New Dallas Morning News Interview with Ruth Paine

[Guest]

To those keeping a file, there is this letter from the Secret Service by Forrest V. Sorrels, SAIC.  Full text of the letters the JA collection at Baylor :

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/events-following-the-assassination-1963-12-02-note-to-irving-police/701336?item=701337

 

 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Tom Gram]

5 hours ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

To those keeping a file, there is this letter from the Secret Service by Forrest V. Sorrels, SAIC.

Full text of the letters the JA collection at Baylor :

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/events-following-the-assassination-1963-12-02-note-to-irving-police/701336?item=701337

That's all I have/know/can share

So long, have a nice weekend !

The line about the note being in very poor Russian reminded me of something. Greg Parker had a Russian expert compare the Walker note with letters Oswald wrote in Russia and they concluded that the Walker note was likely written by a different person based on its very poor grammar. I suppose it’s possible Oswald just got rusty - but who knows?  

To my understanding, the FBI handwriting analysis is basically worthless and was based strictly on the similarity of single English words like “Ervay”. Single words are trivial to forge by someone skilled in free-hand forgeries. Also, if I recall, only one of the HSCA experts would even render an opinion based on the difficulty in comparing handwriting in different languages.

It’d be a pretty friggin elaborate fake that would require the cooperation of Marina Oswald to pull off, so I’m skeptical, but it’s just food for thought. 

[Paul Brancato]

21 hours ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

Hi Greg, the first has to do with a German newspaper (dated Nov. 29) - article by reporter Helmet Muench (he used another name in the article).  The newspaper was right-wing.  Walker called the editor (within days of 22/11 I believe) saying LHO was involved in the 4/10 attempt to murder him.   The matter was investigated and turned out bogus (Walker denied the obvious....): 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Docid-32140807_(November_17%2C_2017_Release).pdf 

But the story was out there, and repeated in newspapers all over the world (France, Le Monde 12/9/1963, etc).    The German story was just before they found the Walker note.... and there we go.... 

And indeed, as the note had no date, did not mention Walker, only Marina could link it to Walker.  

But - as I like original sources - shouldn't there be an Irving PD inventory or report on them receiving the stuff from Ruth ? 

Or is that treated "as being included" in the FBI report ?

 

I looked into his a while back. Remind me - is it absolutely clear that Walker called the Fascist newspaper, not the other way around? 

[Guest]

On 11/20/2022 at 5:17 PM, Paul Brancato said:

I looked into his a while back. Remind me - is it absolutely clear that Walker called the Fascist newspaper, not the other way around? 

IMO it is not absolutely clear.  I believe there has been a long discussion about that on this forum somewhere.      

I was focussing on the earliest date the books/note were handed to Irving Police (because of the "or" in one of the documents above).

Could be I'm wrong but Walker denied calling the Germans, and denied telling them the story, the Germans denied the opposite.  Later on Walker was saying Oswald was arrested in April (and released). 

The only thing I know is that there was a story in a German newspaper about Oswald shooting Walker...., was that related to the dicovery of the note ?   Don't know.

There are a bunch of documents on the internet showing reports between Rankin and Hoover on who has been supposed to have said what...

I will look up the link and let it know.

Photo - Removed to save on attachments space

 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[David Andrews]

On 11/17/2022 at 8:08 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

 

LOL, yeah. Oswald made quite a splash... it was in all the newspapers and everything... um, except that it wasn't. 

 

Was Oz's supposed exhibitionism later set up with the story that, on returning from Russia, he was disappointed in the lack of press turnout?

[Joe Bauer]

25 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

Was Oz's supposed exhibitionism later set up with the story that, on returning from Russia, he was disappointed in the lack of press turnout?

It is the ultimate act of attention seeking insanity to go from being let down because the press in Dallas wasn't interested in you and your Russia defecting story to blowing the head off of JFK to finally get this craved splash attention.

At least LHO expressed a reason for trying to take out General Walker. Comparing him to Hitler in his fascist political promoting activities.

However, there just isn't "anything" in Oswald's expressed words, writings and actions to similarly explain his motivation for wanting to so brutally blow apart JFK.

A man who along with his brother also considered General Walker as a dangerous fascist nut to the point of arresting him and having him involuntarily thrown into a mental ward facility!

You'd think Oswald might have admired JFK and RFK for doing this.

Oswald never wavered in his denial of doing JFK.

If that's grand deed attention seeking...what isn't?

Edited November 20, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Paul Brancato]

9 hours ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

IMO it is not absolutely clear.  I believe there has been a long discussion about that on this forum somewhere.      

I was focussing on the earliest date the books/note were handed to Irving Police (because of the "or" in one of the documents above).

Could be I'm wrong but Walker denied calling the Germans, and denied telling them the story, the Germans denied the opposite.  Later on Walker was saying Oswald was arrested in April (and released). 

The only thing I know is that there was a story in a German newspaper about Oswald shooting Walker...., was that related to the dicovery of the note ?   Don't know.

There are a bunch of documents on the internet showing reports between Rankin and Hoover on who has been supposed to have said what...

 

 

 

Hadn’t seen this before. I took part in earlier discussions on that here for sure. The Rankin memo seems to be saying that the German editor added the part about RFK, but it may also have come from Walker. I’ve never seen anything from or about Walker prior to Nov 22 indicating that he knew who Oswald was, or that Oswald had shot at him. But it’s certainly true that for the rest of his life he claimed the above story as his own - that Oswald had tried to kill him, had been arrested, and released on orders from RFK. I’ve long suspected that the German editor and Walker together made the story up. The Oswald note in bad Russian, forged or not, found in a book by Ruth Paine, supports the ‘Oswald shot at Walker’ story. It occurs to me that one needn’t have had the cooperation of Ruth or Marina to uncover the note, because it might have been planted for Ruth to find. Am I correct - Marina verified it as Oswald’s note to her, written on the night of the attempt on Walker? Well, Marina wasn’t a reliable witness at the time. I wonder if anyone thought to ask her about this note decades later when she went public with her latter day opinion that Oswald was innocent. I could perhaps imagine Oswald trying to kill Walker, but not both Walker and JFK. But personally  I don’t believe any of it, and think the story was cleverly planted - the note, the German  newspaper article, the Hunter of fascist photos - and buttressed by people like DeMohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt, who claimed he put the idea to shoot Walker in Oswald’s head. It’s all part of the posthumous efforts to incriminate Oswald in support of the WC findings. 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Hadn’t seen this before. I took part in earlier discussions on that here for sure. The Rankin memo seems to be saying that the German editor added the part about RFK, but it may also have come from Walker. I’ve never seen anything from or about Walker prior to Nov 22 indicating that he knew who Oswald was, or that Oswald had shot at him. But it’s certainly true that for the rest of his life he claimed the above story as his own - that Oswald had tried to kill him, had been arrested, and released on orders from RFK. I’ve long suspected that the German editor and Walker together made the story up. The Oswald note in bad Russian, forged or not, found in a book by Ruth Paine, supports the ‘Oswald shot at Walker’ story. It occurs to me that one needn’t have had the cooperation of Ruth or Marina to uncover the note, because it might have been planted for Ruth to find. Am I correct - Marina verified it as Oswald’s note to her, written on the night of the attempt on Walker? Well, Marina wasn’t a reliable witness at the time. I wonder if anyone thought to ask her about this note decades later when she went public with her latter day opinion that Oswald was innocent. I could perhaps imagine Oswald trying to kill Walker, but not both Walker and JFK. But personally  I don’t believe any of it, and think the story was cleverly planted - the note, the German  newspaper article, the Hunter of fascist photos - and buttressed by people like DeMohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt, who claimed he put the idea to shoot Walker in Oswald’s head. It’s all part of the posthumous efforts to incriminate Oswald in support of the WC findings. 

The part I posted was the last part of some 10 pages or so.  I have them all on my PC but can't upload them all here (or I'll loose other content).

Having problems to get to some websites, if I can I 'll try to find it again and post the link.

 

[Guest]

15 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Hadn’t seen this before. 

About half-way the page following this link you can find the previous documents (I only posted the last previously) relating to this matter.

Note, this is not where I got my copies from (can reach that link for some reason), but it's the same documents, also there's a lot of other stuff on this page I have not read and don't know what it's about (I'm still very much a newbie...) :

http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm

That's it for this topic, nothing new apparently

Edited November 21, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Gene Kelly]

On 11/18/2022 at 5:53 AM, John Cotter said:

How do Thomas Mallon and Ruth Paine – “this deeply spiritual woman” – reconcile their self-righteousness and presumed high-mindedness with their condemnation of Oswald, a man who was denied his right to a fair trial by a brutal murder facilitated by the flagrantly corrupt Dallas police force?

Anyone who rejects the presumption of innocence and natural justice principles, who effectively condones the murder of an innocent man, who blames the victim and who turns a blind eye to the true extent of the treacherously bloody events in Dallas on the 22^nd and 24^th November 1963, is beyond the moral pale and, in the case of Ms Paine, has to be considered perfectly capable of the duplicity and criminality which some ascribe to her.

John

Mallon's statement that Ruth "represents a commitment to truth and history that I hope isn’t vanishing from American life” is absurd on its face. Given all that we now know about the short life of 24-year-old Lee Oswald, nothing sticks out as coming close to this characterization of him as wanting to make a "splash" or being capable of violence (unless one accepts the canards that he shot at Walker, abused his wife, and murdered Tippit).  And with all of the subsequent information available from Garrison's investigation, legitimate research and books, and ARRB records - that more aptly speaks to truth and history - it's insulting to read such comments. 

Unfortunately, there are those who still subscribe to this nonsense.  Paul Gregory - the son of the man who gave Oswald language lessons in Fort Worth - recently published "The Oswalds: An Untold Account of Marina and Lee".  Gregory's father taught Russian at a Fort Worth library and was approached by Oswald for certification as a Russian translator in June 1962.  His son, currently a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a scholar of Russian economics, had a brief acquaintance with Lee and Marina in the summer of 1962. Young Gregory recounts the familiar pretext of receiving language lessons from Marina (just as Ruth took in Marina to improve upon her Russian) - who he claimed spoke no English - and paints a rather dark picture of young Lee. Gregory asserts that Oswald would not allow Marina to learn English, yet he permitted her to teach Russian to him, which is how they became 'friends'.  In recent interviews, he states the following:

I show that Oswald had all the characteristics to kill a major political figure – the means, the motive, and the soul of a killer.  I observed Lee as a manipulative loner who concealed himself from others and guarded the strict boundaries he erected around his troubled marriage with Marina.  Oswald dreamed of going into the history books where he had learned from his mother that he belonged. He wished to pay back society for not recognizing his exceptionalism. He wanted to punish Marina for her ridicule of his ideas and her scorn of his manhood. We cannot believe that history can be changed by a random set of circumstances. It’s hard for people to accept that a “little guy” – Lee’s mother referred to him as “the boy” – of no known accomplishments could kill the most guarded person in America on his own. 

This same characterization has been used by both Ruth and Michael Paine (e.g., “I think it’s a lone wolf thing ... the opportunity presented itself to him, and he probably wanted to make a mark on society”).  Unfortunately, the commitment in certain circles to defaming Oswald and distorting the historical record has clearly not vanished from American life ... the myth continues. 

Gene

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, Gene Kelly said:

John

Mallon's statement that Ruth "represents a commitment to truth and history that I hope isn’t vanishing from American life” is absurd on its face. Given all that we now know about the short life of 24-year-old Lee Oswald, nothing sticks out as coming close to this characterization of him as wanting to make a "splash" or being capable of violence (unless one accepts the canards that he shot at Walker, abused his wife, and murdered Tippit).  And with all of the subsequent information available from Garrison's investigation, legitimate research and books, and ARRB records - that more aptly speaks to truth and history - it's insulting to read such comments. 

Unfortunately, there are those who still subscribe to this nonsense.  Paul Gregory - the son of the man who gave Oswald language lessons in Fort Worth - recently published "The Oswalds: An Untold Account of Marina and Lee".  Gregory's father taught Russian at a Fort Worth library and was approached by Oswald for certification as a Russian translator in June 1962.  His son, currently a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a scholar of Russian economics, had a brief acquaintance with Lee and Marina in the summer of 1962. Young Gregory recounts the familiar pretext of receiving language lessons from Marina (just as Ruth took in Marina to improve upon her Russian) - who he claimed spoke no English - and paints a rather dark picture of young Lee. Gregory asserts that Oswald would not allow Marina to learn English, yet he permitted her to teach Russian to him, which is how they became 'friends'.  In recent interviews, he states the following:

I show that Oswald had all the characteristics to kill a major political figure – the means, the motive, and the soul of a killer.  I observed Lee as a manipulative loner who concealed himself from others and guarded the strict boundaries he erected around his troubled marriage with Marina.  Oswald dreamed of going into the history books where he had learned from his mother that he belonged. He wished to pay back society for not recognizing his exceptionalism. He wanted to punish Marina for her ridicule of his ideas and her scorn of his manhood. We cannot believe that history can be changed by a random set of circumstances. It’s hard for people to accept that a “little guy” – Lee’s mother referred to him as “the boy” – of no known accomplishments could kill the most guarded person in America on his own. 

This same characterization has been used by both Ruth and Michael Paine (e.g., “I think it’s a lone wolf thing ... the opportunity presented itself to him, and he probably wanted to make a mark on society”).  Unfortunately, the commitment in certain circles to defaming Oswald and distorting the historical record has clearly not vanished from American life ... the myth continues. 

Gene

Gene,

It’s hard to fathom the irrationality and moral perversity of the people who denigrate Oswald like this.

Given their establishment connections and the fact that they’re not stupid, it’s hard to avoid the inference that they don’t really believe what they’re saying and are only saying it to protect and/or further their comfortable positions within the (deep) state apparatus.

It’s not such an outlandish inference, since our authoritarian systems depend on the majority of people “going along to get along”. And as described in Ian Leslie’s excellent book Born XXXXX, Why We Can’t Live Without Deceit, lying isn’t as rare as we like to think – even among the most purportedly virtuous Quaker folk.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11529842-born-XXXXX

John.

PS. I’ve always found your posts to be exceptionally interesting, illuminating and informative. Please keep them coming.

[Jonathan Cohen]

3 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

Given all that we now know about the short life of 24-year-old Lee Oswald, nothing sticks out as coming close to this characterization of him as wanting to make a "splash" or being capable of violence (unless one accepts the canards that he shot at Walker, abused his wife, and murdered Tippit).

Oswald's abuse of Marina is hardly a "canard" -- it is attested to by numerous first-hand witnesses. Why researchers choose to pretend this never happened is a disservice to a true understanding of him.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Oswald's abuse of Marina is hardly a "canard" -- it is attested to by numerous first-hand witnesses. Why researchers choose to pretend this never happened is a disservice to a true understanding of him.

 

Jonathan is engaging in gossip here.

Paul Gregory visited the Oswalds both before and after she got the black eye in the late summer of 1962. Yet as hateful and dangerous he makes Oswald out to be, he says it never occurred to him that Oswald might be a wife beater.

Maybe because he himself witnessed Marina getting the black eye. The time he described her falling down -- baby in arms -- her head hitting the ground with such a thud that he thought she was seriously inured.

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

2 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jonathan is engaging in gossip here.

Only on Planet Sandy Larsen™ do multiple, first-hand accounts of Oswald's treatment of Marina, including from Marina herself, get dismissed as "gossip." But please, do continue believing in doppelgangers and Oswald "face masks" in Altgens 6 ...

[Joe Bauer]

Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

Maybe because he himself witnessed Marina getting the black eye. The time he described her falling down -- baby in arms -- her head hitting the ground with such a thud that he thought she was seriously inured.

If I had witnessed that Marina falling incident and Lee's cruel and humiliating response to it like Gregory...I would have hated LHO from that point on.

I can't believe Gregory didn't feel the same way towards Lee.