Allen Lowe

I'm with Greg on the problem of believing the cops; case after case is documented in the USA of police taking the path of least resistance. And when I worked for the Mayor of a major city some 20 years ago I remember the POLICE CHIEF telling me that "cops are the laziest fu**ing people I ever met."

well, the other possibility - because we know something like this likely happened on the 6th floor on November 22, 1963 - is that 1) the people at the house were scared and intimidated into saying they saw nothing (see Duke Lane on some of his thoughts re: November 22); 2) The tape was faked (because we know that A LOT of evidence in this case has been faked); 3) That, with the above, someone came in, told Demohrhenschildt that unless he cooperated, his family and everyone at the house would be murdered, and shot him point blank and posed the scene. the problem is, Len, that so much has been tampered with a forged and made up in this whole business, that my above 3 points are far from impossible, which is an extremely sad thing.

Jim is right - his testimony in front of the House Committee was his chance to prove what he really knew, and it turned into one contradiction after another.

having read all that, I would ask: 1) was there a continuous beeping or just the intermittent ones which are explained, in the report, as specific people entering and exiting? 2) if we believe it was murder, why no sightings of anyone or anything which indicated illicit entry? There were people around. Were the killers just lucky? 3) yes, cremated, but many people are cremated every year. This is a family decision. 4) bear in mind that the "murder" of DeMohrenschildt is not essential to the conspiracy belief - he may have been under unbearable pressure from various others involved in the assassination, there may even have been threats against his daughter and other family members; he may have seen suicide as a relatively honorable way out of things - espeically knowing that he was about to come under Congressional scrutiny. 5) there is a quote from him somewhere that I cannot put my finger on in which he indicates that, once it became common knowledge that he had a relationship with Oswald, things just started to crash for him - I may be remembering this wrongly, not sure. But the above is not compelling evidence of suicide (even bearing in mind Lisa Pease's note of the absence of an exit wound). personally I believe Demohrenschildt's role was "need to know." He managed Oswald, he watched things and took care of certain logistical things; but there is little evidence that he was aware that the assassination was in progress.

I think they were trying to get us to believe he was leaning LEFT -

thanks for clearing that up, Duncan. But how do we know your source is any better than mine? Also, I thought you said that you DID NOT say it was a plastic up.

Duncan - not to belabor; but if someone see that something "appears to be ____" than they are leaning toward that explanation. I was merely pointing out that it could not be a plastic cup. If I said something "appears to be a telephone" and the picture was from 1492, it would be appropriate to point out the anachronism.

well, Duncan - you said plastic cup - which does not have to be clear and which, as I said, did not yet exist. Not a big deal. Unless he was holding a cup-shaped frangible-firing grenade-sending 2-in-the-chamber(lain) umbrella launcher. Not sure when that was patented.

just an FYI, the first patent for a plastic cup, according to my sources, was not awarded until 1964. And I'm old enough to remember that, in '63, people were not using clear plastic cups like that.

to me the best evidence that JFK would have withdrawn from Vietnam - aside from Newman's entire book - are his actions at the Bay of Pigs and during the Cuban Missile Crises (during which he, I say without exaggeration, quite literally saved the world by pretty much doing the opposite what his military advisers told him to do). And let us not forget what LBJ told Galbraith when JKG was resigning over Viet policy - I am paraphrasing here, sorry, but according to Jim Galbraith it was "I know you don't like what I'm doing but if I didn't do it you won't believe what those guys would do" - at which point he picked up a campaign sign that said "all the way with Curtis LeMay." James Galbraith, btw, is smart and accessible - we have emailed back and forth several times - and is probably already known here; still I would check out this link to get a sense of what JFK was up against in those days: http://prospect.org/article/did-us-military-plan-nuclear-first-strike-1963

I agree to most of that - however - 1) "contacts" do not change the fact that Oswald was close to few people; sure he knew lots of people and had plenty of contacts (so does my son, not to make this too personal, but he's Aspergers); but he lets few into his inner life, and I believe the same of Oswald; this is one prime reason, post-assassination, we see so little detail about Oswald's actions, movements, true beliefs. It is as though there was a barrier between Oswald and everyone else; he would be happy to talk about the things that interested HIM (politics, etc) but made very little effort to connect with others, unless it was operational or related to a personal agenda (also classic Aspergers). This also, and not coincidentally, made him a perfect patsy. 2) DeMohrenschildt was a liberal; I have no doubt about that; but you're right, he was also an a-moral opportunist; the rest is speculation (it makes no sense that his teaching at a Southern black University was some kind of cover for his attempts to prove he was pro-Negro). I agree on the basic points you make about him, but the other 80 percent is speculation. And I still believe his decision to teach at an all-black University is significant; it shows a degree of personal politic which, progressive or not as Texas may have been, could not have been common among White Southerners in the 1960s. His Liberalism is further proved by his charity toward Oswald in I am a Patsy; and let's face it, Liberals led the cover up of the JFK assassination and felt no moral compunction about lying and burying the whole thing. This was the USA in the 1960s. Liberals supported the CIA; liberals supported the overthrow of Castro. (also, if he lost all that money because of the assassination, then his true interests lay elsewhere; this would tend to indicate he did not know there was an assassination in the works). As for George KNOWING all of that - knowing all of the interests who conspired to kill JFK - there is just no proof. I tend to think if he had, that his wife, at the very least, would have said more than just that she believed it was a conspiracy. In that particular conversation she sounds like she believes this but that she really knows very little. as for, again, his decision to teach at that University; I am reminded of the great wave of German immigrants who were the ones who provided musical educations for African Americans in the late 19th and early 20th century, accepting African American students at a time when domestic teachers would not. As a foreign national DeMohrenschildt likely was less encumbered by prevailing racial attitudes.

I hear you - just don't forget to use your CIA filter. I think DeMohrenschildt is our most solid link to Oswald. He shows a lot of insight into the man. Though some may disagree, I don't think he knew what he was babysitting Oswald for, though he knew there was something going on operationally. As for his politics, they were, I think, like Oswald's, complicated. And let's not forget that the CIA in those days was even siphoning funds through liberal groups in the name of anti-communism (something which got Allard Lowenstein into some trouble in later years)and so was not necessarily (in those pre-disclosure days) seen as a purely reactionary entity.

"there is a considerable amount of blood around the body but people normally bleed very little after their hearts’ stop and there are no signs of foot prints." Len - if anything, this supports the theory of someone having murdered DeMohrenschildt - a suicide shooter will do something like put the weapon in their mouth, will try to commit the act so death is quick - if a third party was involved there was more likely to be some kind of resistance, and the shooting would more likely have been rushed and not necessarily efficiently done - with a quick exit to avoid detection, in such a way that might have left the victim basically bleeding to death, but still alive. just a theory, but one that, given your thoughts on excessive bleeding, does make more sense than a suicide scenario.

Greg, it's interesting to hear about Texas' relative progressivism - the I Am A Patsy ms used to be somewhere on line, I read it maybe 5 years ago (and I may be recalling incorrectly but I seem to remember that Reitzes, who at one time was a very convincing Conspiracy supporter, had something to do with it's placement on the net). One thing that I do not think has been addressed in terms of photographic evidence and Oswald is that older photography is really just an analog representation of reality - and so will vary. Think of yourself in multiple photos, even today; some people look quite different in different shots, even at the same angle, in the same lighting. So although Oswald's features to seem to evolve (devolve?) from photo to photo, who knows? Though I do think there was clearly misrepresentation going on re: Oswald, having read Armstrong a while back, I think the scheme he presents is just too complicated to be real. Though in the JFK case I keep finding the need to readjust my opinions as reality moves closer and closer to the ridiculous. Things I never would have believed 40 years ago just keep turning out to be unfortunately true.

yes, Aspergers types are often fascinated with process - and hence a little OCD - once they land on something they tend not to let go. Perseveration is very characteristic. And yes, we came to this conclusion completely separately. One of the things that always really bothered me about characterizations of Oswald was the way in which the LN'ers tried to call him a loser and stupid - classic ways of insulting the learning disabled. There are some comments from his former fellow Marines that go this way, and I have seen such turncoats as Gus Russo call him a loser and worse. It always reminded me of the way these kids were treated when I was growing up - in those days, before anything was really diagnosed, people called them 'stupid' and 'crazy.' These disabilities make them into loners, isolate them and force them to do everything on their own. To me the most interesting and charitable portrait of Oswald is in DeMohrenschildt's book, I Am A Patsy. Whatever DeMohrenschildt's role in all this (and I tend to think his was a very compartmentalized assignment and that there was a lot he did NOT know) he clearly understood what an intelligent and interesting guy Oswald was (he called Oswald, IIRC, 'the first hippy'). (btw, and off topic, I also tend to think that DeMorhenschildt was, like Oswald, somewhat to the Left politically, in spite of some of his history; I think it was Dick Russell who interviewed him when he was teaching at an all-black college).

there were definitely multiples, in some way or shape. Though I know it probably has nothing to do with this, has anyone else ever noticed that the unidentified guy photographed handing out leaflets with Oswald in New Orleans happens to look a lot like Oswald?

I'm a newbie here, officially, though I've been lurking around here about 10 years, believe it or not; I've been in touch with Greg Parker, because I've long believed that Oswald was a classic case of Aspergers (I have a 23 year old son with son with that condition); here's some of what I wrote to Greg in a recent email: "(it is wrong to say) that Aspergers kids live with their parents, can't join organizations, etc. I see people with Aspergers in all realms of life, I work with a few; and many CREATIVE people have it in some way or form - I'm a jazz musician and have known about 50 others with this characteristic; many Aspergers people are high functioning (a cross diagnosis is PDD NOS, Pervasive Development Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified) - think Benny Goodman, for one example (do a little reading on his odd and socially inappropriate behavior). just think of that guy you worked with once who was real smart but did not know how to get along with people (for example, all the IT guys in computerland) - this is very common, Oswald was very likely in this category; it is why some people thought he was idiot, others that he was brilliant (and I will say, having listed to that radio show he did, that he had the classic Aspergers way if talking; a little self conscious and stumbling, yet very logical)." let me add that this might also account for some of Oswald's political contradictions; though I agree he was a tool of the CIA and Naval intelligence, hearing him speak on politic leads me to believe that he was sincere in his neo-Marxist pronouncements. This, too, I see as part of his Asperger's, his failure to see the conflict between his various behaviors. Someone like this is very easily manipulable, overly trusting and naive at the same time that he is capable of certain kinds of sophistication.

it only goes from 1950-1970 - and Haley is, to me, a major figure.

Allen Lowe is a saxophonist, guitarist and jazz historian who lives in South Portland, Maine. He has written books on the blues, jazz history, and American pop, and is a Visiting Professor at the Berklee College of Music in Boston, Massachusetts. His book on the history of rock and roll will be published in 2012.