Ruth Paine

[Paul Trejo]

...This whole thing about the WC portrait of the Paines as triple distilled Good Samaritans has collapsed into a hundred pieces. And it started happening about 20 years ago with the sterling work of Carol Hewett. She tracked down who these people actually were, which you will not find one iota of in the WR. They both come from families of spies. And people here actually try and say, well that doesn't mean a blasted thing. Like every family in America has this same background.

Oh really, how many people here are descended from the first families of America, that is the Cabots and Forbes? Please, raise your hands!

How many people have a brother or sister who worked for the CIA, but they were forbidden to talk about it?

How many people had a father who worked for the AID?

How many people visited their sister recently but forgot where she lived, and, in fact, eventually forgot the state in which she lived in?

Now, here is the clincher: who here are part of a family who had all of those characteristics?

(Sound of crickets in the night.)

In the face of facts like that, its almost shocking to me that some people here are still trying to put those hundred pieces back tiogether and return us to the days of the WC.

Well, James DiEugenio, you're a fine and entertaining writer -- but when it comes to building a logical case, there are steps missing.

(1.0) It is only your WISH, James, that the WC Portrait of the Paines as Good Samaritans has "collapsed into a hundred pieces."

(1.1) You haven't presented one solid argument against Ruth Paine that sticks.

(1.2) As for Michael Paine -- I will set him aside for this argument, because I believe he knew far, far more about the Walker shooting (and the Backyard Photographs) than he told the WC (or than he told Ruth Paine).

(2.0) Again -- even though there may be CIA agents on both sides of their family -- we must use common sense -- it simply does not PROVE that because some of my relatives were in the CIA, that I myself must be a CIA agent.

(2.1) That's a major missing step, James.

(2.2) Clearly, few families have CIA agents in them -- but even if they did, they sure wouldn't broadcast it, now would they?

(2.3) The bias against the Paine's boils down to the fact that they were wealthy. But that's unfair to presume on the basis of their family fortune that they were CIA spies and thus JFK Conspirators. Here is another step missing.

(3.0) As for AID, it's not a CIA organization, but an Economic Development organization. Again, to jump from one to the other blatantly misses a step.

(3.1) How many people would rush to tell Jim Garrison -- who was a hothead -- exactly where your sister lived, and how to contact her? I know I'd hesitate -- surely.

(3.2) Lots of Americans are rich, James, and a significant number have CIA Agents in their family tree. It's just not as impossible as you try to make it sound.

(4.0) In no way do I wish to return to the Warren Report. I say that LHO was innocent of the murder of JFK. I say that LHO was made into a Patsy by the Real JFK Killers.

(4.1) But I also say that by jumping to conclusions about the CIA killing JFK, the CT Community has been letting the Real Killers get away scot free!

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 21, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Chris Newton]

Many blue blood, east coast establishment, WASP families are related because they tend to marry inside their social circles. Many of these same families have generations that have attended the same Ivy League institutions and have been involved in intelligence and our military and subsequently our financial institutions and judiciary. The ones I know are fiercely patriotic and believe service and sacrifice for our nation is both a honor and a requirement. To paint them with a broad conspiratal brush is a disservice and dishonest. I also firmly believe that children should not be held accountable for the sins of their fathers.

Ruth Paine is not considered an intelligence asset for what her father did or didn't do, any more than St. James Hunt or Peter Janney. Ruth Paine is under suspicion because of the actions of Ruth Paine.

USAID is frequently used as a cover for intelligence gathering and the institution's myriad previous incarnations were used and abused for the same purpose.

edit -spelling ty Tom

Edited October 20, 2015 by Chris Newton

[Jon G. Tidd]

Paul Trejo,

Please write a diary addressing your last point. Namely, whether to focus on the CIA is to avoid focusing on the killers.

[Paul Trejo]

...Ruth Paine is not considered an intelligence asset for what her father did or didn't do, any more than St. James Hunt or Peter Janney. Ruth Paine is under suspicion because of the actions of Ruth Paine...

I'm open to that Chris; so, please tell us what her precise actions were in the JFK and LHO saga that marks her as suspicious in your eyes.

I appreciate that you are willing to remove her family from the debate -- I think that's important. So, what's left? What did this Quaker Charity lady actually *do* that offends you?

Regards,

--Paul

Edited October 21, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Paul Trejo,

Please write a diary addressing your last point. Namely, whether to focus on the CIA is to avoid focusing on the killers.

Well, Jon, I say (along with Dr. Jeff Caufield) that General Edwin Walker of Dallas is the true planner and executioner of the Dealey Plaza assassination of JFK.

Yet for the past 50 years General Walker and his minions have been getting a free ride.

General Walker and his "Friends of Walker" organization in Dallas, linked to his activities in the JBS, the Minutemen, the NSRP and the Citizens Councils in Dallas -- but also in Louisiana -- involved City Officials, including members of the DPD.

The DPD had total control over the environment of the JFK murder, and over all the evidence in the first hours of the JFK murder. They were in the ideal position to plan and execute this crime -- IN THEIR OWN BACK YARD.

Yet for 50 years the majority of the CT Community has been looking at the CIA, and contradicting themselves and falling all over each other like Keystone Kops -- and the JFK murder has never been solved in that 50 years.

If the CIA really did it -- then the facts would be much clearer after 50 years.

I say it's time to abandon that theory, and to look at the real culprits -- the Radical Right in Dallas.

IMHO, Ruth Paine was too sensitive a person -- too Christian one might say -- to cast aspersions on her neighbors. Ruth Paine, Marina Oswald and Robert Oswald simply accepted the OVERWHELMING CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE that the WC presented to support its "Lone Nut" theory.

But, if Ruth Paine were shown *all* of the evidence -- evidence about the ACCOMPLICES of LHO that the WC withheld, then I believe that even Ruth Paine would join the CT Community.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 21, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Chris Newton]

My personal opinion:

The Paines and Kloepflers were part of network inside the Quaker and Russian communities set up and managed by de Mohrenschildt, collecting and reporting intelligence related to those communities. They were manipulated to be the enablers of Oswald, his domestic "handlers". Oswald was being set up as a patsy and they were there to help create the myth.

[James DiEugenio]

Chris:

I am not saying that Ruth Paine is suspect because of all the connections in her background. Not my point at all.

What I am objecting to is the tendency of some people to say that this does not matter at all, and in fact Ruth Paine has said that. Words to the effect, "everyone's connected."

Baloney. No one here has anywhere near the connections she or Michael have had. Its ridiculous on its face to say something like that is common. It is the opposite, Its very uncommon.

Now, as I said that is not the only reason i am suspect of her. In both Destiny Betrayed, second edition, and Reclaiming Parkland, I go on for pages upon pages detailing a whole array of things that make her and Mike persons of interest. If I had to categorize it, I would say its the numerous fabrications in their testimony, the numerous acts they performed afterwards e.g. the Minox camera charade they cooperated on with Hoover, and the way their testimony has changed over the years,, e.g. about the BYP.

Now, let me make it clear, I do not think Oswald was involved with the Walker shooting. And the WC had evidence this was the case, since they knew the round fired was the wrong color, coating and caliber and could not be fired from the MC rifle. But Hoover--and Warren DeBrueys-- clearly wanted to pin this on Oswald, like the Dallas police did. Therefore, even though Liebeler thought this was kind of dumb, they went along with it.

And if Oswald did not fire at Walker, what was the photo of his house doing at the Paines, taken by a camera that-- according to the police--was not there at the time?

Edited October 21, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

PT: But I also say that by jumping to conclusions about the CIA killing JFK, the CT Community has been letting the Real Killers get away scot free!

You know, sometimes I wonder.

​The idea that the CIA has been the only group or agency the JFK critical community has accused is simply wrong.

​I mean Farewell America accused the radical right in Texas of killing Kennedy way back in 1968.

What about, A Texan Looks at Lyndon? Way back in 1964.

​What about the Torbitt Document, (1971) which has a very wide ranging plot including the hard right in Texas and the Mafia.

Have you missed the Johnson mania craze started by Barr McClellan? Including people like Philip Nelson?

​Did you miss the Mafia did it books by Blakey, Davis, Scheim etc.

​Why are you so only a CIA apologist?

Edited October 21, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Glenn Nall]

Boy, that Edwin A. Walker was sure one lucky SOB, wasn't he? He was plotting to set up Oswald as a patsy back in April '63 (per Mr. Trejo), and LHO just happens to get the TSBD job on Oct. 15 (with the help of someone who cannot possibly be looked upon as a "co-conspirator", Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle of Irving).

And then, on top of all that, LHO decides he's going to act like a very guilty person on 11/22/63 shortly after 12:30.

You've got to admit, Paul, good fortune like that doesn't come along every day of the week. General Walker must have had TWO crystal balls working for him in the summer and fall of 1963. Maybe three.

Tell me, Paul, what makes YOUR theory re: Walker any more FACTUAL and any LESS SPECULATIVE than any OTHER theory offered up by any other conspiracy theorist?

Have you got any hard evidence---as opposed to just outright speculation and guesswork? I certainly didn't see anything besides speculation and conjecture in your Post #25 above.

And General Walker's papers hardly qualify as proof he had JFK killed.

Thank you.

David, my purpose on this thread is to argue that Ruth Paine didn't have anything to do with the JFK murder. That's my main purpose here. There are other threads in which the case against General Walker is being made (e.g. "New Book" by William O'Neil).

The trouble with defending Ruth Paine is, as you've agreed, that the CIA-did-it CTers are closed-minded about their opinion, and they jump to conclusions promptly.

As for the Walker-did-it scenario, there is plenty of evidence, IMHO, although no smoking gun -- yet. So, I agree with you on that point.

Also, the sheer exhaustion of 50 years of failed CIA-did-it theories is enough to make anybody Skeptical of any CT. So, I sympathize with your frustration -- I really do.

Yet here are the facts: The ARRB released "The Lopez Report" in 2003, which confirms Jim Garrison's theory of LHO working with Guy Banister in New Orleans to assemble a resume specifically to take to the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City to obtain *immediate* passage to Cuba -- as FPCC Directors regularly obtained.

Then, in 2009, the ARRB released Douglas Horne's careful work showing that David Lifton's suspicions in this landmark book, "Best Evidence" (1986) were entirely correct. The Bethesda autopsy was indeed deliberately falsified, and a JFK Cover-up can be proven scientifically. The actual medical evidence (the Best Evidence) proves that there were multiple shooters at Dealey Plaza.

So -- we know that there were multiple shooters, and we know that LHO was working for the Radical Right. We know this with scientific rigor.

Does it really take a genius to connect the dots at this point?

We need only ask -- who was the leader of the Radical Right wing in Dallas in 1963? It was General Walker -- for those who know US History. Walker ran for Texas Governor in 1962 on a Segregationist ticket, financed by H.L. Hunt, and he lost soundly in May 1962. Then, Walker fomented a race riot at Ole Miss in September 1962, opposing James Meredith's registration there. (Hundreds were wounded and two were killed at that riot on 30 September 1962.)

In response, JFK and RFK had Walker taken into custody by an insane asylum in Missouri for a 90-day evaluation. But in three days the ACLU and psychiatrist Thomas Szasz got Walker released. When Walker flew back to Dallas, and landed at Love Field, Walker was greeted by his Dallas supporters who were still backing Walker for President in 1966. Here's the DMN photograph:

http://photographyblog.dallasnews.com/2012/10/today-in-dallas-photo-history-1962-60s-right-wing-figure-gen-edwin-walker-at-love-field.html/

Notice what appears to be tear-gas stains on his left sleeve. Notice the Confederate Flag above his head. Also, notice the "Walker for President" placards. Walker was BELOVED in Dallas.

In January, 1963, a Mississippi Grand Jury acquitted General Walker of all charges related to the Ole Miss riots. Evidently, the JFK action of sending Walker to an insane asylum won Walker lots of sympathy.

Next, Walker and Segregationist Reverend Billy James Hargis made a coast-to-coast "Midnight Ride" tour of the South, from Miami to Los Angeles, preaching that JFK was a Communist.

When they returned to Dallas in April, that very next night, LHO tried to kill Walker -- goaded on by George De Mohrenschildt (I'm a Patsy! I'm a Patsy!, 1978) and Volkmar Schmdit (see FRONTLINE, Who was Lee Harvey Oswald, PBS video: [,]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5eGdgVkHeE],and skip to 37:55)

Also, I suspect that Michael Paine, who knew Volkmar Schmidt, was also part of the cabal to convince LHO to kill Edwin Walker. The argument that Volkmar used on LHO was that Walker was "like Hitler."

IMHO, the assassination attempt on General Walker was the *prime motive* for Walker to murder JFK. As he said multiple times in his personal papers, he believed that JFK and RFK sent LHO to kill him.

Walker was at one time a great US General. He was turned, however, by the John Birch Society and their rigid dogma that all US Presidents since FDR had been Communists -- especially JFK.

In their twisted world, killing JFK was good for the USA.

I'm convinced that nobody else in Dallas knew Dallas well enough -- nobody else was motivated enough -- nobody else was trained enough in US military science -- and nobody else was as respected enough by the Dallas Police -- to plan and execute the JFK murder in Dallas.

Even Larry Hancock, who has tried to involve at least Rogue CIA Agents in the JFK murder, had to admit that somebody inside Dallas was absolutely mandatory -- somebody who was well-connected and knew Dallas like the back of his hand.

So -- on the basis of US History and the material facts -- I want to continue to see how far I can build a case against General Walker in the murder of JFK.

It hasn't been done in the past 50 years -- it's a brand new CT. But with scholars like Jeff Caufield on my side, I am more motivated than ever to slug this out.

The CIA-did-it theories have to stretch and jump to reach any conclusion. The Mafia-did-it theories can only survive by making J. Edgar Hoover into a hoodlum. The LBJ-did-it theories are the most biased and drooling of all. (Sadly, Mark North, who was relatively level headed in the 1990's, came out in 2011 with his latest CT, "Betrayal in Dallas," which combines the Mafia-Hoover-LBJ in his science-fiction world.)

As for Ruth Paine, if she knows more than she told the WC, it has to be about Michael Paine's interaction with Volkmar Schmidt and the plot against General Walker.

If she truly knows nothing further about the Walker plot, then I must conclude that she was kept in the dark, just as Marina Oswald was kept in the dark -- as this was the most common treatment of women in 1963, even among Left-wing activists.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

"**Also, the sheer exhaustion of 50 years of failed CIA-did-it theories is enough to make anybody Skeptical of any CT. So, I sympathize with your frustration -- I really do.**"

what a ridiculous statement - ALL theories, by your logic, are failed, until one is proven. Why is a CIA-did-it theory more of a failure than Walker-didit? Neither have been proven, or even given a gold star.

I happen to think JFK was in on it (with supporting photographic "evidence"). What makes my theory any more of a failure than Oswald-did-it, or a Moron-for-a-general-did-it?

you paint, sir, with an awfully broad brush. paradoxically placing you into an awfully small box.

[Chris Newton]

Jim, check your messages ...

And if Oswald did not fire at Walker, what was the photo of his house doing at the Paines, taken by a camera that-- according to the police--was not there at the time?

Great observation!

[Glenn Nall]

a little interrelationship nachtmusik:

Mary Bancroft, Allen Dulles' mistress & primary OSS contact with the "20th of July" assassination plotters against Adolf Hitler.

- close friend of Michael Paine's parents.

-- According to researcher Gus Russo, FBI and ONI documents reveal that Michael Paine's wife, Ruth, had made inquiries of Lee Harvey Oswald in 1957 -- six years before the Warren Commission claimed they had met

Allen Dulles' uncle, Robert Lansing, had been Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of State.

· Woodrow Wilson also had several powerful University of Texas personalities in his cabinet:

o David Franklyn Houston

o Albert Sidney Burleson

o Thomas Watt Gregory

o Colonel Edward M. House, then a kingmaker in Texas politics was the man principally responsible for Wilson being nominated for and elected President.

· Hugh Bancroft married Jane Waldron Wallis Bancroft, his second wife, stepdaughter of Clarence Walker Barron, publisher of The Wall Street Journal, who appears to have had foreknowledge of President Warren G. Harding's death. (story available as told by Mary Bancroft)

· Mary Bancroft first husband, Sherwin Badger, had a job lined up at United Fruit (CIA) prior to 1923,later went to work for the Boston News Bureau, then transferred to The Wall Street Journal, eventually became editor of Barron’s

· Michael Paine was descended from the Cabots on both his father's and his mother's side; he was thus a second cousin once removed of Thomas Dudley Cabot, former President of United Fruit who offered another of his companies, Gibralter Steamship, as "cover" for the CIA during the Bay of Pigs. also a cousin of Cabot's partner,

o Paul F. Hellmuth, VP of Cabot, Cabot and Forbes, was a trustee of the J. Frederick Brown Foundation, a CIA "conduit", along with G.C. Cabot.

· Michael Paine’s uncle, Eric Schroeder, a friend and investment associate of Dallas oil man, Everette Lee deGolyer;

o cousin Alexander "Sandy" Forbes, former director of United Fruit, member of Tryall Golf Club retreat in Jamaica with former deGolyer associate

o Paul Raigorodsky, a financial patron of the St. Nicholas Parish

1943, Mary Bancroft was asked by Dulles to translate a book on the Third Reich by Hans Bernd Gisevius, a member of Admiral Canaris' Abwehr –

post July 20 failure: By July 23 Gisevius had managed to find a hiding place where he waited for Dulles to smuggle false papers to him. On January 20, 1945 the papers appeared.

On her relationship with Dulles, Mary Bancroft. says, "He knew that there was nothing he could say or do that would affect in the slightest my deep affection for him. He was also aware that I knew his dark side and that it didn't bother me in the least."

In the fall of 1953, Mary Bancroft. moved back to the States permanently and Sherwin, Jr. started working for Time magazine. Of particular interest, Bancroft reveals that "Gisevius married his Fräulein Braut, spent some time in Texas, then returned to Germany where he published several more books; he finally settled on the Lake of Geneva near Vevey. We kept in touch until his death in 1974."

In Leonard Mosley's 1978 book, Dulles. Mosley says that in 1948, a year after her divorce from Jean Rufenacht, "Mary Bancroft was still a friend of Allen Dulles, as she would continue to be until his death, but the intimacy they had achieved in wartime Switzerland had now gone out of their relationship. Mrs. Bancroft had turned her strong personality in other directions and lighted upon Henry M. Luce, president and editor-in-chief of Time magazine [and...?], whom she set out to "convert" from his right-wing ways to her more liberal philosophy."

Mosley says about Allen Dulles: He had periods when he was out on the tennis courts owned by the Belins (challenging and beating Bill Bundy, Jim Angleton, and Bob Amory, or other members of the Agency's top echelon bold enough to take him on.")

Now, either this is the family of

§ David Belin, Warren Commission attorney,

or the family of

§ Gaspard d'Andelot Belin, acting Secretary of the Treasury at the time of the assassination (making him the head of the Secret Service because Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon was out of the country) and husband of Harriet Lowell Bundy, niece of McGeorge Bundy...

George de Mohrenschildt (in 1940 worked briefly for distant cousin, Baron Constantine Maydell, the top German Abwehr agent in the U.S.) had introduced Oswald to Volkmar Schmidt, who had lived and studied with one of the July 20 plotters.

Schmidt, After talking to Oswald wanted him to meet Michael Paine, and arranged the Magnolia Labs party where, allegedly, Oswald and Ruth Paine met (and eventually got him the job in the School Book Depository)

§ Oswald also met, at the party, a man whose father had worked for C.D. Jackson's Radio Free Europe. Jackson, along with having bought the Zapruder film for Henry Luce's Life magazine, was the CIA's propaganda mastermind

And just what is the rest of the story of Gisevius' grandiose ideas that required currents of power in the United States? Was this his motivation for a trip to Texas? Researcher Bruce Campbell Adamson discovered that, by 1953, Hans Gisevius was working for Dresser Industries, a Dallas-based oil equipment company.

· Henry Neil Mallon, Dresser Industries long-time chairman of the board, and newly appointed CIA Director Allen Dulles were mutual friends of Gisevius, who was "handling" a worldwide economic development program called the "Institute on Technical Cooperation."

o Prescott Bush, the father George HW Bush, had just ended a 22-year stint on Dresser's board to take his seat in the U.S. Senate in 1952.

§ International Derrick and Equipment Company (IDECO), a Dresser Industries subsidiary, George HW Bush got his start in 1948 (Bush's third son: Neil Mallon Bush was born on January 22, 1955, in Midland, Texas)

· Neil Mallon helped introduce Allen Dulles to the wealthy and influential in Dallas society.

· when George Bush was founding Zapata Oil (which later explored for oil near a Caribbean base used for CIA raids against Cuba), Prescott Bush and Neil Mallon were meeting in Washington, D.C. with CIA Director Dulles to discuss a "Pilot Project" in the Carribean.

There's more. loads more. it's what appears to me to be what's known as a "network."

So, Paul, care to explain with a few more details how Mary and Allen and the Paines' are of absolutely no relevance to the assassination of JFK?

With baited breath,

Me

Edited October 21, 2015 by Glenn Nall

[Paul Trejo]

PT: But I also say that by jumping to conclusions about the CIA killing JFK, the CT Community has been letting the Real Killers get away scot free!

You know, sometimes I wonder.

​The idea that the CIA has been the only group or agency the JFK critical community has accused is simply wrong.

​I mean Farewell America accused the radical right in Texas of killing Kennedy way back in 1968.

What about, A Texan Looks at Lyndon? Way back in 1964.

​What about the Torbitt Document, (1971) which has a very wide ranging plot including the hard right in Texas and the Mafia.

Have you missed the Johnson mania craze started by Barr McClellan? Including people like Philip Nelson?

​Did you miss the Mafia did it books by Blakey, Davis, Scheim etc.

​Why are you so only a CIA apologist?

My reasoning, James, is threefold:

(1) the CIA-did-it theories far outnumber any other theories. There is hardly any comparison, really.

(2) The Mafia-did-it theories, led by Robert Blakey (1981), are weak as dandelions. All suspicion and virtually Zero Facts. They are a literary diversion -- like Pulp Fiction.

(3) The LBJ-did-it theories, led by Craig Zirbel (1991, the best of the lot), again, are all suspicion and virtually Zero Facts. One of the later writers in this fiction genre, Barr McClellan, famously said that his "proof" that LBJ was the "mastermind" of the JFK murder was that LBJ knew almost Nothing about the details. That's the sort of weak logic we get from *that* Pulp Fiction.

The CIA-did-it theories are the best of the lot in the past 50 years, because they tend to build upon the Warren Report, which is the source of First-Hand Information.

We begin with Jim Garrison's investigation, which began as a prosecution of David Ferrie and the Radical Right in NOLA, and when Ferrie was killed, Garrison quickly turned to the prosecution of Clay Shaw, a former CIA informant. With this switch -- and to explain the failure of his shaky case against Shaw -- Jim Garrison just blamed the JFK murder on the CIA.

Then Mark Lane -- who was himself a *witness* for the Warren Commission -- got into the CIA-did-it theory, and gave us his tour-de-force, Plausible Denial in 1991, which blames Howard Hunt and stands pat.

Of course, we know that some ROGUES in the CIA were involved, because they actually confessed. Howard Hunt confessed on his death bed, and David Morales also confessed. But that's it. We have only TWO -- and they weren't Top-Level in CIA.

All the others that the CIA-did-it theorists name were Street-level Mercenaries -- like Frank Sturgis, Johnny Roselli, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, David Ferrie, Frank Crisman, Thomas Beckham, Jack S. Martin, and so many more.

While all these street-level mercenaries would take money from the CIA to try to eliminate Fidel Castro, they would also work for *anybody* who gave them money -- including the Mafia, the NSRP, the Minutemen, or whomever. Street-level mercenaries craved money -- and the Underground had far more than the CIA.

The reason I like Jeff Caufield's new theory, is that he traces the same people traced by Jim Garrison -- but he is willing to set the CIA aside for a few minutes, and recognize patterns among the principals -- aside from the CIA.

That's when General Edwin Walker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century, forfeiting his 30 year pension -- rises to the top of the heap.

The link with Ruth Paine is zero. However, the link with Michael Paine is significant, and involves Volkmar Schmidt and George De Mohrenschildt with regard to *opposing* General Walker.

So, James, I want to meet you half-way here -- and admit that Michael Paine remains suspicious to me (with regard to the Walker angle) but Ruth Paine shows nothing more than Quaker Charity from early 1963 through late 1963.

Remember, too, that the Paine's were separated for 1963, until the JFK murder. It's the blind effort to mush them together and try to add the CIA to the mix -- it really isn't working, IMHO.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 21, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Glenn Nall]

such a tiny box you live in, Paul. No offense, but you've so closed your mind to any kind of variation by your strict concept of labels.

IMHO

[Paul Trejo]

...In both Destiny Betrayed, second edition, and Reclaiming Parkland, I go on for pages upon pages detailing a whole array of things that make her and Mike persons of interest. If I had to categorize it, I would say its the numerous fabrications in their testimony, the numerous acts they performed afterwards e.g. the Minox camera charade they cooperated on with Hoover, and the way their testimony has changed over the years, e.g. about the BYP.

Now, let me make it clear, I do not think Oswald was involved with the Walker shooting. And the WC had evidence this was the case, since they knew the round fired was the wrong color, coating and caliber and could not be fired from the MC rifle. But Hoover--and Warren DeBrueys-- clearly wanted to pin this on Oswald, like the Dallas police did. Therefore, even though Liebeler thought this was kind of dumb, they went along with it.

And if Oswald did not fire at Walker, what was the photo of his house doing at the Paines, taken by a camera that-- according to the police--was not there at the time?

OK, James, but let's separate Ruth and Michael, and deal with them separately. Michael Paine changed his testimony about the Backyard Photographs -- but Ruth Paine never did. Ruth Paine's claim from 1963 until today is that she never saw the Backyard Photographs until after the FBI showed them to her.

Michael Paine, however, changed his testimony -- he told the WC that he never saw thy BYP before 11/22/1963, but he told Dan Rather in 1993 that he saw the BYP, in LHO's own apartment, on April 2nd, 1963.

THAT'S A MAJOR CLUE TO THE JFK MURDER. It means that Michael was more involved in the Walker shooting than he was willing to admit in 1964 to the WC.

I must point out that the same applies to George De Mohrenschildt. George DM claimed to the WC that he never saw the BYP until 1964, when he "accidentally" found it in his luggage. But in George's 1978 book for the HSCA, "I'm A Patsy!", George DM said that in early 1963 he and LHO would call General Walker "General Fokker".

My point is that there was a PLOT to kill General Walker, and it admittedly involved Volkmar Schmidt, George De Mohrenschildt and Lee Harvey Oswald -- and possibly Michael Paine and perhaps others in that small liberal circle in Dallas.

This is the key to the JFK assassination. But it was lied about in the WC, and only revealed later in 1978 and 1993.

Here is the point I would like to engage with you, James -- you say firmly that you "do not think Oswald was involved with the Walker shooting." Yet the alternative is to construct a fallacy that is as unacceptable as the WC's Single Bullet Theory.

The alternative is to claim that the FBI and Secret Service *invented* the Walker Shooting connection to LHO by some sort of *conspiracy* to bribe the Paines, the De Mohrenschildt's and Marina Oswald!

That five people who HATED General Walker would cooperate to make him into a victim of LHO, just as General Walker WANTED, is illogical in the extreme.

Nobody could get such a conspiracy to work, even if it was invented.

While it is certain that the Walker bullet cannot be linked to Oswald's rifle -- nobody ever proved that LHO was ALONE in the Walker shooting (although that is what LHO told Marina). Nobody ever proved that LHO was on FOOT in the Walker shooting (although that is what LHO told Marina).

It's one thing to question what Marina said -- it's something very different to question what LHO told Marina.

The evidence says that there were TWO shooters that night, in a car.

What *actually* convicts LHO of the Walker shooting is his own handwriting -- the WALKER LETTER. That confirms Marina's story with scientific precision.

Any other interpretation gives us a theory as backward as the SBT, namely, that there was a conspiracy to lie about LHO and the Walker shooting. But WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD ANYBODY EVEN DREAM ABOUT MAKING THAT CONNECTION IF IT WASN'T TRUE? It's too convoluted.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 21, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Glenn Nall]

PT: But I also say that by jumping to conclusions about the CIA killing JFK, the CT Community has been letting the Real Killers get away scot free!

You know, sometimes I wonder.

​The idea that the CIA has been the only group or agency the JFK critical community has accused is simply wrong.

​I mean Farewell America accused the radical right in Texas of killing Kennedy way back in 1968.

What about, A Texan Looks at Lyndon? Way back in 1964.

​What about the Torbitt Document, (1971) which has a very wide ranging plot including the hard right in Texas and the Mafia.

Have you missed the Johnson mania craze started by Barr McClellan? Including people like Philip Nelson?

​Did you miss the Mafia did it books by Blakey, Davis, Scheim etc.

​Why are you so only a CIA apologist?

My reasoning, James, is threefold:

(1) the CIA-did-it theories far outnumber any other theories. There is hardly any comparison, really.

(2) The Mafia-did-it theories, led by Robert Blakey (1981), are weak as dandelions. All suspicion and virtually Zero Facts. They are a literary diversion -- like Pulp Fiction.

(3) The LBJ-did-it theories, led by Craig Zirbel (1991, the best of the lot), again, are all suspicion and virtually Zero Facts. One of the later writers in this fiction genre, Barr McClellan, famously said that his "proof" that LBJ was the "mastermind" of the JFK murder was that LBJ knew almost Nothing about the details. That's the sort of weak logic we get from *that* Pulp Fiction.

The CIA-did-it theories are the best of the lot in the past 50 years, because they tend to build upon the Warren Report, which is the source of First-Hand Information.

We begin with Jim Garrison's investigation, which began as a prosecution of David Ferrie and the Radical Right in NOLA, and when Ferrie was killed, Garrison quickly turned to the prosecution of Clay Shaw, a former CIA informant. With this switch -- and to explain the failure of his shaky case against Shaw -- Jim Garrison just blamed the JFK murder on the CIA.

Then Mark Lane -- who was himself a *witness* for the Warren Commission -- got into the CIA-did-it theory, and gave us his tour-de-force, Plausible Denial in 1991, which blames Howard Hunt and stands pat.

Of course, we know that some ROGUES in the CIA were involved, because they actually confessed. Howard Hunt confessed on his death bed, and David Morales also confessed. But that's it. We have only TWO -- and they weren't Top-Level in CIA.

All the others that the CIA-did-it theorists name were Street-level Mercenaries -- like Frank Sturgis, Johnny Roselli, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, David Ferrie, Frank Crisman, Thomas Beckham, Jack S. Martin, and so many more.

While all these street-level mercenaries would take money from the CIA to try to eliminate Fidel Castro, they would also work for *anybody* who gave them money -- including the Mafia, the NSRP, the Minutemen, or whomever. Street-level mercenaries craved money -- and the Underground had far more than the CIA.

The reason I like Jeff Caufield's new theory, is that he traces the same people traced by Jim Garrison -- but he is willing to set the CIA aside for a few minutes, and recognize patterns among the principals -- aside from the CIA.

That's when General Edwin Walker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century, forfeiting his 30 year pension -- rises to the top of the heap.

The link with Ruth Paine is zero. However, the link with Michael Paine is significant, and involves Volkmar Schmidt and George De Mohrenschildt with regard to *opposing* General Walker.

So, James, I want to meet you half-way here -- and admit that Michael Paine remains suspicious to me (with regard to the Walker angle) but Ruth Paine shows nothing more than Quaker Charity from early 1963 through late 1963.

Remember, too, that the Paine's were separated for 1963, until the JFK murder. It's the blind effort to mush them together and try to add the CIA to the mix -- it really isn't working, IMHO.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

"Then Mark Lane -- who was himself a *witness* for the Warren Commission -- got into the CIA-did-it theory, and gave us his tour-de-force, Plausible Denial in 1991, which blames Howard Hunt and stands pat."

um, begging your pardon, but it wasn't Mark Lane who cast the blame, it was the preponderance of evidence. As far as I know, Mark Lane was not a jury member - who were the ones who ultimately decided the verdict AGAINST E Howard Hunt.

objective participators in this thing do not "get themselves" into a theory - we are led to it by data. No one said, "hey, i'll start with the CIA and see if that fits." it's the other way around.

for the more logical ones, i think.