Gene Kelly

Greg I would seriously doubt the hearsay that Postal Inspector Harry Holmes relates here. He states "he went to the Mexican Consulates, I guess ... ". Then, he admits that none of this was reported in his memorandum of interview. Holmes is not a reliable source on anything. He is frankly a suspect in the entire affair. Holmes is the one and only person in Dallas to know the number of the money order that linked Oswald with the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle; the only person who claimed to have located the money order "stub" (and had access to postal money orders and GPO cancellation stamps); and then waited 4 hours before telling postal inspectors that this never-deposited, never-cashed money order could be found at the Federal Records Center in Washington, DC? Harry D Holmes, a Dallas postal inspector, an active informant for the FBI (Dallas T-2 and T-10), who according to his abbreviated Warren testimony was "feeding change of addressses as bits of information to the FBI and Secret Service, and sort of a coordinating deal on it ..." (before he was cut off by David Belin and taken off the record). There exist no stenographic records or tape in evidence for Oswald's interrogation sessions ... just the word of Harry Holmes, whose summary was not submitted until December 17th, almost a month after the assassination. Then, under oath, he said he heard Oswald say things that others did not hear him say. The only non- law enforcement officer allowed to sit in during Oswald's final interrogation. A guy who dropped his wife off at church the morning of Oswald’s transfer to county jail, and just happened to wander over to the police station where his friend Will Fritz was going to interview Oswald one more time, and asked to sit in Room 317 with Fritz, Forrest Sorrells of the Secret Service, and several deputies who were supposed to be guarding Oswald. And then Fritz allows Holmes to ask questions ... a lowly off-duty postal Inspector walks in during an interrogation of the alleged assassin of the President and interrogates the prime suspect. Really ... Gene

Bob See the August 2021 Kennedys and King article by Paul Bleau "Exposing the FPCC, Part 2": “Follow the money” is one of the things that the FBI and Warren Commission did not do in trying to understand how such a destitute person like Oswald could run an FPCC chapter, raise a family, and save money for Marina (at least $1600 in today’s money).[1] He was so poor that the White Russians paid for his YMCA fees. The FPCC added the following to this drifter’s cost of living: FPCC membership fees, renting of a space, hiring leafleteers, paying a fine for disturbing the peace, the purchase of rubber-stamping equipment, personal displacements, printing of up to five different pieces of literature, correspondence with the FPCC, and use of a Post Office Box…with not one single member to help absorb the costs. The following exchange between Oswald’s lawyer and Wesley Liebeler of the Warren Commission suggests something more plausible than Oswald giving away time and money for a passé organization rather than focusing on his growing family—he was paid $25 a day (Note that Oswald’s job at the Texas Schoolbook Depository paid $1.50 per hour): This commentary is derived from Dean Andrews' July 21, 1964, Warren Commission testimony to Wesley Liebeler: Mr. ANDREWS. Only time I really paid attention to this boy, he-was in the front of the Maison Blanche Building giving out these kooky Castro things. Mr. LIEBELER. When was this, approximately? Mr. ANDREWS. I don’t remember. I was coming from the KBC building, and I walked past him. You know how you see somebody, recognize him. So, I turned around, came back, and asked him what he was doing giving that junk out. He said it was a job. I reminded him of the $25 he owed the office. He said he would come over there, but he never did. Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you that he was getting paid to hand out this literature? Mr. ANDREWS. Yes. Mr. LIEBELGR. Did he tell you how much? Mr. ANDREWS. No. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember telling the FBI that he told you that he was being paid $25 a day for handing out these leaflets? Mr. ANDREWS. I could have told them that. I know I reminded him of the $25. I may have it confused, the $25. What I do recall, he said it was a job. I guess I asked him how much he was making. They were little square chits a little bit smaller than the picture you have of him over there [indicating]. Mr. LIEBELER. He was handing out these leaflets? Mr. ANDREWS. They were black-and-white pamphlets extolling the virtues of Castro, which around here doesn’t do too good. They have a lot of guys, Mexicanos and Cubanos, that will tear your head off if they see you fooling with these things. Gene

Sandy I think that Eusebio Azcue's statements are credible ... and he was adamant that the imposter in the Cuban Consulate on Friday Sept 27th was not our guy Ozzie. There were also some other sources that testified to that effect. The HSCA Lopez report states that Eusebio Azcue Lopez, a Cuban citizen, was the Cuban Consul, and he had diplomatic immunity. The HSCA asked the Cuban government to make Azcue available for staff interviews and they complied with the Committee's request on April 1, 1978. Azcue stated that Alfredo Mirabal, who in September 1963 had recently arrived from Cuba to assume the Consul's duties, had also been present during Oswald's visit. During a second trip to Cuba, the HSCA (including Lopez and Hardaway) interviewed Mirabal. Both of these individuals were then available for the public hearings on September 18, 1978, where Azcue Lopez again told the HSCA at a public hearing on 9/18/78 that the Consul visitor was not LHO. There were also other witnesses that day at the Consulate ...two Cuban officials—Guillermo Ruiz and Antonio García—from the Commercial Office, located upstairs, were also eyewitnesses of the Oswald imposter’s making a scene at the Consulate, and both claimed they didn’t hear any threats against Kennedy. I would refer you to a May 2017 Kennedys and King article "JFK Declassified: Tracking Oswald, Part 3" written by Arnaldo M. Fernandez which unravels some of this story. Further, the declassified HSCA Lopez Report describes the following: The Cuban Consulate was in a separate building from the Embassy. In 1963, the Cuban diplomatic compound in Mexico City was at Francisco Marquez Street (Colonia Condesa) with two main entrances: One to the Embassy, on the corner of Tacubaya Alley, and the other to the Consulate, on the corner of Zamora Street. Gene

Lee apparently is paid $25 (by Bannister and Associates) for the leafletting stunts in August. On September 20th, Ruth Paine returns to NOLA, where Marina decides to return with her to Dallas for the birth of the baby; on September 23rd, they leave for Irving. Lee will return a week or so later, on October 4th, allegedly with no job and no money. Gene

Joe On April 6th, Oswald was let go by Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall because, in his supervisor's opinion, he allegedly did not get along with his fellow employees. He then decides to move to New Orleans, and on April 24, Ruth drives him to the bus station; he arrives in NOLA and moves in with his aunt Lillian Murret. On May 9, Oswald submitted an application for employment with William Reily Company, where his employment lasted a little more than two months until July 19th, when he was let go for allegedly spending too much time in Alba's garage (where he is apparently getting paid by either INS or FBI for unknown services. Meanwhile, Marina left Dallas on May 10th and arrives with Mrs. Paine, who stayed with the Oswald’s for 8 days. On May 14, Ruth Paine leaves New Orleans to return to her home in Irving.

Paul: On September 17th, Lee obtains a tourist card good for one visit to Mexico City from the Mexican consulate in NOLA. Three days later, Ruth visits the Oswalds, and Marina decides to return with her for the birth of the baby (they leave for Irving on September 23rd. On September 25th, Oswald collects an unemployment check of $33. He (somehow) returns to Dallas on October 4th with no job, no money. At this point, Marina (eight months pregnant) is living in suburban Irving at the home of Ruth Paine, who now limits Lee's visits with them. My point here is, he didn't have much money. And all of this happens in the space of just two weeks. Strange ... Gene

During her HSCA interview, she told Ed Lopez the following: LOPEZ - For example, let's start at the beginning. Was he tall, short? TIRADO - Short. LOPEZ - Short. Could you stand up for a minute, Gary? (Laughter.) Would you say he was as tall as Gary? TIRADO - Yeah, more or less. LOPEZ - Would you say he was taller than Gary? TIRADO - No, I think just the same. He was about my size. LOPEZ - About your height? TIRADO - Yeah. LOPEZ - Okay. And what's your height? TIRADO - 160. I think 160 or 162. LOPEZ - Was he skinny? TIRADO - Yes. Skinny. LOPEZ - Could you estimate how much he weighed? TIRADO - About your weight, more or less. He has stronger shoulders, perhaps, than yours.

Sandy I read the HSCA interviews of Duran and Eusebio Azcue. The imposter who visited the Cuban Consulate that Friday was unfriendly, and persistent. Sylvia described him as over 30, thin (and thin faced) with blue or green eyes, and blonde hair. Azcue described him as a white male, between 5'6" and 5'7", over 30 years of age, very thin long face, with straight eyebrows and a cold look in his eyes. He also said the man had blond hair. Gene

Jim: That 7-day period (from September 25- October 4) is fascinating, and the timeline telling: September 20th: Nagell is arrested on 9/20/63, when LHO was still in New Orleans. September 20th: Ruth visits the Oswalds, and Marina decides to return with Ruth for the birth of the baby September 23rd: Ruth and Marina leave for Irving TX September 25: LHO collects an unemployment check of $33 and leaves New Orleans (ostensibly by bus) where the Mexico City charade begins. He allegedly takes three separate bus trips: leaving Houston early on the morning of the 26th and arriving in Nuevo Laredo on the Mexican border that afternoon; leaving Nuevo Laredo an hour or so later and arriving in Mexico City on the 27th. September 27: Sylvia Tirado Duran (and her colleagues) spoke to someone calling himself Oswald on September 27. He came/left the Consulate three times that same day, persistent and angry, eventually being kicked out. The imposter also visited the Soviet embassy the next day September 27th: Silvia Odio receives a visit in Dallas on Friday September 27th; two individuals along with Oswald, one named "Leopoldo" with an odd forehead (likely Bernardo de Torres) doing the speaking and seeking written letters of recommendation from JURE members. “Leopoldo” phoned Odio the next day to tell her how “Leon” had talked about the need to murder the President and that Leon” is “kind of nuts”, implicating the patsy. Not surprisingly, CIA did not allow the HSCA to later question de Torres (who later infiltrated Garrison’s investigation) about his activities. On a Saturday morning in late September, two men visit Robert McKeown's house in Houston - Lee Oswald and a friend called Hernandez - willing to pay $10,000 for four rifles, 300 Savage automatics and a telescopic sight. October 4th: Oswald returns to Dallas (after a failed attempt to go to Cuba and/or return to the Soviet Union) with no job, no money October 14th: Ruth and Marina were having coffee at a neighbor’s house, which leads to Lee's finding work at the Book Depository the next day And as David Josephs has pointed out, from Sept 24 until Oct 31st, there is not a single FBI report on Lee Oswald. Gene

JFK was severely misled about the entire BOP project ... the story circulated for many years to come was - as Jim states - a diversion ... misinformation manufactured by Hunt and Dulles after the fact. BOP was - like the Maddox/Gulf of Tonkin incident and other false flag operations - constructed to create a pretext for an invasion of Cuba (similar to Operation Northwoods). It was meant to fail ... and Dulles and his acolytes sacrificed the Cuban exiles for their own ends. The entire rationale that JFK withheld or cancelled the air cover, and caused the invasion's failure, is baloney. And what CIA did to Manuel Ray and his anti-Castro organization, Junta Revolucionario Cubana (JURE) was treasonous, as evidenced with the Sylvia Odio incident. No wonder that JFK fired Dulles. Dulles played the same disinformation trick when he approached Truman after the assassination, and Hunt was his willing ghostwriter. Hunt would later be found planting false history yet again when the false Diem papers were found in his White House safe. These duplicitous characters were manufacturing false scurrilous history, to smear Kennedy's legacy and reputation, and further their own selfish agenda. Because the official record is doctored and convoluted, it takes some digging and persistence to piece it all together. How honest and intelligent historians can't see all of this today is baffling.

Hey Joe I don't know much about Tucker Carlson, and don't follow Fox News. At first blush, it seems he is just throwing that claim out there for attention and to stimulate controversy. It appears he has a penchant for that with other topics. Interestingly, his bio includes the following: He then went to Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, graduating in 1991 with a BA in history. Carlson's Trinity yearbook describes him as a member of the "Dan White Society", an apparent reference to the American political assassin who murdered San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk. After college, Carlson tried to join the Central Intelligence Agency, but his application was denied, after which he decided to pursue a career in journalism with the encouragement of his father, who advised him that "they'll take anybody". Tucker aside, it's no new revelation to me that certain CIA factions were behind the assassination. We've all been circling around that theme for many years, and the Agency certainly had the means, motive and opportunity. After all, JFK was on a path to radically restructure the CIA - after he learned of their duplicity with the Bay of Pigs (and other policy matters) - and he was significantly curtailing their ability to wage paramilitary operations and unilaterally direct foreign policy. When you read the first few Chapters of Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed, Jim makes it abundantly clear who orchestrated JFK's murder (and why). Kennedy was reversing the Dulles brothers' self-interest decisions ... in Indonesia and with Sukarno, in the Congo, and in Laos and Vietnam. When one reads what Dulles and Howard Hunt later said and wrote about Kennedy - all of which was misinformation and propaganda slander - it's difficult not to conclude that these individuals (and their cronies within the maverick Agency) conspired to whip up a Cuban exile frenzy and devise a plot to kill Kennedy and simplistically blame it on a pro-Castro Communist/Marxist lone nut. I am reminded of the Gary Underhill story, and how he alleged that he knew who was behind the assassination, and that "they" knew that he knew, and so he feared for his life. Underhill alleged that a "Far East" faction was responsible. I would note that is where Howard Hunt got his OSS start, operating behind enemy lines in China’s Yunnan province. Underhill was found dead six months later in what was questionably termed a suicide. William Turner looked into the death of Underhill and wrote about it in 1967 in Ramparts magazine. Tying in this thread to Walton Moore and the Domestic Operations Division, refer to a 2005 EF thread, where the following was shared by Bill Kelly: Underhill's connection to the CIA was via the Domestics Contacts Division, the same branch as J. Walton Moore in Dallas, who handled both DeMohrenschildt and Hugh Aynesworth. There's also records related to Moore's WWII OSS assignment to China with Charles Ford, which certainly qualifies as part of the far east group. So, it's hard not to suspect the CIA in this entire story. But I don't think it's necessarily a "bombshell". Knowledgeable people have known or suspected that for a long time. Merry Christmas! Gene

Thanks ... and good points about Hosty (as always). My thinking was more along the lines of Gerry Down's questions about J. Walton Moore, and how he was using George D. When you pointed out that you had studied de Mohrenschildt at some length - and while he remained in contact with Oswald, the Russian community was more interested in Marina. I recall reading somewhere (a close associate's characterization) that George being the eternal ladies' man, he was probably flirting with Marina, as opposed to "handling" Lee. So that got me to thinking that J. Walton Moore - who should've (ideally) been less interested in Lee - wasn't. Puzzling ... unfortunately, we don't know much about Moore, and he kind of disappears from the story after 1962. Staying more on-thread (Bannister, CIA), Emilio Americo Rodriguez sure seems like a person of interest, given his close associations. Plus, he was recruited by the one and only Henry Hecksher. And Arnesto and Emilio Rodriguez were at Oswald's arraignment. Then there's the individual who wrote the 1960 investigative report on Bannister's firm (GB&A), Elphege Oswall Dumond ... what a name. That Emilio worked closely with David Morales and Tony Sforza in Havana, and later at JMWAVE, is a red flag. When David points out that Morales' intelligence team of AMOTs was run by Rodriguez and Sforza in Havana, that sets off alarm bells for me. Gene

Larry I am a bit late to the party here, but in reading thru this particular thread - as far as J. Walton Moore's interests and who was investigating whom - it struck me that CIA and FBI would be more interested in monitoring Marina (not Lee). Ater all, she is a Russian national with family ties to their intelligence agencies, is suspiciously linked with a returning defector, and had all the appearances of a KGB "honey trap" while in Russia. One would think that all of the various agencies (INS, ONI, FBI, CIA, NSA) would be much more suspicious of her. Also, the White Russian community may have "liked" her more than Lee, but I'd think their suspicions would be heightened as well, which is why I don't buy their posturing as a protective cocoon for Marina, nor do I accept the standard rationale that they all just wanted to improve their Russian fluency. Happy holidays! Gene

Joe I share your concern here. The Domestic Operations Division was performing out of legal bounds in those days (not sure that it still persists) and clearly outside of the CIA's Charter. In the 60's, those were some of the most outlandish (and illegal) activities that CIA conducted. They targeted anti-war groups and American "dissidents", and conducted all manner of dirty tricks (e.g., Operation CHAOS). This was not aimed at something that threatened national security, and it strayed far from their original mandate of intelligence gathering ... which is the criticism that former President Truman made following the assassination. Those were some of the worst abuses (imho) and - if for example you dig into the entire Charles Manson story - you'll find that the intelligence agencies had a hand in that fiasco. Gene

Lance For what it's worth, I tend to agree with some of what you say here. I don't anticipate there ever being the "bombshell" that you allude to. To think such a record still exists is a stretch. And the individuals responsible for JFK's murder were very good at what they did (imho) ... and likely too smart to commit anything incriminating to paper. I've always had a difficult time wrapping my arms around the records release aspect of this case. Nor do I put much hope in it. Pouring thru the released records seems a tedious task, akin to putting a giant jigsaw puzzle together, using bits and pieces (i.e., little scraps of information) to gain more insight. In fairness, I suspect there are certain documents legitimately withheld for valid reasons (personal privacy, means/methods, confidential sources, investigative techniques, physical safety etc.). However, there are suspect individuals (e.g., William Harvey, David Morales, George Joannides) that appear to be inappropriately protected, even though its 50+ years later and they're no longer alive ... that sends a message that something damaging to the official story is still being withheld. Which is important to those still interested in knowing what really happened. Last, knowing a little about federal agencies, my experience is that they're about self-preservation, and protecting their image. While they are public servants who take an Oath, and public opinion is important, it's really not what drives them to change ... only Congress - which funds their activities and controls their staffing levels - can make that happen. Gene

Kirk That quote (about the worst thing ever done) was not from Robert Gates ... it was made by a knowledgeable investigator (a former NYC detective) that I had previously worked with, who was involved in the HSCA. He related to me how extraordinarily difficult it was to get any meaningful information from the CIA, in spite of being a Congressionally sanctioned investigator. And while I was skeptical (at the time) of CIA involvement in the plot, he was quite sure of it. When I asked him how sure, he said that he would bet a year's salary on it. Gene

Lance I come to this Forum to learn, and gain insight. Unfortunately, nothing you've ever posted has taught me anything or given me new perspective. You seem intent on demeaning/denigrating "conspiracy theorists" and telling posters that they're wrong or misguided (or worse). So, I see no substance or original work in what you post ... your arguments (as you call them) are simply unimpressive. Gene

This thread brings to mind former President Harry Truman's cautionary message in a column written for The Washington Post on December 22, 1963 (which he actually began writing nine days after Kennedy was killed). The headline said it all: “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence.” Truman, who had created the Agency, stated: “For some time, I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government ... injecting itself into peacetime cloak and dagger operations.” The timing of Truman’s column - one month to the day after Kennedy’s murder - has been suggestive to many who suspect CIA involvement. Truman didn't mention JFK's death in his column, but rather addressed the allegations of CIA complicity in the assassination obliquely: “This quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and subject for cold war enemy propaganda." Truman said he knew the first two directors of the CIA and called them “men of the highest character, patriotism and integrity” ... int the spirit of this EF Thread, he then added he could only assume the same about “all those who continue in charge.” But he nonetheless recommended that the CIA’s operational duties should be terminated. Truman also alluded to the CIA's subterfuge with the Bay of Pigs (where they tried to "mousetrap" JFK into a Cuban conflict), writing: " ... the most important thing was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions.” Truman apparently recognized that Dulles and his 'unrepentant associates' might not be above conspiring to get rid of a president they felt was soft on Communism and get even for their Bay of Pigs fiasco (see "Truman’s True Warning on the CIA" by Ray McGovern, Consortium News, 2013). The column didn't sit well with the recently fired Allen Dulles ... just four months later, Dulles paid Truman a visit and unsuccessfully tried to obtain a retraction. Undeterred, Dulles nonetheless fabricated a retraction, falsely claiming that Truman told him the Post article was “all wrong,” and that Truman “seemed quite astounded at it.” Jim DiEugenio has suggested that Dulles behavior constituted what prosecutors call "consciousness of guilt". However, Truman denied any such retraction in a June 1964 letter to Look magazine, where he restated his critique of covert action, emphasizing that he never intended the CIA to get involved in “strange activities.” As to considering this "disparate" group of Agency Directors over the past 20 years - and why it's unlikely they would collectively stonewall information on the Agency's involvement - I am reminded of what a former colleague, who had been an HSCA investigator, once shared with me about the CIA. I was new to the assassination backstories at the time (circa 1992, when Robert Gates was DCI) and had expressed skepticism about CIA's role in the assassination, and why it hadn't been eventually exposed and/or acknowledged. His response was simple and concise, and has resonated with me ever since: "What makes you think that's the worst thing that they ever did?" Gene

Lance I am a discerning reader, and I am unconvinced (and unimpressed) of your arguments. You add nothing of substance, and simply throw insults and childish retorts. What part of the story about what was withheld and left out (by the HSCA) - as far as the Lopez and Hardaway investigation - do you not understand? I am inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt, but what exactly are your credentials? What do you bring to the table in this discussion? If you can't be civil, or offer anything constructive, what is your intent here? Gene

Greg I would recommend that you read George Michael Evica's book "A Certain Arrogance: U.S. Intelligence's Manipulation of Religious Groups and Individuals in Two World Wars and the Cold War". The use of the Paines - and hiding behind Quaker institutions and individuals- is a classic Allen Dulles strategy. Evica notably wrote the following: Whoever masterminded the Oswald college action was knowledgeable about both the OSS's and the CIA's use of Quakers, officials of the World Council of Churches, and Unitarians as contacts, assets, and informants (often as double agents) and about the FBI's responsibility in tracking down and identifying Soviet illegals and double agents. Oswald was, therefore, a creature of someone in American counterintelligence who possessed precisely that double body of knowledge. American Spymaster Allen Dulles, based in Switzerland, had abused religious (largely Protestant) individuals and institutions for U.S. intelligence through two World Wars and the subsequent "Cold War." His brother John Foster Dulles also used major religious groups (again, largely Protestant) from 1937 through 1959 to further both his own and the American establishment's political and economic goals. The manipulation and subterfuge associated with the Paine's - and his close connections to their family - clearly has Dulles' imprimatur. Gene

Greg Your points are well taken. I do, however, find it "interesting" that the ersatz purchase of these incriminating firearms happens at just the same time that Ruth is 'courting' Marina, and the Oswalds as a couple are being separated by the Paines. I am not suggesting that Ruth had a hand in the supply of the weapons but given how close she becomes with Lee and Marina, it's conceivable that she knew about the mail orders. At some point, all of Lee's belongings are being stored in her garage, right? Perhaps the best one could ever conclude is that it's simply a coincidence ... but as I've stated previously, there appear to be quite a number of coincidences that surround Ruth Paine. And as Ian Fleming once stated: "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action. Gene

Thanks Denny. I started pulling this list of milestones a week or so ago, but it kept growing. There is more to add, like the incidents in the weeks prior to the assassination at the Bolton Ford dealership, the shooting range, etc. Plus, the paramilitary sightings at Lake Pontchartrain on the property of William McLaney. I am still compiling this list, but the Parrot Jungle anecdote is telling (similar to the Odio visit). The FBI issued reports on it, and it's been highlighted by Larry Hancock: Mrs. Lillian Spingler of Miami stated that she is employed as a clerk in the gift shop at the Parrott Jungle, a tourist attraction located in the Southwest section of Miami. In approximately the first week of November and very probably on November 1, 1963, on a Friday afternoon about 2:30 p.m., that a male whom she assumed was probably a Cuban approached her at her counter in the gift shop at the Parrot Jungle and asked her for a piece of paper. He remarked to her that he obtained much more knowledge from reading the newspapers than the average person because he reads every line and in between the lines. She felt that this individual was seeking attention, and although the store was empty at the time, she did not wish to give him any more time because he was a bit loud in his speech, and the manager of the gift shop does not want the clerks to engage in too much conversation with the visitors. She said that he continued to talk, however, although she did not pay too close attention, until he remarked that he did not like the way the Government of the President and Washington D.C., possibly a statement to the effect he intended to go to Washington, D.C., he stated something to the effect of “shooting between the eyes.” She then realized that he must have been referring to shooting President KENNEDY, and she paid closer attention to him. He continued that he had a friend who was smarter than himself who could speak more languages than himself, including Russian. He said this friend was a Marxist and an American citizen, who - 3 – had served in the armed forces. At this point, he mentioned that "Lee" (using the given name for the first and only time, in place of his previous references to his friend), is a sharpshooter, and that he has a very good eye. He further remarked that his friend was brilliant, but that he did not know where his friend was at that time, although he believed he was either in Texas or Mexico. Spingler thought that the unknown Cuban might be a person with a mental problem, and that he was, in fact, referring to General Lee. Gene

Thanks John ... like many, I have tried to unravel the enigma that is Lee Oswald. Was he a doppelganger (and John Armstrong's theory), was he witting (or just used), did he work for Customs and/or the FBI as an informant, why did he defect (and return with Marina)? Richard Nagell's observations. While there are many views on his Bonafide's, his short life has been meticulously studied and is well-chronicled. Gene

Thanks Jim. The Paines simply fascinate me, and not just because of their proximity to the Oswalds. They have local relevance for me, as a Philadelphia native, and I am familiar with many of the locations that Ruth and Michael frequented, including where they were married. The Providence Friends Meetinghouse - which I have been to - is a Historic Quaker meeting house on North Providence Road in Media, Delaware County, Pennsylvania. The meeting house and adjoining burial grounds (no longer used) were deeded in 1935. In 1955, Providence Monthly Meeting became part of what is still an active worship center today. Michael Paine spent two years at Harvard before transferring to Swarthmore; he left after a year. Ruth studied at Antioch College in her home state of Ohio. After a two-year courtship, she and Michael married at Media Friends Meeting, just down the road from Swarthmore College, on December 28, 1957. Ruth’s correspondence, and related materials are found in the Ruth Paine Hyde Papers on Marina Oswald, RG5/109, a permanent collection of Swarthmore’s Friends Historical Library donated by Paine to the College in 1985. Here is what the college bulletin states: “The endlessly probed story of JFK’s assassination isn’t complete without Ruth and Marina. Their papers at FHL can be read as a tiny beacon in this chapter of American history—a light illuminating the Quaker ideals of community and friendship—or as a complicating shade hinting at a darker truth. Whatever conclusion readers come to, these files, housed forever on Swarthmore’s campus, are fascinating reading”. Gene

David I realize that Oswald is an enigma, and there are many views of what he was up to (witting or not). But there has been quite a lot of legitimate research into his young life ... it's actually been under a microscope for more than 50 years now. So, all of those milestones I mention (in the 9-month period of March-November 1963) are well-recorded and independently substantiated. All that you have to do is connect the dots and form your own conclusion. What I didn't include is the years prior to 1963. The Paines moved to Irving Texas in September 1959, at the same time that Oswald was defecting to the USSR. Bill Simpich has done some good work in analyzing this period, stating that the ostensible reason was for Michael to work at Bell Helicopter ... but the timing was remarkable. Simpich points out that it was the only weekend that Oswald spent in Irving between 1956 to 1962. While he believes that the Paines were being used or manipulated themselves (likely by Allen Dulles), they were certainly up to something. Michael and Ruth moved to the Dallas suburb of Irving in 1959, during the same week that Oswald came to visit his mother in Irving before he left for the USSR. When Oswald came back to the area in 1962, the Paines were still there. It was like they had been waiting for him. Wittingly or not, the Paines were now in an ideal locale to assist Oswald, particularly if his trip to the USSR was unsuccessful. When he returned to the US, Oswald sought out Peter Gregory, a so-called "oil consultant" who had immigrated from Russia in 1923. It seems that everyone now wanted to learn Russian from Marina ... Gregory had his son Paul take Russian lessons from her (a storyline that Ruth will later use). Notably, Peter Gregory and Max Clark later assisted the Secret Service in translating a lengthy interrogation of Marina after the assassination. Fast forward to early 1963, Ruth Paine met the Oswalds and George de Mohrenschildt at a party held by Everett Glover on February 22, 1963. Ruth was introduced to Marina because Glover knew that she was studying the Russian language. Shortly afterwards, Ruth asked Marina to live with her so that she could "improve her Russian". Michael and Ruth then ostensibly split up and were living in different houses. Ruth's claim that she wanted to improve her Russian (as a reason to take in Marina) rings hollow to me. Despite Ruth’s years of Russian study, her Middlebury roommate described Ruth’s Russian as “very poor”. Ruth went so far as to tutor one young student in Russian during 1963. But notably, there is no evidence that she continued her study of Russian after Lee Oswald’s death. You are entitled to your opinion - one that I won't try to change, and respect - but it is difficult for me to accept all of this as innocent happenstance. Gene