WHEN does Oswald crystallize into the patsy?

[Jason Ward]

16 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Yet, Paul would have us believe that a note from General Walker, written 13 years after the assassination, claiming the the Dallas Police arrested LHO 2 days after attempting to murder him (Walker) is solid, primary evidence that this was so.

 

 

 

Whether it was so or not is only one question; the more important question in my view is: Why does Walker insist on making this accusation, repeatedly over the years?  Why is it so important to him?  Almost immediately after the assassination, Walker starts saying DPD knew LHO was the shooter at his house but didn't arrest him, or did arrest him and let him go, or was told to let him go...etc..  Walker repeatedly brings up this story --- why?  What's he so concerned about now that Oswald's dead anyway?

Jason

[Michael Clark]

23 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Hi Michael,

I too THOUGHT I was aware of the evidence that Oswald sought citizenship in the USSR.  After further thought, I only am aware that Oswald SAID he applied for Soviet citizenship. But, whether he did or didn't does not seem to me germane to the assassination plot.  Do you think this point is important for solving the assassination?

Jason

As is often the case, Paul Trejo's assertions, when found to be blatantly dishonest, always lead me to the exact opposite of the blatantly and patently false claim that he is making.

After the recent exchange with Paul Trejo I have come to think that LHO's surrender of his passport, renounciation of US citizenship and apllication for Soviet citizenship, while in Russia, are germane to the case, and also point to his being a CIA asset at that time. This is a conclusion that I was not, previously, an adherent of.

The false case which Paul Trejo was dishonestly trying to make is that LHO was a flunky, loser, Commie who failed in his effort to be absorbed into Russia and the Communist Party. It seems clear to me know that he was  CIA asset at that time.

In relation to the topic of this thread, the fact that (as I now believe) he was a CIA, points to his being set-up, if only contingently, as a patsy, as early as the Walker shooting.

I hate to admit it but I agree with Paul Trejo that the CIA, as an agency, did not do it. CIA rogues, assets and resources did play a key role in the JFKA. Worthy of note, I don't believe that Angleton knew obout the plot, and Dulles was not a participant.

further, since you revised your comment, above, from awareness of LHO's passport surrender and Citizenship renunciation I'll remind you of the documents that support these events.

-LHO's Diary, declaring that he had surrendered his passport.

-LHO's Diary, describing his efforts to repossess his passport before returning to the US.

-The document from the Yeltsin Cache, generated by The Soviet Governent that LHO had applied for citizenship.

--The document from the Yeltsin Cache, generated by The Soviet Governent that LHO had been denied citizenship.

-There is a document from the US embassy in Moscow describing LHO having visited and turned-in his passport. This was not brought-up in this thred so it is not handy. When I find it I will post it here.

-it should be noted that Paul Trejo's claim that he was constantly invited to join the Communist Party, but refused, is blatantly dishonest. Paul Trejo has never been able to support that claim. If he comes up with support for that, I will eat crow.

I will also make a separate thread on this so that thread can be referred-to when Paul Trejo, once again, tries to dishonestly pass off this story, which is nothing but bunk. Too many times have threads been derailed by this; and a separate thread which can be linked should keep that from happening again.

Edited August 18, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Michael Clark]

Michael Clark wrote;

"-There is a document from the US embassy in Moscow describing LHO having visited and turned-in his passport. This was not brought-up in this thred so it is not handy. When I find it I will post it here."

 

I found the US Russian embassy account of LHO's renunciation of citizenship, and passport surrender at the following US archives link to Appendix 15 of the WCR:

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-15.html#attempts

Page 747 OSWALD'S ATTEMPTS TO RENOUNCE HIS U.S. CITIZENSHIP

American officials in Moscow had no knowledge that Oswald was in Russia until October 31, 1959,5 more than 2 weeks after he had arrived, since he failed to register at the U.S. Embassy, as Americans traveling through Russia normally did.6 However, on October 31, 1959, a Saturday, Oswald presented himself at the American Embassy in Moscow.7 He placed his passport on the receptionist's desk and informed her that he had come to "dissolve his American citizenship." 8 She immediately summoned the consul, Richard E. Snyder, who invited Oswald into his office.9 In the room with Snyder was his assistant, John A. McVickar, who observed what ensued.10 Snyder recalled Oswald as "neatly and very presentably dressed," 11 but he also remembered his arrogance. Oswald seemed to "know what his mission was. He took charge in a sense, of the conversation right from the beginning." 12

Oswald stated at once that he was there to renounce his citizenship 13 and that "his allegiance was to the Soviet Union." 14 He said he had already applied for Soviet citizenship.15 He said he knew the provisions of American law on loss of citizenship and did not want to hear them reviewed by Snyder.16 Having taken his passport back from the receptionist, Oswald put it on Snyder's desk.17 Snyder noticed that Oswald had inked out the portion which would have shown his address in the United States.18 Oswald also presented Snyder with a note 19 which he had prepared in advance, which reads:

I Lee Harvey Oswald do herby request that my present citizenship in the United States of america, be revoked. 

I have entered the Soviet Union for the express purpose of appling for citizenship in the Soviet Union, through the means of naturalization. 

My request for citizenship is now pending before Suprem Soviet of the U.S.S.R. 

I take these steps for political reasons. My request for the revoking of my American citizenship is made only after the longest and most serious considerations. 

I affirm that my allegiance is to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.20

Oswald told Snyder that he had not mentioned his intent to remain in the Soviet Union to the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki at the time he had applied for his tourist visa.21 Oswald's passport, upon which his Soviet visa was stamped, shows that by the 31st of October he had already overstayed his visa, despite a 1-day extension which he had received.22 

Oswald gave as his "principal reason" for wanting to renounce his citizenship, "I am a Marxist." 23 He stated that he admired the system and policies of the Soviet Union and desired to serve the Soviet

Edited August 18, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Jason Ward]

On 8/18/2017 at 0:13 PM, Michael Clark said:

As is often the case, Paul Trejo's assertions, when found to be blatantly dishonest, always lead me to the exact opposite of the blatantly and patently false claim that he is making.

After the recent exchange with Paul Trejo I have come to think that LHO's surrender of his passport, renounciation of US citizenship and apllication for Soviet citizenship, while in Russia, are germane to the case, and also point to his being a CIA asset at that time. This is a conclusion that I was not, previously, an adherent of.

The false case which Paul Trejo was dishonestly trying to make is that LHO was a flunky, loser, Commie who failed in his effort to be absorbed into Russia and the Communist Party. It seems clear to me know that he was  CIA asset at that time.

In relation to the topic of this thread, the fact that (as I now believe) he was a CIA, points to his being set-up, if only contingently, as a patsy, as early as the Walker shooting.

I hate to admit it but I agree with Paul Trejo that the CIA, as an agency, did not do it. CIA rogues, assets and resources did play a key role in the JFKA. Worthy of note, I don't believe that Angleton knew obout the plot, and Dulles was not a participant.

further, since you revised your comment, above, from awareness of LHO's passport surrender and Citizenship renunciation I'll remind you of the documents that support these events.

-LHO's Diary, declaring that he had surrendered his passport.

-LHO's Diary, describing his efforts to repossess his passport before returning to the US.

-The document from the Yeltsin Cache, generated by The Soviet Governent that LHO had applied for citizenship.

--The document from the Yeltsin Cache, generated by The Soviet Governent that LHO had been denied citizenship.

-There is a document from the US embassy in Moscow describing LHO having visited and turned-in his passport. This was not brought-up in this thred so it is not handy. When I find it I will post it here.

-it should be noted that Paul Trejo's claim that he was constantly invited to join the Communist Party, but refused, is blatantly dishonest. Paul Trejo has never been able to support that claim. If he comes up with support for that, I will eat crow.

I will also make a separate thread on this so that thread can be referred-to when Paul Trejo, once again, tries to dishonestly pass off this story, which is nothing but bunk. Too many times have threads been derailed by this; and a separate thread which can be linked should keep that from happening again.

Michael:

1. Oswald having some type of connection with a US intelligence entity at the time of his Russian sojourn is, I think, a safe conclusion to make as long as any assassination CT is not dependent on this potential fact for validity.   If a CT requires Oswald as a CIA/ONI contact, operative, or agent, then it in turn becomes shaky because we just don't have solid primary sources proving Oswald is associated with US intelligence while in Moscow.   So, it is a reasonable assumption but I am skeptical of anyone who uses it as a pivotal assumption.

2. I continue to deny that the issue of Oswald applying for citizenship is important and I don't want to get in between your feud with Paul.  However, in reading through the Yeltsin documents this Soviet citizenship question illuminates a fear LBJ has that the Soviets will hold a press conference and announce Oswald was refused Soviet citizenship because of CIA ties - which obviously would blow up the whole pre-determined LN result of the WC. 

The Soviets say Oswald applied for Soviet citizenship and was denied for fairly bureaucratic reasons:

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/other/yeltsin/html/Yeltsin_0063a.htm

....but in fact the reason for denying his request becomes a point of concern between the LBJ White House and the Soviet Ambassador.  Obviously the last thing LBJ wanted to hear was that Oswald was denied Soviet citizenship because Moscow had evidence of his US intelligence ties.  Even if Moscow had no evidence and just THOUGHT Oswald was CIA in a press release, LBJ would be in tears.   I hate to stoke more conspiracy into CT land but I would at this point say that its just possible the Soviets then and now are withholding any information they have connecting LHO to CIA gathered in his stay in Russia, or any other time; oddly both the US and USSR would be on the same side in this matter (if it is a matter).. . . . . . . . . . . {later in the Yeltsin document series there is a high level US-Moscow back and forth where each side is nervously wondering what should be said re: reasons for denying Oswald's Soviet citizenship}

3. The CIA as prime-mover in the assassination is not likely in my view, I agree with you that it at most was rogue agents or a cell (like a cell in New Orleans), if anything, involved in killing Kennedy.  Of course CIA truth and lies in the coverup is a completely different matter - and as far as pre-assassination Oswald, just because the CIA is or was hiding something doesn't mean they're in on it; it just means they're paranoid freaks obsessed with intrigue.

4. Yes, I agree that around 10 April 63 and/or the Carcano transaction is the earliest moment we might be able to pinpoint a tangible effort leading Oswald into a patsy's role.   I  put it was much later, in the fall, before -Dallas and -Oswald as patsy were solidified. Maybe 5 other guys in 1963 had guns sent to a PO Box in an assumed name that they don't even know about to this day.   I believe that LHO was among perhaps a half-dozen guys with similar profiles who were in the running for an appointment with worldwide infamy and a suicidal mission - as being named the slayer of Kennedy and then slain themselves.  Oswald's own habits, no doubt some random variables, and the planets aligned to make him, JFK and Tippett a 3 way tragedy to unfold in ....Dallas, it was finally decided.

As a more subjective insight, I feel the conspiracy is less complicated than imagined, less numerically large, and far less reliant on corrupt government than is imagined.   Really, the post-assassination LBJ White House had little choice but to, in the words of the Soviet ambassador Dobryinin in a secret cable, "put the matter quickly behind them into oblivion."  Whoever you think the plotters were, they knew that a true justice-is-blind investigation was never going to happen.

 

Jason

Edited August 19, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Paul Trejo]

3 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Ok, Paul.

It's not important either way.  Some can see multiple Oswalds and that makes the conspiracy look more elaborate.   Some can see cases of mistaken identity and see a less elaborate conspiracy.  Some, like Posner, use the suggestion that all witnesses of a second Oswald and may other matters are mistaken; except those which agree with his narrative of course.  One of the problems with this place that might turn off, say, a young college researcher or someone new to the assassination is that everyone here is busy yelling at each other over the make and model of Payne's typewriter or other minutia that just doesn't matter all that much.

http://knoxblogs.com/atomiccity/2013/11/22/lee-harvey-oswald-oak-ridge/

Jason

Jason,

OK, I can agree with this.  Anyway, your thread wants to focus on the moment that LHO was crystalized as the Patsy.   I agree that this group tends to lose focus pretty quickly.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

3 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Whether it was so or not is only one question; the more important question in my view is: Why does Walker insist on making this accusation, repeatedly over the years?  Why is it so important to him?  Almost immediately after the assassination, Walker starts saying DPD knew LHO was the shooter at his house but didn't arrest him, or did arrest him and let him go, or was told to let him go...etc..  Walker repeatedly brings up this story --- why?  What's he so concerned about now that Oswald's dead anyway?

Jason

Jason,

I agree with this, too.  I've already explained that Walker's claim that the DPD really arrested Oswald on 4/10/1963 was his mistaken belief, possibly due to paranoia.

But Walker believed it.  And, he keeps bringing up the issue for the rest of his life.  Why?   That's my question, too.

Does it relate to the date of the crystallization of the Patsy?   I think so.  Also, crystallization is a good word for it, because it suggests a "slow development."   I agree with that.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, Jason Ward said:

2. ... I don't want to get in between your feud with Paul.  

3.... Whoever you think the plotters were, they knew that a true justice-is-blind investigation was never going to happen.

Jason

Jason,

Two quick points.  You can't get between Michael and me, because I have set his Forum account to IGNORE.  The only reason I respond on your thread is because you yourself are responding to Michael.

Also, I disagree  about what the JFK plotters expected as an outcome from the USA.  They truly expected an invasion of Cuba, IMHO, and they were stunned when that failed to happen.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited August 18, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Jason Ward]

8 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

I agree with this, too.  I've already explained that Walker's claim that the DPD really arrested Oswald on 4/10/1963 was his mistaken belief, possibly due to paranoia.

But Walker believed it.  And, he keeps bringing up the issue for the rest of his life.  Why?   That's my question, too.

Does it relate to the date of the crystallization of the Patsy?   I think so.  Also, crystallization is a good word for it, because it suggests a "slow development."   I agree with that.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I was re-reading Marina's statements this afternoon re: The Walker shooting.  

So perhaps the Walker shooting is not merely the making of a legend for PR purpose in the eventual lone-nut assassin narrative; perhaps it was planned as a stand-alone success on its own with no further assassination plans in mind?  But something went wrong; they never connected the commies to Walker's shooting in time.

in fact, why not believe there may have been no JFK assassination plan or generic patsy role crystallized in the minds of xxxxxx (the plotters).    To me, the Walker shooting is probably more significant as a stand-alone event; but yet everyone's busy chasing wild geese and trying to weave this into the patsy role of killing Kennedy.  In keeping with my late-patsy theory, can we imagine that an assassination attempt on Walker is programmed as a Gulf of Tonkin incident in and of itself?  

Perhaps the hope is that another red scare is ignited and we get a return to McCarthyism.  This means we can systematically remove leftists among government and media; and resume a more confrontational defense posture.  Oh, and quashing the Civil Rights movement is a side benefit of a red scare.  Possibly there were many of the same JFK-conspiracy hopes, such as a more robust anti-Castro movement and an erosion of Kennedy power.  Maybe there's even a belief that Walker shot by a frightening domestic commie proves Walker right in a Churchillian way, and catapults Walker into the governorship or better.  The problem is, much like with JFK, they overplayed their hand and underestimated what it would take for the American people to get riled up in the way Walker wanted them riled up.

I wonder if perhaps both Walker and Oswald expected LHO in jail for Walker in the same way he stood as the assassin for JFK - except, something went wrong?   Possibly something went wrong with the DPD since Walker seems hell-bent on framing them for releasing Oswald until the day he dies.  It seems to me they were planing on Oswald getting caught the way he was eventually "caught" on 22 November - by some fairly simple connecting of evidence that doesn't seem obviously planted.   They programmed Marina similarly for Walker and Kennedy.  So perhaps they were meant to find a buried gun with Oswald's prints; perhaps a manufactured witness or 5 would show up, perhaps the backyard photos are put on the cover of Life at this point...perhaps a false-flag Walker assassination attempt was the end plan until April, 1963?

Marina says LHO told her he hid the gun near Walker's house both before and after the shooting.  He tells her he takes the bus to/from the Walker house because everyone's expecting him to take a car.  Let's forget about parsing the veracity of the actual words LHO told her, and think about why he said this and apparently left other deliberately noticeable clues he might be gone for awhile.  I mean Oswald could have taken a car or not, it's irrelevant.  The point is that he's doing things that will later be pieced together to show an assassin's intent, target: Walker.   So, perhaps LHO was intended to take the fall for the Walker shooting right away?   Take the fall as in get arrested, go to jail, make headlines.   Perhaps they told LHO that ultimately he'd be let loose by a legal technicality, mismatched evidence, crooked cops, whatever, and he'd walk away with a big payday?

Once Walker as a targeted near-victim of the domestic commie network failed to engender anything, in large part because the un-arrest of Oswald never tied the event to the commies; they realized Walker was small potatoes.    For the kind of reaction they wanted, an assassination attempt on a pillar of then-current Right wing thought like Walker wasn't enough.  A presidential assassination [attempt only?] was deemed necessary.  

Then, perhaps, they recycle Oswald's Walker plan and turn it into the Kennedy plan.  Thoughts?   This hypothetical is still late-patsy for Kennedy but only because early-patsy for Walker failed.  Totally crazy?

 

Jason

Edited August 19, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Jason Ward]

8 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Also, I disagree  about what the JFK plotters expected as an outcome from the USA.  They truly expected an invasion of Cuba, IMHO, and they were stunned when that failed to happen.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Hi Paul,

I don't think the likes of Milteer care very much about invading Cuba.   Are the Murchison-Hunt types of the Right Wing in the South wildly anti-Castro to the point of wanting immediate invasion? I don't read them that way, although sure they see Castro as problem.  Of course there is a strong anti-Castro sentiment running through the assassination story, and there always has been, but can we imagine that this might be just as much as a red herring wild-goose chasing exercise as so much else?  Blame the communist Cubans or the anti-Castro Cubans; either way the Right wins, or is at least shielded from scrutiny.

I propose that the plotters sought primarily a domestic result.  Whatever might come on the foreign policy side was icing on the cake, but even still a function of the domestic Right-Wing grass roots upswell in public opinion they hoped to germinate.  Let me put it another way: isn't Walker and his buddies elevated to national political power more important for them than Castro?  

I mean they have a whole buffet of rightest agenda items on their To-Do list : Vietnam, confronting the Soviets and cancelling the test ban treaty, re-segregating the schools, keeping tax breaks in place for oilmen, impeaching Earl Warren; and more.

Is it so crazy to think that smart Right wingers even then can admit Cuba is something of a sideshow, or even a manufactured crisis?  But a useful sideshow in the whole Cold War fearmongering experience?  I mean really, if I'm a forcibly removed general sitting in my Turtle Creek mansion, relegated to speaking tours and writing pamphlets, what does overthrowing Castro do for me?  I would want more; and while Castro might be one way to get more, I wouldn't rate Castro as any more important than all the other low rent dictators the US flirts with over the years.

I just wonder if we are conflating the rabid anti-Castro passions of the Batistianos and a few segments of US intelligence with the top line goals of the plotters - if only because these Cuba-oriented players pop up so much and are providing manpower in the worker-bee level of the conspiracy?  If I'm a master plotter, I want my worker bees doing my work - but for a nominally different goal than my true intentions.  I don't want them on the same page as me in case they get caught or have a big mouth, which so many in fact did and still do.

Jason

Edited August 19, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Jason Ward]

15 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

  . . .

After the recent exchange with Paul Trejo I have come to think that LHO's surrender of his passport, renounciation of US citizenship and apllication for Soviet citizenship, while in Russia, are germane to the case, and also point to his being a CIA asset at that time. This is a conclusion that I was not, previously, an adherent of.

  . . .

Hi Michael,

I understand and appreciate that your point about Oswald in Russia is in the hope of generally expanding Oswald-knowledge or at least conversation.  This relates to one of my points in polling the community for input as to the time Oswald is made a patsy.   While I agree it's interesting, nevertheless for 50 years Oswald in Russia has never been more than interesting.   If he's a CIA agent -or not- in Russia; the facts of the assassination do not change and it doesn't change the search for clues after Russia.  There are already plenty of people who are so enamored of CIA power that they will pursue this angle even if LHO is, as  you say Paul is saying, just kind of a wandering loser who happens to travel to Russia and acquire a Russian wife. 

It's so seductive to wander off into Oswald's childhood, Marine years, Russian years and pick up or manufacture clues related to the assassination.   I say: so what?   The real answers can only come from 1963.   As far as solving the assassination is concerned, don't you agree we really need to spend our energies on, at the earliest, Oswald's return to Texas in the summer of 62?    Russia is a black hole from which light and information can not fully reveal itself, or at least we have no confidence in our ability to know what's going on in Russia all those years.  IMO.   Pre-crystallization of Oswald as patsy I say whatever he's doing is less important than what the prime-mover plotters are doing, agree?   

 

regards

Jason

Edited August 19, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Jason Ward]

On 8/17/2017 at 10:11 PM, Paul Trejo said:

3> As for  the first PUBLIC mention of Oswald as Walker's shooter, I believe it is this one which was spread by General Walker himself:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg

3.1.  As for the mere hint of it in the DMN on 23Nov1963, I believe that General Walker also spread that rumor, probably through Robert Allan Surrey.   We don't know for sure -- but the next several articles that suggest Oswald was Walker's shooter (e.g. in the National Enquirer) also have General Walker's style and wording.  If anybody has better evidence, they haven't shown it.

 

Medford Evans in American Opinion, September 1967, writes:*

...the only thing in his [Oswald's] record to show that he was dangerous was his attempt to kill General Edwin A. Walker the night of April 10, 1963, and the F.B.I. did not know anything about that until after the assassination. The Report says further, “Prior to November 22, 1963, no law enforcement agency had any information to connect Oswald with the attempted shooting of General Walker.” (Warren Report, New York Times edition, Page 419, ...) Elsewhere the Report says, “Until December 3, 1963, the Walker shooting remained unsolved.” (Ibid., Page 170.) It was on December second that Mrs. Ruth Paine, in whose home the Oswalds had lived, turned over to the police materials in which was found a note in Oswald’s handwriting which is construed as a virtual confession of planning to kill Walker. Marina Oswald said her husband had indicated to her that he was the one who shot at General Walker. The news was headlined in American papers of December 6, 1963.

      Yet on November 29, 1963 the Deutsche National Zeitung of Munich reportedly ran a story translated as follows: “THE STRANGE CASE OF OSWALD. The murderer of Kennedy made an attempt on U.S. General Walker’s life early in the summer when General Walker was sitting in his study. The bullet missed Walker’s head only by inches. Oswald was seized, but the following investigation—as it was reported to us—was stopped by U.S. General Attorney [sic], Robert Kennedy.”

....      I do know this: that General Walker told me personally by long-distance telephone in June of 1967 that evidence is available to establish that Oswald was picked up between 9:00 P.M. and midnight, April 10, 1963 (the shooting occurred that night at 9:00) and was released. I have known General Walker six years. I worked for the Federal Government  six years. I have never known General Walker to lie. I cannot say the same for the Government.

1. I assume the discovery of the Oswald's note in his stuff handed over to police is part of the Ruth Paine-as-CIA 'evidence', correct?

2. However, the first documented source of the claim Oswald shot Walker is not in fact the letter from Paine's house; it is the Deutsche National Zeitung.  There is also the very small mention in the DMN of words to the effect of "police are not ruling out that the shooter of JFK and General Walker last April are one and the same," on 23 November.  You said previously that both of these smell like Walker himself, and after research, I agree - because Walker made precisely the same RFK-released-Oswald claim several times in the 1960s.  WHY is Walker spreading this story?   How did he know what would eventually emerge as "the truth" (that he himself was LHO's target).......before the letter in the Paine house was discovered and made public on 6 December?!!!!!! 

          2a. Why the Deutsche National Zeitung?  Very odd.   For a conspirator its odd.  For a non-conspirator its odd.  It makes no sense either way.

3. I don't believe Paine ever said that she saw the Oswald letter incriminating himself for the Walker shooting, did she?   But Marina says she found the letter on 10April, right? 

4. Given that the letter has all the usual and almost comical signs of someone wanting to be a pretend-communist ('call the Soviet embassy, they'll help..') I don't see why Paine has to be involved with this whether she's CIA or not.   What's the reasoning here?   To me it looks like Oswald was up to something on 10 April, or wanted everyone to think he was up to something, and to support this impression he wrote this note with all the expected crazy-commie personality he could muster.   Unless one is looking to staple Ruth with a CIA identity, why isn't it more reasonable to believe whatever Oswald's role in the Walker incident of 10April, including the letter, it was all part and parcel of the conspiracy either to assassinate JFK; or false-flag attack Walker, or just in general enhance Oswald's commie-nut status?   

>>  WHY focus on the letter as the source of the Walker-Oswald connection instead of the 2 earlier mentions made in the press, obviously from Walker himself?   <<

5. Even if you believe the letter from Oswald implicating himself in the Walker shooting is fake: why is this seen as Paine's work and not many other potential conspirators like the DPD, Marina, whoever....?

 We know that the connection to the Walker shooting was already in production by 23Nov in the DMN and 29Nov in the German paper; and also the chain of evidence on this letter is sketchy anyway; who knows if it was even in the cookbook or whatever it was Paine handed over?   In my view, it isn't this big smoking gun that Ruth 'turns over the letter securing Oswald's guilt in the Walker shooting'...rather:

..THE SMOKING GUN IS THAT WALKER IS ADVERTISING HIMSELF AS OSWALD'S FIRST TARGET  BEFORE HE COULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT IN ANY NON-CONSPIRATORIAL WAY.....

 

am I all wrong here?

Jason

 

 

* full text found here:

http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/History/WC_Period/Reactions_to_Warren_Report/Reactions_of_right/Evans-Coup_dEtat.html

Edited August 19, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Mathias Baumann]

16 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

 

..THE SMOKING GUN IS THAT WALKER IS ADVERTISING HIMSELF AS OSWALD'S FIRST TARGET  BEFORE HE COULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT IN ANY NON-CONSPIRATORIAL WAY.....

 

The John T. Martin film might be another piece of evidence: http://emuseum.jfk.org/view/objects/asitem/search@/0?t:state:flow=c8b4e071-bb56-4d84-bbbe-737e4d559a26

[Jason Ward]

1 hour ago, Mathias Baumann said:

The John T. Martin film might be another piece of evidence: http://emuseum.jfk.org/view/objects/asitem/search@/0?t:state:flow=c8b4e071-bb56-4d84-bbbe-737e4d559a26

Great catch Mathias, I saw this film some time ago and didn't appreciate the significance.  Thanks.

Judging by the airplane coming and going, it looks like the filmmaker was trying to include verifiable date-stamps in the movie and that the trip had only two purposes.*  He wanted to film General Walker's house -and- totally on accident notice a disturbance on Canal Street while peacefully admiring an equistrian statue that is the same as a 1000 other similar statues everywhere, located across from Banister's office in New Orleans.  

So in the summer of '63 what plausible explanation is there to film both General Walker's house and Oswald on Canal Street in the famous FPCC incident?    

 

Jason

*I discount the zoo animal and mossy cypress trees as purposeful, but am open minded enough to hear alternatives on this point.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Paul Trejo]

6 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Medford Evans in American Opinion, September 1967, writes:*

...the only thing in his [Oswald's] record to show that he was dangerous was his attempt to kill General Edwin A. Walker the night of April 10, 1963, and the F.B.I. did not know anything about that until after the assassination. The Report says further, “Prior to November 22, 1963, no law enforcement agency had any information to connect Oswald with the attempted shooting of General Walker.” (Warren Report, New York Times edition, Page 419, ...) Elsewhere the Report says, “Until December 3, 1963, the Walker shooting remained unsolved.” (Ibid., Page 170.) It was on December second that Mrs. Ruth Paine, in whose home the Oswalds had lived, turned over to the police materials in which was found a note in Oswald’s handwriting which is construed as a virtual confession of planning to kill Walker. Marina Oswald said her husband had indicated to her that he was the one who shot at General Walker. The news was headlined in American papers of December 6, 1963.

      Yet on November 29, 1963 the Deutsche National Zeitung of Munich reportedly ran a story translated as follows: “THE STRANGE CASE OF OSWALD. The murderer of Kennedy made an attempt on U.S. General Walker’s life early in the summer when General Walker was sitting in his study. The bullet missed Walker’s head only by inches. Oswald was seized, but the following investigation—as it was reported to us—was stopped by U.S. General Attorney [sic], Robert Kennedy.”

....      I do know this: that General Walker told me personally by long-distance telephone in June of 1967 that evidence is available to establish that Oswald was picked up between 9:00 P.M. and midnight, April 10, 1963 (the shooting occurred that night at 9:00) and was released. I have known General Walker six years. I worked for the Federal Government  six years. I have never known General Walker to lie. I cannot say the same for the Government.

1. I assume the discovery of the Oswald's note in his stuff handed over to police is part of the Ruth Paine-as-CIA 'evidence', correct?

2. However, the first documented source of the claim Oswald shot Walker is not in fact the letter from Paine's house; it is the Deutsche National Zeitung.  There is also the very small mention in the DMN of words to the effect of "police are not ruling out that the shooter of JFK and General Walker last April are one and the same," on 23 November.  You said previously that both of these smell like Walker himself, and after research, I agree - because Walker made precisely the same RFK-released-Oswald claim several times in the 1960s.  WHY is Walker spreading this story?   How did he know what would eventually emerge as "the truth" (that he himself was LHO's target).......before the letter in the Paine house was discovered and made public on 6 December?!!!!!! 

          2a. Why the Deutsche National Zeitung?  Very odd.   For a conspirator its odd.  For a non-conspirator its odd.  It makes no sense either way.

3. I don't believe Paine ever said that she saw the Oswald letter incriminating himself for the Walker shooting, did she?   But Marina says she found the letter on 10April, right? 

4. Given that the letter has all the usual and almost comical signs of someone wanting to be a pretend-communist ('call the Soviet embassy, they'll help..') I don't see why Paine has to be involved with this whether she's CIA or not.   What's the reasoning here?   To me it looks like Oswald was up to something on 10 April, or wanted everyone to think he was up to something, and to support this impression he wrote this note with all the expected crazy-commie personality he could muster.   Unless one is looking to staple Ruth with a CIA identity, why isn't it more reasonable to believe whatever Oswald's role in the Walker incident of 10April, including the letter, it was all part and parcel of the conspiracy either to assassinate JFK; or false-flag attack Walker, or just in general enhance Oswald's commie-nut status?   

>>  WHY focus on the letter as the source of the Walker-Oswald connection instead of the 2 earlier mentions made in the press, obviously from Walker himself?   <<

5. Even if you believe the letter from Oswald implicating himself in the Walker shooting is fake: why is this seen as Paine's work and not many other potential conspirators like the DPD, Marina, whoever....?

 We know that the connection to the Walker shooting was already in production by 23Nov in the DMN and 29Nov in the German paper; and also the chain of evidence on this letter is sketchy anyway; who knows if it was even in the cookbook or whatever it was Paine handed over?   In my view, it isn't this big smoking gun that Ruth 'turns over the letter securing Oswald's guilt in the Walker shooting'...rather:

..THE SMOKING GUN IS THAT WALKER IS ADVERTISING HIMSELF AS OSWALD'S FIRST TARGET  BEFORE HE COULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT IN ANY NON-CONSPIRATORIAL WAY.....

am I all wrong here?

Jason

* full text found here:

http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/History/WC_Period/Reactions_to_Warren_Report/Reactions_of_right/Evans-Coup_dEtat.html

Jason,

By the numbers: 

1.  Yes, the CIA-did-it CTers have long claimed that the “Walker Letter” was forged by Ruth Paine.

2.  Yes, Jason, you’re right that the “Walker Letter” is not the first evidence that Oswald shot at Ex-General Walker – rather, the German newspaper, the Deutsche Nationalzeitung is the first evidence, because that story was obtained less than 24 hours after the JFK assassination.

2.1.  In my reading, the person who told the DMN on 11/22/1963 that Oswald was the likely shooter of Ex-General Walker was closely linked with Walker – if not Walker himself.

2.2.  WHY is Ex-General Walker spreading this story?  Because he was proud of his role in the JFK assassination, that’s why.  He truly in his heart believed he was doing the right thing for America – because he was a Radical Right wing in politics.

2.3.  There is no way that Ex-General Walker could know that Lee Harvey Oswald had written the “Walker Letter” in Russian for Marina Oswald on April 10, 1963.  That was mere happenstance for Walker.

2a.  Why the Deutsche Nationalzeitung?   Mae Brussell’s take on this is the best I’ve heard so far.  Back in 1960-1961, in Augsburg, Germany, when General Walker was in command of troops defending the Berlin Wall, he had become good friends with the Neo-Nazi editor of this newspaper, namely, Gerhard Frey.  

2a.1.  IMHO, Ex-General Walker wanted to be the first to break the news – he was proud of his “achievement.”  But he had deals going with his Radical Right collaborators, and could not tell the US Press.  This was his “leak.”

3.  Marina found Lee Harvey Oswald’s “Walker Letter,” written in Russian and made out to her, on April 10, 1963.  It doesn’t mention General Walker at all.  

3.1.  Ruth Paine never saw that letter until a few days after the JFK assassination, when the Secret Service came pounding on her door, and screaming at her, accusing her of having forged this letter.  That was the first she ever saw the letter.  This is what she testified for the WC, and also what she told me personally.

4.  The CIA-did-it CTers argue that since LHO never shot at JFK, then he never shot at General Walker, either, and so it must be a CIA plot to frame LHO.  

4.1.  Since Ruth Paine had sent a package of personal property to Marina Oswald through the Irving Police, and since the “Walker Letter” was found inside one of the books of that personal property package, the Secret Service accused Ruth Paine of forging it.  

4.2.  So, that gives the CIA-did-it CTers all they need to blame Ruth Paine of conspiring to kill JFK.

4.3.  The reason that CIA-did-it CTers focus on the “Walker Letter” instead of the earlier mentions that link LHO with the Walker shooting, is that the “Walker Letter” brings Ruth Paine into the scene, and so gives them a local punching bag.  The other two mentions fail to provide the desired punching bag.

4.4.   (Mae Brussell did not promote a CIA-did-it CT, but an “Invisible Fourth Reich” CT.)

5.  Why blame Ruth Paine?  In my reading, it’s mainly because she’s an educated woman, and CIA-did-it CTers tend to be old-fashioned MCP’s.  Also, she’s from the wealthy class, and class envy is a part of that.

5.1.  Jason, I have been saying for years on this Forum that the real smoking gun is that Ex-General Walker was advertising himself as Oswald’s first target before the FBI ever heard any such thing.  So, I agree with you here.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited August 19, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Michael Clark]

2 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

By the numbers: 

1.  Yes, the CIA-did-it CTers have long claimed that the “Walker Letter” was forged by Ruth Paine.

2.  Yes, Jason, you’re right “Walker Letter” is not the first evidence that Oswald shot at Ex-General Walker – rather, the German newspaper, the Deutsche Nationalzeitung is the first evidence, because that story was obtained less than 24 hours after the JFK assassination.

2.1.  In my reading, the person who told the DMN on 11/22/1963 that Oswald was the likely shooter of Ex-General Walker was closely linked with Walker – if not Walker himself.

2.2.  WHY is Ex-General Walker spreading this story?  Because he was proud of his role in the JFK assassination, that’s why.  He truly in his heart believed he was doing the right thing for America – because he was a Radical Right wing in politics.

2.3.  There is no way that Ex-General Walker could know that Lee Harvey Oswald had written the “Walker Letter” in Russian for Marina Oswald on April 10, 1963.  That was mere happenstance for Walker.

2a.  Why the Deutsche Nationalzeitung?   Mae Brussell’s take on this is the best I’ve heard so far.  Back in 1960-1961, in Augsburg, Germany, when General Walker was in command of troops defending the Berlin Wall, he had become good friends with the Neo-Nazi editor of this newspaper, namely, Gerhard Frey.  Walker wanted to be the first to break the news – he was proud of his “achievement.”  But he had deals going with his Radical Right collaborators, and could not tell the US Press.  This was his “leak.”

3.  Marina found Lee Harvey Oswald’s “Walker Letter,” written in Russian and made out to her, on April 10, 1963.  It doesn’t mention General Walker at all.  

3.1.  Ruth Paine never saw that letter until a few days after the JFK assassination, when the Secret Service came pounding on her door, and screaming at her, accusing her of having forged this letter.  That was the first she ever saw the letter.  This is what she testified for the WC, and also what she told me personally.

4.  The CIA-did-it CTers argue that since LHO never shot at JFK, then he never shot at General Walker, either, and so it must be a CIA plot to frame LHO.  Since Ruth Paine had sent a package of personal property to Marina Oswald through the Irving Police, and since the “Walker Letter” was found inside one of the books of that personal property package, the Secret Service accused Ruth Paine of forging it.  So, that gives the CIA-did-it CTers all they need to blame Ruth Paine of conspiring to kill JFK.

4.1.  The reason that CIA-did-it CTers focus on the “Walker Letter” instead of the earlier mentions that link LHO with the Walker shooting, is that the “Walker Letter” brings Ruth Paine into the scene, and so gives them a local punching bag.  The other two mentions fail to provide the desired punching bag.  (Mae Brussell did not promote a CIA-did-it CT, but an “Invisible Fourth Reich” CT.)

5.  Why blame Ruth Paine?  In my reading, it’s mainly because she’s an educated woman, and CIA-did-it CTers tend to be old-fashioned MCP’s.  Also, she’s from the wealthy class, and class envy is a part of that.

5.1.  Jason, I have been saying for years on this Forum that the real smoking gun is that Ex-General Walker was advertising himself as Oswald’s first target before the FBI ever heard any such thing.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul Trejo expresses:  ".Why blame Ruth Paine?  In my reading, it’s mainly because she’s an educated woman, and CIA-did-it CTers tend to be old-fashioned MCP’s.  Also, she’s from the wealthy class, and class envy is a part of that."

I am guessing that Paul means Middle Class People with the MCP anacronym..