Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Real Ruth and Michael Paine


Recommended Posts

Greg,

Let's cut to the chase.

I don't want to derail this thread, but I do want to address your persistence that there was one individual named Lee Harvey Oswald, whose visage was captured in various photographs from the 1950s.

I see two individuals. That is my perception. You may have a different perception, in which case I'm interested in and respect your perception.

Let's be colleagues, not antagonists.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 651
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Greg,

Let's cut to the chase.

I don't want to derail this thread, but I do want to address your persistence that there was one individual named Lee Harvey Oswald, whose visage was captured in various photographs from the 1950s.

I see two individuals. That is my perception. You may have a different perception, in which case I'm interested in and respect your perception.

Let's be colleagues, not antagonists.

This is not about whether or not there were two Oswald's per se. It is about the double standard you apply when you insist on provable facts in other areas but are happy to put that aside when it comes to an Oswald doppelganger. I am asking for you to apply your standards consistently - or not at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, all the evidence presented by John Armstrong to posit two Oswalds (Harvey and Lee) is based on countless cases of MISTAKEN IDENTITY.

Armstrong capitalizes on the fact that the CIA doesn't care what anybody says about them, so he twists every case of MISTAKEN IDENTITY into a CIA plot, and he has constructed a tidy fiction and made tidy fortune doing so.

But we're no closer to solving the JFK murder or understanding the material evidence at hand.

The Warren Commission testimony remains our best, most current, most thorough evidence. We must separate it from the FBI tampering to forge a "Lone Nut" LHO, and recognize that LHO had many associates, and was a passenger in many cars, from Mexico to Dallas and beyond.

The FBI stomped on all that (and much more) to forge a "Lone Nut" mythology in the WC volumes. The FBI stepped on witnesses, photographs, medical evidence, film, ballistics, even autopsy results. (Genuine autopsy results would have shown multiple bullets in JFK's brain, so the brain could never be released to the Public, until the year 2039, they were told.)

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, all the evidence presented by John Armstrong to posit two Oswalds (Harvey and Lee) is based on countless cases of MISTAKEN IDENTITY.

Armstrong capitalizes on the fact that the CIA doesn't care what anybody says about them, so he twists every case of MISTAKEN IDENTITY into a CIA plot, and he has constructed a tidy fiction and made tidy fortune doing so.

But we're no closer to solving the JFK murder or understanding the material evidence at hand.

The Warren Commission testimony remains our best, most current, most thorough evidence. We must separate it from the FBI tampering to forge a "Lone Nut" LHO, and recognize that LHO had many associates, and was a passenger in many cars, from Mexico to Dallas and beyond.

The FBI stomped on all that (and much more) to forge a "Lone Nut" mythology in the WC volumes. The FBI stepped on witnesses, photographs, medical evidence, film, ballistics, even autopsy results. (Genuine autopsy results would have shown multiple bullets in JFK's brain, so the brain could never be released to the Public, until the year 2039, they were told.)

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

My comments were not about two Oswalds. They were about two standards.

How about you try an answer this.

The cops who found the blanket which had allegedly held the rifle claimed it was still "rifle-shaped" - so much so that Rose had to step on it to know it was empty.

How then could a Korean War vet like Mike Paine have seen and handled it multiple times and thought that it it was tent pegs? That's BS. But whose? Rose or Paine's?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us not forget Greg: in his revised story, done for the 30th anniversary and then recycled in 2003, Mike said that Oswald showed the BYP to him in April.

Therefore, Mike knew LHO had a rifle.

If the blanket was rifle shaped, then how could Mike have not suspected what was inside?

If you don't buy that, as I do not, then another way of expressing this is:

When was Mike lying? Back in 1964, or in 1993?

(Please let us keep this to the Paines only.)

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us not forget Greg: in his revised story, done for the 30th anniversary and then recycled in 2003, Mike said that Oswald showed the BYP to him in April.

Therefore, Mike knew LHO had a rifle.

If the blanket was rifle shaped, then how could Mike have not suspected what was inside?

If you don't buy that, as I do not, then another way of expressing this is:

When was Mike lying? Back in 1964, or in 1993?

(Please let us keep this to the Paines only.)

1993. The question is, why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg:

In that basement picture (plenty of room for dark room developing), I do see a model train set on the table. Not sure if its Lionel or American Flyer but (as a train collector/enthusiast) it caught my eye. Not unusual for any family circa 1963 and just a month away from Christmas. This soberly reminds one that there were small children in this household and in the center of the story during these relatively 'dark' happenings.

Back to the Worker and the Militant, I am struck by how flimsy that magazine story is ... and these are facts (not opinions or conjecture) backed up by statements and testimony. This one aspect alone seems enough to make the Paines persons of interest if not suspects or co-conspirators in the crime. It reminds me of the unfortunate events in San Bernardino CA last month and the neighbor who bought the guns for the shooters. He was charged with conspiracy and other counts related to the weapons, interrogated for 10 days by the FBI, and is in jail. Contrast that with how the Paines were treated with "kid gloves" in the murder of a president ... it makes my heart sink.

Gene

Link to post
Share on other sites

...How about you try an answer this.

The cops who found the blanket which had allegedly held the rifle claimed it was still "rifle-shaped" - so much so that Rose had to step on it to know it was empty.

How then could a Korean War vet like Mike Paine have seen and handled it multiple times and thought that it was tent pegs? That's BS. But whose? Rose or Paine's?

Well, it's an interesting question.

The fact that Michael Paine admitted in 1993 to Dan Rather of CBS that he saw a BYP on April 2nd, 1963, when he first met LHO face to fact at LHO's apartment, one must doubt Paine's testimony that he never thought of a rifle when he moved the blanket around in his garage while working with his saws, drills and other tools.

I myself doubt Michael Paine's denials about knowing the blanket contained a rifle.

I don't doubt Rose's testimony, because it matches Marina Oswald's testimony so closely. The doubtful story there belongs to Michael Paine.

By way of explanation, IMHO Michael Paine was terrified that people would try to make a close linkage between LHO and Michael Paine -- and then begin to suspect Michael Paine of a conspiracy to murder JFK.

Remember that the DPD immediately arrested Wesley Buell Frazier, and gave him a lie detector test about a conspiracy to kill JFK. Same day. Wesley was LHO's weekend driver, and LHO's driver that day. He was a suspect just by proximity.

How much more would Michael and Ruth Paine be suspects, then, since LHO slept at their house ~14 times in the two months leading up to the murder of JFK.

Furthermore, Marina Oswald herself testified to the closeness of Michael and LHO -- so much that Michael was called back to comment, and he denied everything Marina had said about that. For example, Marina said that: (1) Michael and LHO talked a lot about politics; (2) Michael and LHO talked about General Walker; and (3) Michael knew that LHO had shot at General Walker.

Imagine Michael's terror at the cross-examination. Michael denied it forcefully. LHO was a political amateur, he repeated. Michael would never consider LHO his equal in anything, much less political science. Marina simply didn't understand what LHO said, and no surprise, since LHO deliberately kept Marina in mystery as a matter of course.

Getting back to the blanket itself, Michael said he moved it and thought it was tent pipes. The Warren Commission accepted this, IMHO, because of the class issue. That is, wealthy people are generally fastidious about personal property and property rights. They would never, for example, read the mail of another person.

Ruth Paine said she felt bad about reading LHO's Embassy Letter of November 9th, but it was justified because he used her typewriter and left the draft on her desk for two days, and there was an attack on the FBI in the words showing, and the FBI had come by her house twice asking about LHO in the past two weeks. So, she apologized, but she read it. When Ruth tried to share it with Michael, he didn't want to read it -- he thought it started out "Dear Lisa" instead of "Dear Sirs" and he refused to read the full letter. It was a matter of propriety -- of private property.

Although LHO kept his personal property in the Paine's house -- they never snooped into all these boxes in their own garage. It was PRIVATE PROPERTY. On that basis, Michael Paine said that it really wasn't an of his business what was inside this blanket -- or any of LHO's private property.

The Warren Commission asked Ruth if she would have objected if she had known there was a rifle in her house. Ruth said, no, because this was Texas in 1963, and countless Texans had shotguns in their homes, or even in their trucks. It was too common. Ruth's shock wasn't that there was a rifle in her garage -- BUT THAT MARINA NEVER TOLD HER ABOUT IT.

When the DPD on 11/22/1963 asked Ruth if there were any weapons at her house, Ruth instantly said "No," and then she translated the question for Marina, and Marina instantly said, "Yes, there is!" Ruth's jaw dropped at that point, because: (1) Ruth was caught by surprise; and (2) the context was the murder of JFK and Tippit. Ruth has never recovered from that moment, as she has said many times since then.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg:

In that basement picture (plenty of room for dark room developing), I do see a model train set on the table. Not sure if its Lionel or American Flyer but (as a train collector/enthusiast) it caught my eye. Not unusual for any family circa 1963 and just a month away from Christmas. This soberly reminds one that there were small children in this household and in the center of the story during these relatively 'dark' happenings.

Back to the Worker and the Militant, I am struck by how flimsy that magazine story is ... and these are facts (not opinions or conjecture) backed up by statements and testimony. This one aspect alone seems enough to make the Paines persons of interest if not suspects or co-conspirators in the crime. It reminds me of the unfortunate events in San Bernardino CA last month and the neighbor who bought the guns for the shooters. He was charged with conspiracy and other counts related to the weapons, interrogated for 10 days by the FBI, and is in jail. Contrast that with how the Paines were treated with "kid gloves" in the murder of a president ... it makes my heart sink.

Gene

Well said, Gene.

The kids gloves were never taken off. What sort of journalist lets Mike Paine's 1993 statement slide past without further probing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I'm pretty sure Michael Paine's 1993 confession was to Dan Rather of CBS.

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I've been reminded that David Lifton claimed he taped Michael Paine in an interview making the same claim well before 1993.

David Lifton is a genius in my book. I'd love to have documentation about any David Lifton interview of Michael Paine. Any links?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I've been reminded that David Lifton claimed he taped Michael Paine in an interview making the same claim well before 1993.

David Lifton is a genius in my book. I'd love to have documentation about any David Lifton interview of Michael Paine. Any links?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Genius at self-promotion.

Links? Lifton?

:clapping

Why don't you just ask him?

Good luck! :pop

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Jeff Carter, Paine first said this to Russo in 1993 as an interview for his Oswald did it book, Live by the Sword.

Now, he may have said this to Lifton. But if so I have never heard Lifton repeat that in public. Although I do know he did interview Mike.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...