Paul Jolliffe

Jim, We know for a fact that Grace Gardos was living in Yorkville in the mid 1940's. John Butler provided these screenshots in 2019: Jim, here is my reply from 2019 to the late John Butler after he posted these screenshots: John B., Good. That's exactly what I (Paul Jolliffe) wanted to see. OK it would appear from the address 217 E. 86th Street in NYC (which appears on Google Maps below to be largely unchanged since the 1940's), that there is an elementary school nearby with a very interesting history - The Ramaz School. From school's website: " In the 1930's, the Upper East Side neighborhood known as Yorkville was an area where "Jewishness" was toned down; Jews of the area did not want to attract attention. In fact, in 1936, following the Depression and during the rise of Hitlerism, the pro-Nazi German-American Bund held street rallies up and down Third Avenue . . . As darkness fell upon European Jewry, the light of European children began to fill the halls of the Ramaz School. Jews from France, Belgium, Germany and Holland were flocking to the United States. Their children came from the Lycées of France, the Tachkemoni of Antwerp and a myriad of other schools. The refugee population especially concerned Rabbi Joseph H. Lookstein. It was apparent to him that if the Ramaz School did not exist, these children would have difficulty finding a suitable Jewish school. By 1938, in order to ensure adequate space for these students, the Ramaz School rented several rooms in the Central Jewish Institute building at 125 East 85th Street. Seventy-one boys and girls enrolled, creating the need to lease the entire building as the school's new quarters. The Ramaz School was becoming widely recognized as an institution known for its academic excellence. The Teacher's Institute of Yeshiva University began sending student teachers to observe and fulfill their student-teaching requirements. In 1942, the school received its provisional charter from the Board of Regents of the State of New York. Enrollment by this time had risen to one hundred and twenty students." John Butler, we know from the testimony of Nelson Delgado that "Oswald" apparently knew at least some Yiddish! Whether or not "Oswald" was indeed the biological son of the Gardos parents (and we now in 2024 know for a fact he was NOT their biological son), we are certain there must have been some connection between them, however brief. If there are any surviving elementary school records for either little John Gardos (or "Oswald"), the Ramaz School archives (if they exist) are a good place to start.. https://www.ramaz.org/about-ramaz/history Here is what 217 E. 86th Street looks like today - except for the street level storefronts, the building itself looks unchanged for decades: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7784686,-73.9530716,3a,75y,49.16h,104.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sET4Z9Mb_MJ4TVoPOVy1g6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 So today, in 2024, we can confidently conclude that whether or not Emil and Grace Gardos were officially our "Oswald's" foster parents for a bit in the mid 1940's in Yorkville, they were living in the heart of a neighborhood in which a recent refugee from Eastern Europe (very possibly with a Jewish background) might have been placed in the immediate aftermath of World War II. We can also confidently state that Elizabeth Bentley would have been very familiar with the activities of communists living in this area at that time. As to "Circus Maximus", I am not aware that Grace Gardos translated that one. Do we have evidence for that? I know she did the translation for another book from the same publisher in Hungary at the same time, but are we certain of her connection to "Circus Maximus" itself? Can anyone here get ahold of a copy of the 1962 edition of "Circus Maximus"? (The ones available on Amazon are in German, which in itself raises some interesting questions.)

Jim, For yeats I assumed that the anonymous woman caller (Bentley) had stated outright that "Oswald's" Hungarian father was "Emile Kardos" (Emil Gardos) and that the his uncle was (Fred Blair). However, a close re-reading of the FBI document merely implies that, but does not quite say it categorically. David Joseph argued this point years ago, and I have come to suspect he might (may) have been on to something: it is possible that the caller (Bentley) did NOT allege that Gardos and Blair were our "Oswald's" father/uncle? Yes, she mentioned them (Gardos directly, Blair indirectly) so she obviously connected them somehow with our "Oswald" in Yorkville in the 1940's. But maybe she didn't overtly state that Gardos/Blair were "Oswald's" "Hungarian father and uncle", Communists who got all their money from communist activities . . . " Maybe she meant yet other (unnamed) men. After all, she (Bentley) also mentioned "Weinstock" of "Women's World", whom we've now identified as Louis Weinstock of "Workers World", yet as far as anyone knows, there is no familial connection between either Gardos and/or Blair and Louis Weinstock. So if she (Bentley) did not connect connect the name "Weinstock" with the phrase "Oswald's" Hungarian father and uncle", then how certain can we be that she meant to connect the names "Gardos" and (presumably Blair) with the phrase "Hungarian father and uncle"? The men (Gardos and Blair) and Weinstock were important to her- she mentioned them in close proximity to her claim that she "knew 'Oswald's' Hungarian father and uncle". These men did indeed play some role in young "Oswald's" life in Yorkville, according to her. But whether she meant to imply (as we have inferred) that the "Hungarian father and uncle" were necessarily (Gardos and Blair) might not be so. She might have meant they were only (mentors or friends? of "Oswald's" "Hungarian father and uncle." Might. Either way, our "Oswald" probably had a copy of Tibor Kajan's "Circus Maximus" cartoon book because it likely had some connection to Grace Gardos, a woman he remembered from Yorkville in the 1940's.

For those who don't watch the documentary "Cold Case: Hammarskjold", here is summary overview of the case against the Dutch pilot accused of shooting down Hammarskjold's airplane: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/12/former-raf-pilot-shot-down-un-chief-dag-hammarskjold-1961-plane

Pete, This documentary from 2019 gives a pretty good summary for those us (like me) who may be unfamiliar with the basics of the case. It is not exhaustive, but well worth watching (the entire video is available on YouTube with ads). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Case_Hammarskjöld

Jim, Is Geo saying that the 1962 "Circus Maximus" contained material from various decades which were basically quietly subversive anti-communist cartoons? If so, then that's yet more evidence that our "Oswald" was critical of Soviet Communism (but also no fan of U.S. Imperialism.) Also, great question about the "Gardosh/Gardos" possible connection. Could our "Oswald" originally have been a "Gardosh" in Hungary and was placed with Emil Gardos (briefly) because he was (somehow) a distant relative? Maybe?

John, Russ Geck is the husband of Andrea Gardos, the granddaughter of Emil and Grace Gardos. Andrea Gardos Geck's father was John (Janos) Gardos, son of Emil and Grace Gardos. He was mentioned in the infamous 1966 FBI memo in which the FBI was so concerned about Grace's possible return to the USA from Hungary (with her son), that they considered launching some kind of counter-operation against her! (They were terrified she knew something and might say something at a time, 1966, when the public's doubts about the Warren Commission's conclusions were growing.) The late John Butler did a masterful job of tracking down Russ Geck through Facebook, and through correspondence, established beyond any doubt that little John Gardos (born in 1939) could NOT have later been our "Oswald." Apparently there are no surviving family stories or memories of any possible little child/refugee/orphan the Gardos' might have fostered alongside their own biological son for a bit in the 1940's. So, we have no evidence (at least not yet) that either the Gardos couple, or Fred Blair or (presumably) Louis Weinstock ever fostered our "Oswald" in Yorkville in the 1940's. However, as David Josephs pointed out four years ago, the FBI memo which is the subject of this thread did NOT specifically state that either "Emile Kardos" (Emil Gardos), "brother - in - law" (presumably Fred Blair) or "Weinstock of 'Woman's World'" were either the father or uncle of "Oswald." The anonymous woman caller (Bentley) connected those men somehow with "Oswald", but left open the possibility that "Oswald's" father and uncle ("Hungarians and Communists") were yet other men. If that is correct, then (Bentley) knew these (yet to be identified) other men who had custody of little "Oswald" at a time when he was indeed already called "Oswald." (Otherwise, Bentley could never have been sure that the little boy with whom she interacted in the 1940's was the same person accused of murdering the president in 1963.) Again, for the general readers (if there are any), we know (Bentley's ) information to the Tippit's was taken so seriously by the FBI that they corrupted the names, classified the memo "Top Secret" and tried to hide it away forever. If the anonymous caller was a crackpot, none of that would have happened. It is because of the FBI's reaction to this call that we can confidently know the information was real. So, exactly how many people did (Bentley) know who fit the profile?

Thanks, Sandy. Yes, I probably should have assessed my confidence level at 95% +, but of course, there is still a tiny possibility that yet more information might emerge from the notes of Mrs. Jack D. Tippit, information that might point in another direction. However, based on what have at this time, it seems inconceivable that anyone else could fit besides Elizabeth Bentley.

John, Up in the top left of page two supposedly the really blurry name reads "Oswald, Mrs." However, it is so indistinct as to be worthless. The CIA analyst apparently did a search on the name "Oswald" and this document came up, according to Malcolm Blunt. Personally, I doubt it has much to do with any of this, whether that name really is "Oswald, Mrs." or not. Until and unless something better comes along on this, it seems a dead end.

The transcript from the full set of HUAC's hearings in the summer of 1948 can be found here: https://archive.org/stream/hearingsregardin1948unit/hearingsregardin1948unit_djvu.txt

Jim, Your question as to why Bentley chose to call the Tippit's in Connecticut is a good one. Perhaps the simplest explanation is best: Bentley made the call because she was there and had read of the Tippit's connection to J.D. Tippit in the local paper. The ease of making a local call to a family who had a link to the assassination assured that Bentley's ideas about who did it would be known, but not in a way that could be tracked back to her. Since 1948, Elizabeth Bentley was a professional anti-communist crusader. She saw Reds everywhere. Her entire raison d'etre was to alert Americans to the danger posed by communist infiltrators. In 1950, in the midst of the extended lawsuit brought by William Remington, she was convinced "the communists" were surveilling her. (See page 59 of this document): https://vault.fbi.gov/rosenberg-case/elizabeth-bentley/elizabeth-bentley-part-01-of/view The anonymous woman caller (Bentley) believed not only had this "group in New York" of (Hungarians and Communists) had somehow utilized "Oswald" to assassinate the president, but that they had "plans to take over the government, which of course, they would deny. . . " Jim, compare that phrasing from the anonymous woman caller in 1963 with Elizabeth Bentley's sworn testimony to the House Un-American Activities Committee on Saturday, July 31, 1948. It's the same: Mr. Rankin. You knew the Communist Party was dedicated to the destruction of this Government, did you not? Miss Bentley. I did not at the time I was in it. That was one of the reasons I got out. Mr. Rankin. When you found that out, you quit. You learned that the Communist Party was plotting the overthrow of this Government? Miss Bentley. I would say that was correct; yes. Mr. Rankin. And that that was one of the chief planks — we will say of the platform — or one of the chief elements in their program? Miss Bentley. I don't know if it is in their open program, but it certainly is in their basic secret program ; yes. Mr. Rankin. I am not talking about the open program, because we do not get that, you understand. Now, you knew also that it was dedicated to the destruction of what they called the capitalistic sys- tem— that is, the right to own private property ? Miss Bentley. That would be correct, yes. Mr. Rankin. You learned that in Russia they have taken over the land and that private enterprise has been reduced and that the people of Russia have been reduced to the status of slaves. You found that out before you quit them ; is that true? Miss Bentley. I do not know that I exactly found it out; but judg- ing by the Russians with whom I dealt, it would be extremely plausi- ble ; yes. Jim, the anonymous woman caller on 11/30/63, the subject of this post, the subject of a "Top Secret" FBI memo classified for three decades after the assassination, could only have been Elizabeth Bentley. There simply is no other viable candidate. There is no longer any doubt. The exact ramifications of that knowledge are yet to be determined . . .

Jim, Ask Geo if any of the cartoons in "Circus Maximus" could be seen as anti-communist (or, conversely, as pro-communist). As to why the FBI didn't make it disappear, well I can only guess, but it's possible that the (presumed) Hungarian roots for "Oswald"/Harvey were unknown to very many in the FBI. We know that Hoover knew the CIA had a doppelganger project going on using "Oswald"/Harvey by 1963, but exactly when did Hoover know the specifics of the origins of that project? I wouldn't be surprised if Hoover himself wasn't fully clued in on "Oswald"/Harvey's real origins (whether Hungarian or not), and therefore the FBI may not have realized the significance (if any) of "Circus Maximus." One more thing: When Marina put this book up for auction in 2013, she included a letter of provenance. Maybe she lied about that, but in 2013, outside of you, me, John A., David J., and a very few others, who could possibly have recognized the significance of a Hungarian book of cartoons in "Oswald's" possessions? There was no commercial value in faking a Hungarian book in 2013. If Marina was going to lie about a book, then she would have produced something much more incendiary, not an obscure book of bland cartoons by a man from a country with (officially) no connection to her infamous husband. We probably will have to leave it there - neither of us can prove it was or was not originally "Oswald's" book.

Nice find, Jim. Here's one more to add to the "Elizabeth Bentley was the anonymous caller" file: Bentley testified repeatedly and said several times in 1948 that John Abt was the spymaster in charge of the "Perlo Group" before she took it over. She claimed that the Abt's apartment in NYC was an informal hangout for communist spies. (Whether any of that was true is irrelevant.) What does matter is that the news of the tenuous connection between John Abt and "Oswald" ("Oswald" asked on Saturday, 11/23/63 that John Abt be contacted for legal help) would have sent Bentley into a frenzy in late November, 1963, just like the anonymous woman caller. See these news articles from FBI files, particularly pages 16, 17 and 38: https://vault.fbi.gov/rosenberg-case/elizabeth-bentley/elizabeth-t.-bentley-part-11-of

John K., Here (on page two of this attachment) is the infamous file in question (best copy available - not very useful.) Note that it does NOT say "Mrs. M. Oswald", but merely "Mrs. Oswald." Also, while the references to "1940" and "Nazis" is handwritten, I see no reference to "New Jersey". I remember reading Malcolm Blunt's guess that a CIA analyst did a search on the name "Oswald" and this popped up. Does it have any connection at all to anyone we are interested in? Probably not, but who knows? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=54631#relPageId=2

Well, the simplest one is that our "Oswald" (Harvey) really was of (somewhat) Hungarian origin and that this book meant something to him personally. Did it remind him of a distant past, one before his new identity as "Oswald"? Maybe so, but that's just a guess and nothing more.

John, As far as I know, neither John Armstrong nor anyone else was aware that "Oswald" had this book until it was offered for auction in 2013.

Four years ago, in response to the late John Butler's throwaway comment about Louis Budenz, I raised the possibility that the mysterious women caller was Elizabeth Bentley. (John Butler then followed up my post and discussed it, but he never seriously developed it.) Here is what I thought then and now believe more strongly: Elizabeth Bentley was very probably the mysterious woman caller to the Tippit house in Connecticut on 11/30/63. 1. The caller feared publicity - "they" could identify her if "they" knew she was a woman. She was known entity to the press - she had a quasi-public persona. She was not some anonymous neighbor of the Gardos/Blair/Weinstock crowd. 2. The caller claimed to be calling from New Haven, Connecticut 3. The caller was a "mature" woman. (Not old, but "mature"). 4. The caller believed (like everyone else in America at that moment) that our "Oswald" really had shot the president, and she believed she had inside information on just how connected he was to some dangerous communist group. 5. The caller referenced Emil Gardos, Fred Blair (albeit not by name) and Louis Weinstock. These men were certainly well known to the FBI and HUAC, but not to the general public. 6. The caller mentioned an area of NYC (Yorkville) which really did abound with Hungarians and was home to (at least some) Communists. 7. The caller believed her inside information ("Oswald" did it as part of a nefarious commie plot - this group wants to take over the government! They've got charts and maps!) was likely to be ignored or corrupted by the FBI 8. The caller spoke in an accent, apparently, although neither Mr. nor Mrs. Tippit agreed as to what it was. OK. So why Elizabeth Bentley? 1. She was absolutely a known entity and had spent most of her life in and around New York and Connecticut. She was born in New Milford, Connecticut, went to Vassar College as an undergraduate (Poughkeepsie, NY), Columbia University (NYC) as a graduate student, and got her first job spying for the CPUSA at the Italian Library of Information (a front for Fascist Italy) in NYC. She rose in rank and importance in the communist world as a spy, eventually earning the nickname "Unmitsa" ("clever girl") for her work running two different communist spy rings in the U.S. She spent most of her life between 1935 and 1945 in and around NYC. However, a combination of personal problems, fear and the resentment that her male handlers were cutting her out eventually turned Bentley into a professional anti-communist for the FBI in 1945. (No less than J. Edgar Hoover himself ordered that her defection to the American side be held in the strictest secrecy - the FBI still wanted to use her as a double agent.) To maximize political damage to communist fronts and communist agents in the USA, Hoover decided to have Bentley go public. She gave a series of interviews and appeared before HUAC in 1948. Her testimony exposed the extent to which the American state was riddled with communist-sympathizers (or worse) and was politically explosive for the Truman Administration. in short, for awhile, Elizabeth Bentley absolutely was a public figure. 2.Like the anonymous caller claimed, Elizabeth Bentley really was in New Haven, Connecticut on November 30, 1963. She was there to prepare for abdominal-cancer surgery which would kill her just three days later. 3. Elizabeth Bentley was 55 years old in 1963. Not "old", but "mature". 4. Until 1948, Elizabeth Bentley had spent all of her adult life either working for or against communist groups, much of it in an undercover capacity. Just as the anonymous caller believed (wrongly) her insights into "Oswald's" communist connections could explain the assassination, Bentley believed her insights into the nature of the communist conspiracy in America could explain how Washington worked. 5. I can't prove that Bentley personally knew the names "Gardos", "Blair" and "Weinstock", but as the head of communist spy rings in NYC before 1945 she had to have come across those names. (Who else could have?) 6. As a longtime resident of NYC, and as a spymistress herself, it is inconceivable that Bentley would not have known that Yorkville was home to a huge variety of Eastern European immigrants, many of communist leanings/sympathies (or more.) 7. Elizabeth Bentley had worked with the FBI at the highest levels since 1945. She knew how it worked - as long as she was useful, she was OK. But by 1963, she was an alcoholic Cold War relic from the 1940's, of little further use to Hoover's FBI. 8. Elizabeth Bentley had degrees in English, Italian and French. She was a smart, articulate woman who could converse in multiple languages (as a young woman, she spent time in Florence.) Could she have "faked" an ambiguous accent over the phone? Of course she could have. Did Elizabeth Bentley have any inside knowledge about the "Harvey Project"? I doubt it. But nor did the anonymous caller - she thought "Oswald" had done it as part of a giant commie plot. Here she is on NBC's "Meet The Press" on September12, 1948:

Yes, John A. is correct - the list grew after it came into the possession of the FBI. However, I think that the "Circus Maximus" book probably really belonged to "Oswald". Its presence among his possessions would have raised questions about who he really was. The FBI didn't plant that book - that was exactly the kind of book they wanted to make disappear.

Jim, If the only book offered was the copy of the "Communist Manifesto", then I too would wonder if it really belonged to our "Oswald." (Could or would the FBI have planted a copy of it in the commie-loving "Oswald's" possessions after the fact to shape public opinion? Oh you betcha!) However, as I pointed out on December 2, 2019 (which was then picked up the next day by the late John Butler in his post you referenced above ) the collection included Tibor Kajan's "Circus Maximus". That book was by a Hungarian Jew - a man considered by many Hungarians to be a national hero. (Kajan was a multiple Kossuth award nominee.) I believe we can conclude these books really were owned by our "Oswald" precisely because they were suppressed from the "official" records. After all, people might have started to wonder who "Oswald" really was if they knew this 10th grade dropout from Texas had purchased this book in 1962!

Sandy, I agree that the last name "Oswald" had nothing to do with the birth name of the orphan/refugee/waif from Eastern Europe. (If his real last name was any variation of "Oswald", that would be a remarkable coincidence. Highly unlikely.) No, our little boy in NYC got stuck with the name "Oswald" because of his resemblance to Marguerite Oswald's third son in Texas. And only someone who had laid eyes on both boys could have noticed that resemblance - there was no internet, no way to search a massive database of photos back then. The only person who could have noticed that resemblance would have been Edwin Eckdahl. This is NOT to say that Eckdahl was a spook, merely that he moved in spooky circles - he knew people who knew people who would have wanted to utilize that resemblance. So, our nameless little Eastern European orphan/refugee/waif was (allegedly) placed with Emil and Grace Gardos and/or Louis Weinstock in Yorkville in the mid 1940's, and according to the anonymous caller on 11/30/63, was going by the name "Oswald" then. (If he was not known as "Oswald" when she knew him in the 1940's, she never could have been certain it was the same person in 1963. But she was certain it was him because he was still using the name "Oswald.") Why did our orphan/refugee wind up with Gardos et al. in Yorkville? Probably for humanitarian reasons, although if Gardos, Blair and/or Weinstock were secretly working for the FBI in any capacity, then it's possible they were seen as suitable temporary caregivers until a more satisfactory caretaker could be arranged. Therefore the simplest answer to Jeremy Boczjuk's old question ("why did the plotters go to all the trouble of creating a "Harvey" doppelganger project in the 1940's when they could have used a Russian-speaking American Serviceman in 1959?") is that they hadn't thought of the "Harvey project" when the resemblance between the two boys came to the attention of Allen Dulles or Frank Wisner in 1947 (or so.) Dulles was enamored with "tradecraft" (including the use of doppelgangers), so much so that in 1963 he wrote (or someone did his name) "The Craft of Intelligence", summarizing and explaining "tradecraft" to the novice. https://www.amazon.com/Craft-Intelligence-Legendary-Fundamentals-Gathering/dp/1493018795/ref=asc_df_1493018795/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312674999652&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=957451456147524809&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9016840&hvtargid=pla-491723028848&psc=1&mcid=daf7eb13fe7730cdb265b7ce6260b250&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIierc_tq3hAMVTDXUAR0bOgZCEAQYASABEgJClPD_BwE So, if the physical resemblance between the third son of Marguerite Oswald (Edwin Ekdahl's wife between 1945 and 1948) and the young orphan/waif/refugee from Eastern Europe somehow came to the attention of Allen Dulles circa 1945-47, then it is entirely plausible that Dulles would want to use that resemblance in some way , even if he did not then have a fully fleshed out plan of action. My point is that the "Harvey Project" (secreting a Russian-speaking doppelganger behind the Iron Curtain in 1959) did not yet exist in 1945-47, but what did exist then was Dulles' interest in utilizing the apparent resemblance between the two boys in some future TBD operation against the Soviets.

John, Never mind - I found it at "Kennedys and King."

John, On a different note, can you link me to your research on the alias "John Howard Bowen" which was apparently shared by both the mysterious elderly "Osborne" on the infamous/nonexistent Mexican bus trip, and also by John Caesar Grossi (of Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall fame)? Thanks.

Thanks. Of course. I should have picked that up earlier.

Good question. And: 1. Which way is he facing in the Hughes film? (Toward the motorcade or away from it? Are we looking at his back as he lifts his arms above his head?) 2. Why is he not clearly visible in the Towner film? (How could he have disappeared in the one second between the two films? Even if we assume he stepped (back? forward?) into the shadows at that exact moment, the "why?" becomes even more provocative. The president's limo was literally right in front of him yet he retreated at that split second!) Why?

Ben, No offense, but really, it's Time Magazine for god's sake! What did you expect? Time Magazine was founded in 1923 by "America's Most Influential Private Citizen", Henry Luce (who was still publisher and head honcho in 1963.) Time is now and has always been the voice of the globalist elite, the very class of people bitterly opposed to President Kennedy's foreign and domestic policies. Luce (himself a child of Protestant Missionaries in China, intent on saving souls), had a messianic view of the role the United States should play after World War II. Indeed, Luce invented both the term and concept of "The American Century" which remains to this day the cornerstone economic, political and military philosophy of the American Deep State/Establishment. Luce believed "the power conferred was global and universal rather than territorially specific . . . Luce called upon United States "to exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for such purposes as we see fit and by such means as we see fit". The Ambiguous Legacy: U.S. Foreign Relations in the 'American Century' - Google Books (See page 20.) Henry Luce was the heart, soul and voice of the globalist, economic elite - the very people who would never allow a mere president to stand in the way of their goals. Time Magazine was Luce's most-prized creation, and today, 56 years after his death, it is still his baby. Time will never, ever acknowledge that a conspiracy to murder the president was originated and carried out by the highest-level operatives of the American Deep State.

Hmm. Could be. I wouldn't want to make a case against Lovelady on that alone, but still, it does appear he might be waving something. Why? Who knows? But who could possibly have seen that motion at that moment? Almost no one except for (fortuitously) someone at Tina Towner's exact position. I am afraid that I am going to plead agnosticism on this one: I just can't decide what is going on there.