Allen Lowe

Pat I usually trust your judgement more than mine on these matters, but he called her twice. There’s no way someone would call twice about a job, speak to the same person both times, and not indicate either the job or the importance of a response. If Ruth didn’t indicate any interest or pass any information on, as she clearly didn’t, it’s more than just careless negligence. Everything else she did in these matters was conscientious and to the point.

There you go, Greg. Ruth did not recall getting the phone call, so she clearly didn’t pass the information onto Oswald, and we know Adams told her where he was from and why he was calling. Or is it like that Marina CIA/FBI mixup? He told her he was calling about a job, and she thought he was asking for a job. Yeah that’s the ticket.

let'd go to the Adams affadavit - he called TWICE and advised who he was and why he was calling. He was obviously talking to Ruth, whom you would have thought, if she really cared about LHO and his family, would have told LHO and given him a chance at this other (and, as we know, higher paying) job. She never told him. If you had been looking for work, and even if you found work, wouldn't you want to be advised that somebody else was offering you a job? Of course you would. But you wouldn't hear a thing if Ruth Paine was hiding the information. She knew about the offer, she took TWO calls about the other job, but she never said a word to LHO. Come on guys, use your heads and your logic. Why are LN'ers so intellectually dishonest?

do you guys ever actually read the stuff that you post? From Greg's post: "Adams called the Ruth Paine home in Irving asking for Lee. Ruth answered the phone and said Lee was not there. Adams left a message for Lee to call, so that he could tell Lee of the Trans Texas Airways job offer. " Hello? HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? (Besides Ruth, I mean).

Thanks Greg for, as usual, giving us info which proves the OPPOSITE of what you think it proves. Your method always saves me a lot of time. You have helped us establish that Adams spoke to Ruth and told her about the other, higher paying job. just please be sure I never hire you to defend ME. I hope you’ll continue working for the other side.

Jim, isn’t it true that Ruth heard of another possible job after Oswald was already accepted at the book depository, but never told Oswald about it? I wish she had been confronted about this in the film. If it is true, it’s pretty damning, since from what I’ve heard this other job paid more.

Forget it. That has nothing to do with what I said. Read my last post. Otherwise I give up.

Sandy what are you doing? You said this in your last post to me: “Your statement that I don't know what I'm talking about is merely your opinion. Which is fine -- believe what you want -- but you should make clear it's your opinion.“ did you read that last sentence after you wrote it? It’s directly contrary to what you just said: “Half the things I say about the JFK assassination are my opinion. Same is true with most people here. It's sort of understood..”

I was merely repeating your own words back at you. You should’ve made clear it was your opinion.

thanks for posting that.

I seem to recall Thompson saying in that first book that one of the rear shots was something of a dud.

"I see," said the blind man.

well, without a detailed analysis and an explanation of HOW the results correspond to the language of a 10 year old we are left with just more hearsay. That is a data-based decision, but you continually cite it without data. You are correct, I don't know what I am talking about, because I am relying upon your information and you don't know what you are talking about. So we both sit here in the dark.

ok; well researched. So I take it you do believe this bullet - the one found and then initialed - caused all those wounds in JFK and Connally?

What is this based on? If his comprehension was that of a 10 year old Russian, that's not really the same thing as a 10 year old native Russian, based as it is on an evaluation by an unidentified individual who was presumably an American. It's an equivalency, but in no way can it be used to prove this case. I would like to see some data, how it was determined, when and by who.

and there's this, from an article by Thompson and Aguilar: "A declassified 6/20/64 FBI AIRTEL memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas (“SAC, Dallas” – i.e., Special Agent in Charge, Gordon Shanklin) to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “For information WFO (FBI Washington Field Office), neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet … .” [Fig. 5 - Page 1, Page 2] Whereas the FBI had claimed in CE #2011 that Tomlinson and Wright had told Agent Odum on June 12, 1964 that CE #399 “appears to be the same” bullet they found on the day of the assassination, nowhere in this previously classified memo, which was written before CE #2011, is there any corroboration that either of the Parkland employees saw a resemblance. Nor is FBI agent Odum’s name mentioned anywhere in the once-secret file, whether in connection with #399, or with Tomlinson or with Wright."

that's not my understanding of how Josiah Thompson described his interviews; if anything, he implied that Tomlinson's change in testimony was later, after he, like more than one law enforcement official, had been put under pressure. Not to mention Thompson's location of Odum (I believe it was) who very clearly contradicted the Warren Commission's claims about 399. And as Thompson added: "John Hunt has done some very good work in the Archives, has examined CE 399 with exquisite precision, and has determined that Elmer Todd's initials are not on Commission Exhibit 399. So this is, this is a running crap game! " So, as far as I am concerned, end of story.

Maybe I missed it, but doesn’t anyone find it extremely amusing that Roe and Parnell have basically corroborated the theory that 399 was falsified evidence? Both Tomlinson and Wright, IIRC, told Thompson that the bullet in evidence was NOT the one they found. So the presence of initials proves that this is bogus, planted evidence; the forgery was done on the wrong bullet! good job boys.

Wow that’s amazing Tracy. Over the years this bullet has been eyeballed up close - not in a picture - by countless people who never saw these initials. Didn’t I also see you tell the head of elections in Georgia that there were 11,000 missing votes? Oh no, that was Trump. Same difference.

While I agree with you in principal Pat, there’s just something about these “who shot John” exchanges and the fact that they are coming up like this. Given the clear context of Kennedy‘s death not that many years before, is it not possible that they were playing a spycraft game with double meanings? Even if only for their own amusement? Just a theory.

The difference is that there were no witches; but there are assets and informants. So it’s not the same thing.

You’re missing the point. There are many many documents still to be released that Reynolds would not have access to because no one has access to them. This is the kind of very dishonest reference that you guys make that doesn’t take into account the whole picture, but only that part of the picture which benefits you.

Greg you are one of the worst offenders in this respect. The way you countered the claims about the Dean Andrews call, or Marina’s reference to Ruth as being in the CIA, was fantastically dishonest. You took speculation that was contradicted by actual testimony, and then tried to pass it off as truth. I honestly can’t read your work anymore, it is so ponderously inaccurate. So please spare me a response to even this. I can’t get through your writing anymore.

“Ruth's brother-in-law John Hoke applied for a position at the CIA” - that’s about all we need to know. Does anyone here know anyone who ever applied for job in the CIA? These guys were trying to make it a family business. Even if he did get turned down. Who do you supposed suggested he apply in the first place? And re: “Max Good claims that there are dozens of withheld/redacted records on the Paines and Ruth specifically. If he knows this is true, he should know what the records/RIFs are. Please provide! If these are records which are withheld but are not in the JFK collection, please give details. [emphasis added by W. Tracy Parnell]” How about the records that remain withheld and unseen by anyone? What is your (and Greg’s) source?

I don’t believe that the Secret Service were told to procure prostitutes for JFK. This is just more BS rationale for either their failures or their plotting against him. There’s just absolutely no evidence that this ever was done. Give me some evidence other than what these guys, who clearly couldn’t be trusted (see Abe Bolden) said.