Jonathan Cohen

Is this comment really necessary? Why are you bringing race into the conversation?

So what? Do you expect everyone who ever interacted with Oswald to process his connection to the Kennedy assassination in the exact same way?

In the context of Oswald's itinerant life, anybody who knew him for that amount of time has to be considered to have known him well. I just don't understand why people here are so quick to instantly dismiss this man's recollections.

Someone who intimately knew the Oswalds for an extended period of time in Dallas — in fact, one of the only people who did — is providing “limited information” ?

If you’d have listened to the interview, you’d hear him say he is suspicious of Jack Ruby’s role in the assassination. The larger point is that people here are lamely dismissing Gregory out of hand while totally ignoring the unique perspective provided by his rare, close proximity to the Oswalds at a critical period.

Oswald was also plagued by dyslexia and poor spelling, making it very difficult for him to express himself through the written word. As can be seen in the New Orleans radio debates, he was pretty well-spoken, although often lacking in the ability to have a more deep, nuanced conversation about the subjects at hand.

There's really nothing out of the ordinary about any of this, especially since the Russians had every right to be suspicious of Oswald's true motivations and intent, based on his erratic behavior. Once they realized there was nothing special about him, they promptly sent him to toil away in Minsk, hundreds of miles from Moscow. I find it perfectly reasonable that they continued surveillance of him afterwards -- this was standard KGB operating procedure during the Cold War. You're well aware that this statement has been disputed, with a plausible alternate explanation given by an old friend of yours here.

Please show me one KGB file that alleges Oswald was a CIA agent.

I do not believe Oswald had a witting, working relationship with the CIA. I am willing to consider the possibility he was utilized without his knowledge, but I find the evidence for this to be weak. His actions in Russia are entirely consistent with a young, naive man trying to find his place in the world, and then becoming resigned and embittered by his decision once he realizes life in Russia is no more fulfilling than it was in the United States. So, if you grant that I'm correct regarding Oswald's actions once inside Russia, what IS it that you think he was supposed to be doing on behalf of the U.S .government? Harmlessly whiling away his time working in a radio factory? Making friends with Argentinian expats? Writing imaginary diary entires to be someday read by... whom? What's the point? I don't have an alternate explanation, because numerous other pieces of evidence do not comport with the idea of Oswald as a CIA agent, witting or unwilling. It is simply one of many paradoxes in this case that cannot be easily deciphered. What do you mean by "the Snyder charade" ?

This is a preposterous analogy. Gregory was one of the few people in Dallas intimately familiar with both Oswalds, and the fact the he only knew them for a short period of time in no way diminishes his point of view. You also seem to be forgetting that his father also knew the Oswalds and was pressed into service as Marina's translator after the assassination. Why is it so hard to believe that a close acquaintance of Oswald's would have suspected him of the assassination based on their own personal experience in his company?

People on this board are already dismissing Paul Gregory because of his professional background, which is absurd. To my ears, this is a very compelling interview that provides a lot of insight into Oswald's personality, as well as his unsuitability for being part of any kind of plot or conspiracy with others.

Jim, I'm not disputing any of Betsy Wolf's research. In fact, I applaud her for going to such great lengths to try to uncover what was really going on with Oswald's files. However, just because the paper trail seems to indicate Oswald had a working relationship with the CIA does not mean he actually did. Further, his actions once in Russia are completely inconsistent with his being an agent of the U.S. government, witting or otherwise.

I'll refrain from dignifying your ignorant comment about whether I'm "up to speed on current developments in the case," because it's clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about. In the absence of any actual evidence for Oswald being a "witting asset" of the CIA, Bagley's statement is nothing more than one person's opinion.

She made up every detail and story about Oswald being involved in any of this.

Seriously.. how can anyone who considers his or herself a student of the Kennedy assassination still believe one word of what Judyth Baker says?

Who says they "knew" he was going to defect? I would expect the defector, false or otherwise, to keep his or her mouth shut so as to not attract a tremendous amount of undue attention. Oswald did the exact opposite. Do you believe officials at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow were purposefully duped by conspirators back in Washington as to the true nature of Oswald's arrival in Russia? You can "suspect" it all you want, but the fact remains that Oswald's actions in Russia are thoroughly inconsistent with him being a part of a U.S. intelligence program, as are his well-documented fears that he would face prosecution from the U.S. government once he returned to the country.

No, I'm not a Warren Commission advocate. But I refuse to blindly accept conspiracy theorist canards that are not built on any actual EVIDENCE. In this case, just because the CIA handled Oswald's files (or lack of them) in a suspicious manner DOES NOT mean Oswald was part of a false defector program. There is also no evidence Oswald's Russia episode was urged on by anybody or anything other than his own imagination, and even less evidence he was acting as an agent of the American government once he actually was in Russia, considering he was under near constant KGB surveillance. Do false defectors and/or government agents write long (and sure to be intercepted) letters to their families in the U.S. defending their decisions and ideologies?

"Who we know was a CIA asset as part of a false defector program" ? You have absolutely ZERO hard evidence that this is true. Oswald's behavior in Russia also shows no evidence of him being complicit in such a thing.

Ron, the answer is that we simply don't know, and probably never will. There is zero hard evidence of Oswald meeting with any confederates in Dallas in the days/weeks prior to the assassination, so who would this "contact" have been? By what means would it have been established that this is where they were to meet? Oswald could barely rub two nickels together for most of his post-Minsk life. The idea that he'd leave all the money he had in the world behind with his wife for some mundane reason doesn't ring true for me.

What do you expect her to do about it? Call the police? Rip it up in dramatic fashion while Oswald watches?

And those researchers would be profoundly mistaken. Even Powers didn't believe Oswald had anything whatsoever to do with his being shot down.

The operative word here being “with Marina.” There’s no evidence this trip was meant to include Lee.

You actually believe a word of what Judyth Baker says?

Ron, neither Marina nor Ruth ever mentioned anything about a planned shopping trip with Lee.. so I don't see how this theory holds any water. Lee left his wedding ring and all the money he had in the world on the dresser at Ruth's house before he left for the TSBD on 11/22/1963. Are these the actions of someone who expected to return to his family as normal later that day?

You're seeing light reflecting off the windshield.