Jump to content
The Education Forum

WHEN does Oswald crystallize into the patsy?


Jason Ward
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 343
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

29 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Well Jason, there you go with your intellectual idol Paul Trejo.

How can anyone doubt the word of Hemming?  You know the caravan into Dallas with the hit team?  A la Marita Lorenz and Ozzie and Howard Hunt.

I now await you to say that Paul is also correct about Walker being the mastermind behind the assassination.

Give it up, James; nobody wants to read your Probe Magazine anymore.

Sincerely,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

There's some primary sources for you.

James,

Here's some primary sources for you:

Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you why he wanted to go to Mexico City?

Mrs. OSWALD. From Mexico City he wanted to go to Cuba -- perhaps through the Russian Embassy in Mexico somehow he would be able to get to Cuba.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about going to Russia by way of Cuba?

Mrs. OSWALD. I know that he said that in the embassy.  But he only said so.  I know that he had no intention of going to Russia then.

Mr. RANKIN. How do you know that?

Mrs. OSWALD. He told me. I know Lee fairly well -- well enough from that point of view.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that he was going to Cuba and send you on to Russia?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, he proposed that after he got to Cuba, that I would go there, too, somehow.

And there we go.

--Paul

 

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

I'm not seeing how you can dismiss the sworn testimony of Marina Oswald and Ruth Paine -- the residents of the home with the garage in which the key evidence against Oswald was found.

If you dismiss their testimony -- then everything becomes guesswork at that point.

If you accept their evidence -- then the trail is solid.

I don't like speculation -- I prefer to work with testimony and first-hand reports of people who were there.

Now -- some people do fib -- so I give most weight to sworn testimony -- but if I need to add - I don't GUESS.  I seek first-hand reports.

So --

1.  In addition to the sworn testimony of Michael and Ruth Paine, who say that Oswald's rifle was never among the items moved from New Orleans;

2. In addition to the sworn testimony of Marina Oswald, who says that Oswald's rifle was surely in Ruth Paine's garage after Oswald returned from Mexico City

3. We have Gerry Patrick Hemming's claim to AJ Weberman that from Miami he convinced Oswald to hand over his rifle to somebody outside the TSBD on the morning of 11/22/1963.

This is the core of it.

Now, let's also add the findings of Jeff Caufield (2015) that J.D. Tippit attended General Walker's JBS meetings at Austin's BBQ in Dallas in 1963. 

This connection suggests to Caufield the scenario that J.D. Tippit's role was to kill Lee Harvey Oswald in the street ASAP after the JFK shooting. 

Oswald did not take the bus or the taxi (as those WC witnesses are unbelievable).   Somebody drove Oswald to his rooming house, and then to the Tippit scene.

Tippit tried to kill Oswald, but Oswald evidently out-drew him.  That's what Jeff Caufield opines.

Since there were too many witnesses at the Texas Theater, the rogue plotters in the DPD could not shoot Oswald there.

Jack Ruby -- best friend of the DPD -- was then talked into finishing the job -- with promises that he would be a national hero.

General Walker's dreams all came true that weekend -- his boys had killed JFK and also his April shooter, Lee Harvey Oswald, with paramilitary precision.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, thanks for your clarification on these points.

This goes for Jim as well: merely because certain cherry-picked aspects of the Mexico trip were seemingly leveraged later to flesh out the Oswald-as-patsy character does not convince us that the point of the trip was related to the assassination nor Oswald's patsy role.  Paul, you say the Cuban hysteria and the N.O. intrigues are one and the same.   From one perspective, like David Ferrie's, yes you're right.   But the documentary evidence does not indicate that Oswald's entire proCastro charade was in service of his eventual patsy role; it's clear he is merely a minor league provocateur in the New Orelans sideshow, keeping in mind the real Castro wars are going on via Miami.   So I can admit that Clay Shaw and the N.O. cell are always on a consistent path, but I suggest Oswald's paths change.   He's sent to Russia, he's sent to New Orleans, he's sent to Dallas.  Always he wears an outlandish Marxist hat, but his mission changes in at least each move.

At some point, Oswald's performance is deemed valueless or even counterproductive.  I'd pinpoint this as the return to Dallas, and still no assassination link in place.   So they've got this failing halfass operative on their hands who is easily controlled by manipulative effort, and he he's on ice for awhile, even after the conspiracy to kill Kennedy -somewhere- is already rolling.   I say the Mexico trip only supports the assassination patsy idea in hindsight; there's simply little evidence that Oswalds patsy role is established by the time of Mexico.   It is just possible he was in the running for some type of service in the conspiracy, but the patsy role is not better served by the Mexico trip than returning him to N.O. or elsewhere to work on, towards, or in Cuba. I see Mexico as serving his traditional antiCastro or Soviet penetration role, not yet has he been named the patsy.

Paul, your rifle points are well taken, but no, I accept nothing Marina says as dispositive ...and I think everyone to some degree or another accepts certain testimony from one source which is elsewhere discounted based entirely on the narrative we feel is most accurate.

I'm at work now and actually need to do some work, but, please, keep confronting me and keep up the reputation this place has as a home for inflexible zealots.  I'll try to check back before the end of the day.

thanks everyone

Jason

Edited by Jason Ward
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

...

The Guy Banister plot to kill JFK is all over the Mexico City episode.  Let's begin with the Fake FPCC resume.  It screams JFK plot -- to blame the COMMUNISTS.

 

Paul, I think I've made clear I agree with your take on Ruth Paine versus the claim she's a puppet master.  But you're not honoring the evidence versus conjecture boundary with this comment and your Mexico narrative - it seems to me.   I find little evidence Bannister is a prime mover anywhere, but certainly not in Mexico nor Dallas.   He to me is something like what everyone claims Ruth Paine is - a local puppeteer who takes orders as a field operations guy.   Specifically, the FPCC CV you say screams JFK plot doesn't scream that to a non conspiracy drenched open mind.  All FPCC stuff and most everything up to day 1 at the TSBD job seem like generic communist/proCastro legend building in service of non-assassination low level field work.  Because he was eventually the patsy, it's easy and seductive to see all roads leading to the patsy role, but based on evidence nothing is indisputably patsy until October, around the time of the TSBD start.

In any case, can we forget Bannister and other motive theories  .... instead maybe we can  try and agree on a day or range of days when the Dallas w/ Oswald as patsy plan is in place and getting ducks in a row with discernable effort? Or is that the Day Oswald is born?

Edited by Jason Ward
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Paul, I think I've made clear I agree with your take on Ruth Paine versus the claim she's a puppet master.  But you're not honoring the evidence versus conjecture boundary with this comment and your Mexico narrative - it seems to me.  

I find little evidence Bannister is a prime mover anywhere, but certainly not in Mexico nor Dallas.  

He to me is something like what everyone claims Ruth Paine is - a local puppeteer who takes orders as a field operations guy.  

Specifically, the FPCC CV you say screams JFK plot doesn't scream that to a non conspiracy drenched open mind.  

All FPCC stuff and most everything up to day 1 at the TSBD job seem like generic communist/proCastro legend building in service of non-assassination low level field work.

Because he was eventually the patsy, it's easy and seductive to see all roads leading to the patsy role, but based on evidence nothing is indisputably patsy until October, around the time of the TSBD start.

In any case, can we forget Garrison and other motive theories  .... instead maybe we can  try and agree on a day or range of days when the Dallas w/ Oswald as patsy plan is in place and getting ducks in a row with discernable effort? Or is that the Day Oswald is born?

Jason,

If we set aside Jim Garrison's uncovering of Guy Banister at the heart of Oswald's FPCC campaign in New Orleans, we cannot connect all the dots, IMHO.

But I'll meet you half-way with a challenge.  Let's say (arguendo) that Guy Banister was OK with JFK -- would you agree that:

1.  Guy Banister wanted to kill Fidel Castro?

2.  That the FPCC in New Orleans was 100% Fake?

3.  That the FPCC in New Orleans was Guy Banister's brain-child?

4.  That Guy Banister manipulated Oswald to pretend to be the Officer of this Fake FPCC by newspaper, police report, radio and TV?

If so, then to what end?  What did Lee Harvey Oswald do in New Orleans in the interest of the Anti-Castro forces by pretending to be an FPCC Officer?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jason Ward said:

...Merely because certain cherry-picked aspects of the Mexico trip were seemingly leveraged later to flesh out the Oswald-as-patsy character does not convince us that the point of the trip was related to the assassination nor Oswald's patsy role.  

Paul, you say the Cuban hysteria and the N.O. intrigues are one and the same.   From one perspective, like David Ferrie's, yes you're right.  

But the documentary evidence does not indicate that Oswald's entire proCastro charade was in service of his eventual patsy role; it's clear he is merely a minor league provocateur in the New Orelans sideshow, keeping in mind the real Castro wars are going on via Miami.  

So I can admit that Clay Shaw and the N.O. cell are always on a consistent path, but I suggest Oswald's paths change.   He's sent to Russia, he's sent to New Orleans, he's sent to Dallas.  Always he wears an outlandish Marxist hat, but his mission changes in at least each move.

At some point, Oswald's performance is deemed valueless or even counterproductive.  I'd pinpoint this as the return to Dallas, and still no assassination link in place.  

So they've got this failing halfass operative on their hands who is easily controlled by manipulative effort, and he he's on ice for awhile, even after the conspiracy to kill Kennedy -somewhere- is already rolling.  

I say the Mexico trip only supports the assassination patsy idea in hindsight; there's simply little evidence that Oswalds patsy role is established by the time of Mexico.  

It is just possible he was in the running for some type of service in the conspiracy, but the patsy role is not better served by the Mexico trip than returning him to N.O. or elsewhere to work on, towards, or in Cuba. I see Mexico as serving his traditional antiCastro or Soviet penetration role, not yet has he been named the patsy...

Jason

Jason,

Your skepticism is healthy, but you should also offer a counter-scenario.  I don't see one.

If the New Orleans Fake FPCC was not intended to: (1) sheep-dip LHO; and (2)lead to the Mexico City effort to get into Cuba -- then WHAT WAS IT USED FOR?

If the Mexico City effort to get into Cuba was not intended to further sheep-dip LHO as a KGB agent -- then WHAT WAS IT USED FOR?

My theory connects the dots (without using the old and worn-out CIA-did-it CT).

You have a healthy skepticism -- but your outcome doesn't connect very many dots that I can see.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

Your skepticism is healthy, but you should also offer a counter-scenario.  I don't see one.

If the New Orleans Fake FPCC was not intended to lead to the Mexico City effort to get into Cuba -- then WHAT WAS IT USED FOR?

If the Mexico City effort to get into Cuba was not intended to further sheep-dip LHO as a KGB agent -- then WHAT WAS IT USED FOR?

My theory connects the dots (without using the old and worn-out CIA-did-it CT).

You have a healthy skepticism -- but your outcome doesn't connect any dots that I can see.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

See below...

Edited by Michael Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Jason,

If we set aside Jim Garrison's uncovering of Guy Banister at the heart of Oswald's FPCC campaign in New Orleans, we cannot connect all the dots, IMHO.

But I'll meet you half-way with a challenge.  Let's say (arguendo) that Guy Banister was OK with JFK -- would you agree that:

1.  Guy Banister wanted to kill Fidel Castro?

2.  That the FPCC in New Orleans was 100% Fake?

3.  That the FPCC in New Orleans was Guy Banister's brain-child?

4.  That Guy Banister manipulated Oswald to pretend to be the Officer of this Fake FPCC by newspaper, police report, radio and TV?

If so, then to what end?  What did Lee Harvey Oswald do in New Orleans in the interest of the Anti-Castro forces by pretending to be an FPCC Officer?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

James McCord Jr. Was a CIA officer in charge of operations targeting the FPCC.

"McCord worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. In 1961, and under his direction, a counter-intelligence program was launched against the Fair Play for Cuba Committee." (Wikipedia; Oswald and the CIA by John Newman p.138)"

 

 

 

Edited by Michael Clark
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...