The Education Forum

# L.H.O. at the American Museum of Atomic Energy

## Recommended Posts

The July 26, 1963 entry on line 13 of the Visitor's Register at the American Museum of Atomic Energy reads:

"7-26-63, Lee H Oswald U.S.S.R., Dallas Rd, Dalls"

Or does it?

Bill Kelly has the best copy of this register that I've seen. Enlarge it and keep it handy for a minute.

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2010/10/lee-h-oswald-at-atomic-energy-museum.html

I submit that the entry on the Visitor's Register is an "ICO" puzzle. "ICO" stands for "Igor", "Case", and, "Oswald".

A central question that was intentionally designed into this puzzle, (maybe "THE" central quesion, from a puzzle-solver's point of view) is: "Does the date indicated anagram to the serial number "C-2766", the serial number of the Mannlicher Carcano rifle associated with A Hidell/Lee Oswald?

A non-trivial central question then, is: "Does the register say '7-26-63', or '7-26-62'"?

I can't answer that; the digit in quesion appears ambiguous.

You try. Take a closer look at the number "3" in "63", and try to decide if that is a "3", or in fact a "2". This is not trivial! As in so many other "ICO" puzzles, it is the ambiguities that lead not only to the puzzle's solution, but can provide the puzzle-solver with confidence that he/she is working on an intentionally created puzzle, and not just making stuff up. This will happen when the puzzle itself points out the ambiguity. The ambiguity is "The Irritant in the Oyster".

Below is ICO's key for translating numbers into letters and vice versa. This is the simplest such key known to mankind:

(A=0)(B=1)(C=2)(D=3)(E=4)(F=5)(G=6)(H=7)(I=8)(J=9)(K=10)(L=11)(M=12)(N=13)(O=14)(P=15)(Q=16)(R=17)(S=18)(T=19)(U=20)(V=21)(W=22)(X=23)(Y=24)(Z=25)

I'm going to assume for a moment that it is a "62" in the date, "7-26-62", and using the key above, translate one of the number "2s" to a "C". The date now anagrams to:

"C-2766"

Hang in there for a moment, and we will see some puzzle answers that tell us that the ambiguous number "2" or "3" in the year, "62" or "63", should be regarded as a "2".

But first, let's anagram the next item on line 13:

"LEE H OSWALD, U.S.S.R."

This anagrams to:

"L HOWARD USELESS"

While it may be true that "L HOWARD" was "USELESS", that was not the intent of this puzzle answer. Here is how it should read:

"L HOWARD: USE LESS"

Those that have been following my posts will remember that a major tool of the ICO puzzles is something called the "ONION". It simply involves removing all of the duplicate letters from a piece of discourse. The word "ONION", for example, would become, "ONI". The phrase "USE LESS" is telling us to reduce the number of letters, and the "ICO ONION" is their way.

"L HOWARD: USE LESS", with the "ONION", becomes:

"L HOWARD USE"

And if we added this to our first answer, "C-2766", as we should, we get:

"L HOWARD USE C-2766"

Forget that. Now we are going to use the "ONION" on the entire line. Keep in mind that our central question is the date; whether or not it should be regarded as "62". But for this exercise, I'll go ahead and enter "63" (It actually makes no difference for what happens next) Here is the assumed line again:

"7-26-63, LEE H OSWALD U.S.S.R., DALLAS RD, DALLS"

I'll translate the numbers to letters (grade-school-level decryption):

"HCGGD, LEE H OSWALD U.S.S.R., DALLAS RD, DALLS"

Next, I'll remove all of the multiple letters, i.e. the "ONION" (grade-school-level decryption):

"HCGDLEOSWAUR"

Finally, I will make two anagrams of the above letters:

(1) "L HOWARD: USE '62'"

(2) "H OSWALD URGE '2'"

I regard those as a couple of reasonable answers to our puzzle's question, "2 or "3"?

The "ONION" is one of two methods that ICO used to hide their puzzles in larger pieces of discourse. Their second method was to hide the puzzle in the "primary letters" of a piece of discourse. The "Primary Letters are the first letter of each word, plus any numbers that are present. In this next puzzle step, both the "Primary Letter" trick, and the "ONION" trick are required, and this is not uncommon.

Here is our line 13 again:

"7-26-63, Lee H Oswald U.S.S.R., Dallas Rd, Dalls"

First I will change the numbers to letters:

"HCGGD, Lee H Oswald, U.S.S.R., Dallas Rd, Dalls"

Now we will keep only the primary letters:

"HCGGD, LHO USSR, DR, D"

Next I will apply the "ONION" to the above:

"HCGDLOUSR"

This anagrams to:

"GOLD RUSH C"

And when we translate the "C" to the number "2":

"GOLD RUSH '2'"

Or,

"GOLD RUSH: '2'"

And this is a ICO tripple entendre. The first Gold Rush was in 1849 when gold was discovered in California. The "2nd" gold rush, metaphorically speaking, was the rush for uranium. And here we are at the American Museum of Atomic Energy, and not so coinsidentally, "GOLD RUCH "2"", is the search for the number "2" in this puzzle, and EUREKA!

"GOLD RUSH '2'"

EUREKA! And I have just put you through three or four steps of "grade-school-level" encryption.

"GOLD RUSH '2'" also anagrams to:

"L'S ROUGH 2/3"

And this is where we started: the date of "63" or "62" that was "ROUGH", that was "ambiguous", and prompted us to look deeper.

Do you have doubts that the "62/63" date at the beginning of the line was intentionally ambiguous?

Do you have doubts that one of the primary goals of this ICO puzzle was to point out this"2/3" ambiguity?

One more thing: Notice that there is a missing "a" in Dallas, and that "Texas" was crossed out. One reason for these omissions, I submit, was so the puzzle could end up being "32" letters long.

The essential hook of this puzzle, is, "Is it a '3', or is it a '2'"? "Is it a '2', or is it a '3'"?

Look deeper. Richard Case Nagell, with more than competent help from Igor V Vaganov, created (I'm guessing) more than 200 coded puzzles to tell the trio's story of the assassination, and what they, ICO, were doing to prevent it.

ICO was/were the good guys; the patsy-story-tellers; low level spooks; tangled up in the assassination of another "good-guy", in their view and in mine.

I only scratched the surface of the above puzzle in this post.

ICO, I submit, told us a whole lot of what they knew about the assassination. I assume ICO had reasons for choosing the medium they did - an omnibus of solvable coded puzzles - an "ICO Time Bomb".

I'm not making this up (at least I'm trying not to).

Tom

Edited by Tom Hume
##### Share on other sites

at least i'm trying not to. that's funny...

as a newbie in here, i don't even know if this post is intentionally ambiguous, or a red herring. heck i don't even know if you're real name is Tom -

so i'll just ask: does it matter if LHO was at the museum in July of 63?

why would it be 62 if the other entries are mostly 63?

##### Share on other sites

Hi Glenn,

You wrote:

"as a newbie in here, i don't even know if this post is intentionally ambiguous, or a red herring. heck i don't even know if you're real name is Tom -

so i'll just ask: does it matter if LHO was at the museum in July of 63?

why would it be 62 if the other entries are mostly 63?"

I don't think it matters whether Lee Oswald was at the American Museum of Atomic Energy in Oak Ridge, Tennessee on July 26, 1963 or not. The point is that whoever wrote the "Lee H Oswald" entry had created a solvable anagram puzzle, the same sort of puzzle that surrounds many of Oswald's activities leading up to the assassination.

Oswald gave a speech the following day, July 27, 1963, at Spring Hill College in Mobile, Alabama, a couple hours drive from where he was living in New Orleans. New Orleans to Oak Ridge, Tennessee, would have been about a ten-hour drive, so I suppose it would have been possible. A sharp researcher on this forum might know where Oswald was supposed to have been on the 26th, but I haven't been able to form an opinion.

It's my belief, however, that Lee Oswald was not one of the "ICO" puzzle makers; Richard Case Nagel and Igor Vaganov did that, and since many of the puzzle answers from my previous post are signed with a "C", my bet would be that Richard "Case" Nagell created and entered the "Lee H Oswald" puzzle at the Atomic Energy Museum.

Your second question, Glenn, "why would it be 62 if the other entries are mostly 63?"

Anomalies in discourse surrounding Lee Oswald are often the key to untangling an intentionally created ICO puzzle. I'm used to looking for the anomalies.

If one notices the confusion over whether the "Lee H Oswald" entry in the register says "7-26-63" or "7-26-62", and realizes that the "62/63" anomaly might have meaning, and notices that the numbers in "7-26-62" anagram to "C-2766" (see footnote), the serial number of the A Hidell/Lee Oswald Mannlicher Carcano rifle, and notices that making anagrams from the rest of the puzzle tell one over and over again that the answer to the date entry is "62", one might come to suspect that one is working on an intentionally created Lee Oswald puzzle. Just one of over 200 enigmatic puzzles created to eventually be noticed, solved, and learned from. The ICO puzzles tell the same story over and over and over again, the story of who the bad guys were, and who the good guys were, and what the good guys were doing to prevent the assassination.

Tom

Footnote Letter/Number translation device:

(A=0)(B=1)(C=2)(D=3)(E=4)(F=5)(G=6)(H=7)(I=8)(J=9)(K=10)(L=11)(M=12)(N=13)(O=14)(P=15)(Q=16)(R=17)(S=18)(T=19)(U=20)(V=21)(W=22)(X=23)(Y=24)(Z=25)

Edited by Tom Hume