that he probably did sometimes, but I never did see it. You must understand that sometimes I would be in the kitchen and he would be in his room downstairs, and he would say bye-bye, I will be hack soon, and he may have taken it. He probably did. Perhaps he purely waited for an occasion when he could take it away without my seeing it.

 

Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.
Mr. RANKIN. Could you give us a little help on how you knew?
Mrs. OSWALD. He told me. And he would mention that in passing---it isn't
as if he said, "Well, today I am going"---it wasn't as if he said, "Well, today I am going to take the rifle and go and practice."
But he would say, "Well, today I will take the rifle along for practice."

 

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where he practiced with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know where. I don't know the name of the place where this took place. But I think it was somewhere out of town. It seems to me a place called Lopfield.
Mr. RANKIN. Would that be at the airport---Love Field?
Mrs. OSWALD. Love Field.

 

I read that Love Field is something like six miles from where they lived on Neely St., so he would have had to have taken the bus, unless someone was giving him rides – all the time while he working at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.

 

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, Lee had a small room where he spent a great deal of time, where he read---where he kept his things, and that is where the rifle was.
Mr. RANKIN. Was it out in the room at that time, as distinguished from in a closet in the room?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, it was open, out in the open.


Therefore, I don't know whether he took it from the house or whether perhaps he even kept the rifle somewhere outside. There was a little square, sort of a little courtyard where he might have kept it.

 

Warren Commission Hearings, Volume XXII

Current Section: CE 1156 - FBI report dated February 18, 1964, of interview of Marina Oswald, Dallas, Tex. (CD 735, pp. 439-445).

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=227

 

Marina told the FBI on February 17, 1964 that she saw Oswald practicing with the rifle at the Neely Street address at the beginning of January, 1963. 9(CE 1156 p. 197).

 

Warren Commission testimony of Marina Oswald February 3, 1964,

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm

 

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall seeing any guns at Mercedes Street while you were there?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.

 

Mr. RANKIN. Did you observe any guns in your things when you moved? (From Fort Worth to Elsbeth)
Mrs. OSWALD. No.

 

Mr. RANKIN. While you were at Elsbeth Street do you recall seeing any guns in your apartment?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.

 

 

Warren Commission testimony of Marina Oswald February 3, 1964,

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm


 

Mr. RANKIN. When did you move to Neely Street from the Elsbeth Street apartment?
Mrs. OSWALD. In January after the new year.
I don't remember exactly.

 

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the first time that you observed the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. That was on Neely Street. I think that was in February.

 

 

For whatever reason, this can't be true. The Oswalds moved from Elsbeth to Neely on March 3rd and according to the postal money order, the rifle wasn't ordered until March 12th.

 

In her HSCA testimony, Marina couldn't remember the first time she saw the rifle.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo4/jfk12/marinade.htm

 

Marina's HSCA testimony

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/hscamar1.htm

 

When do you first recall seeing Lee with a rifle in the United States?
Mrs. PORTER. I cannot pinpoint exact month, you know, date of any kind.

Mr. McDONALD. Where did you first see it?
Mrs. PORTER. I do not remember where or when, but I can say that Lee did have a rifle during life in the United States.

 

Current Section: CE 1156 - FBI report dated February 18, 1964, of interview of Marina Oswald, Dallas, Tex. (CD 735, pp. 439-445).

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=227

 

This is cross referenced to DL 100-10461 (4)

 

On February 17, 1964 Marina was interviewed by FBI Special Agents Anatole Boguslav and Wallace Heitman. In their writeup of that interview done on the 18th, they wrote:

 

“She said further that in the beginning of January, 1963 at the Neely Street address, he, (Lee Harvey Oswald) was cleaning his rifle and he said he had been practicing that day.”

(page 443 of CD 735).

 

For whatever reason, this conflicts with the official record as we know it.. Supposedly the Oswalds moved from Elsbeth to Neely on March 3rd and according to the postal money order, the rifle wasn't ordered until March 12th.

CE 1404 - FBI reports dated February 22 and 25, 1964, of interviews with Marina Oswald (CD 735, pp. 446-453).

 

On February 18, 1964 she was again interviewed by Agents Boguslav and Heitman. She told the FBI that she was mistaken about the date, and that the rifle cleaning incident had taken place in March, 1963. The Agents wrote a Report of this interview on February 22, 1964.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=815

(This is on page 446 of CD 735)

 

So, let me see if I've got this straight.

Marina first saw the rifle in February, before it had even been purchased.

She first told the FBI that she saw Lee cleaning the rifle in January, but then later told them that she was mistaken and that the cleaning had taken place in March.

It was kept out in the open, but may be he kept it outside.

She never actually saw him take the rifle away from the apartment and never talks about seeing him bring it back.

Lee took the rifle on Sunday, but the shooting wasn't until Wednesday. Where was the rifle in the meantime?

She said that Lee had told her her buried the rifle after the shooting. When did he go back and dig it up?

Lee was riding a bus for six miles with a rifle - several times.

 

Steve Thomas

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve:

A rhetorical question would be, how/where does a guy who doesn't drive, "practice" with his rifle?   Wouldn't the neighbors notice or be alarmed? 

Gene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul:

I like to give you the benefit of the doubt, and respect your views.  So, I'm not going to "bite" on explaining the November 12th Soviet Embassy letter.  I'm sure you well know there is a wealth of information and investigation as to its origin and provenance.  Ruth Paine is in the middle of it.  And the letter is fishy, to say the least.  You wish to portray her as an innocent ... randomly caught in the middle of a whirlwind of international intrigue, Presidential assassins, FBI agents and Russian expatriates.   Perhaps there's more to the story.  

Gene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

Steve:

A rhetorical question would be, how/where does a guy who doesn't drive, "practice" with his rifle?   Wouldn't the neighbors notice or be alarmed? 

Gene

Gene,

 

He got on a bus and took it to Lopfield.

Several times.

*smile*

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This subject - like so many - ought to be put to rest...  The man never had CE-139 in his possession.  C2766 cannot be proven to have ever been removed from Harborside Storage.  Worse yet... Feldsott tells us the shipment with C2766 was in June 1962...  The evidence shows the first retrieval of rifles from THAT order which included C2766 was not until August 1962...

The FBI reports mention 2 other orders with rifles with serial numbers that are close June 18 '62 and March 27 '63... yet there is no record of those order ever coming to Kleins.

The famous TS to FC rifle order change comes in April 62 yet is not delivered until Feb 63? 

So where is the documentation for these two orders?  (btw, Century Arms sends a "2766" to Vermont in June 1962....

Rupp is the only person in this story who sends “Crescent-to-Klein’s” order info to Feldsott in NYC after shipment.  For Feldsott to have order info for a June 18, 1962 shipment, Rupp or some other rifle dealer needs to have completed an order and sent it to Klein’s.  Rupp offers no such evidence while the Century Arms to Empire Wholesale Sporting goods order of June 29, 1962 had a “2766” Carcano in the shipment.  Amazingly none of the 1300 rifles sent from Canada have the letter prefix – whether this is “C”2766 cannot be known.

 


https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11277&search=&tab=page#relPageId=2&tab=page

 

 

 

Mr. JENNER - Does your recollection serve you that anybody standing in the courtyard and dry-sighting a rifle would be visible to people who just happened by, or who would be looking out a window on the south side of Magazine Street, or in the home or in the dwelling house to the east of the courtyard?
Mrs. PAINE - He would have been very visible. Would have collected a clutch of small boys.
Mr. JENNER - This was a neighborhood, then, in which there were small children?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes
.

And as you mention about the suggestive testimonies:

Mr. PAINE - And that is why I think they asked me, it may have been as early as that, whether it was a rifle, "Do you think it could have been a rifle?" I don't remember how it was posed, but I probably answered when it was suggested, it was a rifle, and there they suggested it was a rifle, because they had already learned from Marina that he had had a rifle, and it had been, perhaps, had learned it had been in that blanket.

Mr. PAINE - My impression was that they asked me if I knew what was in this blanket, or he asked me, and then he asked me if it could be a rifle, and I probably responded, yes. It didn't take long once the rifle was suggested as the object to fit this puzzle together, this puzzle of the pieces that 1 had been trying to assemble in the package.

How many times does Ruth say "No"  ?

Mr. JENNER - It was in the open so you could see what went into your car?
Mrs. PAINE - I think so. I certainly then repacked it to go to New Orleans.
Mr. JENNER - Well, I want to stick with this occasion, please.
Mrs. PAINE - All right.
Mr. JENNER - Was there a rifle packed in the back of the car?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - You didn't see any kind of weapon?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - Firearm, rifle, pistol, or otherwise?
Mrs. PAINE - No; I saw nothing of that nature.
Mr. JENNER - Did you drive them to your home?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - Were the materials and things in your station wagon unpacked and placed in your home?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes; immediately.

Mr. JENNER - Did you see that being done, were you present?
Mrs. PAINE -
I helped do it; yes.

Mr. JENNER - Did you see any weapon on that occasion?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - Whether a rifle, pistol or--
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - Or any covering, any package, that looked as though it might have a weapon, pistol, or firearm?
Mrs. PAINE - No.

Mr. JENNER - Yes, I am interested, and I would like to stick with the duffel-bags for a moment. Was there any appearance as to either duffelbag, which, to you, would indicate some long, slim, hard----
Mrs. PAINE - I assume them to be both full of clothes, very rounded.
Mr. JENNER - I 'don't wish to be persistent, but was there anything that you saw about the duffelbags that lead you at that time to even think for an instant that there was anything long, slim and hard like a pole?
Mrs. PAINE - No.
Mr. JENNER - Or a gun, a rifle?
Mrs. PAINE - No.

Representative BOGGS - Did you see the rifle that he had in the room in your home?
Mrs. PAINE - In the garage, no.
Representative BOGGS - In the garage, you never saw one?
Mrs. PAINE - I never saw that rifle at all until the police showed it to me in the station on the 22d of November.

==============   How about Mikey?  (The man supposedly has photos taken holding the rifle and pistol yet declines to share his little toy with anyone?  If those photos were really taken in March with a copy given to George... is it realistic to accept that no one where the rifle was stored would even be aware it exists?

Mr. LIEBELER - Did you ever observe or hear prior to the assassination that Lee Oswald had been practicing with a rifle?
Mr. PAINE - No, I didn't know prior to the assassination, we didn't know he had a rifle. I had supposed from my conversation with him back on Neely Street that he would like to have a rifle but I didn't gather that he did.
Mr. LIEBELER - Aside from whether or not you knew that he had a rifle, did you ever hear or observe him practicing with a rifle?
Mr. PAINE - No, I did not.

 

Edited by David Josephs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

Not the WC H+E, itself.  Transcripts from the executive sessions give an indication of their concern over Marina's inconsistencies and the fact that she claimed LHO had not been to MC when there was ample proof he had, backyard pictures, etc...https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Warren_Commission_Executive_Session_of_27_Jan_1964

Pamela,

Thanks for your honesty in this important issue.   There is NOTHING in the Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits that accuses Marina Oswald of inconsistencies.   

NOTHING.

Marina Oswald was under oath for the Warren Commission, and she honored that.   She loved the USA and never wanted to go back to the USSR.

HOWEVER -- before the Warren Commission swearing in -- MARINA OSWALD DENIED EVERYTHING TO EVERYBODY.

It is fruitless to call this "perjury" or "lying to the government" or anything of the sort.   People should be more humane about this -- she was picked up by the FBI and Secret Service and grilled like a chicken.   Her husband was accused of killing the President.   Under Texas Law, a wife need not ever testify against her husband.   Marina had a RIGHT TO DENY EVERYTHING that was accused of her, in a hostile manner (especially by the FBI, especially by Hosty, who unfairly suspected her of being a KGB agent).

It is not inconsistency.  It was the right of a wife under Texas Law to deny everything.

Other than that -- what have y'all got to convict Marina Oswald?    NOTHING?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

Are you asking Gene to explain the context in regards to the letter, JFK, Ruth Paine and the FBI in Nov. 1963 because you don't know how they are connected?

Seriously?

Chris,

I'm seriously asking Gene to explain the context of the Soviet Embassy Letter, JFK, Ruth Paine and the FBI in November 1963, to see if Gene knows how they are connected.

I suspect that we might have widely divergent theories about their connection.  It is worth discussing, for serious minded readers.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve and David:

I am sure that CE-139 was never in Oswald's possession.  Its provenance is suspect, the records are falsified, and both the rifle and revolver were obvious "plants".  Behind this charade and setup were people like LAPD Lieutenant Manuel Pena (of RFK Special Unit Senator notoriety) who allegedly "traced" Oswald's telescopic sight to a California gun shop.    Pena's allegiances and affiliations are clearly unmasked in the RFK research.  Another intelligence plant in the police department (in that case LAPD as opposed to DPD).  We are led to believe that Pena was simply involved with Thomas Dodd's mail order handgun trafficking investigation (baloney).

What is more fundamentally wrong with the picture is a guy who doesn't apparently practice with any rifle (or the rifle) -- which is what real shooters do, especially for serious hunting and important events.  This seems irrefutable today, since Oswald's strange enigmatic life has been thoroughly dissected at this point.  Other than the strange behavior at the Sports Drome Rifle Range ( a bogus story, similar to Sirhan's "practice"), no one has ever attested to seeing Oswald shoot or practice.  This all comes across today (with 50 years of investigative knowledge) as a 'B' movie plot.  As Senator Russell Long states: "that dog don't hunt".

But back to Hosty ...  his "surveillance" and interest in Marina and/or Lee (or perhaps Ruth) seem way off.  He was a Notre Dame graduate, so one would think he was a JFK supporter (not one of the many who characterized Kennedy as a "commie symp").  March through November seems an awful long time for FBI to keep poking around the Oswald's (particularly for someone taken off the watch list).  Hosty's interests seem to have shifted in the month before the assassination - to both Michael and Ruth Paine - and his visit on November 1st seems intended for Ruth ... perhaps he was interested in taking up Russian language lessons?   Or maybe he was a good guy, who got too close to the flame.

Gene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gene Kelly said:

Steve and David:

I am sure that CE-139 was never in Oswald's possession.  Its provenance is suspect, the records are falsified, and both the rifle and revolver were obvious "plants".  Behind this charade and setup were people like LAPD Lieutenant Manuel Pena (of RFK Special Unit Senator notoriety) who allegedly "traced" Oswald's telescopic sight to a California gun shop.    Pena's allegiances and affiliations are clearly unmasked in the RFK research.  Another intelligence plant in the police department (in that case LAPD as opposed to DPD).  We are led to believe that Pena was simply involved with Thomas Dodd's mail order handgun trafficking investigation (baloney).

What is more fundamentally wrong with the picture is a guy who doesn't apparently practice with any rifle (or the rifle) -- which is what real shooters do, especially for serious hunting and important events.  This seems irrefutable today, since Oswald's strange enigmatic life has been thoroughly dissected at this point.  Other than the strange behavior at the Sports Drome Rifle Range ( a bogus story, similar to Sirhan's "practice"), no one has ever attested to seeing Oswald shoot or practice.  This all comes across today (with 50 years of investigative knowledge) as a 'B' movie plot.  As Senator Russell Long states: "that dog don't hunt".

But back to Hosty ...  his "surveillance" and interest in Marina and/or Lee (or perhaps Ruth) seem way off.  He was a Notre Dame graduate, so one would think he was a JFK supporter (not one of the many who characterized Kennedy as a "commie symp").  March through November seems an awful long time for FBI to keep poking around the Oswald's (particularly for someone taken off the watch list).  Hosty's interests seem to have shifted in the month before the assassination - to both Michael and Ruth Paine - and his visit on November 1st seems intended for Ruth ... perhaps he was interested in taking up Russian language lessons?   Or maybe he was a good guy, who got too close to the flame.

Gene

Good post above.

Gene a few years ago I came across a recording of one of the first emergency calls from the Ambassador Hotel to the LAPD regarding RFK just being shot there. 

What struck me was the response of the male police dispatcher to the emergency call in by a female employee of the hotel. The hotel caller was understandably upset and first just reported a shooting with victims. She then told the dispatcher that Robert Kennedy was at their hotel, without saying whether it was he that was shot. I assume she perhaps didn't know the details of the shooting.

The police dispatcher then says sarcastically "Big Deal" in immediate response to this woman mentioning RFK's name. It was kind of shocking to me that a person in the officers position would openly and publicly express his personal disdain towards RFK like that and especially under this emergency call in circumstance.

Thinking about the call and this insult toward RFK reminded me that the LAPD was known at that time as being very extreme right wing and Kennedy hating.  In my mind this arouses suspicion in important aspects of their investigation regards RFK's murder due to their known extreme right wing - Kennedy hating political sentiment.

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

Steve and David:

...Back to Hosty ...  his "surveillance" and interest in Marina and/or Lee (or perhaps Ruth) seem way off.  He was a Notre Dame graduate, so one would think he was a JFK supporter (not one of the many who characterized Kennedy as a "commie symp").  March through November seems an awful long time for FBI to keep poking around the Oswald's (particularly for someone taken off the watch list).  Hosty's interests seem to have shifted in the month before the assassination - to both Michael and Ruth Paine - and his visit on November 1st seems intended for Ruth ... perhaps he was interested in taking up Russian language lessons?   Or maybe he was a good guy, who got too close to the flame.

Gene

Gene,

Would you kindly offer your opinion about Lee Harvey Oswald's "Soviet Embassy Letter" of November 12, 1963, and how you believe it links Ruth Paine to the FBI?

Also, the fact that James Hosty was a Catholic is utterly no proof that he was a JFK supporter.   Carlos Marcello and David Ferrie were also Catholics.

Furthermore, as Hosty tells us in his book, Assignment Oswald (1996), his FBI job in Dallas was to monitor "General Walker and his Minutemen in Dallas." (p. 4).  So, Catholic or not, years of exposure to the John Birch Society hype might even "turn" an FBI agent.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gene - before you answer you may want to check the thread from where this info comes...  That's not a "12", it's a "2"... which means the postmarked envelope is dated 7 days prior to the typed letter...

The "letter of the 12th" was actually post marked Nov 2nd...  there is no "1" there as proven in a different thread that Paul has also ignored...

When we spend time analyzing something Paul and come to a conclusion... you being blind to it doesn.t make it wrong, it makes you wrong.

 

The NOISE of the image is what appears as a "1"...  Looking below, a "12" is a "12"...  This Ruth BS is just that... 

5978bec54f3b5_PostmarkonRuthPaineTypedletterofOswaldtoRussianEmbassyinDC-no1there.thumb.jpg.90bae1f61937e7addb466fea75ba9e88.jpg

 

 

 

 

Edited by David Josephs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul:

Since this thread is about Hosty and his "surveillance" of Marina, I’d prefer to stay on point.  Regarding Hosty's religious roots, I have no knowledge of his upbringing but it appears that he was a practicing Catholic in his adult life.  He had nine children, which mirrors many large Irish-Catholic families of that era (of which I am familiar) ... and therefore Hosty had quite a bit in common with the Kennedys.  My statement related to Notre Dame is less about the religious similarities between Hosty and JFK, and more to the recruitment strategies of the FBI.  I am acquainted with persons who went to work for the FBI in the 1970's ... growing up where I lived, it was considered an honor to be considered for a job with the FBI, and there was an almost reverence for the prestige of the Bureau on the part of our teachers.  I received a Catholic school upbringing (through college) and prestigious Catholic universities (like Notre Dame) were a recruiting ground for the Bureau.  So, my observation is that – given James Patrick Hosty’s background and education - it’s difficult to envision him being anti-Kennedy. Those who grew up in that era Catholic (as I did) were extremely proud of the first Catholic president, and If you read Hosty's 2011 obituary (June 17, 2011, Kansas City Star), his son Thomas, who helped write his 1996 book "Assignment: Oswald", is quoted as saying:

“The irony was, my dad was a devout Irish-Catholic Democrat who loved Kennedy ... My father was prepared to lay down his life for the president.”

It's quite a stretch to posit that Hosty had turned to the radical right, and was a conspirator.  I see no evidence of that, so you'll have to make a stronger case than simply "years of exposure to the John Birch Society".  As you well know, Hosty was reprimanded and sent to Kansas City, where he continued with FBI until retiring in 1979 (mandatory for law enforcement).  He enjoyed over 30 years of retirement until his death in 2011.  He doesn't come across so much as one of the 'bad guys' to me, but more a scapegoat.  As far as the letter to the Russian Embassy, you need to perform your own due diligence.  I'm not inclined to lay it out for you, and have it dissected it (by the numbers).  I would direct you to the Mary Ferrell website, and the following references as a good start: 

  • Overview: The CIA, the Drug Traffic, and Oswald in Mexico, by Peter Dale Scott
  • The Fourteen Minute Gap, by Rex Bradford
  • CIA Files and the Pre-Assassination Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald, by Peter Dale Scott
  • A Model of Mexico City, by Joseph Riley
  • Oswald, the CIA, and Mexico City, by John Newman
  • The Three Oswald Deceptions: The Operation, the Cover-Up, and the Conspiracy, by Peter Dale Scott

I’d be interested to know your thoughts about the provenance of the Embassy letter, when you're done.

Regards,

Gene

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/25/2018 at 6:25 AM, Ray Mitcham said:

Maybe Hosty just fancied Marina.

Ray, your stated thought and question above regards Hosty fancying Marina ( and so many other men in the whole Marina and Lee story ) is a more important one deserving of more consideration than just trivial asides joking imo.

Marina's youthful, physically attractive appearance was always a real dynamic in how it effected her's and Lee's relationship in that it caused much jealousy in Lee when he saw how drawn to Marina other men were and especially men of better means than Lee.  I am sure that Lee felt that Marina was offered assistance and sympathy by some of these other men for more reasons than simple platonic humanitarian concern.

Many men are like lustful wolves when they come across a beautiful young woman who is in a vulnerable marriage situation and vulnerable themselves..like Marina totally was.

Does anyone actually believe that Jeanne and horn dog George DeM would have become as involved with the Oswalds if Marina looked like Nina Khrushchev? 

Or anything like the Cold War posters of heavy set, thick ankled, weathered faced, missing toothed, grey babushka and dirty farm coat wearing Russian women standing next to the family plow?

The constant eyeing and circling interest of these wolves around Marina must have driven Lee Oswald batty at times. 

When I first saw Marina Oswald giving that "Marina, what do you do all day?" nationally televised interview, I too was instantly smitten. She was simply gorgeous, even with her missing tooth which she so self-consciously tried to hide. 

She seemed totally vulnerable in that scene which made her even more attractive.

Marina's youthful and vulnerable beauty combined with her Russian mystery background created a main character that made the entire Lee and Marina story much more attractively intriguing and clearly effected the actions of those who willingly interacted with them.

If Lee Oswald had married a frumpy, thick necked, farm plow pushing Russian woman instead of a gorgeous young Lee Remick look-a-like, who knows ... maybe Oswald's life after returning to the U.S. from Russia may not have taken the tragic history changing turn it did.

 

 

 

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

I’d be interested to know your thoughts about the provenance of the Embassy letter, when you're done.

I think this is a key item that could unravel whatever was really going on with Oswald, the Paines and the FBI post assassination. I don't know what the true story is yet but there are so many really odd coincidences and discrepancies that it's difficult for an objective researcher not to "smell smoke".

Ruth Paine admits that she never saw or read either Oswald's draft or the letter he typed in her kitchen, yet she "knew" the handwritten letter she found in her living room and later stole, was in fact, the draft of the letter Oswald typed.

How many letters did Oswald type? A careful reading of Ruth Paine's testimony reveals that she blurted out that "it wasn't the only time he borrowed the typewriter". This revelation was subsequently ignored by counsel and went unexplored.

What of the "furniture moving" story that culminated in Ruth actually acquiring Oswald's draft? Why make this up? If this is an elaborate fiction, as I believe, then you can toss any notion that there is a true provenance for this "evidence".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×