Was Oswald an Intelligence Agent?

[Steven Gaal]

(1) Jack Ruby told Earl Warren that Edwin WALKER and the JBS were behind the JFK murder. // Trejo

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Not the whole story. (GAAL)

====

'Rodney Rivers', on 26 Feb 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&section=findpost&pid=247362http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&section=findpost&pid=247362

Ruby pointed the finger at LBJ correct? That's probably why.

Spot on, Rodney! He whispered as much to a reporter and was caught on film and audio doing so.

--Tommy Graves

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Marina Oswald (important Trejo source,Gaal)

More evidence of FBI intimidation and threats of witnesses comes no less from Oswald's brother Robert, who told the Commission that he overheard the FBI threaten to deport Marina Oswald if she did not cooperate with them.

Mr. OSWALD. In my presence. And the tone of the reply between this gentle man and Mr. Gopadze, and back to Marina, it was quite evident there was a harshness there, and that Marina did not want to speak to the FBI at that time. And she was refusing to. And they were insisting, sir. And they implied in so many words, as I sat there--if I might state--with Secret Service Agent Gary Seals, of Mobile, Ala.--we were opening the first batch of mail that had come to Marina and Lee's attention, and we were perhaps just four or five feet away from where they were attempting this interview, and it came to my ears that they were implying that if she did not cooperate with the FBI agent there, that this would perhaps--I say, again, I am implying--in so
many words, that they would perhaps deport her from the United States and back to Russia.

( 1 H 410 )

The FBI even brought an agent from the Immigration and Naturalization Service in to the Inn at Six Flags to talk to Marina and advise her to "help" the FBI:

Mr. RANKIN. Did you see anyone from the Immigration Service during this period of time?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who that was?

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember the name. I think he is the chairman of that office. At least he was a representative of that office.

Mr. RANKIN. By "that office" you mean the one at Dallas?

Mrs. OSWALD. I was told that he had especially come from New York, it seems to me.

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say to you?

Mrs. OSWALD. That if I was not guilty of anything, if I had not committed any crime against this Government, then I had every right to live in this country. This was a type of introduction before the questioning by the FBI. He even said that it would be better for me if I were to help them.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he explain to you what he meant by being better for you?

Mrs. OSWALD. In the sense that I would have more rights in this country. I understood it that way.

( 1 H 80 )

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

see pgs 283-94 re MARINA 6 Flags

https://books.google.com/books?id=zWewDbarT3YC&pg=PA283&lpg=PA283&dq=peter+dale+scott+marina+six+flags&source=bl&ots=6HQeVmMHtl&sig=el2xHvx5MZWx57MCAwM9dwtm0FI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=11kEVZSYD4TeoAT2y4LwAg&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=peter%20dale%20scott%20marina%20six%20flags&f=false

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Part 3

　

Part 3 - Journalists & JFK – The Real Dizinformation Agents at Dealey Plaza

Hugh Aynesworth, Priscilla Johnson (McMillan) & Gordon McLendon

http://www.ctka.net/2011/Journalists_&_JFK_3.html

Edited March 14, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Trejo]

Oh come on. This is sick. Will the rest of you please look at the Crichton article in Spartacus? Paul, seriously. How can you call this nothing of substance, nothing but suspicion, innuendo, and rumor. You think there is more than that on your chief suspect Walker? You asked what the politics of the 488th were, and then completely dismiss Crichton's politics. That was the whole reason I asked you to read it. Sure we don't know which 50 Dallas cops were members of Crichton's unit. We know a few, and wouldn't you like to know the rest?

Your post is just one big sorry dismissal. When you combine the info on the Crichton article with the info that Bill Kelly posted in the thread 'Oswald - from out of the cosmos' - you have to at least question your central tenet that DeMohrenschildt was some kind of liberal who hated Walker. Who was it that DeMohrenschildt wrote to in a panic in the mid 1970's when the xxxx was hitting his proverbial fan? GHWB, then head of the CIA. Who did DeMohrenschildt meet with during his Haiti sojourn after his Oswald adventure? Well, you know the answer since you have read plenty of Joan Mellen. His name was Devine. Mellen never could figure out who Devine's partner was because it is still classified. All roads lead to GHWB. Sorry I am a bit too lazy to drag out 'Our Man in Haiti' at the moment.

Paul - the nazi fascist right wing Russian émigrés in Dallas, along with Marina, did a pretty good job setting up Oswald ex post facto. And you would like to dismiss the fact that it was Crichton who set up the first translator for Marina, and who housed her at a motel owned by the Great Southwest Corporation. Gaal has posted all of this, and you have read it all.

Sure, we agree the DPD was screwed up. But to dismiss their known ties to Crichton in favor of their possible ties to Walker is absurd. I don't dismiss Walker. I just don't buy the rest of the too well worked out scenario. Don't dismiss Crichton.

Serious question for any of you that have read this far. Have you read the Spartacus article on Crichton?. Good, glad to hear it. So - what do you think?

Well, Paul B., I gave you a solid opinion. The CRICHTON on Spartacus is skinny. Not much there.

Now, you yourself are biased against Marina Oswald, and you're also predisposed to "deep structures" and other global theories with no mandatory ground crew.

Your theory is based on suspicion. There is so much more on WALKER than is shown on this article on CRICHTON.

The politics of the 488th were Anticommunist. Now, although I believe that Anticommunists killed JFK, I don't say that EVERY Anticommunist killed JFK, nor do I say that EVERY Anticommunist was as crazy as those on the Far Right.

I have already said I'd like to know the names of all the DPD in the 488th. They are certainly suspicious -- however, given the data we have, I would next like to know how many members of the 488th were also "Friends of Walker." How many were also members of the JBS?

There just isn't enough data in the CRICHTON article to work with. Sure, Peter Dale Scott or Mae Brussell would run with that trickle of data, but they are clearly biased on the political side against anything right-wing.

Because I blame Anticommunists for the murder of JFK, I must also carefully distinguish my position from the sort of jumping to conclusions that we see in Peter Scott and Mae Brussell.

There is not one iota of data that Bill Kelly posted in his thread, "OSWALD -- FROM OUT OF THE COSMOS," to convince me that George DeMohrenschildt (DM) was anything else than a dedicated hater of Edwin WALKER.

So what if George DM had a positive relationship with GHW Bush, starting with the Batista regime? It proves exactly NOTHING. Even if GHW Bush was involved in oil exploration in Haiti -- that still proves exactly NOTHING.

There is no way that the Russian Exile community in Dallas framed OSWALD. They told the simple Truth, which really wasn't much to tell. The WALKER shooting was real, and OSWALD was really the shooter. This was totally unrelated to the murder of JFK, except that WALKER, who already hated JFK, now blamed JFK/RFK for that April shooting.

It is entirely boring that CRICHTON set up the first translator for Marina, and arranged her housing for her protection. Somebody had to do it.

I'm not dismissing CRICHTON out of hand -- I'm only saying that the Spartacus article is as weak as a dandelion.

Somebody give me some red meat on CRICHTON. The 488th and the 112th are interesting. Yet one must find at least two "Friends of Walker" inside them to make them more interesting.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 14, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Marina Oswald (important Trejo source,Gaal)

More evidence of FBI intimidation and threats of witnesses comes no less from Oswald's brother Robert, who told the Commission that he overheard the FBI threaten to deport Marina Oswald if she did not cooperate with them.

Mr. OSWALD. In my presence. And the tone of the reply between this gentle man and Mr. Gopadze, and back to Marina, it was quite evident there was a harshness there, and that Marina did not want to speak to the FBI at that time. And she was refusing to. And they were insisting, sir. And they implied in so many words, as I sat there--if I might state--with Secret Service Agent Gary Seals, of Mobile, Ala.--we were opening the first batch of mail that had come to Marina and Lee's attention, and we were perhaps just four or five feet away from where they were attempting this interview, and it came to my ears that they were implying that if she did not cooperate with the FBI agent there, that this would perhaps--I say, again, I am implying--in so
many words, that they would perhaps deport her from the United States and back to Russia.

( 1 H 410 )

The FBI even brought an agent from the Immigration and Naturalization Service in to the Inn at Six Flags to talk to Marina and advise her to "help" the FBI:

Mr. RANKIN. Did you see anyone from the Immigration Service during this period of time?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know who that was?

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember the name. I think he is the chairman of that office. At least he was a representative of that office.

Mr. RANKIN. By "that office" you mean the one at Dallas?

Mrs. OSWALD. I was told that he had especially come from New York, it seems to me.

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say to you?

Mrs. OSWALD. That if I was not guilty of anything, if I had not committed any crime against this Government, then I had every right to live in this country. This was a type of introduction before the questioning by the FBI. He even said that it would be better for me if I were to help them.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he explain to you what he meant by being better for you?

Mrs. OSWALD. In the sense that I would have more rights in this country. I understood it that way.

( 1 H 80 )

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showuser=859

Posted Today, 05:10 PM

(1) Jack Ruby told Earl Warren that Edwin WALKER and the JBS were behind the JFK murder. // Trejo

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Not the whole story. (GAAL)

====

'Rodney Rivers', on 26 Feb 2012 - 10:15 AM, said:http://educationforu...post&pid=247362http://educationforu...post&pid=247362

Ruby pointed the finger at LBJ correct? That's probably why.

Spot on, Rodney! He whispered as much to a reporter and was caught on film and audio doing so.

--Tommy Graves

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

The Mae Brussell tape showed that the military had a plot to kill Walker AND JFK. There is thus a plot above and beyond General Waker.

==

Walker is surrounded by CIA connected people or people with loyalty to Allen Dulles. BTW Banister was in working Chicago at the time FBN (CIA helper) George White was assigned there, before White moved upward to head FBN. One can conclude that Walkers operations was CIA penetrated back to front and this is why Ruby named him (Walker) culpable in the JFK matter - for Walker was an assigned Patsy. Ruby was just doing his job and hoping said loyalty would give him some relief in his ultra difficult situation.

==

You ignored the Armstrong Article that showed Ruby's CIA/DOD connections.

==

The TACA articles (plus Spider's Web article} implies a ultra secret GUN/DRUGS TSBD operation that comes from a compartmentalized hidden State Department operation that is , sideways so to speek, unknown to even most of the upper levels of American intelligence.

==

"that George DeMohrenschildt (DM) was anything else than a dedicated hater of Edwin WALKER. " // Trejo

==

Truly this Tejo quote shows a lack of knowledge and intellectual acumen in JFK assassination research

So what if George DM had a positive relationship with GHW Bush, starting with the Batista regime? It proves exactly NOTHING. Even if GHW Bush was involved in oil exploration in Haiti -- that still proves exactly NOTHING. // Trejo

==

Bush is with the former COS of Greece in Dallas. Helms' second in command was also former COS Greece (and Greek BTW). Barbara Bush told Beschloss that her husband and son ("W") went to see the parade (JFK Dallas). Cuban intelligence chief stated that Crichton and Bush were part of a group of businessmen organizing the financing for anti-Castro operations.

==

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Ruby's compartmentalized controlled knowledge was that Walker was an assigned Patsy. Ruby was in part staying on script and also giving a partial blackmail back at the conspirators,for the CIA penetration of Walker's operations could lead back to the CIA/DOD. I have explained it all (Hah !!). isn't that what Trejo implies ????????????

Edited March 14, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Mark Knight]

Again, it is all suspicion, innuendo and rumor. That will no longer do in JFK Research. We should be beyond that.

And yet you've built a "case" against Walker--oops, my mistake; you've built a THEORY--on little more. Your PROOF is sorely lacking. You seem to want a "smoking gun" from others, but give yourself a pass.

Well played, Paul Trejo...well played.

[Paul Trejo]

Again, it is all suspicion, innuendo and rumor. That will no longer do in JFK Research. We should be beyond that.

And yet you've built a "case" against Walker--oops, my mistake; you've built a THEORY--on little more. Your PROOF is sorely lacking. You seem to want a "smoking gun" from others, but give yourself a pass.

Well played, Paul Trejo...well played.

I have a heck of a lot more street-level evidence against Edwin WALKER in the JFK murder than *anybody* ever presented about President GHW Bush. Sorry, but the Bush-did-it theories are sillier than the LBJ-did-it-theories. Pitiful.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

I have a heck of a lot more street-level evidence against Edwin WALKER in the JFK murder than *anybody* ever presented about President GHW Bush. Sorry, but the Bush-did-it theories are sillier than the LBJ-did-it-theories. Pitiful.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

ooooo]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]ooooo

The Bush-Dallas-JFK issue has been much debated on the forum showing many strong evidentiary links. I will just bring out a few. To call Bush-JFK-Dallas theories silly is really arrogant and disrespectful to many serious assassination researchers.

o]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]o

• Dulles mistresses childhood friend was Ruth Paine. http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2012/08/mary-bancroft-autobiography-of-spy.html
• In Dallas, Oct 28, Dulles had lunch with Harold Byrd (owner TSBD), mayor Cabell and Jack Crichton (was involved in the arrangements of the fatal visit of JFK,wiki). Later that day Dulles had dinner with Neil Mallon who was a long term friend (and former boss) of GHWB. GHWB's father Prescott and Dulles are long term and very close friends.
• Bush is with the former COS of Greece in Dallas. Helms' second in command was also former COS Greece (and Greek BTW). Barbara Bush told Beschloss that her husband and son ("W") went to see the parade (JFK Dallas). Cuban intelligence chief stated that Crichton and Bush were part of a group of businessmen organizing the financing for anti-Castro operations.
• If the Bush family had a Coup against the POTUS before , why not again ?

https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/11/08/18628134.php

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Silly is the GHWB-JFK-Dallas connection idea Mr. Trejo ?? Really, I think not. (Gaal) <<<<<<<<<<<<

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Im posting from Tyler texas. No, I am in Southern California, however, in 63 GHWB felt that this ,'Tyler Texas', was a good alibi. According to Bruce Adamson GHWB knew the Brother of the agent he called. (GAAL)

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Shifting his attention to the elder Bush, Baker found that here, too, reinvention was the very essence of the man. Painstakingly studying the particulars of Poppy Bush’s life, Baker began to grasp that the public portrayal of George H.W. Bush as a bland, patrician, genial bumbler was essentially a clever cover-up. But what was it hiding? From conflicting accounts of Bush41s wartime service to the outsized global reach of Bush’s tiny start-up offshore drilling company, Baker began connecting the dots. Step by step, his research led him to an astonishing truth: that Bush41’s career in oil, politics and diplomacy had provided cover for a secret life-as a clandestine intelligence operative involved with highly sensitive operations, many of them domestic.

The only thing the public knew about Bush41 and the spy world, prior to publication of FAMILY OF SECRETS, was that he spent a single year as CIA director. Appointed by President Ford in 1975 at a time of intense congressional inquiries into CIA abuses, Bush was, according to government and media, a fresh face and outsider who as a former congressman could fend off congressional attempts at oversight.

It is significant, however, that during the same period Congress was also on the verge of reopening inquiries into the death of John F. Kennedy. Baker notes this factor as he begins to tote up curious inconsistencies and anomalies in the elder Bush’s accounts of his activities at the time of Kennedy’s death. Baker presents three faces of George H. W. Bush: the one who cannot remember where he was on November 22, 1963; the one identified (in a declassified FBI memo about the assassination) as a CIA officer working with Cuban exiles; and the one who, identifying himself as an ordinary citizen, calls in a tip on a potential assassin.

"At 1:45 pm on November 22," Baker reports, Bush Sr. "called the FBI to identify James Parrott as a possible suspect in the president’s murder, and to mention that he, George H.W. Bush, happened to be in Tyler, Texas." That is, not in Dallas (at least not at that precise moment). While Poppy was making the call fingering Mr. Parrott, Baker writes, Poppy’s own assistant was visiting the suspect at home-thus enabling the Bush aide to provide Parrott with an alibi. This evidentiary daisy-chain begs what follows: an exhaustive examination of Bush’s own furtive activities and his whereabouts that day-and his close ties to a large gallery of intelligence operatives who played a role in the events unfolding in Dallas. Among the subjects of interest: Allen Dulles, a former business associate and close friend of Poppy’s father, the former banker, Senator Prescott Bush. Dulles had been forced out of his post as CIA director by John F. Kennedy-who spent his three years in office virtually at war with the uncontrollable spy agency. Another important figure was Bush’s old friend George de Mohrenschildt, a mentor to Lee Harvey Oswald in the months before the shooting. More than a decade later, after Bush had become CIA director, De Mohrenschildt wrote him a panicked note mentioning Oswald; six months later, De Mohrenschildt was dead from what was described by local police as a self-inflicted shotgun blast.

Baker contextualizes these troubling events by establishing the extent to which Kennedy had alienated the powerful-from the CIA to the FBI leadership, from the mafia to the oil industry, from the Pentagon to major corporate figures. He also demonstrates the crucial role the Bush dynasty, through five generations, played in loyally advancing the agendas of many of these same interests.

The more people Baker interviewed, the more documents he obtained, the more he delved into diverse and often obscure treatises, the more he could see the outlines of an American history that had not been fully told before-a story of behind-the-scenes battles for control of this country’s policies, with incredibly high stakes.

In FAMILY OF SECRETS we learn that it was a business partner and secret-society confrere of Prescott Bush who drew up the blueprint for a new Central Intelligence Agency for President Truman; in retirement, Truman would assert that he had been tricked-and never intended to authorize the CIA’s covert action component. We grasp what the former soldier, Dwight Eisenhower, meant when, leaving the presidency, he warned us of a "military-industrial complex."

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]ooo]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

=====================>> Let me add even David (Atlee) Phillips implicates Dulles in a IMHO limited hangout.(GAAL) <<<<<<<<

Professor Paul S. Cutter

In one of many conversations with David (Atlee) Phillips(1922-88), a CIA senior officer, who

hobnobbed with the members of the East Coast Establishment and Social Register, a CIA station

chief in the Dominican Republic and Rio de Janeiro, who was implicated in the Salvador Allende

death in 1973, as well as President Kennedy assassination, he personally told me, of course, that

he had nothing to do with either charges, disclosing very privately his own opinion and others

around him that it was a group of agency stalwarts,headed by Allen Dulles, head of CIA, involving Vice President Johnston, who had most to gain,it was that cavalcade (including support from

the military-industrial complex), which assassinated JFK. "There was a feeling in Allen’s innersanctum that JFK had all the makings of another Julius Caesar, in this day and age easily to

name himself a ‘dictator for life’ with all the popularity with the public at large, both home and

abroad… Plus his ‘secret disarmament agreement with K’ (Khrushchev), which you know all

about…," the ol’ sleuth concluded. I think I believed him, but not about Allende… I broached the

subject and Henry Kissinger’s rolein it as well, who brought $8 million dollars in cash to Chile,

paid to the trade unions, to finance the revolt while the trigger was pulled by CIA snipers, the

black arts section of the Langley agency. He glossed over and changed the subject, in fact, every

time I brought it up for discussion… I thought all along that Phillips’s squad did it, but he refused

to cave in and more so because of his ability to change the subject…David was a clever man.
In one of many conversations with David(Atlee) Phillips(1922-88), a CIA senior officer, who

hobnobbed with the members of the East Coast Establishment and Social Register, a CIA station

chief in the Dominican Republic and Rio de Janeiro, who was implicated in the Salvador Allende

death in 1973, as well as President Kennedy assassination, he personally told me, of course, that

he had nothing to do with either charges, disclosing very privately his own opinion and others

around him that it was a group of agency stalwarts,headed by Allen Dulles, head of CIA, involving Vice President Johnston, who had most to gain,it was that cavalcade (including support from

the military-industrial complex), which assassinated JFK. "There was a feeling in Allen’s innersanctum that JFK had all the makings of another Julius Caesar, in this day and age easily to

name himself a ‘dictator for life’ with all the popularity with the public at large, both home and

abroad… Plus his ‘secret disarmament agreement with K’ (Khrushchev), which you know all

about…," the ol’ sleuth concluded. I think I believed him, but not about Allende… I broached the

subject and Henry Kissinger’s rolein it as well, who brought $8 million dollars in cash to Chile,

paid to the trade unions, to finance the revolt while the trigger was pulled by CIA snipers, the

black arts section of the Langley agency. He glossed over and changed the subject, in fact, every

time I brought it up for discussion… I thought all along that Phillips’s squad did it, but he refused

to cave in and more so because of his ability to change the subject…David was a clever man.

++++++++++++++++

++++++++++++++++

PLEASE SEE

CIA plot to kill JFK is based only on political bias, and not on solid evidence. That's my final word on it.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21367&hl=dulles

Edited March 15, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Brancato]

Thanks Gaal, though I do wish you could restrain yourself from the artistic touches in your choice of fonts.

Yes, Russ Baker's book Family of Secrets is worth reading. Trejo is just unable to imagine a world in which there are deep power structures. So he regularly disses P D Scott, Mae Brussell, and anyone else who dare suggest that Alan Dulles was a snake in the grass. Of course it doesn't take much research to discover the long standing links between the Bush, Walker, Dulles, and Forbes families. Trejo has no trouble accepting the collusion with nazis before, during, and after the war, when thousands of war criminals were protected from prosecution, calling these deals with the devil 'necessary evils', real politik. He gives the war mongering JCS a free pass because they were war heroes. Hoover is still a hero in his eyes.

Yet I agree with him that it was a cabal on the Right that committed the horrible crime. I agree that Walker was one of their most visible leaders, that Dallas was their Mecca, senseless hatred their mantra. But unless you can see deeper levels, you cannot view our current world with a clear lens.

[Mark Knight]

Again, it is all suspicion, innuendo and rumor. That will no longer do in JFK Research. We should be beyond that.

And yet you've built a "case" against Walker--oops, my mistake; you've built a THEORY--on little more. Your PROOF is sorely lacking. You seem to want a "smoking gun" from others, but give yourself a pass.

Well played, Paul Trejo...well played.

I have a heck of a lot more street-level evidence against Edwin WALKER in the JFK murder than *anybody* ever presented about President GHW Bush. Sorry, but the Bush-did-it theories are sillier than the LBJ-did-it-theories. Pitiful.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, Mr. Trejo.

I have NEVER expressed the idea that George Herbert Walker Bush was behind the assassination. The fact that some have, on somewhat flimsy evidence, does nothing to bolster the quality, OR LACK THEREOF, of your own evidence. You seem to have lower standards of evidence for YOUR pet theory than you do anyone else's theory.

I still firmly believe that Walker had NO evidence that LHO was involved in the Walker shooting. I think that Walker was simply an attention-hound, and couldn't stand the fact that, even in death, JFK was a bigger headline than Edwin Anderson Walker. So Walker called a German newspaper to MAKE a headline for himself.

If some policeman or FBI agent actually DID tell Walker that LHO was "involved" in his shooting, who was that policeman or agent? Why has NOT ONE PERSON stepped forward and said, "Yeah, I was the one who told Walker...so what? The Kennedys are dead, what does it matter?" A reasonable answer COULD be that NO ONE told him this, that it came from his own tortured imagination.

What of Marina's testimony? What, indeed....threaten an immigrant with deportation, and then see what kinds of stories they spin, trying to tell the authorities what they WANT to hear.

And of course, in 2017, when the documents "proving" your "theory" fail to materialize...you can always say they "must've been" destroyed, right? Because that's the story behind EVERY document that never existed: someone in power must've destroyed it.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Was Oswald an intelligence agent?

Assuming your Oswald was Marina's husband, I'd like to talk with Marina. She wouldn't talk with me, I understand, because she's been trashed by CTs.

I'd still like to ask: [1] How well did your first husband speak Russian? [2] How well did your first husband write Russian?

[Paul Trejo]

Was Oswald an intelligence agent?

Assuming your Oswald was Marina's husband, I'd like to talk with Marina. She wouldn't talk with me, I understand, because she's been trashed by CTs.

I'd still like to ask: [1] How well did your first husband speak Russian? [2] How well did your first husband write Russian?

Well, Jon, the US Government spent millions getting Marina Oswald to tell her story. It's in the pages of the Warren Commission volumes.

Now, have you read all those pages? Do you have specific questions about them? What questions?

We have evidence from others (e.g. George De Mohrenschildt) that OSWALD spoke Russian surprisingly well. We have samples of OSWALD writing in Russian. We also have his English samples, and we notice he was a poor speller in English. Very likely he was a poor speller in Russian as well.

The material about OSWALD in the Warren Commission is believable -- until the conclusion -- the "Lone Nut" theory. At the point of the conclusion, all the evidence is twisted and forced into the "Lone Nut" scenario.

But BEFORE that bogus conclusion, we have a ton of critically valuable data in the WC volumes. What, specifically, do you distrust in the WC volumes regarding the testimony of Marina Oswald?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

Marina Oswald (important Trejo source,Gaal) --------------- ((ALL BELOW CTKA))

=====================================================

Hugh Aynesworth
Refusing a Conspiracy is his Life's Work

　

　

At the time of the assassination, Hugh Aynesworth was a reporter for the Dallas Morning News. He has maintained that on November 22, 1963 he was in Dealey Plaza and a witness to the assassination --- although there is no photograph that reveals such. At times, he has also maintained he was at the scene where Tippit was shot --- although it is difficult to locate a time for his being there. He has also stated that he was at the Texas Theater where Oswald was arrested --- although, again, no film or photo attests to this. Further, he has written that he was in the basement of the Dallas Police Department when Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby. Like Priscilla Johnson, Aynesworth soon decided to make his career out of this event. As we shall see, it is quite clear that he made up his mind immediately about Oswald's guilt. Long before the Warren Report was issued. In fact, he tried to influence their verdict.

On July 21, 1964 Aynesworth's name surfaced in the newspapers in Dallas in a column by his friend Holmes Alexander. Alexander implied that Aynesworth did not trust Earl Warren and therefore was conducting his own investigation of the Kennedy murder. He was ready to reveal that the FBI knew Oswald was a potential assassin and blew their assignment. He also had talked to Marina Oswald and she had told him that Oswald had also threatened to kill Richard Nixon. Alexander goes on to say that these kinds of incidents show the mind of a killer at work. That "of a hard-driven, politically radical Leftist which is emerging from the small amount of news put out by the Warren Commission. If the full report follows the expected line, Oswald will be shown as a homicidal maniac." Holmes concludes his piece with a warning: If the Commission's verdict "jibes with that of Aynesworth's independent research, credibility will be added to its findings. If [it] does not there will be some explaining to do." Clearly, Aynesworth contributed mightily to the article, had decided Oswald had done it even before the Commission had revealed its evidence, and was bent on destroying its credibility if it differed from his opinion.

The story about Marina and Nixon was so farfetched that not even the Warren Commission bought into it (Warren Report pp. 187-188). It has been demolished by many authors; most notably Peter Scott who notes that to believe it, Marina had to have locked Oswald in the bathroom to keep him from committing this murderous act; yet the bathroom locked from the inside. Also, as the Commission noted in the pages above, Nixon was not in Dallas until several months after the alleged incident. Further, there was no announcement in any local newspaper that Nixon was going to be in Dallas at this time period --- April of 1963. Since Aynesworth was quite close to Marina at this time (he actually bragged to some friends that he was sleeping with her) it may be that he foisted the quite incredible story on her in his attempt to portray Oswald as the Leftist, homicidal maniac he related to Holmes Alexander.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Gerald Posner: Did He Get Anything Right?

　

One of the notable things about Posner's book is how much of a personal attack it is upon Oswald. Who does he rely upon for much of this personal vitriol? None other than Priscilla Johnson... Another source is Ruth Paine. Another is John Lattimer. As the reader can see from other profiles, these are not the most unbiased or credible sources. Posner just used them indiscriminately. He also used Hugh Aynesworth. In the profile on this site of Aynesworth, we mention the "attempt' by Oswald to do away with Richard Nixon. We showed how this was probably foisted on Marina Oswald by Aynesworth sometime in 1964. We also showed why not even the Warren Commission could accept it. Guess what? Posner did. In the paperback edition of his book (p. 119) he treats this episode straightforwardly, without reservations. The tell-tale sign that he got it from Aynesworth is that he uses the same newspaper heading that Aynesworth gave to his friend Homes Alexander for his 1964 article. Alexander noted in 1964 that an article in the Dallas Morning News featured a story that was headed "Nixon Calls for Decision to Force Reds out of Cuba". This is precisely the story that Posner uses. He then adds that Nixon was not in Dallas "the day" Marina said he was, implying that Marina was off by a day or two when she was actually off by nearly seven months. He also discounts the fact that there was never any announcement of Nixon arriving around this time by saying that there was an announcement that Johnson was and Oswald confused the two. Finally he argues that Marina was strong enough to keep Oswald barricaded in the bathroom by bracing herself against the opposite wall. This is ludicrous to anyone who has ever met Marina. She is positively petite, actually dainty, being a little over five feet tall and, at the time of the assassination and probably about 120 pounds. Posner never notes the Alexander/Aynesworth column, the then association between Aynesworth and Marina, Aynesworth's mercenary and clearly ideological aims, or Marina's plight and later recantation of much of what she said when she was under the influence of Aynesworth and Priscilla Johnson. He could have done all of this. He mentioned none of it.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Book review (pt. 2): With Malice

By Hasan Yusuf

　

Naturally, Myers also uses the Warren Commission testimony of Marina Oswald as evidence that Oswald actually owned the revolver allegedly used to kill Tippit (With Malice, Chapter 8). Unfortunately for him, Marina Oswald has been exposed as an incredibly compromised witness by a multitude of researchers. For one thing, Marina initially denied that Oswald ever used the name Hidell (WCE 1789). However, when she testified before the Warren Commission in February 1964, she now claimed that she first heard of the name Hidell, "When he [Oswald] was interviewed by some anti-Cubans, he used this name and spoke of an organization." (WC Volume I, page 64). She was referring to Oswald's debate with Ed Butler of INCA and anti-Castro Cuban Carlos Bringuier on William Stuckey's radio show on August 21, 1963. The problem is the name Hidell was never mentioned during the debate by anyone (WC Volume XXI, Stuckey Exhibit No. 3).

When Marina testified before the Warren Commission on June 11, 1964, she now claimed that she signed the name "A.J. Hidell" on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee card (WCE 819), which Oswald allegedly had in his possession when he was arrested in New Orleans on August 9, 1963! (WC Volume V, page 401). It should be obvious to any intellectually honest researcher that Marina was being pressured into being less than honest.

In assessing Marina Oswald's credibility as a witness, the reader should also bear in mind that according to Oswald's brother Robert, Marina may have been deported back to Russia if she didn't co-operate with the FBI (WC Volume I, page 410). Marina also admitted during her testimony before the Warren Commission that a representative from the United States immigration service had advised her that it would be better for her to help the FBI, in the sense that she would have more rights in the United States (WC Volume I, page 80). Although she testified that she didn't consider this a threat, the mere fact that she had been advised she would have more rights in the United States if she co-operated should send the message to researchers that she would even lie to obtain those rights (ibid). Marina Oswald also testified that she initially " ... didn't want to say too much" to evidently protect her husband (WC Volume I, page 14). However, Marina's friend Elena Hall told the Warren Commission that she didn't think that Marina ever actually loved her husband, and would apparently belittle him (WC Volume VIII, page 401). Such a revelation undermines the notion that Marina lied to protect her husband. None of these problems with Marina Oswald's credibility as a witness is ever discussed by Myers.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

CIA Rogues and the Killing of the Kennedys,
by Patrick Nolan

Reviewed by Martin Hay

　

Of course, there are allegations that Oswald beat his wife, Marina, but many of these were made by Marina herself after she was put under intense pressure to tell the authorities what they wanted to hear. As Nolan himself notes, in her earlier interviews, Marina described Lee as "a good family man" (p. 110). It wasn't until after she was threatened with deportation that the Russian-born widow's stories began to evolve. So these are open to question. And how would this prove Nolan's thesis anyway?

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Philip Shenon's A Cruel and Shocking Act

By James DiEugenio

Posted December 4, 2013

Philip Shenon's book A Cruel and Shocking Act begins with a deception. It then gets worse.

On the frontispiece, before the actual text begins, Shenon quotes from Marina Oswald's Warren Commission testimony. In that particular quote, Marina was asked if Lee Oswald had visited Mexico City. She replied that yes, Oswald had told her that he had been at the Cuban and Russian embassies.

In itself, this is an accurate quote. But what Shenon does not tell the reader here, and in fact what he does not say until nearly 200 pages later, is this: that during her first Secret Service interview she denied Oswald had ever told her he was in Mexico. She did this more than once, and she was categorical about it. She even denied it when she was not asked about it. Just because she had seen the story about Oswald in Mexico City on television. (Secret Service Report by Charles Kunkel "Activities of the Oswald Family November 24 through November 30, 1963")

When Shenon does admit she initially denied it, he does not mention a major event that occurred after the initial denial and almost simultaneously with her February appearance before the Warren Commission. A week after her initial appearance before the Commission-where she now changed her story about Mexico City and several other matters-Marina signed a contract with a film company called Tex-Italia Films. The grand total of funds transferred to her was $132, 500. Which today would amount to about a half million dollars. (John Armstrong, Harvey and Lee, p. 977) What makes this transaction so intriguing is that when the company partners were investigated, it was discovered that they used false names. Further, the company's business offices were asked to leave the lot they were located on for failure to pay their rent. Finally, there was no film made by Tex-Italia about Marina or her dead husband. (ibid)

Now, to most people, these events and the subsequent reversals of testimony would seem relevant to the story Shenon is telling. After all, if the reader was informed of this information, one conclusion he or she could come to is that Tex-Italia was a front company, and its main purpose was to get Marina Oswald to testify to a tale that was more in line with the official story about Kennedy's assassination. After all, Mexico City was quite important to the Commission. As we shall see, it is even more important to Shenon. If there is a serious question about Oswald being there, then the Oswald story begins to wobble about in a direction the Commission, and Shenon, do not want it to go. Therefore, in addition to beginning his book with this misleading testimony, in addition to not informing the reader about the timing of the financial transaction, when one scans the index of Shenon's long book, the reader will not find an entry for Tex-Italia Films.

==........

The second piece of old evidence that Shenon reports as being long hidden is the destruction of a photograph of Oswald by Marina and Oswald's mother Marguerite. To use just one example, this incident was thoroughly described by writers like the late Jack White and Greg Parker many years ago. It is also described at length by Vincent Bugliosi in his colossal book, Reclaiming History. Like Bugliosi, who Shenon greatly admires, the author wants us to think that somehow this is another of the infamous "backyard photographs" which the Commission, and Life Magazine, used to incriminate Oswald. But like Bugliosi, Shenon does not quote Marina's testimony before the HSCA about this point. (Shenon, p. 25) Her memory of this was very hazy and unreliable. But further, Marguerite described this particular photo as being different than the others. She said, in this one, Oswald was holding the rifle above his head with both hands. Further, that this one was addressed to his daughter June. June was two years old at the time. These points are rather indecipherable. Especially in light of the fact that Marina originally said she took just one backyard photo. (ibid, DiEugenio, p. 86) Which is probably why the Commission, when they had the opportunity, did not press far at all in this field.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

ALSO SEE

David Josephs on Mexico City: Part 1, Part 2, Section A, Part 2, Section B, Part 3, Section A, Part 3, Section B

　

　

Edited March 16, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Trejo]

All hear-say guesswork and speculation, Steven.

As for Aynesworth, he believed in a LEFTIST Oswald, and to that degree belongs with the Kill-Team. Anybody who continues to regard OSWALD as a LEFTIST belongs to that degree to the Kill-Team, which wanted to blame the JFK murder on the LEFTISTS.

That is a far cry from a LONE NUT, because a LEFTIST and a LONE NUT are mutually exclusive. Try to grasp that.

As for OSWALD being unstable emotionally -- I think the evidence shows that clearly. OSWALD was a loose cannon. This was the main criterion that qualified him to be a PATSY. Every PATSY always has this character flaw. His "trust radar" is wonky because he himself trusts nobody, and so he can't tell if other people really trust him or not. It's a serious liability.

Ron Lewis, who was briefly friends with OSWALD in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, said that OSWALD also made jokes and even moves about assassinating members of the Long Family in New Orleans. OSWALD had a mean streak buried in his character -- but it didn't come out very often. Ron Lewis claims to have seen it -- yet he regards OSWALD as innocent of the JFK murder. Innocent -- but no angel. OSWALD knew who the real JFK Killers were -- yet he made no moves to turn them in (that we can see).

As for Lee Harvey OSWALD beating Marina Oswald, this was only during the brief Ft Worth/Dallas period, when Marina was seeing too much of George Bouhe (and perhaps other men) and we have multiple witnesses who were eye-witnesses to the beatings, bruises or original complaints by Marina. So, quit trying to make OSWALD look like a choir-boy...Marina was no saint, but neither was Lee.

OSWALD was a complex character. He was not all violent, and not all pacifist. He was not all LEFTIST, and not all RIGHTIST. He was not all DISGRUNTLED and not all CONSERVATIVE. OSWALD was complex.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

Marina Oswald & Ruth Paine (important Trejo sources ,Gaal) ---------------

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Journalists & JFK – The Real Dizinformation Agents at Dealey Plaza

Hugh Aynesworth, Priscilla Johnson (McMillan) & Gordon McLendon

http://www.ctka.net/2011/Journalists_&_JFK_3.html

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

http://www.giljesus.com/jfk/marina.htm

MARINA & "HIDELL"

On the topic of when she first learned of the name "Hidell", Marina told three different stories.

STORY # 1

Commission Exhibit 1789 is an interview that the Secret Service conducted with Marina Oswald on December 10, 1963.

On page 2 of that document, she was asked specifically if her husband used the name "Hidell" and she, according to the report, "replied in the negative".

STORY # 2

Just two months later, in her February 1964 testimony before the Warren Commission, she said that she learned about the fictitious "Hidell" from Oswald's radio debate in New Orleans.

Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever heard that he used the fictitious name Hidell?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. When did you first learn that he used such a name?

Mrs. OSWALD. In New Orleans.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn that?

Mrs. OSWALD. When he was interviewed by some anti-Cubans, he used this name and spoke of an organization.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you discover it, then?

Mrs. OSWALD. I already said that when I listened to the radio, they spoke of that name, and I asked him who, and he said that it was he.

( 1 H 64 )

But the name "Hidell" was never mentioned during the radio debate, as one can see by examining a transcript of that broadcast ( Stuckey Exhibit 3 )

In addition to the non-mention of "Hidell" during the broadcast, Lt. Frank Martello of the New Orleans Police appeared before the Commission on April 7 & 8, 1964 and testified that when he interviewed Oswald, he asked Oswald for identification and Oswald produced his wallet. Martello asked him to empty the wallet and examined the contents of it. Among the contents was:

4. Card for the New Orleans Chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in name of LEE HARVEY OSWALD signed by A. J. HIDELL, Chapter President, issued June 6, 1963." ( 10 H 54 )

This was a signature on the card that Marina had signed and was seen by Martello BEFORE THE RADIO BROADCAST.

And Martello wasn't the only one who saw it.

FBI agent John Quigley interviewed Oswald at the time of his New Orleans arrest and testified on May 5, 1964 that he also SAW the FPCC membership card signed by "Hidell".

Mr. McCLOY. Did he have the membership cards in his possession at that time?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; he did, sir.

Mr. McCLOY. You saw them?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; I did, sir. I think the last you will notice, in that last sentence he had in his possession both cards and exhibited both of them.

Mr. McCLOY. Right. One of them was, at least one of them, was signed A. Hidell?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir; that is correct.

( 4 H 434 )

SO THERE ARE TWO WITNESSES WHO PROVE THAT MARINA'S # 2 STORY IS A LIE. SHE SIGNED THAT CARD BEFORE THE RADIO BROADCAST.

STORY # 3

Because of these developments, Marina Oswald was invited back to give testimony and appeared before the Commission on June 11, 1964. At that time she admitted signing the FPCC card as "A.J. Hidell" and said that Oswald threatened to beat her if she didn't sign the card.

If story # 3 was the truth, then the first two stories were lies.

She was never questioned about why she lied to the SS in December 1963 or why she lied under oath to the Commission in February 1964. The Commission just accepted her latest version of events as the truth because her latest version satisfied its preconceived notions.

"Oswald's membership card in the "New Orleans chapter" of the committee carried the signature of "A. J. Hidell," purportedly the president of the chapter, but there is no evidence that an "A. J. Hidell" existed and.....there is conclusive evidence that the name was an alias which Oswald used on various occasions. Marina Oswald herself wrote the name "Hidell" on the membership card at her husband's insistence." ( Report, pg. 292 )

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Dulles mistresses childhood friend was Ruth Paine. http://jfkcountercou...phy-of-spy.html

=

Buddy Walthers took part in the search of the home of Ruth Paine. Walthers told Eric Tagg that they "found six or seven metal filing cabinets full of letters, maps, records and index cards with names of pro-Castro sympathizers." James DiEugenio has argued that this "cinches the case that the Paines were domestic surveillance agents in the Cold War against communism."

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

David Regan says:

March 1, 2015 at 9:39 pm

=

Tough to say, Vanessa. Perhaps our WC defenders can shed light on this, but it doesn’t end there.

The FBI was deeply unimpressed by the ‘Nixon’ story. There were no witnesses and it’s credibility rested entirely upon Marina’s word. On top of that, there is conflicting testimony between Marina and Ruth Paine as to when Oswald left Dallas in April 1963 for New Orleans.

In addition, both the FBI and the Secret Service had tried without success to establish_Oswald’s whereabouts during the two weeks following the Walker incident on April 10. They had been unable to find any evidence that he was in Dallas after April 12, when he cashed his last pay check from the Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall and
applied for unemployment benefits at the Dallas office of the Texas Employment Commission.

On March 18-19, 1964, Mrs. Paine appeared as a witness before the Commission. When the events of April, 1963 came into
discussion, she volunteered the “recollection” that she and both
Oswalds and their child shared a picnic in a Dallas park on April 20, 1963 and that, on April 24, she took Oswald’s baggage to a bus station for his departure for New Orleans that evening
or the next morning.

She said Marina went to stay at her home on that day, April 24, and remained there until she drove her to New Orleans on Nay 10, her husband having): found work there. She added that she, Mrs. Paine,
went to San Antonio on April 26-28, leaving Marina at her home.

In her testimony, Marina had mentioned no “picnic” with Mrs. Paine in April or any other time. She had not specified
when her husband left for New Orleans.
As with Marina’s “Nixon” story, there were no witnesses to Mrs. Paine’s “recollections.” But the Warren Commission accepted
her statements without auestion. They had the effect of making Marina’s “April 23 incident plausible, at least to the
extent that Oswald was now asserted to have been in Dallas then. No one on the Commission appeared to have been aware that, when interviewed right after the assassination (Nov. 27, 1963)
by FBI agents Hosty and Odum, Hrs. Paine had told them that “she took Marina to her home” on April 11, 1963 – which was the day after the Walker attempt.

The documents which have been reviewed indicate that Mrs. Paine told Agents Hosty and Odum the truth, but lied to
the Warren Commission under oath.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooxxxxxxxxoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

===================================================================================================

Stratfor

=======

Far less speculation has gone into what is, in our view, a significantly neglected aspect of this story: Marina Oswald. From Stratfor's standpoint, she is at least one of the keys to whatever happened on Nov. 22, 1963. Our image of Marina Oswald, dating back to the days following the assassination, is that of a simple, frightened young woman, stunned by what had happened and in way over her head. That image of a more or less innocent bystander has remained intact for 40 years, even though the facts have consistently pointed to her being a much more important figure in the story.

Marina Oswald — born Marina Prusakova — met Lee Harvey Oswald in Minsk, where he worked in an electronics factory after having defected to the Soviet Union in 1959. She was then 19 years old. Her father had been killed in the war; she lived with her stepfather in Archangel, in the far north of Russia, before moving to Moldova as a small child and then to Leningrad at age 12. In 1955, she entered the Pharmacy Technikum for what the Warren Report called "special training." She received a diploma in pharmacology in June 1959 and then was assigned to a job in a warehouse, which she quit after a day.

Two months later, she moved to live with her uncle in Minsk, the capital of Belarus. Her uncle was a colonel in the MVD — the Russian Interior Ministry security service. At that time, the agency — which was a mixture of a national police force and the FBI — carried out several functions, from running large parts of the Gulag to serving as an internal security force. According to the Warren Commission, Col. Prusakov was head of the local lumber industry, which would have certainly made him part of the Gulag apparatus and therefore part of the security structure. With a rank of colonel, he clearly had substantial responsibilities. According to the Warren Commission, Prusakov "… had one of the best apartments in a building reserved for MVD employees."

In Minsk, Marina finally got a job in the pharmacy of a hospital. At the same time, she joined Komsomol, the Communist youth organization — a fairly common thing to do and something that her uncle, given his standing in the government apparatus, certainly would have expected her to do. She had a good many friends when, seven months after moving to Minsk, she was introduced to Lee Harvey Oswald. They had one date — at a dance. Immediately after the dance, Oswald was taken ill and checked into a hospital, though not the one where Marina worked. Marina visited him often in the hospital, although they had met only twice prior to his hospitalization. She was able to visit him outside of regular visiting hours, according to the Warren Commission, because of her uniform. Oswald was hospitalized from March 30 until April 11. It is not clear what illness kept him hospitalized for almost two weeks, but he was cared for at an ear, nose and throat clinic: He apparently had the mother of all sinus headaches.

According to Marina's testimony to the Warren Commission, Oswald visited her regularly at her uncle's apartment after his release. The Commission makes a point of saying that "they were apparently not disturbed by the fact that he was an American and did not disapprove of her seeing him." This is an important point. Oswald was an American defector, clearly regarded with suspicion by Soviet Intelligence. Marina's uncle was a colonel in the MVD. Having American defectors visit his apartment in 1961 should have concerned him a lot. He would certainly report it to his superior. An American FBI official entertaining his niece's Soviet defector boyfriend in 1961 would certainly be cautious about its effect on his pension; however, Prusakov apparently was not concerned.

Now it gets interesting. On April 20, a little more than a month since their first meeting, Oswald proposes to Marina. She accepts and they are married on April 30. Let's pause here. Marina Oswald is an attractive young woman. She holds a diploma in pharmacology from a first-rate technical school in Leningrad. Her uncle is a senior official in the MVD. Lee Harvey Oswald is a foreign defector, without any real future and — we are handicapped here by our glandular bias — not a great looker or sharp dresser. But he must have been a hell of a dancer, because they were married about six weeks after they met with much of the courtship having taken place in a hospital.

OK — it may have been uncontrollable love at first sight. Stranger things have happened, we suppose. The problem was that in order for Marina to marry Oswald, they needed to get special permission from the state, because he was a foreigner. That would have been true if he were the head of the Polish Communist Party. But Oswald wasn't just a foreigner, he was an American defector. Given the Soviet bureaucracy, someone in Moscow was going to have to sign off on this one — and it had to have kicked off one heck of a security review in her uncle's office, but permission nevertheless was granted in 10 days.

If that is hard to believe, try the next one. After about a month of marriage, Oswald tells Marina that he's tired of the Soviet Union and wants to go home. She apparently says "whatever" and they start making arrangements to leave the Soviet Union. At this point, she told the Warren Commission, her aunt and uncle became upset and stopped speaking to her. A great deal has been made of the U.S. Embassy's willingness to allow Oswald to return to the United States, but not nearly enough has been made of the fact that the Soviets permitted not only Oswald, but also Marina, to leave the country.

In October, while this was going on, Marina decided to take her annual vacation. According to the commission, Oswald and Marina agreed that she needed "a change of scenery." Having been married less than six months, she took a three-week vacation by herself to visit an aunt in Kharkov. Kharkov in October is not the greatest place to visit, but off she went.

When she returned, she pursued her exit visa. She met with an MVD colonel, Nicolay Aksenov, who had to approve the exit permit. Marina thought that the interview might have been granted because her uncle was also an MVD colonel, but that makes little sense if her uncle opposed her departure. On Dec. 25, 1961, about six weeks after applying, she received her exit visa from the Soviet Union, as did Oswald. Marina told the Commission that she was surprised to receive permission. That is an understatement — what happened was unheard-of. Although the Warren Commission tried to argue that these things were not that uncommon, they just were.

Let's recap here:

1. Marina, part of the Soviet upper-middle class, reasonably educated and an attractive young woman, meets Lee Harvey Oswald and is so smitten by him that she agrees to marry him in a little over a month — two weeks of which he spent courting her from a hospital bed.

2. The Soviet government grants Marina permission to marry him in the span of 10 days, despite the fact that this is an MVD colonel's niece marrying a U.S. defector.

3. Oswald immediately decides to head back to the United States, and in spite of her uncle's supposed objections — and Prusakov could have stopped this dead in its tracks if he wanted — she is granted permission to leave the Soviet Union in the company of an American defector. The time between her formal request and receiving permission is a matter of weeks.

If the Warren Commission has the facts right — and we think they do — then this is clear: the Soviet government wanted Marina and Oswald to marry and they wanted them to go together to the United States. That is crystal clear. Now, we take a leap, but a reasonable one: The only agency in the Soviet Union with the ability and interest to get this done was the KGB. If Marina wasn't KGB, she did one hell of an imitation.

Endless questions flow from this, ranging from what the mission was to why the U.S. embassy permitted Marina into the country. This now enters into the realm of speculation. However, one thing is clear to us: Any theory as to what happened on Nov. 22, 1963, that does not take into careful account the role of Marina Oswald is inherently flawed. This includes the Warren Commission's own findings. If Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F. Kennedy, there has been no adequate explanation of Marina Oswald's role in this.

The only way to dismiss the Marina question is to make the following three assertions:

1. You have to believe that Marina, the attractive MVD princess, took one look at Oswald and said, "I've got to have that man."

2. You have to argue that obtaining permission in 10 days for an MVD colonel's live-in niece to marry an American defector was no big deal.

3. You have to argue that getting an exit permit from the Soviet Union for Marina in the space of six weeks in 1961 was no big deal.

If ever there was a cooked-up marriage, this was it. Now, how this fits into the assassination story is too speculative to bother with — but that no explanation is possible without building this into the story is obvious.

There has been tremendous focus on Oswald's stay in the Soviet Union and speculation that his defection might have been part of a CIA plot. That is not inconceivable, although the purpose of the plot is opaque. There has been focus on Washington's decision to readmit Oswald, even though he had renounced his U.S. citizenship. All of this has focused attention on the CIA, but there has not been equal attention paid to the extraordinary story of Marina Prusakova's marriage to Oswald and her exit from the Soviet Union.

This does not necessarily clear things up, but in our mind, it sets an additional hurdle that any theory must pass over. The eagerness of the Warren Commission to pass over the strange marriage of these two is one of the reasons we have little confidence in the analysis it contains. The fact of the marriage raises questions of whether Oswald was, simply in the context of his marriage, involved in a conspiracy. If he was the only gunman — which we doubt — he still was not alone.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Trejo]

STRAW MAN ARGUMENT, Mr. Trejo.

I have NEVER expressed the idea that George Herbert Walker Bush was behind the assassination. The fact that some have, on somewhat flimsy evidence, does nothing to bolster the quality, OR LACK THEREOF, of your own evidence. You seem to have lower standards of evidence for YOUR pet theory than you do anyone else's theory.

I still firmly believe that Walker had NO evidence that LHO was involved in the Walker shooting. I think that Walker was simply an attention-hound, and couldn't stand the fact that, even in death, JFK was a bigger headline than Edwin Anderson Walker. So Walker called a German newspaper to MAKE a headline for himself.

If some policeman or FBI agent actually DID tell Walker that LHO was "involved" in his shooting, who was that policeman or agent? Why has NOT ONE PERSON stepped forward and said, "Yeah, I was the one who told Walker...so what? The Kennedys are dead, what does it matter?" A reasonable answer COULD be that NO ONE told him this, that it came from his own tortured imagination.

What of Marina's testimony? What, indeed....threaten an immigrant with deportation, and then see what kinds of stories they spin, trying to tell the authorities what they WANT to hear.

And of course, in 2017, when the documents "proving" your "theory" fail to materialize...you can always say they "must've been" destroyed, right? Because that's the story behind EVERY document that never existed: someone in power must've destroyed it.

Well, Mark, you might be right -- it might be that WALKER stuck his nose into the JFK murder to get himself named more than 500 times in the Warren Commission volumes -- simply because he was an egomaniac.

I doubt it, though.

You suggest that WALKER called the Deutsche Nationalzeitung less than 24 hours after the JFK murder to boast about the fact that OSWALD was also his shooter back in April 1963 -- out of sheer envy of JFK getting national headlines.

That's a wild guess, Mark. Just out of envy? Yet if WALKER wanted publicity, he could have told a USA newspaper. Why tell a German newspaper? You offered no logic for that.

WALKER never told us who told him about OSWALD being his 10 April 1963 shooter four days later. In all cases, though, he says it was a high-level official. Usually he says the person was high muck-a-muck the DPD, and at other times he says the DPD and the FBI had some kind of deal going to protect OSWALD. WALKER truly believed this -- even if he was wrong.

I think that history will eventually learn that WALKER was telling the truth about this person. H.L. Hunt, e.g. heard this story directly from WALKER himself, and Hunt told Playboy magazine that WALKER was one of the most truthful people he ever met, and so he always believed WALKER about the OSWALD shooting report on Easter Sunday 1963.

I think that history will eventually reveal the name of the person who warned WALKER about OSWALD on Easter Sunday 1963. I have always admitted that we don't have final proof of this, yet.

As for Marina Oswald, you have her all wrong, Mark. You and Steven Gaal share a superficial grasp of her psychology, her motives, her behavior -- and your bias shows through clearly in your words.

As for the 26 October 2017 fulfillment of the JFK Records Act, Mark, I'll make you a deal: if the US Government fails to provide documents demonstrating that my WALKER theory is correct -- then I'll fold up shop, apologize to this FORUM for being wrong about it, and say no more on the topic.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

Marina Oswald (important Trejo source,Gaal)

=====================

How would you get near an Afghan ambassador unless you were a spook or a wanta be spook. She would have known of the consequences of her actions. She was already working for her Uncle or soon would be doing so....

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

see pg 197 below

=

https://books.google.com/books?id=SC-wBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=afghan+ambassador+%22marina%22+oswald&source=bl&ots=eeWO2vMFQs&sig=YeD-PxudpNuU4FaKnSO1WT7lS8I&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lFIHVdP5EdDioAS97oJA&ved=0CC0Q6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&q=afghan%20ambassador%20%22marina%22%20oswald&f=false

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Below blogger Conspiracy Critic

There is also an allegation that Marina was raped at age 16 by an Afghan ambassador and that she was kicked out of Leningrad for suspicion of prostitution, or what’s known as a honey pot…With all her “high profile” targets and “relations”, it is thought she used to gain the benefits of pillow talk…tongues tend to loosen when the clothes come off and some alcohol imbibed. Marina supposedly graduated from pharmacology school at age 14, and with her parents out of the picture, and a KGB uncle that took her in following the Leningrad incident, who knows how she could have been used and trained by the KGB.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

I want to know a full list of all JBS members in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were in powerful County and City positions in Dallas in 1963. I want to know which ones were members of the "Friends of Walker" group in Texas. // TREJO

}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
GOLLY YOU LIVE IN TEXAS. CANT YOU DO SOME RESEARCH ??? .....YOU SEEM TO HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO POST....

Edited March 16, 2015 by Steven Gaal