WHEN does Oswald crystallize into the patsy?

[Jason Ward]

3 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The witness to the $6500 payment, Gilberto Alverado, said it happened in late September. (When Oswald was alleged to be in MC.) This accusation surfaced on November 26. I'm sure you won't accept it as having been concocted prior to the date it surfaced.

Jason, I'm afraid that you have an unreasonable expectation with regards to evidence. I suspect that criminal convictions would drop dramatically in numbers if the courts were to adopt your standards. And I am confident in saying that the JFK assassination -- which I believe has been solved to a significant extent -- will never be solved under your standards.

 

You're right I don't accept that the comical Alverado episode was concocted before the assassination, because it doesn't make sense.  If the Mexico trip is this indisputable patsy-building link in the assasination chain as I think you and many others claim, they would have had Alverado documented three ways to Sunday B E F O R E the assassination takes place.  Obviously, after the fact of the assassination, they realized the Mexico trip was a potentially fertile ground to conjure up some false flag evidence pointing towards Castro.   Alternatively, and I think this CIA technique is under-appreciated, they could have generated the Alverado bs just to muddy the waters, send people on wild goose chases, etc.   But if they were seriously trying to use Mexico to link Oswald to a pro-Castro plot in the minds of the public and/or LBJ, they would have had the evidence in place pre-November 22nd, and a lot more.

Odd you should mention it, but I used to work in the criminal court system.  There is no discussion of evidence, there is no trial, because the police only catch people who are absolutely red-handed and usually guilty of much more than what they are charged with; we are running a criminal justice ENTERPRISE and niceties like rules of evidence are largely irrelevant.  Occasionally an OJ Simpson or other big splashy trial is held, but this is the very very rare exception.  Even so, people have this great faith in the justice system and have been indoctrinated with innocent until proven guilty.  Sandy, you're just not going to get very far with this circumstantial Paine-as-CIA-agent level of "proof."   Lets find something conclusive.

Jason

[Michael Clark]

59 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Michael,

When you say the MC trip was to "give the hired guns, anti-Castro Cubans, confidence that the agreed-upon plan was being implemented," do you mean give them confidence before the assassination, or after the assassination?

I ask because if it was to give confidence before, then there would be nothing for the Cubans to see at that time (other than perhaps Oswald leaving town). And if it was to give confidence after, then what they would see is actual war. In which case I would argue that the primary purpose of the MC trip was a prelude to war.... with perhaps a secondary purpose being to give anti-Castro Cubans confidence.

 

Sandy, in my working pet CT, MC and the Dallas meeting between LHO/DAP/AV were meant to give the hired guns confidence that the operation, the hit, was being set-up as planned. It had to include an American so Communism (an ideology) would be blamed, rather than Cubans ( a race of people, so to speak). Guys like Phillips, Hunt and Morales were asking the the Anti-Castro Cubans to kill Kennedy. Their pay-back would be a free Cuba. The fact that they had to have these confidence building measures was a sign that there was not absolute trust. Having an American involved showed them that the organizers were serious and upholding their part of the plan.

I believe that LHO did go to MC and evidence for his trip and activities were generated. After the assassination, that evidence was made to disappear, in order to double cross the Cubans.

------- You said "if it was to give confidence before, then there would be nothing for the Cubans to see at that time"

Veciana met LHO in the presence of Phillips. If it was in the Southland Center, that probably meant something as well. Who knows whose offices were there? I believe the Mexican Consulate was there. Perhaps other very important people were there amd Veciana was familiar with that place, and those people. It would be highly unordinary to meet there, but this is how Veciana knew they were serious.DAP and LHO, together, would go a long way in instilling confidence.

THAT would be "something to see".

Pictures or photos of LHO doing his thing, loudly, and conspicuously in MC, would be something to see. Photos, reports, operatives or informants could confirm that the organizers were moving along according to plan, based on what they saw in MC.

- They would also probably have received confirmation that LHO was in position with a job at the TSBD.

all of these things were confidence building measures, and some of this evidence would serve as assurance, insurance, and, eventually, black mail, at Watergate.

I am seeing a series of confidence building measures.

After the assassination, the Anti Castro Cubans got double crossed by local Dallas elements, some intelligence elements, Industrial elements and the police. They screwed them by disappearing evidence of conspiracy, and creating the lone nut myth. It wasn't the threat of WWIII., It was a double-crossing that prevented the invasion.

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Sandy Larsen]

14 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

Sandy, do you want a decisive smoking gun to emerge that convinces 100% of the world as to the conspiracy and who was behind it?  Well, lets find it!

Jason,

There is no decisive smoking gun in the JFK assassination. There is little hard evidence. You are dreaming.

 

Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning.

. . .  most criminals try to avoid generating direct evidence. Hence the prosecution usually must resort to circumstantial evidence. . . .

A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence. . . .

(From this Wikipedia article.)

The JFK assassination has already begun to be, and will continue to be, solved primarily through the reasoned interpretation of circumstantial evidence. Just the way many civil and criminal cases are decided.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

35 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jason,

It is not necessary for there to be documentary or testimonial evidence that Ruth Paine was a CIA asset. Again, you are avoiding the circumstantial evidence.

How do you think the CIA plotters got Oswald a job in a location where he could have shot Kennedy? Without influencing Ruth?

 

The CIA plotters did NOT get Oswald the job, nor was the TSBD job essential to the assassination, nor is Ruth in any way pivotal to proving the CIA (or whoever) were the prime movers in this story.   Ruth a conspirator or Ruth a saintly Quaker means nothing to the 7 billion who think CTs are drifting towards the lunatic fringe.

Prove it. What is your evidence?

If one accepts that the plotters were CIA, the circumstantial and other evidence indicates that Ruth Paine was influenced by the CIA. And until some stronger evidence surfaces that points in another direction, that conclusion will stand.

[Sandy Larsen]

43 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

We just have to find it and quit bickering over the likes of Ruth Paine's typewriter.

Oh my gosh, everything about Ruth Pain should be scrutinized, especially anything to do with Mexico City and the letter to the Soviet embassy in Washington.

Keep up the good work guys!

 

[Michael Clark]

Sandy, as an aside, did you see the Yeltsin memo regarding the LHO dec 9 letter that I posted a few days ago? It garnered no interest and I thought it was a very interesting find.

[Sandy Larsen]

29 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The witness to the $6500 payment, Gilberto Alverado, said it happened in late September. (When Oswald was alleged to be in MC.) This accusation surfaced on November 26. I'm sure you won't accept it as having been concocted prior to the date it surfaced.

Jason, I'm afraid that you have an unreasonable expectation with regards to evidence. I suspect that criminal convictions would drop dramatically in numbers if the courts were to adopt your standards. And I am confident in saying that the JFK assassination -- which I believe has been solved to a significant extent -- will never be solved under your standards.

 

You're right I don't accept that the comical Alverado episode was concocted before the assassination, because it doesn't make sense.  If the Mexico trip is this indisputable patsy-building link in the assasination chain as I think you and many others claim, they would have had Alverado documented three ways to Sunday B E F O R E the assassination takes place.

Who said it was a "patsy building link?"

And to say that the plotters would have had the Alverado claim documented BEFORE the assassination.... are you kidding? That's precisely what they couldn't do. Had the claim been documented before the assassination took place, Oswald would have been placed under arrest!

 

[James DiEugenio]

Jason is beginning to remind me of a certain Colorado lawyer from a few months back.

 

Like Jason he was going to set all of us conspiracy junkies straight, except his obsession was not Good Samaritan Ruth. It was  the rifle.  This went on for weeks if you recall.  I even went to a banker and interviewed him to review something I knew was correct anyway. People were going to Federal Reserve board records and other sources. 

I always have a problem with new people lecturing me on something I have studied for decades. And written three books about.  Yet thinking that somehow, their rules of evidence--which is usually nothing but their own biases-are somehow more insightful than mine.

So I will sit this one out.  I had enough of the Colorado Lawyer, who also said if you recall, that JFK was not really withdrawing from Vietnam and we had beatified the guy.

Have fun with Jason's Class.  And remember, Ruth and Michael were simply Good Samaritans.  Who just happened to conjure up a Minox at Hoover's request.

 

Edited August 16, 2017 by James DiEugenio

[Jason Ward]

17 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Prove it. What is your evidence?

If one accepts that the plotters were CIA, the circumstantial and other evidence indicates that Ruth Paine was influenced by the CIA. And until some stronger evidence surfaces that points in another direction, that conclusion will stand.

Sandy, I strongly disagree with your reasoning here.  The "circumstantial and other evidence" is to a rational fact-finder in no way judged by a pre-determined conclusion.   I don't have to proove Paine is not a CIA agent and in a conspiracy - you have to proove she is guilty of perjury and a xxxx.  Even though it is logically not necessary to prove a negative, the proof there was no conspiracy to get LHO a job at the TSBD is the twice given testimony of Linnie Randle; and of course Ruth's own testimony:

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/randlelm.htm

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490&relPageId=184&search=linnie_randle

Mrs. RANDLE. Well, they had--it was just general knowledge in the neighborhood that he didn't have a job and she was expecting a baby. Of course. I didn't know where he was or anything. And of course you know just being neighborly and everything, we felt sorry for Marina because her baby was due right away as we understood it, and he didn't have any work, so they said, so it was just-- 
Mr. BALL. Mrs. Paine told you that Lee didn't have any work? 
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, I suppose. It was just in conversation. 
Mr. BALL. Marina didn't take part in the conversation? 
Mrs. RANDLE. No. She couldn't. So far as I know, she couldn't speak. 
Mr. BALL. You and Mrs. Roberts and Mrs. Paine talked about it? 
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes. 
Mr. BALL. Was there anything said then about the Texas School Book Depository as a place he might get a job? 
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, we didn't say that he might get a job, because I didn't know there was a job open. The reason that we were being helpful, Wesley had just looked for a job, and I had helped him to try to find one. We listed several places that he might go to look for work. When you live in a place you know some places that someone with, you know, not very much of an education can find work. 
So, it was among one of the places that we mentioned. We mentioned several others, and Mrs. Paine said that well, he couldn't apply for any of the jobs that would require driving because he couldn't drive, and it was just in conversation that you might talk just any day and not think a thing on earth about it. In fact, I didn't even know that he had even tried any place that we mentioned. 

[Sandy Larsen]

8 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Sandy, as an aside, did you see the Yeltsin memo regarding the LHO dec 9 letter that I posted a few days ago? It garnered no interest and I thought it was a very interesting find.

Yes, I did see it and I read the article. I remember because it was in a local paper, The Deseret News.

Don't assume there is no interest just because nobody responds. Just think of all the Douglas Caddy posts that get no response, yet he gets a lot of praise for posting those articles.

 

[Jason Ward]

7 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Jason is beginning to remind me of a certain Colorado lawyer from a few months back.

 

Like Jason he was going to set all of us conspiracy junkies straight, except his obsession was not Good Samaritan Ruth. It was  the rifle.  This went on for weeks if you recall.  I even went to a banker and interviewed him to review something I knew was correct anyway. People were going to Federal Reserve board records and other sources. 

I always have a problem with new people lecturing me on something I have studied for decades. And written three books about.  Yet thinking that somehow, their rules of evidence--which is usually nothing but their own biases-are somehow more insightful than mine.

So I will sit this one out.  I had enough of the Colorado Lawyer, who also said if you recall, that JFK was not really withdrawing from Vietnam and we had beatified the guy.

Have fun with Jason's Class.  And remember, Ruth and Michael were simply Good Samaritans.  Who just happened to conjure up a Minox at Hoover's request.

 

I think your self worship is destructive to solving this matter and to this website.  May I kindly ask you not to participate in any discussions  I start and stick to discussing the evidence instead of me personally?  You're a legend in your own mind and my threat to your ego is obviously devastating.  Good riddance, admire yourself elsewhere.

 

Jason

Edited August 16, 2017 by Jason Ward

[Michael Clark]

1 minute ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Yes, I did see it and I read the article. I remember because it was in a local paper, The Deseret News.

Don't assume there is no interest just because nobody responds. Just think of all the Douglas Caddy posts that get no response, yet he gets a lot of praise for posting those articles.

 

Yes, thanks. I know better than to assume. I just wanted to ask you.

it was in the local paper? Are we talking about the same thing? I'll re post it here, to be sure.

[Michael Clark]

On 8/4/2017 at 0:41 PM, Michael Clark said:

Roughly translated from this ducument using my iPad voice text function.

Yeltsin/Clinton cashe ducument regarding LHO Russian Consulate letter.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/other/yeltsin/html/Yeltsin_0028a.htm

 

Do we have the source of our wire-tap?

Do we have the reason why a forged letter would be generated?

-------------

At 16 hours 00 minutes, the U.S. Telegraph agency reported that police in Dallas, TX, had arrested a U.S. National Lee H. Oswald, 24 years old, Chairman of the local branch of the FPCC, on suspicion that he had assassinated Kennedy.

It is also reported that Oswald was in the USSR some time ago and is married to a Russian woman.

It was ascertained by checking at the consulate section of the embassy that Oswald really did spend several years in Minsk,  where he married Soviet citizens Marina P. (born 1941). In June 1962, they returned to the US. In March 1963 Marina applied to return with her daughter to the USSR for permanent residency. The KU of the Ministry of Foreign Affair of the USSR (October 7, 1963) reported that her application was rejected.

The counselor section of the embassy has the correspondence between Marina and Oswald regarding her return to Russia.The last letter from Lee Oswald was dated November 9 (the text was transmitted on the line of nearby neighbors).

 

Bringing this to Sany's attention

[Michael Clark]

10 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Yes, I did see it and I read the article. I remember because it was in a local paper, The Deseret News.

Don't assume there is no interest just because nobody responds. Just think of all the Douglas Caddy posts that get no response, yet he gets a lot of praise for posting those articles.

 

Posted above in the previous post.

[Sandy Larsen]

4 minutes ago, Jason Ward said:

I don't have to prove Paine is not a CIA agent and in a conspiracy...

 

You do if you claim she wasn't. And you did claim that.

I mean, it's like if your neighbor claimed it rained last night. He didn't see it rain but he saw a little puddle of water when he went out to get the newspaper. In response you tell him it didn't rain. Don't you think you should prove your claim?

If there is no evidence for your claim, then you shouldn't claim it.