Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition - Jim DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

 

George then said that he only discussed the photo found in his storage place with close friends.

If he only met the Paines the one time, how were they close friends?

His wife Jeanne swore they never saw the photo before they got back from Haiti. (Crossfire, pp. 287-88)

Everett Glover placed the Baron's things in storage, but Ruth Paine had access to them. (ibid). That particular photo is the one that most people think is clearly a forgery, for technical reasons I will not go into here. Jeanne was later convinced the picture was planted.  Its the one with Russian spelling and Hunter of Fascists on it.

According to Greg there is not one thing about Ruth or Michael that anyone should ever question. If you want to read a perfect example  of this, take a look at his argument with Greg Parker at ROKC over Bill Hootkins.  That one was a real doozy.  Consider what Parker does with Ruth's non denial denial in order to keep her student Hootkins away from Oswald:

"I will end with another classic RP non-denial denial - this time about the identity of the boy. 

"Mrs Paine 2515 West 5th Street, Irving, Texas advised that she has no child even as old as school age and knows of no boy of about 14 with whom Oswald was ever associated in the neighborhood."

Key phrase "in the neighborhood". Hootkins lived in Dallas, not Irving. Which is why Shasteen did not recognize him. If she had said she knew of no 14 year old with whom Oswald ever associated... it would have been a lie. "In the neighborhood" made it technically true. And that was the only reason that bit was added.

The FBI by the way, knew Ruth was tutoring Hootkins. They knew he was 14. They knew what he looked like because they interviewed his mother in his presence regarding the Russian lessons. They had Shasteen's description which was Hootkins to the nth degree. Yet with all of that, they never connected the dots? More bullshit. The FBI knew."

Edited February 10, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[Pamela Brown]

I am focusing on this book and finding it rich in detail, right now, about Lee Oswald and his trip to Russia.  Interesting insights as well.

I am wondering what, if any research has been done on Lee Oswald's contacts in the Communist community in New York City.  I ask this because of the rather odd coincidence of Bob Dylan's early girlfriend, Suze Rotolo's family, having strong Communist connections there. 

Thanks...

Edited February 11, 2021 by Pamela Brown

[Greg Doudna]

On 2/10/2021 at 10:35 AM, James DiEugenio said:

 

George then said that he only discussed the photo found in his storage place with close friends.

If he only met the Paines the one time, how were they close friends?

His wife Jeanne swore they never saw the photo before they got back from Haiti. (Crossfire, pp. 287-88)

Everett Glover placed the Baron's things in storage, but Ruth Paine had access to them. (ibid). That particular photo is the one that most people think is clearly a forgery, for technical reasons I will not go into here. Jeanne was later convinced the picture was planted.  Its the one with Russian spelling and Hunter of Fascists on it.

According to Greg there is not one thing about Ruth or Michael that anyone should ever question. If you want to read a perfect example  of this, take a look at his argument with Greg Parker at ROKC over Bill Hootkins.  That one was a real doozy.  Consider what Parker does with Ruth's non denial denial in order to keep her student Hootkins away from Oswald:

"I will end with another classic RP non-denial denial - this time about the identity of the boy. 

"Mrs Paine 2515 West 5th Street, Irving, Texas advised that she has no child even as old as school age and knows of no boy of about 14 with whom Oswald was ever associated in the neighborhood."

Key phrase "in the neighborhood". Hootkins lived in Dallas, not Irving. Which is why Shasteen did not recognize him. If she had said she knew of no 14 year old with whom Oswald ever associated... it would have been a lie. "In the neighborhood" made it technically true. And that was the only reason that bit was added.

The FBI by the way, knew Ruth was tutoring Hootkins. They knew he was 14. They knew what he looked like because they interviewed his mother in his presence regarding the Russian lessons. They had Shasteen's description which was Hootkins to the nth degree. Yet with all of that, they never connected the dots? More bullshit. The FBI knew."

DeMohrenschildt did say in I'm a Patsy that he only discussed the BYP confidentially with close friends such as the Fords but he also said he discussed it with Life magazine for a story and invited the Paines over for dinner in 1967 prompted by discovery of that photo in order to see if the Paines could shed light on it. That is reasonable as to how that dinner happened. Neither George nor Jeanne DeMohrenschildt said they knew the Paines well before that dinner in 1967 nor is there any other evidence conflicting with Ruth's testimony. But George wrote sympathetically of Ruth Paine after that evening as if they did become friends that evening. You are citing a hairsplitting exegesis of DeMohrenschildt's generalization "only talked about it to close friends"--clearly the meaning is: as opposed to going public with it--in his tale I'm a Patsy as your sole justification--you cite zero other reason--for smearing Ruth Paine to the world in accusing her of lying. 

Now you add something new: an insinuation, supported by no evidence whatsoever, that Ruth Paine had something to do with forging and planting the backyard photo found by Jeanne DeMohrenschildt in Jeanne's language records which she had lent to Marina and then had been returned to their storage unit around the time George and Jeanne left for Haiti. That is just ludicrous. Apart from no evidence, think for a moment: what would be the point of Ruth slipping a forged BYP into someone's record jacket in a storage unit--hiding it inside a record jacket making it unlikely to be found at all--for the purpose of having it found by accident many years later if ever--what sinister purpose would be served by that? It makes no sense.  

The handwritten date on that BYP, 5/IV/63, accompanying "to my friend George", is written in an idiosyncratic form matching Oswald's way of writing with the Roman numeral (http://www.jfklancer.com/byphotos.html). The date, April 5, 1963, was when Oswald was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall with use of a darkroom and high-tech photographic equipment. Other analyses have shown the BYP were produced with high-tech equipment consistent with that Oswald worked with at Jaggers. Other practice items using photographic techniques were found among Oswald's things. The handwritten "hunter of fascists--ha ha" on the back of that BYP from Marina matches Marina's written idiom and humor.

Because there is a mystery concerning why that BYP was not known to George or Jeanne in 1963, yet later found by Jeanne in 1967 in Marina's returned records to Jeanne, and because Ruth had visited Marina in Oak Cliff and, theoretically, on one of her visits could, if she were intent on doing so, have plotted to gain access to Marina's things to plant that BYP while Marina's attention was diverted elsewhere, you appear to hold (based on your insinuation) that it is perfectly logical to conclude that on one of her visits that is what Ruth in fact did. But in the absence of any evidence that does not logically follow. That Jim Marrs 2013 edition of Crossfire reports on p. 267 that Jeanne told him she was convinced it had been "planted" does not alter that. Marrs gives no footnote, no date of interview, no quotation from Jeanne on that point but she may have said it. But the Marrs' Jeanne report notwithstanding, common sense says it is unlikely that that BYP was "planted" in one of Jeanne's records where it would likely never be found, for no known rational motive. Incidentally your statement that "Ruth Paine had access [to the Baron's things in storage] (ibid.)" is not in the "ibid", Marrs' Crossfire, and sounds  doubtful to me.

If I were to take a guess at what was going on with that BYP it would run something like this. It appears to have been prepared by both Lee and Marina to be given to George. It appears to have humorous intent (Marina's humor). However it was not given to George. Instead the exact opposite happened: Marina hid it, the best way she had means to hide it, inside the jacket of one of her language records where no one would see it. When Lee and Marina packed up their belongings preparing to move to New Orleans under somewhat precipitous and hurried circumstances later that month, the box of Jeanne's language records, with the BYP still inside one of those record jackets forgotten by Marina, was returned by Lee to friends of the DeMohrenschildts taking care of DeMohrenschildt's property, from which it ended up in the storage unit. The date on the photo is April 5, 1963. At the time Lee and Marina wrote their inscriptions on that photo they intended to give it to George. But that intent changed by April 10 at the latest with the Walker shooting, and may have changed earlier than April 10 depending on at what point Oswald came into knowledge of a planned shooting at the Walker house. At whatever point Oswald became knowledgeable of and/or participant in the Walker shooting, it would no longer be a laughing matter to give that photo to George, and Marina concealed it at that point. The photos were prepared by Oswald at Jaggers before Oswald knew he would be involved in the Walker shooting. The BYP which would have been given to George as a humorous gift changed to a hiding of it. This reconstruction accounts for the facts, agrees with the close correspondence of the dates, it explains why a gift prepared for George was not given but instead hidden, and it explains how it ended up in the DeMohrenschildt storage unit through natural and mundane circumstances. Nobody "planted" that photo. It was found in a box of language records of which Marina had last custody because Marina put it there. Marina put it there because she was hiding it.

With all of the puzzlement expressed by George and Jeanne over how a BYP with Marina's writing on it could possibly come to have been hidden in a box of language records that Marina had borrowed and returned and had last custody, one person neither George nor Jeanne ever asked about that baffling question was Marina, according to George's account in I'm a Patsy. George explained that was because there was a rift between them and Marina, that Marina had gone cold to them, had never expressed any gratitude even in good times, parallel to what George characterized as similar unjust treatment of Marina toward Ruth. But never mind that, when Marina was shown the de Mohrenschildt BYP by investigators, if it had been a forgery and a "plant" a normal person's reaction would be immediate and unambiguous denial of having seen it or having written the "hunter of fascists--ha ha" on it. That was not Marina's reaction. Marina, as you know so often dissembling in her testimony by nearly unanimous consensus of investigators such that investigators despaired of knowing which parts of Marina's testimony were credible and which were not, reacted this way:

Mr. McDonald ... do you recognize the handwriting?

Mrs. Porter. No, I don't ... you have certain way of writing, habit of writing certain letters, so I know for sure that I could not, I do not write certain letter that way. So at first I thought it was maybe my handwriting, but after I examine it, I know it is not ... 

The "at first I thought it was maybe my handwriting" on the BYP implies the BYP photo was familiar to Marina and weighs against it having been a forgery or a plant unknown to Marina. At least that is how I read that.  

Whether or not the DeMohrenschildt BYP is to be explained along the lines outlined--that the reason the BYP was found hidden in items last used by Marina is because Marina hid it there and never retrieved it--either way there is no legitimate basis for you to associate and smear Ruth Paine in that since there is no evidence or reason to suppose Ruth had anything to do with it.

Finally, since this is about the fourth time you bring up the Greg Parker Shasteen barbershop discussion I will address that, even though it has little relevance to the topic. Greg Parker and I had quite a discussion on that--Greg P. kindly invited me to that discussion on his ROKC--which started with agreement that the notion of an Oswald impersonator was off the table but agreement on little else. Greg P. is very astute and deals with documents and sources, always treated me civilly, and won points with me by on one or two occasions when I would cite an item of evidence he would acknowledge and modify (a mark of honesty and productive discussion), as I did several times when some of his points convinced me. I want to be careful in representing him here because he is not here to respond. But bottom line: the end result of my thinking, that the Shasteen "Oswald sighting" was a mistaken identification, I am sure is correct and that Greg P. who thinks it was Oswald is mistaken. Therefore I have no embarrassment in addressing that as you seem to assume. But I will do so in a separate message and people uninterested can skip over.  

Edited February 13, 2021 by Greg Doudna

[Allen Lowe]

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

DeMohrenschildt did say in I'm a Patsy that he only discussed the BYP confidentially with close friends such as the Fords but he also said he discussed it with Life magazine for a story and invited the Paines over for dinner in 1967 prompted by discovery of that photo in order to see if the Paines could shed light on it. That is reasonable as to how that dinner happened. Neither George nor Jeanne DeMohrenschildt said they knew the Paines well before that dinner in 1967 nor is there any other evidence conflicting with Ruth's testimony. But George wrote sympathetically of Ruth Paine after that evening as if they did become friends that evening. You are citing a hairsplitting exegesis of DeMohrenschildt's generalization "only talked about it to close friends"--clearly the meaning is: as opposed to going public with it--in his tale I'm a Patsy as your sole justification--you cite zero other reason--for smearing Ruth Paine to the world in accusing her of lying. 

Now you add something new: an insinuation, supported by no evidence whatsoever, that Ruth Paine had something to do with forging and planting the backyard photo found by Jeanne DeMohrenschildt in Jeanne's language records which she had lent to Marina and then had been returned to their storage unit around the time George and Jeanne left for Haiti. That is just ludicrous. Apart from no evidence, think for a moment: what would be the point of Ruth slipping a forged BYP into someone's record jacket in a storage unit--hiding it inside a record jacket making it unlikely to be found at all--for the purpose of having it found by accident many years later if ever--what sinister purpose would be served by that? It makes no sense.  

The handwritten date on that BYP, 5/IV/63, accompanying "to my friend George", is written in an idiosyncratic form matching Oswald's way of writing with the Roman numeral (http://www.jfklancer.com/byphotos.html). The date, April 5, 1963, was when Oswald was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall with use of a darkroom and high-tech photographic equipment. Other analyses have shown the BYP were produced with high-tech equipment consistent with that Oswald worked with at Jaggers. Other practice items using photographic techniques were found among Oswald's things. The handwritten "hunter of fascists--ha ha" on the back of that BYP from Marina matches Marina's written idiom and humor and suggests the BYP itself may have been practice photos for a joke.

Because there is a mystery concerning why that BYP was not known to George or Jeanne in 1963, yet later found by Jeanne in 1967 in Marina's returned records to Jeanne, and because Ruth had visited Marina in Oak Cliff and, theoretically, on one of her visits could, if she were intent on doing so, have plotted to gain access to Marina's things to plant that BYP while Marina's attention was diverted elsewhere, you appear to hold (based on your insinuation) that it is perfectly logical to conclude that on one of her visits that is what Ruth in fact did. But in the absence of any evidence that does not logically follow. That Jim Marrs 2013 edition of Crossfire reports on p. 267 that Jeanne told him she was convinced it had been "planted" does not alter that. Marrs gives no footnote, no date of interview, no quotation from Jeanne on that point but she may have said it. But the Marrs' Jeanne report notwithstanding, common sense says it is unlikely that that BYP was "planted" in one of Jeanne's records where it would likely never be found, for no known rational motive. Incidentally your statement that "Ruth Paine had access [to the Baron's things in storage] (ibid.)" is not in the "ibid", Marrs' Crossfire, and sounds  doubtful to me.

If I were to take guess at what was going on with that BYP it would run something like this. It appears to have been prepared by both Lee and Marina to be given to George. It appears to have humorous intent (Marina's humor). However it was not given to George. Instead the exact opposite happened: Marina hid it, the best way she had means to hide it, inside the jacket of one of her language records where no one would see it. When Lee and Marina packed up their belongings preparing to move to New Orleans under somewhat precipitous and hurried circumstances later that month, the box of Jeanne's language records, with the BYP still inside one of those record jackets forgotten by Marina, was returned by Lee to friends of the DeMohrenschildts taking care of DeMohrenschildt's property, from which it ended up in the storage unit. The date on the photo is April 5, 1963. At the time Lee and Marina wrote their inscriptions on that photo they intended to give it to George. But that intent changed by April 10 at the latest with the Walker shooting, and may have changed earlier than April 10 depending on at what point Oswald came into knowledge of a planned shooting at the Walker house. At whatever point Oswald became knowledgeable of and/or participant in the Walker shooting, it would no longer be a laughing matter to give that photo to George, and Marina concealed it at that point. The photos were prepared by Oswald at Jaggers before Oswald knew he would be involved in the Walker shooting. The BYP which would have been given to George as a humorous gift changed to a hiding of it. This reconstruction accounts for the facts, agrees with the close correspondence of the dates, it explains why a gift prepared for George was not given but instead hidden, and it explains how it ended up in the DeMohrenschildt storage unit through natural and mundane circumstances. Nobody "planted" that photo. It was found in a box of language records of which Marina had last custody because Marina put it there. Marina put it there because she was hiding it.

With all of the puzzlement expressed by George and Jeanne over how a BYP with Marina's writing on it could possibly come to have been hidden in a box of language records that Marina had borrowed and returned and had last custody, one person neither George nor Jeanne ever asked about that baffling question was Marina, according to George's account in I'm a Patsy. George explained that was because there was a rift between them and Marina, that Marina had gone cold to them, had never expressed any gratitude even in good times, parallel to what George characterized as similar unjust treatment of Marina toward Ruth. But never mind that, when Marina was shown the de Mohrenschildt BYP by investigators, if it had been a forgery and a "plant" a normal person's reaction would be immediate and unambiguous denial of having seen it or having written the "hunter of fascists--ha ha" on it. That was not Marina's reaction. Marina, as you know so often dissembling in her testimony by nearly unanimous consensus of investigators such that investigators despaired of knowing which parts of Marina's testimony were credible and which were not, reacted this way:

Mr. McDonald ... do you recognize the handwriting?

Mrs. Porter. No, I don't ... you have certain way of writing, habit of writing certain letters, so I know for sure that I could not, I do not write certain letter that way. So at first I thought it was maybe my handwriting, but after I examine it, I know it is not ... 

The "at first I thought it was maybe my handwriting" on the BYP implies the BYP photo was familiar to Marina and weighs against it having been a forgery or a plant unknown to Marina. At least that is how I read that.  

Whether or not the DeMohrenschildt BYP is to be explained along the lines outlined--that the reason the BYP was found hidden in items last used by Marina is because Marina hid it there and never retrieved it--either way there is no legitimate basis for you to associate and smear Ruth Paine in that since there is no evidence or reason to suppose Ruth had anything to do with it.

Finally, since this is about the fourth time you bring up the Greg Parker Shasteen barbershop discussion I will address that, even though it has little relevance to the topic. Greg Parker and I had quite a discussion on that--Greg P. kindly invited me to that discussion on his ROKC--which started with agreement that the notion of an Oswald impersonator was off the table but agreement on little else. Greg P. is very astute and deals with documents and sources, always treated me civilly, and won points with me by on one or two occasions when I would cite an item of evidence he would acknowledge and modify (a mark of honesty and productive discussion), as I did several times when some of his points convinced me. I want to be careful in representing him here because he is not here to respond. But bottom line: the end result of my thinking, that the Shasteen "Oswald sighting" was a mistaken identification, I am sure is correct and that Greg P. who thinks it was Oswald is mistaken. Therefore I have no embarrassment in addressing that as you seem to assume. But I will do so in a separate message and people uninterested can skip over.  

for someone who likes evidence, you sure make up a lot of stuff - like the whole scenario of putting the photos with her language records. Pure invention on your part, and not made any more real by so many layers of fake detail.

If the back yard photos were real, they were put there for one purpose only: to  "expose" Oswald in the aftermath as a crazy lefty/Communist. Of course there are a lot of problems with this, but you have to remember what the USA was like in 1963/64. This was all a big code for subversion and the cold war effects of American rabid anti-communism.

[Jeff Carter]

The handwriting on the back of the deMohrenschildt BYP does not match Marina Oswald, at least by a comparison of the same phrase ("ha-ha!") as it appears on that item and in a handwritten autobiography she produced for the Warren Commission. The inscription on the BYP, however, is consistent with Marina's speech pattern. Ruth Paine could write Russian, knew Marina reasonably well, and was in direct contact with the LP records which later disclosed the inscribed BYP - so it is not unreasonable to surmise that she may know a little bit more about all this than has been revealed.

An aside - information about communist circles in NYC and the mechanics of political assassinations appear in fascinating detail in a four part essay just published by the World Socialist Website: "Sylvia Ageloff and the Assassination of Leon Trotsky"             https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/02/06/sylv-f06.html

[Greg Doudna]

19 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

The handwriting on the back of the deMohrenschildt BYP does not match Marina Oswald, at least by a comparison of the same phrase ("ha-ha!") as it appears on that item and in a handwritten autobiography she produced for the Warren Commission. The inscription on the BYP, however, is consistent with Marina's speech pattern. Ruth Paine could write Russian, knew Marina reasonably well, and was in direct contact with the LP records which later disclosed the inscribed BYP - so it is not unreasonable to surmise that she may know a little bit more about all this than has been revealed.

Thanks Jeff but I'm not so sure about that. Police document examiner Joseph McNally testified that whereas Lee wrote the date and "to my friend George", the "hunter of fascists ha-ha-ha!!!" in Russian was not a match to Marina or Lee or George. But if McNally's experience was with handwriting in English and not in Cyrillic, given the small sample size in a language he could not read I am cautious of that expert testimony. If that testimony is correct then you are right, one would be looking at Jeanne or one of the other White Russians or Ruth Paine. But Jeanne would conflict with Jeanne's testimony, and Ruth would conflict with Ruth's testimony, in addition to no established match to her handwriting. Also I do not know where you are getting the idea Ruth "was in direct contact with the LP records" (in Marina's apartment in Oak Cliff? in the DeMohrenschildts' storage unit? Ruth lived in Irving!), or what that even has to do with anything. Is not the obvious explanation for how that BYP came to be in the LP record jacket because Marina hid it there? Marina herself told of hiding things in other cases (the "Walker letter" in the book pages; a different BYP in her shoe on the day of the assassination prior to destroying it). It is the kind of thing Marina did, told herself of doing, is in character, and she had the LP record jackets--why make it complicated? Why this business with some (not meaning you Jeff) wanting so gratuituously (and with no evidence, seemingly maliciously) to bring RUTH so improbably into it, against her explicit testimony, when she has testified consistently and credibly in all of her testimony otherwise in the opinion of 100% of the staff investigators of both major investigations? 

I have found something however that may require some rethinking of the DeMohrenschildt BYP. This is from an FBI interview of Edward Jay Epstein in Florida on March 30, 1977, the day after DeMohrenschildt's untimely death.

"De Mohrenschildt contended that he had seen the photo of Oswald holding a rifle with scope sight pointed at Oswald residence, shortly after General Edwin Walker had been shot at and humorously remarked to Oswald, 'Did you take a pot shot at General Walker?', and De Mohrenschildt contended that after this casual question, Oswald acted strangely and De Mohrenschildt left the Oswald residence. De Mohrenschildt stated he had previously lent the Oswalds a number of phonograph records which dealt with the Russian and English language and when these records were later returned to him by Marina Oswald, he found the original of this photograph mixed in with the photograph records." (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145503&relPageId=213&search=epstein_leneaux )

From a document apparently representing a writeup at FBI headquarters of notes of a phone call from the Miami field office telling of the Epstein debriefing prior to sending the teletype above:

"On one occasion, shortly after an attempt was made in Dallas on the life of General Walker, [DeMohrenschildt] observed a photograph at the Oswald's of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle. He advised this photograph later appeared in 'Life' magazine. He asked Lee Harvey Oswald if he was the one who had shot Walker whereupon Oswald became very upset and DeMohrenschildt left. He mentioned on another occasion that he had left several English-Russian language training records with Marina Oswald. Several days later these records were returned to him and enclosed with the records was a copy of the same photograph previously seen at the Oswald's." (https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/009/9980/images/img_9980_313_300.png ).

Another FBI telex dated April 5, 1977 says "Miami also in possession of information that DeMohrenschildt may have claimed that he was not truthful with the Warren Commission, was closely associated with the Oswalds and had put Oswald in touch with the 'right people' in Dallas". At the end DeMohrenschildt seemed like he was attempting to speak truthfully on some things. 

In this light the accepted story of George and Jeanne learning of the existence of the backyard photo by accident in the storage unit in 1967 is minimally called into question and may have been an untrue assumption. There was motive for DeMohrenschildt to not admit knowledge of the BYP at the time of the Walker shooting, for that would raise questions why DeMohrenschildt had not come forward with it. Marina told the WC the story that George had asked Lee after the Walker shooting, "How could you have missed?" In I'm a Patsy George flatly denied that story of Marina, said it never happened. But here in 1977 he told Epstein that story of Marina was true after all. 

Allen Lowe: there had to be a serious reason for the BYP prior to Marina writing an inside joke on one of the BYP copies. There probably was a government agent intent on making Lee look like a Communist--that agent being Lee himself (compare BYP and FPCC). Lee was in the spy business from the beginning going into the USSR, and when he returned with Marina to Dallas, DeMohrenschildt on behalf of CIA and Moore became Lee's minder. If there was any photoshopping in the BYP the logical photoshopper would be Lee himself at Jaggers.

An anecdote: a faculty member at a college I attended in east Texas with whom I remained friends over the years and will call D, went into the typesetting business. By coincidence the lady that lived next door was the mother of one of the three names of Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall though I do not remember which one. This woman's two grandsons--sons of one of the owners--worked at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall and knew Oswald when he was there. Because of the common business of typesetting D would talk shop and compare notes with the grandsons when they would come in from Dallas to visit grandma. D told me they told him that when Oswald was hired, they (Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall) called out to Washington, D.C. to a government agency to check whether Oswald was OK to hire. They were surprised at the reaction to Oswald's name over the phone: "oh we know about him, he's fine!"  

Edited February 13, 2021 by Greg Doudna

[Greg Doudna]

One more comment on Ruth Paine and the destruction of her good name. Her father's AID work and sister's employment as a psychologist with CIA was unrelated to the covert-assassination ops of CIA and does not mean Ruth was CIA for which there is no evidence. Probably most have known a friend who has siblings or a parent who has been career military, if not coming from such a family yourself; that does not mean that friend or you yourself are covert military. There is no evidence of CIA employment or involvement in Michael Paine's family at all, let alone in Michael's own history. Ruth has denied being CIA or a Marina babysitter for an agency. Ruth has testified that the Hosty visit to her home in Nov 1963 was the first time she met an FBI agent in her life. Ruth's testimony from start to finish has never been shown to be other than credible and truthful and has been regarded as credible and truthful by 100% of the experienced staff investigators for WC and HSCA. Ruth has no criminal record, never underwent training in the kind of covert black arts attributed to her, everyone who knew her has spoken of her as sincere and living her religious convictions as a Friend. The Paines' finances were investigated in detail by FBI and no compensation from an agency ever came to light. The way Ruth Paine came to meet and took an interest in helping Marina is reasonable in terms of Ruth's pre-existing study and teaching of Russian. The suspicions of Ruth as CIA later in Nicaragua with her work with pro-Nica, so damaging in discourse, have never been substantiated and were fueled in the first place by the unfounded accusations of JFK assassination researchers. I encountered mention of those suspicions raised of Ruth in Nicaragua, told to me in the St. Petersburg Friends Meeting by persons who did not believe them to be true, but I imagined how hurtful such accusations were. Has anyone here been falsely accused, without evidence, and then it became believed? This is how innocent people are destroyed folks.

DeMohrenschildt had a long known history of CIA and other agencies' involvement, that is completely clear, unlike with Ruth. It is very plausible (and would be surprising if it were not the case) that DeMohrenschildt informed on Lee and Marina to the same Dallas CIA Domestic Contacts close friend Moore that DeMohrenschildt had been in contact with in his supplying of other information from his travels of interest to CIA, and who discussed Oswald with DeMohrenschildt when DeMohrenschildt sought out his first contact with Lee. Yet nobody makes up fantastic stories about George DeMohrenschildt fabricating and planting evidence all over the place on Lee, forging and planting backyard photos, forging and planting firearms purchases in Lee's name, etc and etc and etc. But all sorts of things of that nature are imagined and hallucinated out of thin air and believed without any evidence whatsoever with respect to Ruth; why?

On the supposition that if DeMohrenschildt was a conduit of intelligence-informant information on Lee in Dallas, and that some continuity in intelligence agency information continued with Lee after the DeMohrenschildts left for Haiti around the end of April 1963, it does not logically follow that Ruth Paine was the handoff. Lee and Marina went to New Orleans at that time and lived in New Orleans and any handoff of Lee would be in New Orleans. Ruth Paine was helping Marina with these moves, and upon learning Marina was about to have a baby and the Oswalds in dire straights concerning medical care and finances, Ruth invited Marina to live with her in Oak Cliff in late Sept 1963 to get medical attention and have her baby. There is of course no reason to suppose Ruth had any idea that JFK would be assassinated or that Lee would be charged with it, when Ruth made that fateful phone call at Marina's urging to see if Lee could get a job at the TSBD. 

The reason there is no reason to suppose that is because if Ruth were witting to the assassination or had been involved in wittingly setting up Lee, or any of the other things imagined, or Michael either, what mechanism was in place to ensure neither of them would ever talk, ever blow the whistle, ever go to authorities and confess? Neither were murdered, neither suffered medical or personal or psychiatric breakdown or untimely deaths, they both spoke openly, there is no sign anybody controlled what either of them said over the years. Ruth welcomed my wife and me after I returned to the US from working in Denmark newly married to my wife from Denmark, and Ruth was part of a small group who went to a restaurant for lunch following my first Friends Meeting upon my return to the US. At that time the book Mrs. Paine's Garage had just come out and Ruth talked informally to us about it. I did not notice any fear or trepidation in her as she talked. Is this how two persons with lifetime huge sinister secrets inside behave? Does that sound like someone materially involved in the assassination of JFK or in one of the most high-profile felonious framings imaginable of an innocent man long ago?  

People who spin out elaborate conspiracy theories invoking covert actions and deception of Ruth Paine as a "deux ex machina" explanation for anything needed to fill out a JFK assassination theory, despite no evidence for any of it, never seem to consider some prior questions of plausibility: if you were asked to fabricate or plant evidence criminally implicating someone--such a very serious and horrible thing--and to testify falsely and extensively under oath concerning that, would you maybe ask for some indemnification from the US government, drawn up by lawyers and airtight legally, in case your perjury were to be exposed and you were prosecuted for that? When you imagine Ruth hither and yon forging and planting fabricated evidence, carrying out instructions from unseen handlers above her instructing her what to do and testify (all without documentary evidence for any of this) ... do you realize how bizarre that sounds? How far removed it sounds from actual "Innocence Project" type cases addressing issues of false convictions in the US criminal justice system? When there has never been any evidence her story is other than what she has long testified?

I have not in all this time renewed contact with Ruth, remiss on my part. She is now in her upper 80s so I will not delay. With covid and logistics a visit to her retirement home in northern California is not too likely. But I am already forming the letter. How I have studied quite a bit concerning the JFK assassination, have seen the things said about her, and how deeply, deeply sorry I am that she has had to experience that, for she did not deserve it. In her life she has told the truth, has worked for Quaker causes, was part of Kennedy liberalism and idealism, tried to help Marina at the time, has no record of ever maliciously hurting anyone in her life. We all make mistakes in our various walks with God. But I think Ruth will fare better in the judgment of eternity than in the words of some on earth.

This is about all I intend to say regarding Ruth Paine.

[Adam Johnson]

Just throwing this out there for consideration. What if Lee under instructions was told to produce the BYP's whilst he had access at jaggers for some purpose down the track, but gave himself some deniability by superimposing his face from one image onto another image of his own face? Creating some sizing or shadow issues or cut lines that if ever the image(pic) was used against him...he could get experts to agree the image was doctored. Sneaky of him but if he was at all paranoid of his role in things to come...i think he was capable of trying to create himself some insurance had the notion entered his mind.

[Andrew Prutsok]

Mr. Doudna's remarks are compelling. However, I'm not buying the Ruth Pain innocence stuff. No evidence in her entire life of ever "living her religious convictions as a Friend" by helping out people who were down on their luck apart from the Oswalds, she placed Lee in the TSBD, and it seems a stretch that the Secret Service regularly warns people to keep their distance from harmless Quakers, as they did Marina Oswald. In addition, she was demonstrably untruthful to the people in Nicaragua she was surveilling via notes and photographs.

[Greg Doudna]

1 minute ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Mr. Doudna's remarks are compelling. However, I'm not buying the Ruth Pain innocence stuff. No evidence in her entire life of ever "living her religious convictions as a Friend" by helping out people who were down on their luck apart from the Oswalds, she placed Lee in the TSBD, and it seems a stretch that the Secret Service regularly warns people to keep their distance from harmless Quakers, as they did Marina Oswald. In addition, she was demonstrably untruthful to the people in Nicaragua she was surveilling via notes and photographs.

There is no demonstrable untruth on the part of Ruth Paine regarding Nicaragua, or that she was surveilling on behalf of an intelligence agency in her photographs and notes. There was only voiced suspicions in Nicaragua, none of which had any demonstrated substance. For what it is worth, I know of no one in the St. Petersburg Friends Meeting who believed that was true of Ruth in Nicaragua. The Secret Service's isolation of Marina in the days following the assassination for purpose of debriefing her is completely and fully explicable in terms of standard interrogation practice and purposes, and does not require or imply supposition of substance concerning anything negative about Ruth Paine.   

[Richard Booth]

On 2/5/2021 at 3:52 PM, Chris Barnard said:

Just thought I'd write a few words about this book, which i've just finished reading. I suspect most of you have read it already but, for those who haven't. in my opinion it's an absolute masterpiece. I've probably only read around 12 or 13 JFK assassination books and this one makes a very convincing case, for any reader. I listened to the audiobook version, it reads very well, didn't drag at all and considering the wealth of information, it's very well organised. I am also glad the Ruth Paine and Freeport Sulphur threads make a lot more sense now. 

I have to agree. 

It's one of those books that both brings the goods (in terms of facts, details, documentation, insight) but also is very well written with a style that makes it a pure joy to read.

There are a lot of books that are factually sound, groundbreaking, or otherwise have stand-out content. Jim's work is a treat to read because in addition to those qualities previously cited, the writing is just enjoyable. It has both substance AND style. 

I also strongly recommend "JFK: The Evidence Today" -- for the same reasons cited concerning Destiny Betrayed. 

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks so much Richard.  I have always tried hard to make the writing smooth and understandable to the reader.

Part of that is based on my experience with Harold Weisberg.  Harold had a lot of good info, but he was poor at presenting it in a clear and forceful way. In fact, the only JFK book that I literally could not read was his book on the autopsy Post Mortem.

So I wanted my books to  be well organized--stay on topic with each chapter--and I was  conscious of making the wording easy to understand.  Nice to know I succeeded with a few people.

 

[Gene Kelly]

I have the 2nd edition (Jim had recommended this a year ago to me) and it is great ... even though many of us have assimilated considerable information by now on this infamous case, it adds fresh insight and several thought-provoking back stories (e.g. Freeport Sulphur).  Also, I now have a new word in my lexicon: the French idiom "Bête Noire (meaning "black beast")  

 An anathema; someone or something which is particularly disliked or avoided; an object of aversion, the bane of one's existence.

[David Andrews]

On 2/15/2021 at 12:22 PM, Andrew Prutsok said:

Mr. Doudna's remarks are compelling. However, I'm not buying the Ruth Pain innocence stuff. No evidence in her entire life of ever "living her religious convictions as a Friend" by helping out people who were down on their luck apart from the Oswalds, she placed Lee in the TSBD, and it seems a stretch that the Secret Service regularly warns people to keep their distance from harmless Quakers, as they did Marina Oswald. In addition, she was demonstrably untruthful to the people in Nicaragua she was surveilling via notes and photographs.

Ruth Paine's penchant for languages and folk dancing is starting to remind me of Ed Lansdale's love of Filipino and Vietnamese folk cultures.  Excellent cover, and it probably assuages the soul to keep a culture alive while selling out a people.

[Joe Bauer]

I read many of Jim Di's Kennedy's And King essays he occasionally posts on the forum.

Love the deeper and thought provoking historical knowledge he shares and which seems well cited.

He also includes interesting pieces by other writers.

I do see how he tries to keep his writing easier to follow by those of us who are not used to more complex and higher vocabulary versed literary expositions which he could whip out blindfolded I am sure.

Still, like a highly trained "Grand Chef" making dishes for the common palate he can't help but toss into these a pinch of choice dramatic or even humorous flavor enhancing exotic spice quotes, words or analogies now and then and which makes his essays as deliciously fun to read as they are informative and thought provoking imo.

Jim Garrison also had this skill of mixing just enough well chosen subject fitting humor in with his deadly serious writing to keep his readers entertained and engaged as well as informed.

Regards George de Mohrenschildt, isn't it obvious to everyone by now that if anyone involved with Oswald, even for just a few to several months before 11,22,1963, that begs the most believably suspicious motive scrutiny it would be him? GD's thoroughly documented background shouts agency activity...for decades!

I always wondered why the de Mohrenchildts ( both George and Jeanne ) didn't immediately end their contact with Lee and Marina over the rifle discovering incident in the Oswald's apartment.

Whether GD asked Lee upon seeing the scoped rifle in the closet if he had perhaps taken a pot shot at Walker, or said "how could you miss" to Oswald as Marina testified to, GD surely seems to have had a serious sense that Oswald might very well have been the Walker shooter.

You can be sure that Russian suspicion savvy Jeanne and George de discussed the rifle discovery incident with dark Lee Oswald implication ponderings after they left the Oswald's apartment.

Who would want to associate with someone they suspected slightly or strongly was going around trying to kill people for any reason? Maybe they decided to distance themselves from the Oswalds in Marina considering stages beginning that evening?

 

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2021 by Joe Bauer