Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Secret Service never told Marina that Ruth Paine was CIA--never happened


Recommended Posts

Jonathan:

Please, I have usually liked what you have contributed at this site.  Of late though, I mean whew.

What did Ruth Paine do for Lee?  As far as I can see the key thing she did was to separate Lee from Marina. And this began within three weeks of her meeting the Oswalds. The other thing she did was help get him a job at the TSBD.  The way that turned out, well, not so sure you want to count that one.  (I won't even go into all the extenuating circumstances about the TSBD.)

To do what they did to Oswald's name after the assassination?  How anyone could not think something was up when Oswald was murdered on live TV in the arms of the Dallas Police?  By a patriotic strip club owner?

I will tell you what I would have done as a result of that if I was Michael.  I would have queried into who Jack Ruby was.  And I mean really done some investigating.  Why would someone do that live on TV knowing they would be apprehended?  Why would they kill this "little guy" who was oh so guilty anyway? Well, most likely because they did not want him to talk.  If Mike would have dug deeply enough, he would have likely found out about the Saturday night call to Mr. Hurt. ANd then any objective person would have had a Eureka! reaction.

Now, go ahead and try and find any evidence that the Paines did that. Because I cannot.

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

What did Ruth Paine do for Lee?  As far as I can see the key thing she did was to separate Lee from Marina. And this began within three weeks of her meeting the Oswalds. The other thing she did was help get him a job at the TSBD.  The way that turned out, well, not so sure you want to count that one.  (I won't even go into all the extenuating circumstances about the TSBD.)

Jim, your question pre-supposes some obligation on the part of the Paines to do ANYTHING at all for the Oswald family. Everything they DID do was out of kindness and concern for their well-being, particularly the pregnant Marina, whom Lee could barely support financially, emotionally or otherwise. Did Ruth "separate" Lee and Marina by somehow convincing Lee to move to New Orleans? No, she did not. And in fact, she drove Marina across the country to New Orleans once Lee was "ready" for her to join him there. If Ruth was so hell-bent on keeping Marina and Lee apart, why did she then allow Lee to come to her home in Irving every weekend to visit once the Oswalds returned from New Orleans? And yes, she helped Lee get his job at the TSBD. So what? Is it so impossible to simply chalk this up to a quirk of history, rather than some nefarious conspiracy?

 

10 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

To do what they did to Oswald's name after the assassination?  How anyone could not think something was up when Oswald was murdered on live TV in the arms of the Dallas Police?  By a patriotic strip club owner?

I will tell you what I would have done as a result of that if I was Michael.  I would have queried into who Jack Ruby was.  And I mean really done some investigating.  Why would someone do that live on TV knowing they would be apprehended?  Why would they kill this "little guy" who was oh so guilty anyway?

Now, go ahead and try and find any evidence that they Paines did that?  Because I cannot.

As stated earlier, they had numerous reasons to believe Oswald was guilty. What they did or didn't do following Oswald's murder is, frankly, irrelevant. They had no obligation to DO or SAY anything! Nobody is claiming the Paines are perfect, but that hardly opens the door to accuse them of somehow being involved in a plot to frame Oswald of the Kennedy assassination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Your complaint is that the Paine family didn't do MORE for the Oswalds than they already had?

So what? They believed that's exactly what he was, and had ample first-hand observations to back it up. Are you implying they should have just automatically declared he was innocent in spite of their legitimate reasons for believing the contrary?

My remarks were in context of this thread's assertion: "It was the ACLU which the Secret Service was afraid of, in the motive to cut Marina off from Ruth Paine. (Not the CIA.)"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

I’m not sure the ACLU angle is as cut-and-dried as portrayed here.

Michael Paine took Oswald to a Dallas ACLU meeting Oct 25/63. According to Paine, Oswald “didn’t know about” the organization and Paine had to explain “its purpose” on both sides of the 35 minute drive to and from the meeting (WCHII, p407). In the days following, Oswald begins what appears as an “op” directed at the ACLU, similar to what he did with the FPCC: Oswald writes to The Worker, describing his introduction to the ACLU local chapter and requesting advice on future interaction; he opens a new Dallas post office box listing both FPCC and ACLU on the postal form; he mails a membership form to the ACLU and requests notification on how to “contact ACLU groups in my area” even as he is now aware of monthly meetings through Michael Paine.

On Saturday Nov 24, while in custody, Oswald told Dallas Bar Association president H. Louis Nichols that he was an ACLU member and requested an ACLU lawyer if Abt was not available. On Nov 27 a reporter from the Dallas Times Herald broke the story that Oswald had listed ACLU on the postal form, which revelation caused the ACLU in general to assume damage control (see CD 205,p704-708). Wonder what they thought about the fact that provocateur Oswald was at times staying at the home of long-time local ACLU Treasurer Ruth Paine. The ACLU was never going to involve itself with this case, and there was no reason for the Secret Service to even be concerned about it.

Despite what may have been said to Marguerite Oswald, neither of the Paines stepped forward to assist with Oswald’s civil liberties in the aftermath of his arrest, and in fact appeared on local television shortly after his death to advance not just his guilt for the assassination but to also assert what would later form the official profile - that he was a little man trying to be something bigger than he was.

An informative post Jeff, for me at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is classic Roe/Parnell stuff. Faced with bad news for their cause they come up with a theory which they then try and pass off as truth. CIA? ACLU?  Sure, everyone confuses those two. Maybe she meant IRS? PTA? LSD?

I don’t think the Paines knew about the plot, but like George Demohrenschildt they were put in place to handle Oswald, to move him according to some third-party plan. Why the hell else would Mrs.Paine drive all over the map to help out Marina? Out of the goodness of her heart? Geez you just said she had no obligation to help Oswald or Marina. Get your stories straight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can Marguritte's WC testimony be confabulated into Marina's Grand Jury testimony five years later?

Marge couldn't remember the name of the uh, uh, uh.  She had to be prompted.  This on top of the WC proclivity to prepare and rehearse witnesses.

Marina was straight forward, five years later, at the Shaw trial.  She had no trouble identifying the organization she was referencing.  She did it twice.  If you skipped her testimony Jim posted earlier read closely and think about it logically.  I'll capitalize key words For You.

"I was being Advised by the Secret Service Not to be Connected with Her, seems like she was . . . Not Connected . . . she was Sympathizing with the CIA".  Yes, the C I A, Not the ACLU.

"In Other Words You were left with the Distinct Impression that She was in some way Connected With The CIA?"

"Yes."  Yes, the C I A, Again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allen: This is classic Roe/Parnell stuff. Faced with bad news for their cause they come up with a theory which they then try and pass off as truth. CIA? ACLU?  Sure, everyone confuses those two.

 

👏😁 

 

And Ron follows on that line drive with a ground rule double.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oy vey. It seems likely she mis-spoke, and was thinking of the ACLU.

Think about it. Does the Secret Service know the identities of undercover CIA agents within the U.S.? No, they don't. 

And think about it some more. Would the Secret Service tell a Russian immigrant and wife of a suspected assassin that the people who've been helping her are spying on her? No, of course not.

The logical conclusion then is that she mis-spoke and was thinking of the ACLU. There is no way in heck they would have wanted anyone around her telling her rights, and that she didn't have to co-operate. That they warned her against the Paines because of their connection to the ACLU makes total sense, while their warning her against the Paines because they were CIA fails to make sense.

 

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Oy vey. It seems likely she mis-spoke, and was thinking of the ACLU.

Think about it. Does the Secret Service know the identities of undercover CIA agents within the U.S.? No, they don't. 

And think about it some more. Would the Secret Service tell a Russian immigrant and wife of a suspected assassin that the people who've been helping her are spying on her? No, of course not.

The logical conclusion then is that she mis-spoke and was thinking of the ACLU. There is no way in heck they would have wanted anyone around her telling her rights, and that she didn't have to co-operate. That they warned her against the Paines because of their connection to the ACLU makes total sense, while their warning her against the Paines because they were CIA fails to make sense.

Thanks Pat. Succinct and to the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Oy vey. It seems likely she mis-spoke, and was thinking of the ACLU.

Think about it. Does the Secret Service know the identities of undercover CIA agents within the U.S.? No, they don't. 

And think about it some more. Would the Secret Service tell a Russian immigrant and wife of a suspected assassin that the people who've been helping her are spying on her? No, of course not.

The logical conclusion then is that she mis-spoke and was thinking of the ACLU. There is no way in heck they would have wanted anyone around her telling her rights, and that she didn't have to co-operate. That they warned her against the Paines because of their connection to the ACLU makes total sense, while their warning her against the Paines because they were CIA fails to make sense.

 

Who could ever possibly confuse the ACLU with the CIA? What's next? Mixing up the FBI with the Fraternal Order of Police?

If Marina twice agreed with the characterization that it was the CIA, logic suggests she meant what she said. Where is the logic in proceeding with the assumption that she made a mistake? We already know Ruth's sister worked for the CIA.  Ruth also knew George de Mohrenschildt, another person connected with the CIA that just happened to be the fellow that brought the Paines and the Oswalds together. That's two clear connections between the CIA and Ruth Paine, one of those connections going to the Oswalds themselves, and we're expected to ignore that and go with a mistake? (Technically two mistakes, since she was was invited to clarify her answer a second time and for the second time confirmed that she indeed meant CIA.)

How do you know what the Secret Service knew and what they didn't, or what they would or would not have told Marina at that time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said:

Who could ever possibly confuse the ACLU with the CIA? What's next? Mixing up the FBI with the Fraternal Order of Police?

If Marina twice agreed with the characterization that it was the CIA, logic suggests she meant what she said. Where is the logic in proceeding with the assumption that she made a mistake? We already know Ruth's sister worked for the CIA.  Ruth also knew George de Mohrenschildt, another person connected with the CIA that just happened to be the fellow that brought the Paines and the Oswalds together. That's two clear connections between the CIA and Ruth Paine, one of those connections going to the Oswalds themselves, and we're expected to ignore that and go with a mistake? (Technically two mistakes, since she was was invited to clarify her answer a second time and for the second time confirmed that she indeed meant CIA.)

How do you know what the Secret Service knew and what they didn't, or what they would or would not have told Marina at that time?

To answer your initial question...my wife's parents were immigrants in the 1960's. And I would consider it a HUGE surprise if they at that time knew the difference between the CIA and the ACLU. At that point to them they were just letters that had something to do with the government or the law or something. I would bet my life on it. 

The researchers on this forum live in a bubble. They assume people not interested in spy stuff and politics know a lot more than they do about history, and the assassination, in particular. 

And when you take into account that Marina was a recent immigrant, well, I'd bet she knew next to nothing about what agency did what or to whom. 

Let me make an analogy...What percentage of Americans know the difference between MI5, MI6, M3, NHS, U2, the UK and the EU?  

Probably less than 2%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read half of Harvey And Lee while it was for a time years ago freely available for browsing on the Internet. I was gonna finish, and still mean to. IIRC, Harvey And Lee maintains the following: Marina's uncle worked for MVD (Ministry of Internal Affairs). Marina knew English, covered it up. Knew the "defector" Webster, in the USSR, before Oswald "defected" there. Not your average immigrant.

Edited by George Govus
Spartacus Educational info via DuckDuckGo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, George Govus said:

I read half of Harvey And Lee while it was for a time years ago freely available for browsing on the Internet. I was gonna finish, and still mean to. IIRC, Harvey And Lee maintains the following: Marina's uncle worked for MVD (Ministry of Internal Affairs). Marina knew English, covered it up. Knew the "defector" Webster, in the USSR, before Oswald "defected" there. Not your average immigrant.

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...