Ruth Paine on "The Assassination & Mrs. Paine" film: "Well done, but powerfully awful"

[Sandy Larsen]

39 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

The flaw in this logic

First a disclaimer: I believe the assassination was a criminal conspiracy and that there was a framing of Castro and Oswald by those carrying out the assassination by means of having a rifle linked to Oswald linked to the assassination, put together with Oswald's communist associations and activity. But I do not believe Oswald's employment in the TSBD was foreordained. However you do assume this. I am going to show your logic collapses taking your assumptions.

Very simply, if TSBD employment by Oswald was foreordained as a necessary part of the plot, you must have the following participants under control of the plotters, in order to ensure that it will happen as planned:

• Above all, Truly at TSBD has to be instructed and ensured that he hire Oswald. That cannot be left to chance. No cold-call phone call from a woman in Irving, no matter how persuasive over the phone, is going to be enough to ensure that a Truly who is not involved with the plotters will hire instead of blowing off the phone call. ("I'm sorry ma'am, we have nothing now--he can drop off an application if he likes and we'll keep it on file in case our needs change in the future and give it every consideration at that time, but we just have nothing at present.") So, you've got to have Truly lined up in advance by the plotters. No ifs, ands, or buts about this, in terms of your scenario. (I believe in an earlier discussion you did agree to this so I do not anticipate you disputing this.)
• And, you must have Oswald instructed to take the job, by the plotters. That cannot be left to chance. If left to chance, Oswald might find a different job. Or he might decline to take the TSBD job for some unexpected reason. All the months of work of who knows how many handlers and coordinated plotters would be for nothing. Oswald has to be on board with the plotters in advance on this, of taking the TSBD job. No ifs, ands, or buts about this, in terms of your scenario.
• And, the plotters must have a plan to ensure that Oswald not be hired at any of the places he applied for prior to the TSBD. I won't list them here but there were several job applications and interviews done by Oswald where he was turned down for a job despite making an effort to be hired. The plotters cannot allow a hiring of Oswald other than at the TSBD. If follows (following your premises and logic) that each of the hiring decision-makers, in each of the businesses where Oswald applied, has to be under the control of the plotters--in order to know they are not to offer Oswald a job. The plotters must also control the placement counselor at the Texas Employment Commission who gave two job interview leads to Oswald to which Oswald went, in order to direct Oswald to the right places where the plotters have instructed those employers not to hire Oswald. 

With these three items established as necessary to ensure Oswald is hired at the TSBD, here is the logical fallacy: If both Truly and Oswald are on board with the plotters--as it has just been established they both must be--all that is needed is for Oswald to show up and Truly says "you're hired". Once this realization sinks in and is properly appreciated, there is no longer any need or necessary function or role for any persuasive phone call from Ruth Paine. It is irrelevant. It is unnecessary to the plot. Truly does not need to be persuaded by a cold-call from a housewife in Irving to hire a stranger (which cannot ensure that outcome in any case). Truly is going to hire Oswald who is going to take the job offered at TSBD, in the scenario, because that already is lined up on both of their parts. Ruth Paine's phone call becomes superfluous. Therefore there is no reason her phone call to Truly must have entered into the plotters' advance planning at all, since it plays no necessary role in anything, it cannot be guaranteed to accomplish anything, it is not needed to accomplish anything. Therefore Ruth's phone call to Truly will not have been preplanned by the plotters. It will have come about for a different, unrelated reason: she did that just as when she gave Lee a map, drove him to a written drivers license test location, taught him to parallel park, made him a birthday cake, etc.--on her own. Therefore, your argument that Ruth Paine is CIA because she made a phone call to Truly collapses because it rests on nothing logically.

Your premise, if true, requires Truly, Oswald, and the hiring decision-makers at places where Oswald applied for work prior to the TSBD, were under control of the plotters. Those are necessary to the plot for it to work, to ensure Oswald is employed at TSBD.

Ruth Paine making a cold-call phone call to Truly is not necessary for the plot to work. Not being necessary to the plot, there is no reason to suppose it would have been planned by the plotters at all. To assume otherwise is a logical fallacy. 

 

Greg,

So you believe that it was by sheer coincidence that Oswald got a job at the very same place the plotters executed the assassination plot.

Is that correct?

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Greg,

So you believe that it was by sheer coincidence that Oswald got a job at the very same place the plotters executed the assassination plot.

Is that correct?

You do not have exactly right what I believe but never mind, what I believe is not at issue. What is at issue is what you are arguing. You asked where was the fallacy in what you were arguing--that Linnie Mae's and Ruth's activity in helping Oswald get the job at TSBD prove Linnie Mae Randle and Ruth Paine were CIA. I showed the fallacy you asked to be shown. Acknowledge or address the fallacy. 

[Sandy Larsen]

54 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

You do not have exactly right what I believe but never mind, what I believe is not at issue.

 

Greg,

I really want to know what you believe. Let me ask you a question.

I understand that you believe the plotters framed Oswald and Castro in an assassination that was carried out by others (i.e. not by Oswald or Castro).

We know that the plotters chose the TSBD for the assassination.

How do you explain that Oswald just happened to get a job at the very same place the plotters chose for the assassination?

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

On 10/24/2022 at 1:28 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Kirk, Kirk, Kirk,

You are always right about things, as I have noted in the past. But I'm afraid you are wrong about this.

I recall several years ago when David Talbot was being interviewed for his new book by Chris Matthews on Hardball. Talbot didn't really want to talk about the JFKA conspiracy part of his book, but Matthews brought it up bluntly by asking how it could have possibly been a conspiracy given that Oswald just happened to get the job at the TSBD?

Matthews would have made mincemeat out of any of you conspiracy guys who are Ruth apologists.

Kirk... the idea of Ruth Paine as a CIA asset is not going to become more fringe as you say, but rather quite the opposite.

Let me explain.

It is just now becoming more accepted that Oswald was never actually in Mexico City. His roles were played by imposters, the most widely recognized one being the blond-haired one who visited the Cuban Consulate.

What I've discovered is this: When one accepts that none of the Oswald activities in Mexico City actually involved the real Oswald, and then one re-analyzes the evidence keeping that in mind, the more one's mind becomes uncluttered and the more one begins to understand the whole Mexico City incident.

It is my understanding the John Newman still assumes that Oswald was actually in Mexico City. Even though there are plenty of reasons to believe he wasn't. John Newman is going to have quite a surprise once he quits assuming that, IMO.

The following is what a researcher figures out once he accepts that there was no Oswald there, and he quits believing the WC narrative:

The purpose of the Mexico City trip was to make it appear to low-level CIA and the FBI that Oswald and some companions had traveled by car to Mexico City in order to conspire with the Cubans and Russians on assassinating Kennedy. Evidence was created to show that Oswald was pals with Sylvia Duran and other Cuban consulate  employees. That they had a twist party at the Duran's. That Oswald met with KGB assassinations chief Valeriy Kostikov, at the Russian Embassy. And Oswald was paid a $6500 down payment for the hit by a red-haired black guy.

The whole thing was created by high-level CIA plotters. It was a false flag operation meant to create a prelude to a Cuban invasion.

The reason for involving Oswald in the plot was so that the assassination in Dallas could be linked back to the Cubans and Russians. The CIA plotters needed the FBI to discover the FAKE false flag plot right away after the assassination.

(There's much more to this, but I need to keep this brief. But the false flag operation apparently worked, at least at first. James Hosty, in his book, reported that American warplanes were sent to Cuba not long after the assassination, but were called back before arriving.)

Now, we know for a fact that Oswald worked at the place where the shooting took place. Either 1) the plotters wanted him there, and therefore put him there; or 2) he just happened to get a job there not long before the assassination. What a coincidence!

Does anybody really believe that Oswald just happened to get that job?

Since you, Kirk, think that Oswald just happened to get that job, then you must not believe that Oswald was an integral part of the plot. And you must believe that the Mexico City incident never occurred. Perhaps you believe that Hardway and Lopez fabricated the Mexico City incident in order to implicate the CIA in the JFK assassination. LOL

 

Since you're so positive about your theory. You have to be able to answer Greg's questions about it. The ball is in your court. 

Besides Oswald got the job 6 weeks earlier and the motorcade route was changed, was it the day before?

*****

Sandy, Sandy, Sandy  I'm quite aware of your subtext. I've remembered the impostor photo in MXC, for many decades now. You've shared your theories with me before about this. Of course, they are just your theories, right? And yours is somewhat of a hybrid as I recall. You're now calling  us "Ruth Paine apologists", but your own theory explicitly states Ruth Paine doesn't owe anybody any apology at all! Please correct me where I get your theory wrong.

.

Ruth and Lee were CIA assets, but  unbeknownst to each other. Ruth's purpose is to put Lee in the sniper's nest,(and what else?) but that's very disputable and assuming a greater circle of people are involved in lying only weakens your case IMO. Saying someone is lying or part of the conspiracy, "witting or unwitting"  can't be the answer to every flaw in a JFKA hypothesis.

To your theory, You've said Ruth is completely clueless to aiding the plotters and the plotters had absolutely no fear that her or Michael's testimony before the WC could possibly go astray. The operation concerning the Paines was a total slam dunk! Ruth is rewarded and assigned further work much later in Nicaragua. To you, she's an innocent  patriot, whose only secret is she worked for the CIA, right?

 

I don't agree with your theories, but It's definitely not as teeth gnashing as Jim Di's or Allen's accusations. I've applauded you for being specific and putting your theory out there, which I haven't heard from anyone else.

I think the status quo here for the last, I'd say for at least 10 years is that  Ruth is the "CIA Dragon Lady'. We can disagree if the future research emphasizes the Paine's role less or goes after the Paine's more.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

You asked where was the fallacy in what you were arguing--that Linnie Mae's and Ruth's activity in helping Oswald get the job at TSBD prove Linnie Mae Randle and Ruth Paine were CIA. I showed the fallacy you asked to be shown. Acknowledge or address the fallacy. 

 

The fallacy you say you found is unrelated to my argument, and is therefore not a fallacy in my argument. Specifically, my argument said nothing about Linnie May Randall or Ruth Paine.

For your convenience, my argument is below. But never mind that... I have found a simpler way to make my argument.

 

Quote

Premise: The plotters chose Oswald to be the patsy for the assassination.

Argument:

1. The plotters planned to used Dealey Plaza for the assassination, and the TSBD specifically for at least some of the shots.
2. It took the plotters some time and preparation to be ready for the Big Event.
3. The plotters chose to place the patsy, Oswald, at the TSBD. How do we know that? Because that is where he was on the day of the Big Event. He certainly didn't get there by accident.
4. Therefore, the plotters were in control of Oswald getting the job at the TSBD.

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

48 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The fallacy you say you found is unrelated to my argument, and is therefore not a fallacy in my argument. Specifically, my argument said nothing about Linnie May Randall or Ruth Paine.

Do I understand you have no argument that Ruth Paine's phone call to Truly means she was CIA? 

This is a thread about Ruth Paine. If you are saying you have no argument that Ruth Paine's phone call to Truly means she was CIA, that is all we need to know here, thanks, glad to get that cleared up.   

[Sandy Larsen]

6 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Since you're so positive about your theory. You have to be able to answer Greg's questions about it. The ball is in your court. 

 

Finished!

BTW, that was not my theory Greg was addressing, it was an argument I made with a given premise. But never mind that... I've discovered a simpler way to argue my case.

 

6 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Besides Oswald got the job 6 weeks earlier and the motorcade route was changed, was it the day before?

 

That information is irrelevant to the argument I'm trying to make.

 

6 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

You've shared your theories with me before about this. Of course, they are just your theories, right? And yours is somewhat of a hybrid as I recall.

 

My theory is similar to Peter Dale Scott's. And I think Jim DiEugenio's. And probably Jim Douglass's and others.

But it doesn't matter. The only reason I brought the theory up was to show where I was getting the premises to the argument I was going to make. The premises are that the plotters were CIA and that Oswald was their patsy. Maybe other stuff as well... I forget.

But I wrote my post to you it seems like days ago. Since then I've gotten some feedback, and found that I can simplify and focus my argument.

 

6 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

You're now calling  us "Ruth Paine apologists", but your own theory explicitly states Ruth Paine doesn't owe anybody any apology at all! Please correct me where I get your theory wrong.

 

I said "Ruth Paine Apologists" tongue in cheek. Because when you guys argue for Ruth's innocence, you come across to me just like Warren Commission apologists do.

I believe Ruth Paine was a CIA asset and that she helped the CIA in their attempt to frame Oswald. That doesn't mean she's a bad person. Back then communism was considered evil by a lot of Americans, and I think that people who fought it considered doing so a patriotic thing. I think that Ruth thought it was patriotic to keep tabs on communists. And I think she was given some patriotic excuse for her helping to frame Oswald for the WC. Maybe to help prevent WW3. Whatever.

 

6 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Ruth and Lee were CIA assets, but  unbeknownst to each other. Ruth's purpose is to put Lee in the sniper's nest,(and what else?) but that's very disputable and assuming a greater circle of people are involved in lying only weakens your case IMO. Saying someone is lying or part of the conspiracy, "witting or unwitting"  can't be the answer to every flaw in a JFKA hypothesis.

To your theory, You've said Ruth is completely clueless to aiding the plotters and the plotters had absolutely no fear that her or Michael's testimony before the WC could possibly go astray. The operation concerning the Paines was a total slam dunk! Ruth is rewarded and assigned further work much later in Nicaragua. To you, she's an innocent  patriot, whose only secret is she worked for the CIA, right?

 

I have hypothesized on how it all worked out between the different CIA assets, etc. But there is no point in sharing it with you given that you are not receptive.

BTW you will soon discover that I am right... that if Oswald was a patsy, his employment at the TSBD had to have been controlled by the plotters. There's just no way around it.

 

[Greg Doudna]

Sandy I could speculate some possible answers to your question of how a criminal conspiracy to assassinate JFK which was done with Oswald framed via his rifle at the TSBD could come about not dependent on planning prior to Oct 15 to involve the TSBD--e.g. plotters intent on killing JFK when he came to Dallas could wait to see where Oswald landed in Dallas in what a TEC employee who counseled Oswald recounted was an explicit, directly-expressed desire by Oswald to obtain employment in an office building downtown, then shaping the logistics of the hit around that--but I will save that for another time and place. It is off topic here. The baseless accusations that some CT's continue to fling on and smear Ruth Paine as if with absolute certainty surrounding her phone call to Truly to try to obtain an employment possibility for the unemployed husband of Marina--just like Ruth gave him a map, drove him places, took time to teach him parallel parking, etc., which if anyone else did those things one would say this is someone trying to be helpful, not more complicated than that--are the topic and issue here.

[Sean Coleman]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Greg,

I really want to know what you believe. Let me ask you a question.

I understand that you believe the plotters framed Oswald and Castro in an assassination that was carried out by others (i.e. not by Oswald or Castro).

We know that the plotters chose the TSBD for the assassination.

How do you explain that Oswald just happened to get a job at the very same place the plotters chose for the assassination?

 

Good point.

I’m sure we all agree the kill site was chosen in advance, and that LHO was to be the nominated patsy using his own rifle from the 6th floor where he worked. That’s the bare bones of it.

So he had to be working there. So he had to be shoehorned into that job………..surely?

[Sandy Larsen]

4 minutes ago, Sean Coleman said:

Good point.

I’m sure we all agree the kill site was chosen in advance, and that LHO was to be the nominated patsy using his own rifle from the 6th floor where he worked. That’s the bare bones of it.

So he had to be working there. So he had to be shoehorned into that job………..surely?

 

I'm glad you see the problem there Sean. I was beginning to think I was the only one who could see it.

Greg refused to answer my question here, saying it was off topic. So I created a topic just for that one question.

I thought it is pretty obvious that the plotters would have had to do a good deal of planning to work everything out (how to get the weapons and shooters inside, where they could hide, how to get them out, etc). And that they would have to choose a place whose owners are friendly so they can get inside and set everything up, and get in some practice. But it looks like Greg seems to think that all they had to use whatever building Oswald got a job in, go inside, and shoot. LOL I don't think so.

 

[Joe Bauer]

Have no idea who may have nefariously facilitated Oswald getting a job in the TXSBD and if so their motive and connections.

However, it just happens to be a laughably suspicious coincidental fact that of all the higher floor buildings along the entire JFK Dallas motorcade trip...the one person who wanted to take a pot shot at JFK happens to have the perfect building to do this from?

One where JFK's limo has to slow down with two 90% turns just in front and below?

A totally alone wide open space high floor with a window that is overlooking JFK's limo with a turkey shoot view. Oswald ( or whoever is the shooter) has the floor to himself. No one else around to see him assemble his rifle and perch.

Throw in scores of heavy boxes to wall himself off from view in case anyone may wander up to the floor.

Not one security person on the ground looks up at the open windows of the TXSBD with any concern at all? Highest security precautions in Dallas police history? Chief Curry quote.

The motorcade route ends with two slowing down 90 degree angle turns ( or three? ) into this weird dog leg, sparce crowd location with not only the TXSBD looming right above during those turns, but a long stretch of tree canopy and fence lined grassy knoll which any common sense security person could see would be a perfect place for a sniper to shoot from and with no police security up behind that long stretch of hiding barriers?

Then throw in an overpass that JFK has to drive right underneath from which an explosive device could be dropped. And the DPD didn't even block it off from pedestrians ( or check those on it for weapons? ) before JFK passed underneath it?  NUTS!

Oswald or some other shooter having the perfect shooting location...just an incredible coincidence? JFK's 2 90 degree slowing turns limo was brought to the perfect place for a high floor shooting. It was brought to the shooter.

And just another nefarious coincidence? The TXSBD building is owned by oil rich "JFK hating" D.H. Byrd? A close buddy of all the other wealthiest JFK hating men on Earth Texas oil barons and even of LBJ himself?

Naw...too many nefarious logistical coincidences in this story folks.

 

And why did Harold Norman, Junior Jarman and Bonnie Ray Williams not go up to the floor with the best view of the JFK motorcade...the 6th floor? They chose the 5th? Wasn't the 5th floor a wide open room as well like the sixth floor?

 

Edited October 27, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Guest]

Agree, that's a lot of coincidences... way too much IMO

But, within the conspiracy theories there were previous attempts that did not "succeed" (they also included some patsies I think, didn't check those in full detail). This one could have failed as well for all we know.

What would be needed to call it off ?  Was it "all-in" on Dallas ? 

Dallas or back to the drawing board ?

Unless... failure was not an option...

 

 

Edited October 26, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Joe Bauer]

6 hours ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

Agree, that's a lot of coincidences... way too much IMO

But, within the conspiracy theories there were previous attempts that did not "succeed" (they also included some patsies I think, didn't check those in full detail). This one could have failed as well for all we know.

What would be needed to call it off ?  Was it "all-in" on Dallas ? 

Dallas or back to the drawing board ?

Unless... failure was not an option...

 

 

 

[Joe Bauer]

10 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Have no idea who may have nefariously facilitated Oswald getting a job in the TXSBD and if so their motive and connections.

However, it just happens to be a laughably suspicious coincidental fact that of all the higher floor buildings along the entire JFK Dallas motorcade trip...the one person who wanted to take a pot shot at JFK happens to have the perfect building to do this from?

One where JFK's limo has to slow down with two 90% turns just in front and below?

A totally alone wide open space high floor with a window that is overlooking JFK's limo with a turkey shoot view. Oswald ( or whoever is the shooter) has the floor to himself. No one else around to see him assemble his rifle and perch.

Throw in scores of heavy boxes to wall himself off from view in case anyone may wander up to the floor.

Not one security person on the ground looks up at the open windows of the TXSCB with any concern at all? Highest security precautions in Dallas police history? Chief Curry quote.

The motorcade route ends with two slowing down 90 degree angle turns ( or three? ) into this weird dog leg, sparce crowd location with not only the TXSBD looming right above during those turns, but a long stretch of tree canopy and fence lined grassy knoll which any common sense security person could see would be a perfect place for a sniper to shoot from and with no police security up behind that long stretch of hiding barriers?

Then throw in an overpass that JFK has to drive right underneath from which an explosive device could be dropped. And the DPD didn't even block it off from pedestrians ( or check those on it for weapons? ) before JFK passed underneath it?  NUTS!

Oswald or some other shooter having the perfect shooting location...just an incredible coincidence? JFK's 2 90 degree slowing turns limo was brought to the perfect place for a high floor shooting. It was brought to the shooter.

And just another nefarious coincidence? The TXSBD building is owned by oil rich "JFK hating" D.H. Byrd? A close buddy of all the other wealthiest JFK hating men on Earth Texas oil barons and even of LBJ himself?

Naw...too many nefarious logistical coincidences in this story folks.

 

And perhaps Rip Roberts and General Ed Lansdale were in the crowd in Dealey that day.

[Joseph McBride]

Armstrong proves with his exhaustive research

that Oswald did not own the rifle or the revolver

placed into what he called the "so-called evidence"

against him.