The timing and content of the "we both know who was responsible" phone call of Ruth and Michael Paine

[Gene Kelly]

Max ... nice work on the film, which I think tried to keep a neutral stance and just get the questions and issues on the table with a very intersting first-hand participant who is still alive.  I do agree with Bill Simpich's point that both Paines got in over their head (as did Oswald) in something constructed by Allen Dulles and his cabal.  Dulles had a penchant for using religious groups like the Quakers, as explained in the June 2022 article in Kennedys and King, "The Assassination and Mrs. Paine" by Jim DiEugenio. This tactic was first pointed out by researcher George Michael Evica, how Allen Dulles used Quakers and Unitarians for espionage work (e.g., Noel Field). And Mary Bancroft knew of this, so its not too diffuclt to connect these dots.  In fact, Evica suggested that Dulles may have helped secure for the Paines a character recommendation at the beginning of the FBI’s inquiry into the JFK murder.

Your film paints a clear picture of how a CIA asset (George deMorenschildt) escorted the Oswalds around Dallas/Fort Worth after their return from the USSR, and then left abruptly for Haiti before the assassination. In the interim, you have Ruth and Michael Paine producing daming evidence on Oswald (i.e., the rifle, Walker letter, Minox camera, Mexico City).  Then yet another CIA "handler" - Priscilla Johnson - comes into the picture by becoming Marina's personal escort (for almost 13 years).

The views of the late great Vincent Salandria are priceless. As described in Jim DiEugenio's excellent August 2020 article, "Vincent Salandria: In Memorial", Salandria always maintained the Big Picture of John Kennedy’s murder. In a 1968 speech Vince gave in Central Park on the occasion of Bobby Kennedy’s death, he pointed out the foreign policy reversals that occurred after JFK’s murder. Salandria also warned Jim Garrison about the infiltration of his investigation, and that he did not think Garrison would achieve his goal of flushing out the lower levels of the conspiracy to get to the top level of the plot. Vince pointed out that the real insights would lie in the efforts of certain groups to obstruct and to halt his efforts, which (as Jim D. highlights) is exctly what happened. Jim D. insighfully wrote in Destiny Betrayed that Gordon Novel was recruited by Allen Dulles to infiltrate and electronically monitor Garrison’s office. Novel later sued Ohio Bell so Garrison could not get hold of phone conversations between him and Dulles. Vince also came to the conclusion that the Warren Commission could not have been so stupid as to think that what they had done would not fall apart upon future scrutiny. 

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

56 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

you have Ruth and Michael Paine producing daming evidence on Oswald (i.e., the rifle, Walker letter, Minox camera, Mexico City).  

Objection, unsubstantiated, let alone settled fact no matter how many times repeated. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Gene Kelly said:

You have Ruth and Michael Paine producing daming evidence on Oswald (i.e., the rifle, Walker letter, Minox camera, Mexico City).

What do you mean "producing" ? All of those items BELONGED to Oswald, whom the Paines generously offered to live in their home. What did you expect them to do while the police were searching every nook and cranny of the place? Throw them in the trash? Burn them?

[Gene Kelly]

Greg

We will have to agree to disagree.  I respect your stauch defense of the Paines, but I simply don't share your views, no matter how many times you repeat them.  There are too many coincidences associated with Ruth and Michael to dismiss them as persons of interest.  And Vincent Salandria was prescient in characterizing this couple as "... beacons showing the way to identify the conspirators who had selected them".  Here are his words:

“Rationality requires that one is compelled to the conclusion that Kennedy’s killers carefully selected Ruth and Michael Paine to perform the vital conspiratorial tasks to which they were assigned. Without the Paines having carried out their crucial assignments in the conspiracy, the Dallas assassination simply could not have occurred. Let us briefly summarize some, but certainly not all, of the vital work carried out by the Paines without which no successful Dallas conspiracy could possibly have occurred. The work of the Paines regarding Oswald was essential for the successful closing of the circle of events that were required to kill Kennedy and to frame Oswald as the patsy.”

Gene

[Sandy Larsen]

6 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

Greg

We will have to agree to disagree.  I respect your stauch defense of the Paines, but I simply don't share your views, no matter how many times you repeat them.  There are too many coincidences associated with Ruth and Michael to dismiss them as persons of interest.  And Vincent Salandria was prescient in characterizing this couple as "... beacons showing the way to identify the conspirators who had selected them".  Here are his words:

“Rationality requires that one is compelled to the conclusion that Kennedy’s killers carefully selected Ruth and Michael Paine to perform the vital conspiratorial tasks to which they were assigned. Without the Paines having carried out their crucial assignments in the conspiracy, the Dallas assassination simply could not have occurred. Let us briefly summarize some, but certainly not all, of the vital work carried out by the Paines without which no successful Dallas conspiracy could possibly have occurred. The work of the Paines regarding Oswald was essential for the successful closing of the circle of events that were required to kill Kennedy and to frame Oswald as the patsy.”

Gene

 

Gene,

I haven't yet watched Max's film. Did it include Salandria saying much of what he said in his interview? Like his list of what Ruth Paine did for the plotters? And the odds against those things happening by chance?

Especially, did he mention in the film the part about Ruth getting the job for Oswald, and make the point that that was essential for making Oswald the patsy?

 

[Tom Gram]

14 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

What did you expect them to do while the police were searching every nook and cranny of the place? Throw them in the trash? Burn them?

That actually did happen with Oswald’s mail. Ruth Paine testified in a bizarre exchange with Jenner that she destroyed copies of The Worker and The Militant immediately after seeing the BYPs on television on the evening of the 23rd: 

Mrs. Paine: I believe so. I might say that my awareness of his subscribing to these last two, the Militant and the Worker, came after the assassination. There was mail waiting for him for that weekend which he did not pick up on the 21st, and after the assassination, indeed, after Saturday evening, the 23rd, when it was announced on television that they had a photograph of Lee Oswald holding two papers. I looked at this pile of mail waiting for him which consisted of these two newspapers, the Militant and the Worker, and I threw them away.

Mr. Jenner: You threw them away?

Mrs. Paine: Without opening them

Mr. Jenner: Well, my question or query, and I think expression of surprise, is activated by what I am about to ask you as to whether you might call that to the attention of the FBI?

Mrs. Paine: Oh, I am sure they knew.

Mr. Jenner: How are you sure they knew?

Mrs. Paine: Because mail stopped coming on the spot, nothing came after the assassination, I was certain it was still coming to some place.

Mr. Jenner: But this was almost instantaneously after you heard a broadcast that a photograph of him had been found in which he had been holding up the Militant. But you immediately went to see if he had that mail and there was a copy of the Militant and you threw it away?

Mrs. Paine: Why not?

Later she admitted to also throwing out a Russian newspaper, so this alleged “pile” consisted of more than just the two magazines. Presumably it was all the mail delivered for Oswald since his last visit to Irving. 

It seems doubtful that Paine would just casually volunteer that she destroyed evidence if it was anything nefarious, but there are aspects of this whole thing that bug me. Saturday evening was after Paine’s home had already been searched twice by the DPD. How the hell did the cops miss this “pile” of subversive mail for Lee Oswald? Why didn’t Paine mention it?

The Worker and Militant were being delivered to Paine’s home since late September - and according to Paine there was no packaging and she could tell what they were without opening them - but Paine had no clue that Oswald was a subscriber until the 23rd? Yea right. 

There’s a lot more discussed in this thread:

 https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2526-ruth-paine-destroys-worker-and-militant

[Max Good]

Thanks for the kind words, Gene.  And yes, Sandy, Salandria makes those points in the film.

I think we can throw out the crude and deceptive argument that "Ruth Paine has been 100% honest at all times and, as a pious Quaker, she would never lie."  Anyone making this argument shouldn't be taken seriously.

She stole Oswald's letter, planned to give it to the FBI behind his back, and did so, but not before FAILING to tell the police about this letter when they first arrived to search her home after THE ASSASSINATION OF THE PRESIDENT.  She was clearly less than forthcoming when I asked her about her sister's CIA connections.  She also repeatedly dodges my question about there being a conflict of values with Michael working for a military contractor.  And as Tom points out above, I know there are other examples of Ruth being less than forthcoming. 

Michael Paine supposedly kept it a secret that he saw the photo of Oswald with the rifle for 30 years.

 

[Gene Kelly]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Gene,

I haven't yet watched Max's film. Did it include Salandria saying much of what he said in his interview? Like his list of what Ruth Paine did for the plotters? And the odds against those things happening by chance?

Especially, did he mention in the film the part about Ruth getting the job for Oswald, and make the point that that was essential for making Oswald the patsy?

 

Sandy

Vincent Salandria was interviewed on April 8, 2016, by Max Good as background for the documentary released last year. Vince had a prepared statement which he read to the camera ... this is what I was quoting from (and had previously watched). He did make all of those points in the film.  As you probably know, Vincent Salandria passed away in August 2020.  Here is a link to that 2016 interview, if you havent seen the entire doumentary:

https://www.maxgoodfilm.com/vince-salandrias-statement-on-the-paines-with-video/

Vince characterized the assassination narrative as a “false mystery,” and always cautioned interested parties against ‘drowning in irrelevant details’ of what he believed to be an obvious state crime.

Gene

[Joe Bauer]

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

The Worker and Militant were being delivered to Paine’s home since late September - and according to Paine there was no packaging and she could tell what they were without opening them - but Paine had no clue that Oswald was a subscriber until the 23rd? Yea right. 

 

Didn't it even cross Ruth Paine's intelligent mind that anything with Lee Harvey Oswald's name on it was super important evidence that every police agency involved would have raced over to pick up?

Ruth Paine mentioned many times over the years how "deeply offended" and overtly angry she was at Oswald for using her typewriter without her permission.  How dare he!

How then did she feel when for weeks these Russia commie newspapers and who knows what other commie organization literature items were being delivered right to her house? To be seen by the mail carriers and probably reported to the FBI by the postmaster?

If Ruth Paine was that worked up over Oswald's unapproved use of her typewriter...one would think she would have really blown her stack at Oswald turning her home into a commie literature repository...and in so doing probably attracting the suspicious attention of the FBI and other agencies and perhaps putting even herself under their suspicion?

What other things of Lee Harvey Oswald did Ruth Paine simply throw away right after 11,22,1963?

Edited December 8, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Greg Doudna]

I would just like to point out Max Good, that none of the items you mention logically indicate Ruth perjured or framed Oswald, and your setup is unfair and prejudicial. 

Of course no one claims Ruth or anyone else cannot perjure because they are a member of any religion. Everybody knows that is a non sequitur, nobody claims that. The issue is not whether someone can perjure (anyone can), but whether she did.

And you don’t just call her identifying as Quaker but a “pious” Quaker. The adjective is disparaging and prejudicial. Ruth never claimed to be pious. Didn’t come across as any more pious than anyone else. You use the term as a disparaging or mocking term setting up a straw man. Even if the adjective was fair, which it isn’t, it would be irrelevant, personality is irrelevant to proving or suggesting perjury or forgery of physical evidence as Ruth is baselessly accused. 

Gene Kelly, Salandria wanted Garrison to indict Ruth right up there along with Clay Shaw for willful conspiracy to assassinate JFK. Garrison’s staff thought Salandria was raving and nuts, reminding him that prosecutors need evidence to file charges.

I cannot believe how a total lack of evidence is in people’s minds equated with certainty that Ruth was planting and forging physical evidence, perjuring, framing Oswald, conspiring to assassinate a president she loved, all over the map according to taste, in between caring for two toddlers as a single mom in a ranch house in Irving, and sharing a household with Marina.

She was caught up in proximity. “No good deed goes unpunished”—Burt Griffin of Ruth.

Her sister’s cia employment in DC has no more to do with Ruth assassinating JFK than my sister-in-law being a nurse in the US Air Force at a base in Germany makes me guilty of DOD war crimes done in Southeast Asia. 

Same logic. 

To me, this is like trying to talk to an Obama “birther” convinced Obama was secretly born in Kenya, not US born. There is nothing to it in terms of evidence but ones who believe it will never change. They know. People who think Ruth Paine was fabricating and forging evidence and maliciously knowingly giving false testimony to frame Oswald and conspiring to assassinate JFK as Salandria thought, will never change.

A film could be made, talking heads expressing suspicions of Oswald born in Kenya, not a real American. Obama denies the charges. Neutral moderator presents both sides, suspicions and the denials, leaves viewer to decide…  

Same thing. 

What could Ruth do differently which would prove her innocence to these people. Think about it. If you were in Ruth’s shoes and innocent, what would, what could, you do that would change anything to these people, prove your innocence? Think about it.

[Sandy Larsen]

Thanks @Max Good and @Gene Kelly for your responses. Now I am even more anxious to watch Max's film. (I haven't only because I have other responsibilities but limited energy.)

Yesterday I read Salandria's prepared statement. I was struck by the fact that his thinking is exactly mine. In fact, I've been unknowingly using his arguments in the forum for the last few years. Though I focus on Ruth getting Oswald the job at the TSBD because, IMO, it is indisputable proof that Ruth, Oswald, and at least one official at the TSBD worked for the plotters.

The Mexico City incident is, IMO, indisputable proof that the plotters were CIA officials and that Oswald was merely a patsy.

Upon accepting those facts, everything else begins to fall in place.

 

 

[Max Good]

I believe Ruth was offended that Lee was "lying on her typewriter" after reading his letter, and that he was actually using it with her permission.

How interesting that the Paines, with all their communist/socialist parents, harboring a Russian emigre and a returned defector, never seemed to arouse the slightest suspicion on the part of the authorities.  If there was suspicion for a moment in the beginning, it was completely shut down by higher ups and the right people vouching for the Paines.

 

 

[Jean Ceulemans]

50 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

my sister-in-law being a nurse in the US Air Force at a base in Germany 

I'm way off topic here, sorry, I have actually known a nurse at Lindsey Air Station in Germany in late 1980's, she transferred to Ramstein for some time and returned to the USA in the 1990's I think

Sorry, my mind is taking me for a walk in time...

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Max Good said:

I believe Ruth was offended that Lee was "lying on her typewriter" after reading his letter, and that he was actually using it with her permission.

I agree with this, seems accurate. I think Ruth had some qualms or twinge of guilt over looking at his letter he left out in her room, and was a little defensive about that, yet justified in her view in light of content which she thought the fbi should know. in other words I’m agreeing here. 
 

2 hours ago, Max Good said:

How interesting that the Paines, with all their communist/socialist parents, harboring a Russian emigre and a returned defector, never seemed to arouse the slightest suspicion on the part of the authorities.  If there was suspicion for a moment in the beginning, it was completely shut down by higher ups and the right people vouching for the Paines.

Wow Max. How can you say that? The Dallas Police upon first arrival to Ruth’s house were not friendly but suspicious that Ruth might be a communist, asked her directly in the car whether she was on the way downtown. By the next day LBJ had handed investigation over to the FBI so DPD became out of the picture.

Do you not know there was extensive FBI investigation of both Paines on the Communist angle? The MFF site has the FBI reports on that in great quantity. There is no sign that I can see that it was shut down from higherups. Instead what ended the communist question concerning both Paines was, to a man and to a woman, those who knew them attested to the FBI to their good personal character, being loyal Americans, not being communists or subversives, etc. 

It was thorough—I think running into some dozens of persons interviewed, and there just was nothing to tie either Ruth or Michael to being communists, even if they were liberal and Michael had a true blue Trotskyite father in California. 

There was not a single serious accuser charging that either Ruth or Michael were communist, no attending communist meetings of either, no memberships in communist groups or front groups of either, no communist associations other than Lee and Marina themselves and Michael’s long distance father. 

How could you miss that entire investigation of the Paines, the countless witnesses who were asked did they think the Paines were communist (no, no, no… went all the answers), coming up with nothing. The FBI concluded they weren’t communists. How can you say the question was not satisfactorily investigated or resolved.

I suspect Michael did check with someone security related at Bell, as to whether there was objection to his wife’s close association with Marina (and Lee) in light of their defector status, and was told it wasn’t a problem. One of the owners of Jaggars said Jaggars, when hiring Oswald, called to DC and asked if Oswald was OK and was told yes Oswald is OK, same answer I think Michael may have received. The reason I think Michael checked at Bell with whatever “intel” may have been there is it just sounds like a prudent thing he would have done. Though I don’t know that for sure. For all we know Michael could have kept them informed of anything important from time to time concerning his wife’s unusual housemate and returned defector husband.

Also I have something possibly new on Michael Paine and the BYP I plan to put up in the next couple of days or so. 

Edited December 8, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Jean Ceulemans]

7 hours ago, Max Good said:

She was clearly less than forthcoming when I asked her about her sister's CIA connections. 

How would the job of your brother or sister affect you ?  Importance ?

If I was asked that question continuously, over and over again, I'd tell them to take a hike. 

 

Edited December 8, 2023 by Jean Ceulemans