Mathias Baumann

Hello James, I think we both agree that Oswald's language skills were truly extraordinary and need to be explained. I think I've shown persuasive evidence that Oswald was NOT a native speaker. If he'd been one he'd most certainly have surpassed level L2/R2, especially in the field of listening comprehension. On the other hand it would've been EXTREMELY difficult for him to reach that level by self-study only. In your article you mention the Warren Commission's attempt to "find out what [Oswald] studied at the Monterey School of the Army in the way of languages". For a long time I've been trying to find out where the Warren Commission got the idea that Oswald studied at the Monterey School. Do you have more information on that?

Well, it seems that Nelson Delgado thought that Oswald was going to a language school. And so did the Warren Commission: http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.de/2011/09/monterey-language-institute-presidio.html So there might be a kernel of truth to that story. An 8th or even 6th grader would normally be way beyond L2/R2. L2/R2 is defined as follows: Limited working proficiency is rated 2 on the scale. A person at this level is described as follows: able to satisfy routine social demands and limited work requirements can handle with confidence most basic social situations including introductions and casual conversations about current events, work, family, and autobiographical information can handle limited work requirements, needing help in handling any complications or difficulties; can get the gist of most conversations on non-technical subjects (i.e. topics which require no specialized knowledge), and has a speaking vocabulary sufficient to respond simply with some circumlocutions has an accent which, though often quite faulty, is intelligible can usually handle elementary constructions quite accurately but does not have thorough or confident control of the grammar You can read more about the different levels here --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ILR_scale#ILR_Level_5_.E2.80.93_Native_or_bilingual_proficiency

Sandy, maybe Oswald attended a Berlitz School?

Jim, if we look more closely at the results James Norwood posted you'll see that they support my opinion that Oswald was a second language learner. Notice that he did pretty badly at understanding (=listening comprehension) in comparision to reading and writing. This is not surprising. Most second language learners struggle with listening comprehension. For various reasons for second language learners listening is much more difficult than reading: https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/9780472034598-myth1.pdf. If you're theory is correct and Oswald learned Russian as his native language when he was a child one would expect him to perform better in listening than in reading and writing, especially if he only attended elementary school.

Paul, yes, being a language teacher I doubt that very much. I'll tell you why: I recently talked to an American colleague of mine. He teaches English as a foreign language at our school. He's got a college degree and he's fluent in German. For about a year he's been taking lessons in Russian. He's had 300 individual lessons so far and has just passed his L1/R1 test. He got a "C" on it. High school dropout Oswald reached level L2/R2 on his test. So this should give you a rough idea how remarkable his achievement truly is. There's a reason why language schools still flourish in the age of YouTube. Learning a language all by yourself is extremely difficult, it takes a lot of discipline, motivation and talent. There's no indication in Oswald's school records that he possessed any of those skills in abundance. So the most likely conclusion is that he was trained in Russian, probably at Monterey Language School.

Paul, I've posted about this before. Oswald's Russian was already quite good BEFORE he went to the USSR. This link is also very interesting: http://www.dliflc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Generic-Fam-Guide-MC-CBu-updated.pdf The target level of foreign language tests in the US military is L5/R5. So if Oswald got about 50 percent of the questions right, that means he reached level L2/R2. And without instruction that is EXTREMELY difficult, especially considering the difficulty of Russian. I'm sure he received extensive training.

Hello Michael, if you compare the backgrounds of both Oswald and Gilberto Lopez you'll find striking similarities: Report post Posted September 2 Sandy, yes, I think that is possible, at least in the case of Lopez: "Like Oswald, Lopez was also of interest to Naval Intelligence. Also similar to Oswald, Gilberto Lopez made a mysterious trip to Mexico City in the fall of 1963, attempting to get to Cuba. Lopez even used the same border crossing as Oswald, and government reports say both went by car, though neither man owned a car. Like Oswald, Lopez had recently separated from his wife and had gotten into a fist-fight in the summer of 1963 over supposedly pro-Castro sympathies. Declassified Warren Commission and CIA documents confirm that Lopez, whose movements parallel Oswald in so many ways in 1963, was on a secret "mission" for the US involving Cuba, an "operation" so secret that the CIA felt that protecting it was considered more important than thoroughly investigating the JFK assassination. Our high Florida law-enforcement source confirmed that Lopez was an asset for another agency, though he did not say whether Lopez was a "witting" or "unwitting" asset)." --> Ultimate Sacrifice, page 305 "Oswald was linked to Lopez via Informant reports of a visit by Oswald to Tampa and someone with its small Fair Play for Cuba Committe chapter, the same Group Lopez visited on November 17,1963, the day before JFK's Tampa trip." --> page 307

Two of Ferrie's friends testified he'd been in Dallas the day of the assassination? Is that true?

Michael, as far as I know Thornley started writing "The Idle Warriors" before Oswald even killed Kennedy. If that is true he certainly was very prescient... About Wikipedia: I don't consider it a reliable source of information especially when it comes to the Kennedy assassination. I've done some work on the German-language article on the assassination, so I know what I'm talking about. The admin responsible for the article didn't even know who John Newman was, can you believe that? No wonder the article was completely biased. About the Bolton Ford incident: Do you really think the use of the name "Oswald" was mere coincidence? What about the descripton of "Joseph Moore"? An athletic Latino who had a scar over his left eye? Just like the man who monitored Oswald handing out the leaflets in 1963?

Hello Jim, when Oswald applied for a job in New Orleans in the spring of 1963 he gave his height as 5’ 9”, which coincidentally is the exact height of Kerry Thornley (and which he misstated to the Warren Commission! He claimed Oswald had been shorter than him when in fact he was TALLER than Thornley.) By his own admission he knew Guy Banister and David Ferrie, became friends with John Roselli, wrote a book about Oswald BEFORE the assassination and was passing through Mexico at the time Oswald visited the Russian and Cuban embassies there. Thornley could also have been the Oswald doppelganger at the Mexican Consulate in New Orleans who asked if "he could take a gun to Mexico", according to witness Fenella Farrington.

Jim, so what role did Thornley play in your opinion?

--> http://www.wnd.com/2013/09/did-george-h-w-bush-witness-jfk-assassination/

Jim, Garrison thought that the man who impersonated Oswald could've been Kerry Thornley. Thornley knew that Oswald was in Russia and he lived in New Orleans at the time the incident happened. He and Oswald also looked quite similar. And if I remember correctly Thornley also WAS shorter than Oswald.

So the first shot came not from inside the building. And a great number of witnesses also said it sounded different, more like a fire cracker. A diversionary device on the grassy knoll, maybe? That might also explain the smoke people saw.

Sandy, yes, I think that is possible, at least in the case of Lopez: "Like Oswald, Lopez was also of interest to Naval Intelligence. Also similar to Oswald, Gilberto Lopez made a mysterious trip to Mexico City in the fall of 1963, attempting to get to Cuba. Lopez even used the same border crossing as Oswald, and government reports say both went by car, though neither man owned a car. Like Oswald, Lopez had recently separated from his wife and had gotten into a fist-fight in the summer of 1963 over supposedly pro-Castro sympathies. Declassified Warren Commission and CIA documents confirm that Lopez, whose movements parallel Oswald in so many ways in 1963, was on a secret "mission" for the US involving Cuba, an "operation" so secret that the CIA felt that protecting it was considered more important than thoroughly investigating the JFK assassination. Our high Florida law-enforcement source confirmed that Lopez was an asset for another agency, though he did not say whether Lopez was a "witting" or "unwitting" asset)." --> Ultimate Sacrifice, page 305 "Oswald was linked to Lopez via Informant reports of a visit by Oswald to Tampa and someone with its small Fair Play for Cuba Committe chapter, the same Group Lopez visited on November 17,1963, the day before JFK's Tampa trip." --> page 307 And that is why I think that it is not all that important. I think we already have enough evidence to show that Oswald was an intelligence asset. We should now concentrate on identifying the people behind the assassination plot. People like David Morales, Johnny Roselli, Bill Harvey etc.

Tracy, so it was mere incompetence when Phillips changed Duran's testimony from "he never called again" to "she can't remember if he called again"? Phillips' Spanish was fairly good, so "incompetence" is out of the question here. And what about his lie that the tapes of the call had been destroyed before the assassination? Really just incompetence? Or evidence that he was trying to cover up that he'd been involved in the impersonation? And what was CIA counterintelligence trying to cover up BEFORE the assassination when they whithheld crucial parts of Oswald's file from the Mexico City Station? And why was Oswald's file so sensitive that only a handful of the most high ranking officers had access to it? Is that not evidence that the CIA had some sort of "operational interest" in Oswald BEFORE the assassination?

Sandy, I don't really care if Oswald learned Russian in Hungary or at Monterey Language School. The point is that the fact he did so well in the test points to his involvement in intelligence activities. But there's a very specific reason why I do not believe in the "Oswald Project": I don't think Oswald was all that important to the success of the plot. You and Jim seem to believe that he was indispensible, because he had a doppelganger. But what about the other plots that failed, in Chicago and in Tampa? Were there also two Thomas Vallees and two Gilberto Lopez'? Sure, Oswald made a good patsy because of his involvement with Kostikov. But Lopez had also traveled to Mexico AND Russia. Who knows what kind of evidence would've surfaced about him if the Tampa plot had been successful? Any theory that does not take into account the other plots stands on shaky ground in my opinion, because obviously the plotters did not put all of their eggs in one basket.

Paul, I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. Do you believe that the plot in Dallas was not directly connected to the plots in Chicago and Tampa?

Tracy, of course I cannot PROVE that Oswald couldn't have achieved the results without training. Just as the Warren Commission could not PROVE that Oswald - who couldn't shoot paraplegic rabbits in Russia - killed Kennedy singe-handedly with a crappy WWII mail order rifle. And I'm sure you know why the test was rated "poor" - because the target level was that of a native speaker. And yet Oswald got about half the answers right - which puts him at about level L2/R2. To reach that level a person of average intelligence would need hundreds of lessons. The evidence that Oswald could not have reached that level just by reading a dictionary is compelling. Please read my other posts where I present the evidence in more detail and tell me where exactly you disagree with my reasoning. About Phillips: - He lied about the Mexico City tapes being destroyed right after the assassination. - He tampered with Silvia Duran's testimony. - He was running smear campaigns against the FPCC - He had performed over the phone impersonations before - He endorsed Alvarado's phony story. - Phillips used the DRE for psychological warfare against Cuba - the very group Oswald supposedly tried to infiltrate. - His initial refusal that he didn't know Veciana - one of the most prominent figures in the anti-Castro movement - is highly suspicious. About Veciana: I've said it before that I find some of his statements dubious. But I don't think that his testimony is all that important - unless you want to prove that Oswald was working directly for Phillips - which I believe he wasn't. I think he was what Bill Simpich has called an "unwitting co-optee".

Paul, I think the appeal of your Walker-did-it-theory is, that it explains why the assassination happened where it happened - in Dallas. But I think it could've happened anywhere. Some years ago I read about the John T. Martin film on this forum here. At that time I was still a member of Robert Harris's forum. I started a thread there about the video and soon got a message from Gary Mack informing me that he'd soon put it on his website. And when he finally did and I saw it with my own eyes I was astounded and almost convinced that it was evidence of a link between Walker and Banister. That link may have well existed but I'm no longer so sure that Walker was involved in the assassination. Have you read "Ultimate Sacrifice"? The author thinks the assassination attempt on Walker may have been organized by Banister in order to put his pal Walker back on the news and shore up his support, so maybe that could somehow explain why that video was taken. All in all I think there's much more evidence for mafia involvement. Johnny Roselli was probably the link between the mob and rogue CIA agents such as Morales and Harvey. The Mafia had much to gain from a US invasion of Cuba and they were threatened with annihilation by the Kennedy brothers' war on crime. And I just found the following interesting piece of information. Milteer told the FBI informer that "the agreement was reached" about the assassination plot "probably in New Orleans or Miami, maybe New York, maybe Chicago". Of course Marcello was based in New Orleans, Trafficante had a base in Miami, and Roselli's mob family controlled Chicago. As for New York, that was a base for Michel Victor Mertz, Rolando Masferrer and mob Boss Tony Provenzano. --> Ultimate Sacrifice, page 836. Notice that he didn't mention Dallas.

Tracy, just because Jim's theory about the "Oswald Project" is probably wrong, does not mean that every piece of evidence he presents must necessarily be wrong too. I get the feeling you are not really interested in the case itself but rather in winning an argument. You are not being open-minded. To give you an example: Jim has provided evidence that Oswald got about half the answers right on a Russian test that was aimed at native speakers. Which is incredibly remarkable. You just shrug that off and say "Well he must have been some kind of prodigy". Do you really think that this is the most logical conclusion? Especially considering the circumstantial evidence that his trip to Russia was connected to an American intelligence operation? --> https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret_Chapter1.html I talked to an American colleague of mine today, who teaches English at our school. He's a very well educated man, he has a college degree and he's reached Level CEF-B2 (https://www.examenglish.com/CEFR/cefr.php) in German. He's been learning Russian for a while. Today he told me that he's got a C on his A1 test. And do you know how many lessons he's taken so far? 350! Oswald achieved the equivalent of A2, a whole level above A1, on his test, supposedly without any formal instruction. Which is ludicrous in my opinion. There's nothing in his school record that would indicate that he was some kind of language prodigy. The most logical conclusion is that he had received extensive language training before he took the test, maybe at Monterey Language School. Another example: You think that by questioning Veciana's testimony you can prove that David Attlee Phillips was not involved in the assassination. When I pointed out to you that to you that there's much more evidence that links Phillips to Oswald you just say that the CIA is probably hiding its "incompetence", when even Robert Blakey has finally realized the magnitude of the CIA's treachery. Why are you so incurious? Why can't you look at the evidence without prejudice and see where it leads you? The school records might not be definitive proof of an "Oswald Project". But they may be proof of something else, who knows?

Jim, I think Tracy has a point here. In my opinion there's no question that Oswald was a genuine leftist. People who knew him closely like Titovets and deMohrenschild paint a pretty coherent picture here. Oswald even invented his own political system, "The Athenian System". Why would he do that if his leftist leanings were just make-believe? I think he was clearly very much interested in matters of justice and equality. For instance I remember reading he would always sit with black people on the bus. I also find it curious that he never refered to himself as a Communist, but always as a "Marxist". That shows he obviously wanted to distance himself from mainstream Communism. So if Oswald was really only playing the left-wing radical, he did a pretty convincing and very nuanced performance.

If I remember correctly the other man was described as an athletic Latino who had a scar over his left eye. Could this have been David Morales? Kerry Thornley lived in New Orleans at that time. And he knew that Oswald was in Russia. Was he impersonating Oswald?

According to this news report, there were also bomb threats against Kennedy in Miami: http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/11/21/exclusive-jfk-death-threat-note-in-nov-1963-in-miami-revealed-for-1st-time/

Jim, thanks for pointing that out, it seems I got confused. Now I know where I had read about that 5'9'' Oswald: Read Bill Simpich's State Secret. There, you will learn how the 5-9 height thing came about. It goes into great detail but keep in mind this was happening BEFORE Kennedy was even elected. What does that mean? It means that, yes, Oswald worked for the government, especially during his "defection," which was not a defection. Personally, I think it was some kind of mole hunt but the bottom line is Bill's story will explain it in detail. I think I'll read that book again. As I remember it also had a lot of startling information about David Morales. In my personal opinion it is futile to try to find out who the puppet masters were. I'm sure they made certain to leave no traces. But I think some of the people who were directly involved can be identified and it's them we should concentrate on, in my opinion. My prime suspects are John Roselli, David Morales and Bill Harvey. They had the means and the motives to kill Kennedy and we know they were involved in "wet affairs"... Michael, about Phillips' novel: of course it's fiction, but it's precisely for that reason that I think it would have been a great means for Phillips to tell the truth and ease his conscience without taking too much risk. I think George de Mohrenschild did the same thing when he wrote his book about Oswald. I guess he was also an unwitting party to the framing of Oswald. Yes, it is remarkable if Phillips said that in the newspaper. If he did actually say that, those few words he said reveals a lot, just like Oswald, while being whisked away, revealed a lot when he said, "I'm nothing but a patsy.". Here's the source by the way: --> http://jfkfacts.org/jfk-most-wanted-dave-phillips-cia-files/