The Real Ruth and Michael Paine

[Paul Brancato]

In 1996 Marina said that she no longer believed LHO was guilty, that she had been misled by 'evidence' presented to her while she was in FBI protective custody, and that as a result she 'assisted in the conviction of Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin'.

I'm mostly with Greg on this argument, and feel that using Marina's testimony as proof of anything, as if we could reasonably ascertain when her statements were truthful and when they weren't, or when they may have been coerced, is a fool's errand.

[Paul Trejo]

In 1996 Marina said that she no longer believed LHO was guilty, that she had been misled by 'evidence' presented to her while she was in FBI protective custody, and that as a result she 'assisted in the conviction of Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin'.

I'm mostly with Greg on this argument, and feel that using Marina's testimony as proof of anything, as if we could reasonably ascertain when her statements were truthful and when they weren't, or when they may have been coerced, is a fool's errand.

Well, that could be misleading, Paul B.

It's not as though Marina Oswald was entirely against LHO during the Warren Commission hearings, and then made a 180 degree turn to reverse herself in 1996.

In fact, Marina Oswald said often during the Warren Commission hearings that she DIDN'T believe that LHO was JFK's killer -- at least not his sole killer. She tried to argue her case as well as she could -- but she was OVERWHELMED by the one-sided, tampered evidence that the FBI showed her.

The same with Robert Oswald. The same with Ruth Paine. The same with Michael Paine. The same with George DeMohrenschildt. All these folks were slowly and gradually beaten down by the FBI's tampered evidence.

Marina for her part said, early in the 1960's, that she DIDN'T believe that LHO was JFK's killer, but that the WC had showed her so much EVIDENCE that based on this EVIDENCE (so-called "FACTS") she had no choice but to decide against LHO. HOWEVER, she would often add, IIRC, if OTHER EVIDENCE was ever revealed, she was open to change her opinion.

Ruth Paine said much the same thing, as recorded in her WC testimony and also in Tom Mallon's book, Mrs. Paine's Garage (2002).

Robert Oswald said much the same thing, as recorded in the final chapter of his book, Lee: A Portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald by His Brother (1967).

George DeMohrenschildt said much the same thing in his manuscript, I'm A Patsy! I'm A Patsy! (1978).

Marina eventually did change her opinion -- and no longer believes that LHO acted alone. But that was a smooth change for her.

Ruth Paine is still waiting for a convincing CT. Today she just sits back and laughs at CTers as she would a WWE wrestling match.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

...Anyway, Marina simply denied everything at first -- when the whole world came crashing down upon her shoulders. But when it became obvious that she was going to be all right in the USA -- not because of the FBI or Secret Service or Warren Commission -- but because of the generosity of the American Public -- Marina got up her courage and TOOK THE OATH and TOLD THE TRUTH.

Anybody who refuses to believe Marina Oswald's testimony -- as she knew it -- is simply being stubborn. Any contradiction of Marina Oswald's testimony amounts to invented fiction, IMHO.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Really?

Allegedly when the police descended on this unsuspecting person did she deny Oswald owned a rifle?

Later, did she deny taking a photo of him holding a weapon?

The ONLY person making stuff up is YOU.

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

Common sense tells you. This coming from You? Very scientific.

The point you're blatantly missing, Greg, is that when the DPD first came to their door hours after the JFK murder, to inquire about the Tippit killing, THE WORLD HAD NOT YET FALLEN DOWN ON MARINA'S SHOULDERS.

Marina did not feel pressured by the FBI, the Secret Service, the DPD, or the US Army at that specific hour.

QUITE THE CONTRARY!

Marina Oswald behaved as though she was completely CERTAIN that LHO was 100% innocent of wrong-doing in those early hours, and as though she totally expected that LHO's rifle WOULD STILL BE THERE!

The fact that it wasn't there was a SHOCK to Marina, and a TRIPLE-SHOCK to Ruth Paine.

So, you see, Greg, you're entirely mistaken.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Greg Parker]

The point you're blatantly missing, Greg, is that when the DPD first came to their door hours after the JFK murder, to inquire about the Tippit killing, THE WORLD HAD NOT YET FALLEN DOWN ON MARINA'S SHOULDERS.

Marina did not feel pressured by the FBI, the Secret Service, the DPD, or the US Army.

QUITE THE CONTRARY!

This is just a classic example of trying to move your own goal posts.

Here is what you said, and I what I very specifically rebutted:

"Common sense tells me that when the police descend upon an unsuspecting person, the first reaction of that person is to deny EVERYTHING."

So once again--what happened when the police descended upon this unsuspecting person? Did she deny he owned a rifle, or freely admit it?

Your MO is entirely transparent and you are nothing but a self-appointed spin doctor for a person whose world is going to collapse if the actual facts ever come out.

[Paul Trejo]

The point you're blatantly missing, Greg, is that when the DPD first came to their door hours after the JFK murder, to inquire about the Tippit killing, THE WORLD HAD NOT YET FALLEN DOWN ON MARINA'S SHOULDERS.

Marina did not feel pressured by the FBI, the Secret Service, the DPD, or the US Army.

QUITE THE CONTRARY!

This is just a classic example of trying to move your own goal posts.

Here is what you said, and I what I very specifically rebutted:

"Common sense tells me that when the police descend upon an unsuspecting person, the first reaction of that person is to deny EVERYTHING."

So once again--what happened when the police descended upon this unsuspecting person? Did she deny he owned a rifle, or freely admit it?

Your MO is entirely transparent and you are nothing but a self-appointed spin doctor for a person whose world is going to collapse if the actual facts ever come out.

No, Greg, you're the one trying to move the goal posts. You're agreeing with me, actually -- you know that Marina didn't feel overwhelmed by the DPD when they first came politely ringing the doorbell at Mrs. Paine's house one hour after the JFK assassination.

There is no way that Ruth or Marina even DREAMED that LHO was the killer of JFK at that moment. Both of them say so in their WC testimony.

So, there was no DESCENT of authorities down upon the head of Marina Oswald at that moment.

And you know it. Just admit it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Greg Parker]

The point you're blatantly missing, Greg, is that when the DPD first came to their door hours after the JFK murder, to inquire about the Tippit killing, THE WORLD HAD NOT YET FALLEN DOWN ON MARINA'S SHOULDERS.

Marina did not feel pressured by the FBI, the Secret Service, the DPD, or the US Army.

QUITE THE CONTRARY!

This is just a classic example of trying to move your own goal posts.

Here is what you said, and I what I very specifically rebutted:

"Common sense tells me that when the police descend upon an unsuspecting person, the first reaction of that person is to deny EVERYTHING."

So once again--what happened when the police descended upon this unsuspecting person? Did she deny he owned a rifle, or freely admit it?

Your MO is entirely transparent and you are nothing but a self-appointed spin doctor for a person whose world is going to collapse if the actual facts ever come out.

No, Greg, you're the one trying to move the goal posts. You're agreeing with me, actually -- you know that Marina didn't feel overwhelmed by the DPD when they first came politely ringing the doorbell at Mrs. Paine's house one hour after the JFK assassination.

There is no way that Ruth or Marina even DREAMED that LHO was the killer of JFK at that moment. Both of them say so in their WC testimony.

So, there was no DESCENT of authorities down upon the head of Marina Oswald at that moment.

And you know it. Just admit it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

CEO Pug's Irving Spin Services, Inc (PISSI)

All I know is that you prove my point every time you post.

[Paul Trejo]

The last brilliant point Tommy made, IIRC, is that no Intelligence Agent could have been transformed into a Patsy for the JFK murder.

The implication is that LHO was really a wanna-be Intelligence Agent. That's a serious contribution to the JFK discourse, IMHO.

IMHO, Tommy operates as a useful counter-balance to Greg's vitupriation.

No, there's no pair here -- but I do perceive a "pairing" between Greg Parker and James DiEugenio. Same modus operandi.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

You're simply forcing the rationale. Her very first statement HELPED the government. "Yes, he owns a rifle. Come, I show you". This alone makes a mockery of Paul's claim.

Later when interviewed in depth, suddenly she was not being helpful. No he didn't go to Mexico. No, he good man. etc etc... so she was held until they got her straightened out for her star turn before the Malignant Seven.

By the way... I don't buy that she admitted the rifle... I think that was all retrospective. But she's your witness, so I'll run with the rifle story just for you pair.

I wouldn't make that concession for just anyone, Tommy. Paul is special. In a very special way. --Greg Parker

Dear Greg,

I've got some sad news for you. Despite what you dream, Trejo and I are not "a pair".

At least not officially.

You see, The Agency told me a long time ago to disassociate myself from "WT" so that we could spread disinformation here more effectively.

--Tommy

Edited January 11, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Parker]

You're simply forcing the rationale. Her very first statement HELPED the government. "Yes, he owns a rifle. Come, I show you". This alone makes a mockery of Paul's claim.

Later when interviewed in depth, suddenly she was not being helpful. No he didn't go to Mexico. No, he good man. etc etc... so she was held until they got her straightened out for her star turn before the Malignant Seven.

By the way... I don't buy that she admitted the rifle... I think that was all retrospective. But she's your witness, so I'll run with the rifle story just for you pair.

I wouldn't make that concession for just anyone, Tommy. Paul is special. In a very special way. --Greg Parker

Dear Greg,

I've got some sad news for you. Despite what you dream, Trejo and I are not "a pair".

At least not officially.

You see, The Agency told me a long time ago to disassociate myself from "WT" so that we could spread disinformation here more effectively.

--Tommy

You are "paired" on this issue, Tommy, by your own words. Of course, if you want an annulment, I happen to know there is a member here who is a bona fide online Minister and has the certificate to prove it. I'm sure she will grant the divorce for the proper fee.

[Paul Trejo]

Paine told LIfton Oswald showed him an 8 by 10?

Interesting. Because it seems to me that should denote that LHO was working on the photo himself then?

Which would be the perfect story for Mike to come up with. Keep it coming Mike.

It was really your Minox, and Lee worked on the photos himself.

I guess he wanted to keep those trust funds didn't he?

In fact it makes good sense that LHO was working on the Back Yard Photographs at his Neely address in early April 1962, when he was still working at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.

We know that LHO made his Alek J. Hidell FAKE ID there at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall. Why not the Back Yard Photographs?

Surely LHO was technically capable of making four FAKE versions of the BYP.

Furthermore, the man who (according to Jack White) supplied the body-double was Roscoe White, who was a Marine associate of LHO during his time at the Atsugi Naval Base.

Roscoe White joined the Dallas Police Force later in 1963 -- in October. But this was still April, 1963. So it's plausible that LHO and Roscoe White were on speaking terms in Dallas, where they both lived at this time.

Ricky White claimed that his dad, Roscoe White, admitted to being one of the JFK shooters that day. Why not dig deeper here, and get off of Ruth Paine's back?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

Nothing about your picture of Oswald, or Caufield's, makes any sense at all.

Me and Greg disagree about some things, but his discovery of Redskin was a good contribution to the Oswald file.

As was his chapter about Ferrie we excerpted at CTKA from his book--concerning the omnipotents.

The idea that Caufield tries to sell, by artily and adroitly censoring the record about Oswald will simply not stand in light of the actual factual record. I mean what self respecting author would spend two sentences on Oswald's trip to and stay in the USSR in a chapter devoted to LHO in an 800 page book? What self respecting author would call Oswald a neo Nazi? Based on two FBI reports which do nothing of the kind?

Greg's book is much closer to the truth about LHO simply because he is focused on the important facts and associations. Just like he is much closer to the truth about the Paines since he has dug up some very interesting facts in his research.

Caufield wants to send us back to 1964 on those two topics, and several others.

Edited January 11, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Thomas Graves]

You're simply forcing the rationale. Her very first statement HELPED the government. "Yes, he owns a rifle. Come, I show you". This alone makes a mockery of Paul's claim.

Later when interviewed in depth, suddenly she was not being helpful. No he didn't go to Mexico. No, he good man. etc etc... so she was held until they got her straightened out for her star turn before the Malignant Seven.

By the way... I don't buy that she admitted the rifle... I think that was all retrospective. But she's your witness, so I'll run with the rifle story just for you pair.

I wouldn't make that concession for just anyone, Tommy. Paul is special. In a very special way. --Greg Parker

Dear Greg,

I've got some sad news for you. Despite what you dream, Trejo and I are not "a pair".

At least not officially.

You see, The Agency told me a long time ago to disassociate myself from "WT" so that we could spread disinformation here more effectively.

--Tommy

You are "paired" on this issue, Tommy, by your own words. Of course, if you want an annulment, I happen to know there is a member here who is a bona fide online Minister and has the certificate to prove it. I'm sure she will grant the divorce for the proper fee.

For what it's worth, paranoia does strike rather deeply, doesn't it, Greg? I mean, even among our finest researchers, like you.

So tell me, how does it feel? I mean, you went to the finest schools, Miss Lonely, ... didn't you?

--Tommy

Edited January 11, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

Nothing about your picture of Oswald, or Caufield's, makes any sense at all.

Me and Greg disagree about some things, but his discovery of Redskin was a good contribution to the Oswald file.

As was his chapter about Ferrie we excerpted at CTKA from his book--concerning the omnipotents.

The idea that Caufield tries to sell, by artily and adroitly censoring the record about Oswald will simply not stand in light of the actual factual record. I mean what self respecting author would spend two sentences on Oswald's trip to and stay in the USSR in a chapter devoted to LHO in an 800 page book? What self respecting author would call Oswald a neo Nazi? Based on two FBI reports which do nothing of the kind?

Greg's book is much closer to the truth about LHO simply because he is focused on the important facts and associations. Just like he is much closer to the truth about the Paines since he has dug up some very interesting facts in his research.

Caufield wants to send us back to 1964 on those two topics, and several others.

It was in early 1964 that some JFK researchers still saw the importance of General Walker in the murder of JFK.

In 1965 Harry Dean came right out and announced it. He was practically creamed for his efforts.

By 1965 the field was so concentrated on finding the alleged CIA plot to kill JFK -- that this lasted for 50 years. It's practically a knee-jerk reaction now.

It won't be easy to roll back the hands of time, back to 1964, and revive the theories that General Walker was the mastermind of the JFK murder.

There is just so much JFK Mythology out there -- much of it centered around Oliver Stone's 1991 movie, JFK, which is largely based on the errors of Jim Garrison.

Yet since 1991 there have been so many millions of readers of JFK literature, and that's 25 years of zero results.

Every time there's an FOIA release of CIA or FBI documents, it shatters more of the CIA-did-it fabric.

The Lopez-Hardway Report is absolutely mandatory for an intelligent assessment of LHO in Mexico City -- and it undermines Jim Garrison and all his followers.

The breakthrough by Bill SImpich with his eBook, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) is a virtual guarantee that the CIA had no clue who was framing LHO in Mexico City. This was a framing by rogues in a Civilian, rightist plot. That's what the new evidence shows.

The theories of the 1990's are utterly passé in the 21st century. That's what y'all have to look forward to.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

I will trust Phil Melanson, John Newman, and Greg Parker with the record of Lee Harvey Oswald any day over what Caufiled does with it.

Oswald as a neo Nazi?

It won't fly, even as long as the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk.

Greg's work on Oswald and the Paines is, as far as I can see, annotated and uses credible sources.

In addition to the stuff on Redskin his work on Sylvia Hoke and that CIA study was also quite good.

I havde a feeling that his discovery of what the Paines were doing with the rest of the Brahmins on Nashua Island is going to be quite gripping.

It will bring all the suspicions and paradoxes that Carol, Barbara and Steve brought out into the open.

Edited January 11, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Paul Trejo]

...

Oswald as a neo Nazi?

...

Dr. Caufield makes a good case that LHO held politics on the extreme right. He also says that the personal papers of Jim Garrison researched this angle in some detail -- but this is not common knowledge.

Of course, the Warren Commission would never let that come out, because LHO was not supposed to have any "accomplices who are still at large."

According to the WC, LHO was a Lone Nut. Well, we know that LHO wasn't a Lone Nut -- so, was he left, right or center?

Caufield makes the case that LHO on the far right, but was FAKING his connections with the far left.

The EVIDENCE presented by Jim Garrison himself supports this take on the data.

The relationship between LHO and Daniel Burros is intriguing, as there was more than Burros' name in LHO's notebook. When you think of it, this really isn't that surprising for a Marine.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 11, 2016 by Paul Trejo