Paul Brancato

Probably twice that.

Joe - who would have thought of asking that question at that press conference? Someone in on the conspiracy to frame Oswald. Misdirection spread by Walker?, who seemed intent on making sure he had an alibi so he wouldn’t be suspect himself. The unknown reporter’s question feels like an important clue, occurring when it did. It leads me to think it was Walker who called the National Zeitung with his Oswald story. It implies that Walker was in on framing Oswald. It surely fits, and funny enough it is the first theory I ever read, coming to me as a NYC 15 yr old via the Communist press (the Guardian?) shortly after the assassination, pointing at the Minutemen and naming Walker himself.

Good question Joe. But the reporter who asked the question might not have known anything. Could have been a stab in the dark, might have been set up with the question. We simply don’t know, even who he was.

And Walker shouted it from the rooftops for the rest of his days. But as he told it, he found out it was Oswald from someone inside DP shortly after the incident himself. Of course his public rants only began after Nov 22. I don’t recall Walker recounting any of this until after the National Zeitung article a week later. The question lingers - who called who? Did Walker call the German newspaper or did they call him? Even more importantly, who told who that Oswald was the potshot dude? If there was evidence of Walker knowing who shot at him dating to before Nov 22 then we’d have an answer. But we don’t, so I think we should remain open to the possibility that the editor of National Zeitung originated the story. We don’t even know whether this explosive new info on Walker’s shooter was revealed between the Nov 23rd phone call and the Nov 29th publication. That’s 6 days - lots of time for responsible parties to take control of the news cycle. I’d welcome info showing that Walker talked about Oswald before Nov 22, or even in the week following.

Indeed, indoctrinate is a strange word to use when describing one’s own dive into Marxism.

I guess there are a few possibilities, but the one that makes sense to me is that his Marxist bonafides were a cover, a deliberate act, executed over several years. I don’t think it likely that he was vehemently right wing either, but if I had to pick one I would choose the latter. I went into this will Paul Hoch 35 years ago, and he would only say the truth was obvious to him, but wouldn’t reveal to me what that truth was. I think Paul believed the Marxist story and could tell that I was doubtful. Years later I listened to Oswald’s New Orleans radio appearance, and it seemed to me that he sounded too doctrinaire. I grew up in a Communist/Marxist milieu, and never heard anyone talk the way Oswald did, like he had studied the lingo as part of his masquerade. Ask yourself - why did he go to Russia? On his own, in exploration of something to believe in, or as part of a false defector program? He never defected. And he was already being groomed while stationed in the far east. His first US contact upon his return was connected to the ABN - Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations. Upon moving to Dallas he and Marina were welcomed by the White Russians there. He was the sole member of a FPCC chapter which he created in New Orleans. Even the FPCC may have been an intelligence gathering front. The street altercation with Bringuier seems staged. When I started the thread called The Adventures of Lee Harvey Oswald it was in hopes that we would see him not as a dupe or a loner, but as a young but brilliant undercover operative.

These days there is enormous division in the US. That is not an explanation for why there was opposition to the WC report. The split then was between the government and media on one side and the people on the other. Today’s LN crowd is an extension of the media and government coverup of the killing of a beloved president. They have refined their arguments but they cannot really rebut the enormous evidence of multiple shooters and thus conspiracy.

It would seem, outwardly, like a teenager having fun. Heck, I can relate. But Nagell speaks of this as a girlfriend. So the question of why she is hanging around this 18 year old marine is important. In trying to get inside his head I’m trying to imagine what assignments he may have been on. Perhaps he was being trained in survival, in keeping your cool. I don’t think he was ordinary, so looking at his actions as teenage lust or pranks just feels too shallow. I mean, look what happens when he gets back home. Almost immediately he’s on assignment to Russia. He’s 19? He renounces his citizenship - but oh wait, he doesn’t actually. By this time he’s pretty fluent in Russian. How? By his own initiative? Just wanted to be a great spy, figured this was his meal ticket? It’s all the steps that happen right after he leaves the far East that make me wonder about those early adventures in the spy world of Atsugi. If I have some timeline details mixed up please correct me!

I think if Oswald had a Japanese girlfriend he met at the Queen Bee there is a strong likelihood she was Yakuza connected.

That’s the question I keep asking myself. I’ve been rereading parts of Dick Russell’s book The Man Who Knew Too Much, which is mostly about Nagell. The parts on Oswald in Japan are particularly interesting. He was 18, and according to Nagell meeting with Nicolai G Eroshkin, who he says was the subject of a CIA effort to turn him. Was Oswald trying to induce him to do so as part of this recruitment effort? Did Oswald really have a girlfriend who worked at the Queen Bee? I’m hoping Larry can answer that. So his personal beliefs remain a puzzle, and so do his actions which to me seem directed by US Intelligence. I have no doubts his move to the USSR was officially sanctioned, same goes for his actions in New Orleans. So what about as an 18 year old in Atsugi?

‘What if LHO was spying on GDM’? A question no one to my knowledge has ever asked, an interesting one. GDM had a lot to say about LHO, but how much of it should we believe? And what would LHO have said about George had he lived? It’s good to know that Hancock and Boylan are looking anew at Oswald. We’ve examined his time in the Soviet Uinion and how he got there, yet still don’t have all questions answered. We know far less about what he was up to in Japan (as an 18 yr old), or when and how he learned Russian. What occurs to me rather overwhelmingly is that when viewed in its entirety it’s an impressive resume, and for such a young man. Larry says, and I agree, to paraphrase, that the WC flooded us with words about him, yet slanted their overall picture of him to fit the facts as they needed them to be. In some way it’s a miracle LHO got to Dealey Plaza in one piece. Blind luck? I’d say street smarts, intuition, training under pressure. Whether we call him an agent or asset, he was a highly skilled one able to penetrate behind enemy lines and navigate to safer shores. It’s hard to put oneself in his young shoes at the age of 17 when he writes to the Socialist Party three weeks before joining the Marines. He was a chameleon. Descriptions of him, behaviors and beliefs, vary greatly. I recall listening to his radio ‘confrontations’ in New Orleans, and having the distinct impression he was playing a part, that in some way he and Ed Butler were on the same team. Bottom line - no dummy, hyper intelligent and clever. Even now no can say for sure what he believed.

I’ve often thought that endlessly researching Oswald was somewhat of a distraction, because rightly or wrongly I decided early on that he wasn’t a shooter at Dealey Plaza, and I was much more interested in the shooters than the patsy. But like everyone else I’ve read numerous books exploring in detail what is known about Oswald’s life. After recent conversations with the gifted Robert Montenegro I began to question some basic assumptions I had made about Oswald, such as he was clueless, reckless, not particularly bright, a pawn in someone’s game, a husband and father who could barely keep himself together, a somewhat ordinary guy who got caught up in things beyond his control, a man of uncertain morals working for an array of largely unseen handlers. Kind of a Where’s Waldo surrounded by the footprints of intelligence doing what he was told yet not understanding why. You get the picture. But is that real?

Frederic. - did Pugibet ever say who hired him?

Paul Hoch moved into the LN camp too. 30+ years ago when I was introduced to him by Peter Dale Scott, he was not.

Of course. Big waste of energy, plus it’s subtle propaganda.

Good try Ron - I’m with you

Thank you. A statesman unlike any we’ve had since.

Jim - do you have a link to the 1957 Algeria speech, filmed or text?

According to this summary of the book FDR was a bigot too. The other book you mention, the Secret War against the Jews, which I am reading now, is very interesting too.

Jim - this is incredible and much needed work. Amazing thing is that no one wants to actually discuss your well articulated and researched points. The second essay really hits home, and I’m really looking forward to the next two installments.

Robert - what is the evidence on Joseph Kennedy supporting Hitler?

Agree. And earlier when I said I thought much the same I was referring to your earlier post questioning why, if JFK could be blackmailed, would he be assassinated? So many books and movies smear him and besmirch his legacy. They seem to be part of a concerted effort. And it has by and large worked. I’m thinking of my baby boomer friends. After years of talking about JFK with them there is only one out of a few hundred that opened his mind enough to read a book I recommended, and it had a profound effect on him. It’s some kind of massive brainwashing, and these hit pieces are part of it. Headlines stick, and then everyday life intrudes and they are too busy dealing with hosts of problems. They remain unsuspecting of the true extent to which their lives today were impacted by events 60 years ago.

I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall when the Kennedy family sat down together and discussed the assassination of JFK, and perhaps even more so after RFK. What responses did they consider?

I’ve thought the same.

You literally never miss a chance to share your LBJ theory. I would love to see Jackie Kennedy’s personal papers, but whatever she is reported to have said to her friend it’s fair to call it her opinion. I’m not dismissive of the LBJ did it theory per se.