Ruth Paine

[Martin Blank]

Conflating the Oswald Assassination with the Kennedy Assassination is second nature in JFK research.

Another perfect example.

Hemming was involved with JFK's killers 'cause he said he interacted with Oswald?

Either one has a grasp of the principle of "compartmentalization" in intel ops -- or one does not.

Well, Cliff, I find your argument interesting -- and I'd like to see how it might apply to the unfounded but harsh attacks upon Ruth Paine over the years.

Let's take this question as presented by A.J. Weberman about Gerry Patrick Hemming again, please.

According to Weberman, Hemming confessed to him that he offered LHO twice the price of his rifle if LHO would bring it to the TSBD building on 11/22/1963.

Now -- in my reading, this is a conspiracy to make LHO a Patsy in the JFK killing. (And thus, makes Hemming's contacts, like General Walker and Interpen, into the Ground Crew of the JFK killing, instead of the CIA, and so removes the motive for the nonsense that Ruth Paine was in the CIA.)

Again -- Weberman's claim about Hemming's offer of twice the price of his rifle to bring it to the TSBD on 11/22/1963 is, IMHO, part of an obvious conspiracy to make LHO a Patsy in the JFK killing.

What does it mean to you?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

what's more important was what weberman found in bob dylan's garbage

[Cliff Varnell]

Conflating the Oswald Assassination with the Kennedy Assassination is second nature in JFK research.

Another perfect example.

Hemming was involved with JFK's killers 'cause he said he interacted with Oswald?

Either one has a grasp of the principle of "compartmentalization" in intel ops -- or one does not.

Well, Cliff, I find your argument interesting -- and I'd like to see how it might apply to the unfounded but harsh attacks upon Ruth Paine over the years.

Let's take this question as presented by A.J. Weberman about Gerry Patrick Hemming again, please.

According to Weberman, Hemming confessed to him that he offered LHO twice the price of his rifle if LHO would bring it to the TSBD building on 11/22/1963.

Now -- in my reading, this is a conspiracy to make LHO a Patsy in the JFK killing. (And thus, makes Hemming's contacts, like General Walker and Interpen, into the Ground Crew of the JFK killing, instead of the CIA, and so removes the motive for the nonsense that Ruth Paine was in the CIA.)

Again -- Weberman's claim about Hemming's offer of twice the price of his rifle to bring it to the TSBD on 11/22/1963 is, IMHO, part of an obvious conspiracy to make LHO a Patsy in the JFK killing.

What does it mean to you?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

I don't buy a lot of what Hemming says.

The folks who set up Oswald as a Commie Agent of Fidel & the KGB, and managed to get a fake photo in the inventory of autopsy photos, and sent Ruby to kill Oswald, weren't the same folks as killed Kennedy.

Were they coordinated from on high?

Sure, but it involved two discrete operations.

The guys who killed Kennedy were untouchable.

The guys who framed Oswald and had him killed were in the patsy chain, expendable.

Ruth Paine, back up patsy.

CIA as an institution -- back up patsies.

[Chris Newton]

The folks who set up Oswald as a Commie Agent of Fidel & the KGB, and managed to get a fake photo in the inventory of autopsy photos, and sent Ruby to kill Oswald, weren't the same folks as killed Kennedy.

Cliff, I agree. There's a good probability that there were many more than just two compartmentailzed operations.

I think it was the mob's role to clean up the patsy chain and that Tippet and Ruby were part of that.

[Paul Trejo]

New York Times (December 16, 2014): "As a cold war policy tool, the agency was, at times, used as a front for C.I.A. operations and operatives. Among the most infamous examples was the Office of Public Safety, a U.S.A.I.D. police training program in the Southern Cone that also trained torturers." http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/04/15/when-is-foreign-aid-meddling/secret-programs-hurt-foreign-aid-efforts

Well, Andric, that is certainly a chilling report from the New York Times in 2014. Thanks for sharing it.

This explains, probably, why Ruth Paine's efforts for Quaker Charity in Nicaragua and Guatemala in the 1980's was regarded with tremendous fear and suspicion among native relief workers in those same groups, when many of them turned up dead.

The fear and concern was taken to Ruth Paine -- amid wild rumors that she was a CIA Agent connected with Lee Harvey Oswald and the murderers of JFK.

As a result of their RATIONAL FEAR OF BEING KILLED, Ruth Paine wept for the victims in those groups, as she agreed that the suspicions mounted against her had made it impossible for her to do any further Quaker Charity service there.

Ruth Paine left those areas with a broken heart. Charity is often naïve -- but this was too much for anybody. The Cold War was almost intolerable.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

I don't buy a lot of what Hemming says.

The folks who set up Oswald as a Commie Agent of Fidel & the KGB, and managed to get a fake photo in the inventory of autopsy photos, and sent Ruby to kill Oswald, weren't the same folks as killed Kennedy.

Were they coordinated from on high?

Sure, but it involved two discrete operations.

The guys who killed Kennedy were untouchable.

The guys who framed Oswald and had him killed were in the patsy chain, expendable.

Ruth Paine, back up patsy.

CIA as an institution -- back up patsies.

Well, Cliff, NOBODY can buy a lot of what Gerry Patrick Hemming says. His continual lying was one his best methods of Self-defense. He didn't want to be charged with Treason on top of all the other troubles he faced as the Cold War fizzled away.

I realize that this compromises Hemming's confession to Weberman about Oswald's rifle. My only point is that SOME of what Hemming said is verifiably true -- and if (and only if) this confession is true, then it surely simplifies the theory of making LHO into a PATSY.

You suggest that GROUP-1 set up LHO as a Red (in New Orleans and Mexico) AND ALSO falsified the Bethesda autopsy photographs AND ALSO got Ruby to kill LHO.

Then you suggest that GROUP-2 killed JFK.

Then you ask if perhaps GROUP-1 and GROUP-2 were coordinated from a higher group, GROUP-X, but even if so, you wish to keep GROUP-1 and GROUP-2 separate, and to regard GROUP-2 as "untouchable." The people in GROUP-1 you wish to regard as "expendable."

Finally, you also classify Ruth Paine in GROUP-1, and even the CIA in GROUP-1.

Did I get that right, Cliff? Your statements were easy to follow, IMHO.

I like your systematic approach -- but please now consider my own systematic approach.

There was another GROUP -- GROUP-ZZ, that had nothing to do with any of the others, and this Group was responsible for all the US Government COVER-UP activities of the JFK Murder. It was GROUP-ZZ that altered the Bethesda photographs, and tampered with all evidence of the WC in order to push the "Lone Nut" theory of LHO.

Notice how this is the OPPOSITE of GROUP-1, which pushed the "Communist" theory of LHO. That's why they must be separated. Otherwise, I tend to agree with you:

GROUP-1 consisted of Guy Banister's operation in New Orleans. Also there were lower level DPD officers involved in controlling the evidence and controlling Jack Ruby.

GROUP-2 consisted of DPD rogues, Minutemen and NSRP sharpshooters in Dallas.

GROUP-X consisted of General Walker and his core team. Their ultimate goal was to blame the JFK murder on a "Communist" (using GROUP-1) and so entice the USA to invade Cuba and assassinate Fidel Castro.

The CIA was blindsighted by this. Two CIA Agents -- Morales and Hunt -- went rogue and joined Walker's plot.

By keeping GROUP-ZZ (the JFK Cover-up) entirely separate from all the other Groups, we can separate the JFK-Cover-up from the JFK Assassination -- and more easily solve the case.

In my system, the CIA plays no role at all in the scenario -- and thus neither does Ruth Paine.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

GROUP-Z

Edited October 25, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Gene Kelly]

That the Paines were used to set up Oswald is "intuitively obvious to the casual observer"

Beyond George DeMohrenschildt, the larger question is who was behind their efforts ... and their affiliations therefore become important

The Charitable Quaker couple legend is a veneer and doesn't pass a red faced test

[Paul Trejo]

That the Paines were used to set up Oswald is "intuitively obvious to the casual observer"

Beyond George DeMohrenschildt, the larger question is who was behind their efforts ... and their affiliations therefore become important

The Charitable Quaker couple legend is a veneer and doesn't pass a red faced test

Well, Gene, you keep SAYING that, but where's your EVIDENCE?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[David G. Healy]

So being a Quaker makes you charitable? You keep pointing out that Ruth was a Quaker, as if that proves something about her character. I suppose Nixon was full of Christian charity too.

...

It boggles my mind why anybody would want to impute Evil Intentions to this Christian heart.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

well Paul T., let's just say it's an easy assumption when you take into consideration that Richard Milhous Nixon was a "Quaker." Not a big stretch. Doesn't boggle the mind at all.

From: Piers Anthony (who was himself a Quaker), Bio of an Ogre, Berkley Publishing Group: New York, NY (1988), page 63: As [George Bernard] Shaw... said: "What a man believes may be ascertained, not from his creed, but from the assumptions on which he habitually acts." So I endorse much of Quakerism, but have no formal participation. Richard Nixon, whom I regard as our nation's first criminal president, professed to be a Quaker; obviously he was something else.

Edited October 26, 2015 by David G. Healy

[Paul Trejo]

So being a Quaker makes you charitable? You keep pointing out that Ruth was a Quaker, as if that proves something about her character. I suppose Nixon was full of Christian charity too.

...

It boggles my mind why anybody would want to impute Evil Intentions to this Christian heart.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

well Paul T., let's just say it's an easy assumption when you take into consideration that Richard Milhous Nixon was a "Quaker." Not a big stretch. Doesn't boggle the mind at all.

Well, David, you're simply being ABSTRACT about this. My example was CONCRETE, that is, the FIRM EVIDENCE that we have for Ruth Paine shows nothing else but Quaker Charity toward Marina Oswald who was 8 months pregnant when Lee Oswald had no job.

So, Ruth Paine took her into her own home out of Christian Charity.

It boggles my mind why -- given only this evidence -- anybody would want to insinuate that she was a CIA Agent plotting JFK's murder.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[David G. Healy]

So being a Quaker makes you charitable? You keep pointing out that Ruth was a Quaker, as if that proves something about her character. I suppose Nixon was full of Christian charity too.

...

It boggles my mind why anybody would want to impute Evil Intentions to this Christian heart.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

well Paul T., let's just say it's an easy assumption when you take into consideration that Richard Milhous Nixon was a "Quaker." Not a big stretch. Doesn't boggle the mind at all.

Well, David, you're simply being ABSTRACT about this. My example was CONCRETE, that is, the FIRM EVIDENCE that we have for Ruth Paine shows nothing else but Quaker Charity toward Marina Oswald who was 8 months pregnant when Lee Oswald had no job.

So, Ruth Paine took her into her own home out of Christian Charity.

It boggles my mind why -- given only this evidence -- anybody would want to insinuate that she was a CIA Agent plotting JFK's murder.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Vietnam was not abstract Paul. Nor was Watergate.... Nor was Bebe Rebozo... Nixon smelled, still does...

Ruth Paine needs a supporting cast of characters to go on the record supporting her (and your evidently) contentions regarding her alleged Christian charity.

She may well be caught up in the broad brush cast of characters associated with the alleged assassin approach, (becoming) tainted if you will. Way too many skeletons as I'm sure some see it. But this Christian charity angle, that's simply laughable especially with what we now know of Dallas and its characters circa. 1960-64, not to mention LHO.

Edited October 26, 2015 by David G. Healy

[Paul Trejo]

Vietnam was not abstract Paul. Nor was Watergate.... Nor was Bebe Rebozo... Nixon smelled, still does...

Ruth Paine needs a supporting cast of characters to go on the record supporting her (and your evidently) contentions regarding her alleged Christian charity.

She may well be caught up in the broad brush cast of characters associated with the alleged assassin approach, (becoming) tainted if you will. Way too many skeletons as I'm sure some see it. But this Christian charity angle, that's simply laughable especially with what we now know of Dallas and its characters circa. 1960-64, not to mention LHO.

So, David, let's review your logic. (1) Richard Nixon was a Quaker and his politics were catastrophic; (2) Ruth Paine was a Quaker; and (3) therefore her politics were catastrophic.

Does that pretty much summarize your logic, David?

Heck -- why not go whole hog like the English Professor George Michael Evica and just condemn the entire Quaker movement as a CIA plot? Heck, why not go back to William Penn in 1682 and claim that he was also in a "prototype" CIA?

C'mon, David. Offer some SPECIFIC EVIDENCE ON RUTH PAINE. It really doesn't make sense to simply change the topic to Richard Nixon -- or ANYBODY else.

You object because I continually refer to Ruth Paine as a Quaker? But then Paul B. objects if I only refer to her as a Christian. The bias against Ruth Paine is so thick around here, one could cut it with a butterknife.

Ruth Paine doesn't need ANYBODY to support the facts of her life. She took Marina Oswald into her home -- free of charge -- while Marina Oswald was 8 months pregnant and Lee Harvey Oswald had no job.

Those are the facts. Those facts need NO supporting cast of characters. They stand on their own. You continually evade those simple, ordinary, everyday facts, David.

You, like Gene and Paul B., and many others here keep saying words to the effect of, "Way too many skeletons," but you never provide SPECIFIC EVIDENCE of any material value.

Clearly that's a major problem for your side.

Ruth Paine's Christian Charity is NOT AN ANGLE. It's a series of facts. Will you next accuse the CIA of getting Marina pregnant so that Ruth Paine could take care of her?

It's no laughing matter to continue to accuse an innocent woman of the crime of murder, with logic as shabby as y'all have shown around here.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 26, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Brancato]

The Fact that Ruth took a pregnant Marina into her home proves nothing in and of itself. You want to see it as Christian charity. That's your interpretation. It's a FACT that Marina moved in to Ruth's house while pregnant. That doesn't prove anything. Stop asking for proof. You have none to offer.

[Paul Trejo]

The Fact that Ruth took a pregnant Marina into her home proves nothing in and of itself. You want to see it as Christian charity. That's your interpretation. It's a FACT that Marina moved in to Ruth's house while pregnant. That doesn't prove anything. Stop asking for proof. You have none to offer.

The fact that Ruth took a pregnant Marina into her home certainly proves the claim of Charity.

Only a willful bias would argue otherwise.

You want me to stop asking for proof only because you and your side have none yourselves.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

"It is important to recall that the first attempt to mail the parcel was on Wednesday the 20th. It failed for postage due.

But Oswald was at the Paine home on Thursday the 21st, the night before the assassination. If the mailing had been successful, Oswald likely would have opened the package, and then handled the paper. He probably would have discarded it. If he had, one of two things would likely have followed:

1.) The police would have found the discarded wrapping paper.Or

2.) Ruth Paine would have found it. Either way, the police now would have fresh fingerprints on wrapping paper resembling the sack allegedly used by Oswald to carry a rifle into the Texas School Book Depository.

This is crucial because the official story states that Oswald stored the Mannlicher Carcano murder rifle in the Paine garage. To have Oswlald's prints, and only his prints, on a sheet of discarded wrapping paper would have been strong evidence that the alleged assassin had wrapped the murder weapon the night before.

The incredible thing about the above case against the Paines is this: this does not even come close to exhausting it." (p. 207)

As Sylvia Meagher wrote many years ago, it appears that someone knew where Oswald would be the night before the assassination, and what he would be accused of the day of the murder.

But beyond that, these person(s) also knew that a paper bag would become a key piece of evidence against the suspect, who was accused of acting alone. (Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p.64)

Jim,

Where did the bad guys expect that paper bag, theoretically / ideally with Oswald's fingerprints on it (but, strangely, with no gun oil on it), to be found?

In Ruth Paine's wastebasket?

Since the theory would be that Oswald had made the bag for transporting the rifle to the TSBD, how would the finding of it at Ruth Paine's house after the assassination help to frame Oswald?

--Tommy

Its not a good question at all.,

Why? Because it was only 18 inches long.

The rifle was almost twice that length. And one would expect it would be double bagged to mask its true outline.

Edited October 26, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Chris Newton]

Heck, why not go back to William Penn in 1682 and claim that he was also in a "prototype" CIA?

Well, since you brought that up...

There was Robert Townsend, the good Quaker, who became the leader the the Culper Ring. Many consider him to be the greatest American spy of the Revolution. His mistress had been captured by the British because Benedict Arnold had learned her name, she died on a British prison ship.

In addition to being a Quaker, he was a Yale graduate - pretty much "prototype" CIA.