Jump to content

James Hosty and KGB Agent Kostikov


Paul Trejo
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

Thanks Jim, I know I've read about this letter several times but I've not travelled this part of the rabbit hole yet so taking the plunge. I lent my copy of Jim's Unspeakable to a relative, (and can probably kiss it goodbye) but maybe I can scrounge online.

I want to note that in my earlier post I used the words "re-typed" and that was an assumption on my part. In RP's WC testimony she clarifies that she had found a longhand written "draft" on her desk and this is what she copied, in longhand so my assumption was incorrect.

Things I found in the WC testimony that make me go hmmmm:

She states she knew it was Lee's handwriting....

She copied it in longhand... in English...

Thought it was the weekend of November 8,9,10...

Wasn't asked if she gave it to the FBI... subject changed...

Michael P. thought it was a "personal letter" and it started with "Dear Lisa" (stated twice)

 

Note: the FBI visited on the 1st and 5th of November. 1 agent the first visit, 2 Agents on the second.

Chris,

Just curious.  What's so interesting about her copying the letter in English?

--  Tommy :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

So I'm going to quote my statement above because on review of the relevant testimony I've found that SA Hosty says he was given the original handwritten copy by Ruth Paine the morning of 11/23/63. He wasn't aware of the Paine copy until 11/24/63 when SA Odum overheard Hosty being berated by Shanklin for not destroying his copy.

Hosty gave no explanation of why Ruth P. withheld the copy from him but stated that SA Odum, sent to re-interview R.P. by Shanklin, turned this copy over to Odum.

It's commission exhibit #103, btw.

Chris,

Odum turned his copy over to Odum?

--  Tommy :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Just curious.  What's so interesting about her copying the letter in English?

I hadn't seen the original document yet but I found it interesting that she would need to say she copied it in English. I was halfway expecting to see an original document written to the Russian Embassy in Russian after seeing that statement.

12 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Hosty gave no explanation of why Ruth P. withheld the copy from him but stated that SA Odum, sent to re-interview R.P. by Shanklin, turned this copy over to Odum.

Not very well written. I'm trying to say there that Ruth gave her handwritten copy to SA Odum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

So I'm going to quote my statement above because on review of the relevant testimony I've found that SA Hosty says he was given the original handwritten copy by Ruth Paine the morning of 11/23/63. He wasn't aware of the Paine copy until 11/24/63 when SA Odum overheard Hosty being berated by Shanklin for not destroying his copy.

Hosty gave no explanation of why Ruth P. withheld the copy from him but stated that SA Odum, sent to re-interview R.P. by Shanklin, turned this copy over to Odum.

It's commission exhibit #103, btw.

You raise a good point, Chris, about Ruth's making an unnecessarily big deal about her having copied the letter in English.

Ruth may have "spilled the milk" by doing so.

Regardless, I'm still confused as to whether or not Ruthie's handwritten copy is viewable on the internet. It's my understanding that the Warren Commission gave it back to her, but ...

(The reason I ask is because it would be interesting to see if she copied "Oswald's" putative spelling and punctuation errors verbatim.  It would have been reasonable for her to do so, imho, because for all she knew, Oswald was concealing a coded message to the Ruskies.)

--  Tommy :sun

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tommy,

There's a really poor copy of the original typed letter signed by Oswald in the WC Exhibits. On the same page is what I assumed to be Oswald's handwritten version . I haven't seen the Paine version yet. The Russian Embassy turned the Oswald typed version over to the WC (but of course we already had that via HTLINGUAL).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Newton said:

I'm relying on the Attorney General of the United States.

...But you are saying, "he wasn't there" so I should rely on two people who's stories changed with the seasons and whom I suspect were in cahoots to at best CYA and at worst...

Chris,

Even the Attorney General of the United States only has second-hand information in this case.  They can only rely on their sources.

It was already admitted by J. Edgar Hoover himself that FBI agent James Hosty was unreliable, and Hoover demoted Hosty.   Hosty is our key suspect.

However, FBI Agent Odum mainly knew what Hosty told him.  The Attorney General mainly knew what Odum told him.  Then they tried to piece facts together to forge a "Lone Nut" scenario (on Hoover's orders) and so that's why we have a CT community -- to try to discern the Truth about the JFK assassination aside from the official conclusion.

Again, Chris, would you tell us, in your own words, what you think REALLY happened with regard to Oswald's "Soviet Embassy Letter?"

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Chris Newton said:

Not very well written. I'm trying to say there that Ruth gave her handwritten copy to SA Odum.

Chris,

Both James Hosty and Ruth Paine testified that Ruth Paine handed James Hosty her handwritten copy of Oswald's "Soviet Embassy Letter" on 11/24/1963.

I realize not everybody agrees with this, but I myself accept every single word that Ruth Paine testified -- every word of it -- and I've studied it carefully.  

If you think she's lying, then I wish you would offer some hard evidence.  Nobody has ever offered anything but rank suspicion about Ruth Paine -- going back to the 1990's and the CTKA nonsense.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

I realize not everybody agrees with this, but I myself accept every single word that Ruth Paine testified -- every word of it -- and I've studied it carefully.   If you think she's lying, then I wish you would offer some real evidence.  Nobody has ever offered anything but rank suspicion about Ruth Paine -- going back to the 1990's and the CTKA nonsense.

Show me the citations, I'm not playing this game with you based on your petty bias.

I spent the time researching, I corrected my errors, posted citations, I don't give a rats %^# where the cards fall. If you were lied to by Hosty and Paine, meh.

Edited by Chris Newton
comment
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Chris, 

This is a most interesting FBI summary of a CIA document dated 10/18/1963.   It seems to seriously challenge my theory.

My remaining arguments are now as follows: that CIA cable calls LHO, "Lee HENRY Oswald."

We know from the writings of Bill Simpich (2014) that the CIA deliberately modified the CIA 201 file on Lee Harvey Oswald, changing his middle name to HENRY in order to catch the Mole who impersonated Lee Harvey Oswald.  The impersonation was determined less than one hour after the phone call itself, because that phone was tapped by the CIA in a serious way.

The CIA Mole Hunt started on that very same day -- namely -- October 1, 1963.

After that point, however, anybody who saw the CIA 201 File on LHO would report his name to be Lee HENRY Oswald.  Now, this is what we see in this 10/18/1963 cable.

Very interesting.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Correction, Paul.  We don't 'know from the writings of Bill Simpich...etc...', Simpich presented a theory to that effect...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Chris Newton said:

Show me the citations, I'm not playing this game with you based on your petty bias.

I spent the time researching, I corrected my errors, posted citations, I don't give a rats %^# where the cards fall. If you were lied to by Hosty and Paine, meh.

Chris,

Fair enough.   I'll post the citations.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Chris,

Even the Attorney General of the United States only has second-hand information in this case.  They can only rely on their sources.

It was already admitted by J. Edgar Hoover himself that FBI agent James Hosty was unreliable, and Hoover demoted Hosty.   Hosty is our key suspect.

However, FBI Agent Odum mainly knew what Hosty told him.  The Attorney General mainly knew what Odum told him.  Then they tried to piece facts together to forge a "Lone Nut" scenario (on Hoover's orders) and so that's why we have a CT community -- to try to discern the Truth about the JFK assassination aside from the official conclusion.

Again, Chris, would you tell us, in your own words, what you think REALLY happened with regard to Oswald's "Soviet Embassy Letter?"

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Hoover did not "admit" that Hostey was "unreliable". Hoover needed a fall guy and Hosty was at the top of the list.  So he declared him 'unreliable', whether that was the case or not...

Oh, and the "Line Nut" scenario was more likely the product of Nicholas Katzenbach then Hoover.  I don't know if JEH was smart enough...

Edited by Pamela Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

Correction, Paul.  We don't 'know from the writings of Bill Simpich...etc...', Simpich presented a theory to that effect...

Pamela,

Fair enough.

By the way, I'm glad you're following this thread, because Chris finally found that 10/18/1963 CIA cable that James Hosty claimed he saw on page 48 of his book, Assignment Oswald (1996) and that seriously injured my theory about Hosty.

So -- Hosty was telling the truth -- there really was a CIA document dated 10/18/1963 alleging a connection between Oswald and Kostikov.  This is a most interesting development, and despite our disagreements on particulars, I sincerely value the research being shared here.

Of course, that 10/18/1963 CIA cable does name Lee HENRY Oswald... 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

Hoover did not "admit" that Hosty was "unreliable". Hoover needed a fall guy and Hosty was at the top of the list.  So he declared him 'unreliable', whether that was the case or not...

Oh, and the "Line Nut" scenario was more likely the product of Nicholas Katzenbach than Hoover.  I don't know if JEH was smart enough...

Pamela,

Professor David Wrone cites FBI documents dated 11/22/1963, before 3pm CST, from JE Hoover, telling RFK that: (1) LHO was not a Communist; (2) LHO was not an FPCC officer; and (3) LHO was a "Lone Shooter."

According to Professor Wrone, the "Lone Nut" theory can be traced to JE Hoover himself, at 3pm 11/22/1963.  Orders from Hoover to the FBI to tamper with all JFK evidence, photographs, film, witnesses, crime scene, ballistics, medical data -- were likely issued at that hour.  It was considered a matter of "National Security" to blame Lee Harvey Oswald, and him alone.  LBJ loved that solution.  Certainly Katzenbach loved it, too, because the alternative was the Dallas story -- the Reds did it..

The FBI had one of the conspirators -- Lee Harvey Oswald (even if he was only the Patsy).  The FBI didn't want to identify General Walker and the Radical Right, the Minutemen in Dallas, and so on -- because the Cold War was raging and the USSR would have had a propaganda victory.

As it turned out, the Communists did blame the Radical Right in Dallas.  One of their best writers on this was Joachim Joesten, who almost solved the JFK mystery single-handed in 1963.  Brilliant research.

Finally -- Hosty was at the top of the list of fall guys because he really was to blame -- the Secret Service PRS asked James Hosty for dangerous people in Dallas, and Hosty very deliberately reported to them:  NOBODY AT ALL.   The Secret Service asked James Hosty who published the WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK handbills, and Hosty very deliberately told them, I HAVE NO IDEA.  

Actually, Hosty knew exactly who was who and what was what among the Radical Right in Dallas.  They were his primary duty.

So, Hosty was part of the Radical Right plot in Dallas.  I feel certain of this based on this evidence.  Robert Alan Surrey was the publisher of the WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK handbill, and James Hosty was the bridge partner of Robert Alan Surrey for years -- according to Penn Jones Jr.

JE Hoover knew exactly what he was doing -- Hosty deserved worse than he got.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

 Well, not carefully enough.

WC Vol III:

Paine_lies.jpg

Chris,

This account by Ruth Paine says exactly what I said.   What's your question?

Ruth took hold of Oswald's handwritten original of the "Soviet Embassy Letter" which Lee Oswald had written on Friday, November 9th, and left there by Ruth's typewriter on Saturday, November 10th.  She slipped it into the drawer of the desk before she asked Lee and Michael to move furniture for her that day.  

When Lee wasn't looking, Ruth made her own handwritten copy of it.  Her intent was to give her own copy to James Hosty, personally.

Then, Ruth placed Oswald's handwritten letter back exactly where she got it. She says, "I took it back out of the desk and placed it..I don't think he knew that I took it."

Ruth thought all night about confronting Oswald with this letter, but she didn't.  She was afraid that Lee really was a Communist Agent --- but she wasn't sure why Lee was reporting all these lies to the Communists.  She couldn't sleep.

The next time she saw James Hosty, she says, she handed it to him -- that was 11/23/1963.  This matches what James Hosty says exactly, in his Assignment Oswald (1996).

Insofar as this contradicts what FBI agent Odum claimed, and therefore what the AG claimed -- it seems to me that Odum and the AG merely made mistakes.  Heck, they couldn't keep straight if "the letter" meant this "Soviet Embassy Letter" or the "stay-away-from-my-wife" note that Lee Oswald wrote to James Hosty.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...