WHEN does Oswald crystallize into the patsy?

[Ty Carpenter]

What about Ruby's correction/exclamation at the late night press gathering that LHO was a member of the FPCC. How would he know that?  To me, that reeks of some type of connection between Ruby and N.O. folks. 

[Michael Clark]

10 minutes ago, Ty Carpenter said:

What about Ruby's correction/exclamation at the late night press gathering that LHO was a member of the FPCC. How would he know that?  To me, that reeks of some type of connection between Ruby and N.O. folks. 

LHO was on TV and radio shows in 1963, claiming his position as secretary of the NOLA chapter of the FPCC. Some of those broatcasts were on the air in Dallas. Your  point is still valid. Ruby would not have had that tid bit ready to correct the DPD spokesman if he was not more intimately familiar with LHO and his relationship to the FPCC.

Edited August 15, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Michael Clark]

22 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

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)"

 

 

 

I think it's funny how Paul always manages to have the opposite affect of his attempts at Debunking Ruth Paine and CIA complicity. I am not a CIA  did-it CT, and I would dismiss Ruth as personally uninteresting to me. But Paul's characterization and arguments are so easily gutted that in debating him, both the CIA and Ruth become much more clearly culpable.

[Ty Carpenter]

12 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

LHO was on TV and radio shows in 1963, claiming his position as secretary of the NOLA chapter of the FPCC. Some of those broatcasts were on the air in Dallas. Your  point is still valid.

You have to admit, that is a bit of a reach. Whether Ruby knew LHO or not, you are proposing that he remembered the exact name of his committee, which he may or may not have heard months previously. And he had the presence of mind to correct the misstatement immediately. 

[Michael Clark]

9 minutes ago, Ty Carpenter said:

You have to admit, that is a bit of a reach. Whether Ruby knew LHO or not, you are proposing that he remembered the exact name of his committee, which he may or may not have heard months previously. And he had the presence of mind to correct the misstatement immediately. 

Absolutely. I finished my thought ((edited it) since your post.

[George Sawtelle]

Jason

Great post and good job. I agree with you for the most part. You're right. The Mexico City affair had nothing to do with the assassination. But the inpersonation of Oswald did.

Oswald never made it to Mexico City. However when Hoover told anyone who would listen that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City the CIA` and FBI had to back track and place Oswald in Mexico City after the fact. It was a necessity to deal with the impersonation.

I believe like you that after Lisa Howard was debriefed by the CIA in April/May 1963 the CIA realized that Castro was willing to accede to the demands of the US for reproachment with Cuba. The hit was on.

But don't forget the impersonation. And don't forget the original route of Kennedy's motorcade did not pass in front of the TSBD.

[Mathias Baumann]

5 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Why not?

It appears that manufacturing and destroying evidence or breaking the law is almost routine in this era for the FBI/CIA.   So Oswald is on the watch list....or not... either way they have the administrative and operational power to make whatever they want with this point.  To me it's kind of like saying you can't hire a killer who has a murder warrant out for his arrest.   If you're Hoover, you simply change the evidence to match the desired narrative.

Jason

Jason,

I guess that exactly is the important question: did the conspirators possess the power and influence to move Oswald around at will, make him incriminate himself and did they have access to all the files and documents pertaining to him and could they get him off the FBI's radar? My hunch is: Oswald was just one of many possible patsies. He was NOT indispensable to the success of the operation. If the Chicago plot had worked we'd be talking about Thomas Vallee not Oswald. So Oswald being taken off the list was probably just a lucky coincident or possibly related to some other clandestine operation but not the assassination itself.

The conspiracy has not been exposed for more than 50 years. That leads me to the conclusion that the actual number of plotters was rather small, probably just a handful of people. Some of them certainly occupied influential positions (at least one of them must've been a high-ranking officer in counterintelligence with access to all of Oswald's files.) But they were neither all powerful nor omniscient. They chose Oswald because of his background, but they didn't create it.

Oswald was a wanna-be-spook. He was playing all sorts of spy games and actively seeking the attention of all sorts of intelligence agencies. And they used him for all sorts of purposes (Russia, New Orleans) but he was never on their official payroll, so they always had plausible deniability.

I think if people as powerful as Lyndon Johnson or Dulles had decided to plot Kennedy's death, they'd simply have poisoned him and make it look like a disease. So my bet is on "rogue" CIA agents, probably in cahoots with the mafia.

Edited August 15, 2017 by Mathias Baumann

[Michael Clark]

2 hours ago, Ty Carpenter said:

You have to admit, that is a bit of a reach. Whether Ruby knew LHO or not, you are proposing that he remembered the exact name of his committee, which he may or may not have heard months previously. And he had the presence of mind to correct the misstatement immediately. 

Ty, I am re-reading your post. My info on LHO's media appearances was just informational, and a direct answer to your question. I didn't mean to suggest that Ruby knew LHO from those appearances, just that someone could argue that point. I agree that it is unlikely that Ruby was spending the hours since the assassination trying to commit such details of LHO's background to memory, and would feel informed enough to correct the Police spokesperson.

[Jason Ward]

7 hours 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

Thanks, Paul.

1 & 2 are true in my book almost beyond dispute.

3 & 4 may or may not be true in the sense that Bannister is afaik never known as a major or minor spymaster outside of the New Orleans antiCastro program.   He's an old guy who's about to die and my perception is that he's a trusted order-taker but not a policy maker.   He is acting as directed and his funds are not his own, he's middle management. IMO.   Obviously I'll consider evidence to the contrary.

thanks for the polite conversation

Jason

 

[Jason Ward]

8 hours 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: (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

You're falling into the Paine-must-be-CIA fallacy.   Too many otherwise  fair-minded researchers think the only thing that explains Paine is some level of conspiratorial influence over Oswald . As you and me see it,  there is just nothing at all to indicate Ruth's role as puppeteer (or in any government connection) from the primary sources . Likewise,  just because I cannot with one hundred percent certainty explain what the Mexico city trip was for, this does not mean the trip defaults to the next best explanation as the only exclamation . I think that the Mexico City trip is of unknown purpose at this point . It is conceivably the first step towards an Osswald counterintelligence or direct penetration operation , and not the assassination. I feel that because the assassination happened, all the evidence is now arbitrarily folded to point towards this assassination, when in fact it is less clear when the assassination in Dallas scenario is finalized, and very very unclear when Oswald's patsy roll is finalized . 

 We have to be able to say , " I don't know."

 Thanks again,

Jason 

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Jason Ward]

7 hours ago, Ty Carpenter said:

What about Ruby's correction/exclamation at the late night press gathering that LHO was a member of the FPCC. How would he know that?  To me, that reeks of some type of connection between Ruby and N.O. folks. 

Good point.   No doubt that with Oswald still alive after the Texas Theater Ruby is activated or brought into the frontline of the conspiracy at this point, although obviously there's plenty suggesting he's previously connected to Oswald.   Still I'm trying to get ideas about when Oswald morphed into patsy from his previous role as flunky.  Your previous mention of the Odio incident is reasonable moment to say LHO is getting patsyfied.

thanks

Jason

[Jason Ward]

9 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Jason

Great post and good job. I agree with you for the most part. You're right. The Mexico City affair had nothing to do with the assassination. But the inpersonation of Oswald did.

Oswald never made it to Mexico City. However when Hoover told anyone who would listen that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City the CIA` and FBI had to back track and place Oswald in Mexico City after the fact. It was a necessity to deal with the impersonation.

I believe like you that after Lisa Howard was debriefed by the CIA in April/May 1963 the CIA realized that Castro was willing to accede to the demands of the US for reproachment with Cuba. The hit was on.

But don't forget the impersonation. And don't forget the original route of Kennedy's motorcade did not pass in front of the TSBD.

Thanks for the nod of support, George!  This place is kind of hostile and unwelcoming so the voices that are more indulgent and open-minded make me think that pursuing this still has some worthwhile rewards. 

 I think I'm noticing right away that everything that happens in Oswald's life is portrayed as leading to the assassination.  That's the default mode of thinking and in my short time here I've repeatedly been asked to explain how a person or event does NOT lead to the assassination .   I am not really trying to say that I have the solution or that I know what the Mexico City trip is for, but what I'm really trying to ask is: At what point are we certain Oswald's role in the conspiracy is in place and more specifically when is the patsy roll  crystallized ? 

 I don't want to get into a side track argument about Mexico, but my read of the documentary information is that Oswald never crosses the border at Laredo and never made it to Mexico City  - as you say .  I say that in part because I mostly believe Odio, although I think she might be a little loose with some details.  There's no point having an impersonator go to the embassies if Oswald himself is already there. The impersonator fiasco is to my mind one of the biggest clues that the Mexico City trip is NOT part of the assassination conspiracy ....because it's just such a monumental screwup without an essential purpose to the assassination . I don't think once it's decide to kill the president you have your patsy do things that are optional or nonessential, do you ? The Mexico City trip was not necessary for the patsy legend at all, right?  We already "know" he's a commie nutcase.....

 Thanks again,

Jason 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Paul Trejo]

23 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

You're falling into the Paine-must-be-CIA fallacy.   Too otherwise many fair-minded researchers think the only thing that explains Paine is some level of conspiratorial influence over Oswald . As you and me see it,  there is just nothing at all to indicate Ruth's role as puppeteer (or in any government connection) from the primary sources . Likewise,  just because I cannot with one hundred percent certainty explain what the Mexico city trip was for, this does not mean the trip defaults to the next best explanation as the only exclamation . I think that the Mexico City trip is of unknown purpose at this point .

It is conceivably the first step towards an Oswald counter-intelligence or direct penetration operation , and not the assassination. I feel that because the assassination happened, all the evidence is now arbitrarily folded to point towards this assassination, when in fact it is less clear when the assassination in Dallas scenario is finalized, and very very unclear when Oswald's patsy roll is finalized . 

 We have to be able to say , " I don't know."

 Thanks again,

Jason 

Jason,

IMHO, your position accords best with that of David Atlee Phillips in his manuscript, The AMLASH Legacy (1988), in which he claimed that he was in charge of Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans and Mexico City -- preparing him to kill Fidel Castro from an office building with a high-powered rifle.  

Sadly -- says Phillips -- "somebody" hi-jacked Lee Harvey Oswald in the JFK plot.  

The "somebody" in this text by Phillips, will always remain UNKNOWABLE.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Jason Ward]

6 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Jason,

I guess that exactly is the important question: did the conspirators possess the power and influence to move Oswald around at will, make him incriminate himself and did they have access to all the files and documents pertaining to him and could they get him off the FBI's radar? My hunch is: Oswald was just one of many possible patsies. He was NOT indispensable to the success of the operation. If the Chicago plot had worked we'd be talking about Thomas Vallee not Oswald. So Oswald being taken off the list was probably just a lucky coincident or possibly related to some other clandestine operation but not the assassination itself.

The conspiracy has not been exposed for more than 50 years. That leads me to the conclusion that the actual number of plotters was rather small, probably just a handful of people. Some of them certainly occupied influential positions (at least one of them must've been a high-ranking officer in counterintelligence with access to all of Oswald's files.) But they were neither all powerful nor omniscient. They chose Oswald because of his background, but they didn't create it.

Oswald was a wanna-be-spook. He was playing all sorts of spy games and actively seeking the attention of all sorts of intelligence agencies. And they used him for all sorts of purposes (Russia, New Orleans) but he was never on their official payroll, so they always had plausible deniability.

I think if people as powerful as Lyndon Johnson or Dulles had decided to plot Kennedy's death, they'd simply have poisoned him and make it look like a disease. So my bet is on "rogue" CIA agents, probably in cahoots with the mafia.

Mathias, many thanks for your considered conversation and for not firebombing everything I say ! 

 I'm afraid I've got to go have dinner with my wife and kids so I'm running out of time for now , and anyway Ruth Paine called and told me to shut my big fat mouth about all this; she's lined up a job interview for tomorrow that will make everything clear.

 I pretty much agree with everything you said here, or at minimum I agree that what you say in the last post is a very reasonable synopsis. I see three layers here. 1- Prime movers who have the motive and money.   2- Middle management who can marshall resources like Oswald, make fake IDs, manipulate government agents, etc.  3- Hapless fools who have little clue as to what they're doing, why, or who for.

thanks again

Jason

[Paul Trejo]

9 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

...My read of the documentary information is that Oswald never cross the border at Laredo and never made it to Mexico City  - as you say .

There's no point having an impersonator go to the embassies if Oswald himself is already there.

The impersonator fiasco is to my mind one of the biggest clues that the Mexico City trip is NOT part of the assassination conspiracy ....because it's just such a monumental screwup without an essential purpose to the assassination .

I don't think what you decide to kill the president you have your patsy do things that are optional or nonessential, do you?

The Mexico City trip was not necessary for the patsy legend at all, right?  We already "know" he's a commie nutcase.....

 Thanks again,

Jason 

Jason,

Taking that position, you must then respond to the primary source, the Hardway-Lopez Report (2002).

Edwin Lopez admits that the lack of a photograph of LHO at the Mexico City Embassies is a major road-block.  Still, Lopez insists that Oswald was certainly in Mexico City, and that Oswald's New Orleans Fake FPCC resume was also there at the Cuban Consulate, complete with ID photos of Lee Harvey Oswald.

The connection with New Orleans is this primary source -- the New Orleans RESUME.  How would you answer that, in your evolving CT?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo