Joe Bauer Posted January 6, 2023 Share Posted January 6, 2023 (edited) If Marina Oswald's husband Lee had been granted permission to go to Cuba...he wouldn't ( or couldn't ) have killed JFK? Edited January 7, 2023 by Joe Bauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 6, 2023 Share Posted January 6, 2023 2 hours ago, Tom Gram said: Marina almost certainly did visit the Dallas post office at least once, the day she left Irving for New Orleans with Ruth Paine and filed her own change of address from P.O. Box 2915. How far off the main topic are we going to get here? Oswald Never went to Mexico... Marina and the rifle - both complete lies from top to bottom - has nothing to do with it... "Almost certainly". don't know about you Tom but this isn't horseshoes or hand grenades... "almost" doesn't really cut it when we have mountains of "evidence" from which to source such a statement... Please provide a link or source for that statement... or at least present it as an opinion or hypothesis without any support but a hunch... 2 hours ago, Tom Gram said: I’m not sure you’re really appreciating how insane and blatantly suspicious it is that Marina was not asked a single question about the post office box or the rifle order - but it’s way worse than that. Most of us having done this for quite a while are fully aware how poor Marina is as a source for most anything... how she was immediately surrounded and coached, interpreted by the white Russian community of Dallas and goes from that homely little girl to cover girl... Marina was a Russian prostitute... fwiw please check out more of the evidence related to her... case in point... she could not even deal with the BYPs with even a touch of honesty... She claims in her testimony it was the first time she ever worked a camera... yet couldn't remember how amazingly difficult it is to work a box camera while getting 3 crystal clear images... from 2 shots and 1 negative... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 6, 2023 Share Posted January 6, 2023 Tom, Aren't you aware of all the evidence showing that Oswald didn't buy the rifle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Kelly Posted January 6, 2023 Share Posted January 6, 2023 5 hours ago, Tom Gram said: I’m not sure you’re really appreciating how insane and blatantly suspicious it is that Marina was not asked a single question about the post office box or the rifle order - but it’s way worse than that. Marina almost certainly did visit the Dallas post office at least once, the day she left Irving for New Orleans with Ruth Paine and filed her own change of address from P.O. Box 2915. That CoA form and every subsequent CoA form that could be traced back to it were buried, including a CoA in Oswald’s name that was the very first clue that Oswald had spent time in New Orleans after the assassination - which allowed the Postal Inspection Service to get a jump on the FBI before the FBI realized who they were dealing with. The WC had a report from Harry Holmes stating that Oswald claimed in his final interrogation that he lent Marina one of the two keys to the box on occasion to pick up the mail. The WC also had the Walker note, which if it actually had anything to do with the Walker shooting implies that Oswald believed Marina didn’t know how to get to the Post Office as of the first week of April. The WC had zero evidence that Oswald actually picked up the rifle from the Post Office. So we have a provable case of disappearing evidence linking Marina to P.O. Box 2915, and the deliberate complete avoidance by the WC of a topic with Marina they had every imaginable reason to question her about in depth. This thread’s on MC so I’ll stop there - but I recommend you read my essay if you’re curious at all about Marina and the Post Office. It needs an update/addendum, and I’ve changed my opinion on a few things since I wrote it - but you can read it in that google drive link or here: https://gregrparker.com/rethinking-oswalds-mail/ I only use the drive link because Greg’s pdf reader threw some of the formatting out of whack for some reason. Makes better sense now Tom. I will read the essay and dig deeper on this. I do certainly have suspicions about Marina, although it's difficult to put much stock in her testimony. Perhaps she wasn't asked any questions by the WC about how the rifle got from the PO to Lee's possession and/or Ruth's house, because they were afraid of what she might say. Also, I wouldn't put much stock in any Harry Holmes report about Oswald's interrogation. However, I don't doubt that he may have lent Marina one of the two keys to the box on occasion to pick up the mail. And the record of someone (anyone) picking up that rifle is nonexistent ... its provenance is highly suspect. Gene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Gram Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, David Josephs said: How far off the main topic are we going to get here? Oswald Never went to Mexico... Marina and the rifle - both complete lies from top to bottom - has nothing to do with it... "Almost certainly". don't know about you Tom but this isn't horseshoes or hand grenades... "almost" doesn't really cut it when we have mountains of "evidence" from which to source such a statement... Please provide a link or source for that statement... or at least present it as an opinion or hypothesis without any support but a hunch... Most of us having done this for quite a while are fully aware how poor Marina is as a source for most anything... how she was immediately surrounded and coached, interpreted by the white Russian community of Dallas and goes from that homely little girl to cover girl... Marina was a Russian prostitute... fwiw please check out more of the evidence related to her... case in point... she could not even deal with the BYPs with even a touch of honesty... She claims in her testimony it was the first time she ever worked a camera... yet couldn't remember how amazingly difficult it is to work a box camera while getting 3 crystal clear images... from 2 shots and 1 negative... David, Marina filed a change of address from P.O. Box 2915 to Ruth Paine’s house on 5/10/63, the exact same day Marina and Ruth drove to New Orleans. The only reason I say “almost” is because it’s possible she mailed the form, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Unfortunately we can’t know for sure because the form was buried and never entered into evidence, along with several other key postal records. My essay is 50+ pages long with ~150 footnotes, but here you go: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57690#relPageId=182 I’m not trying to derail the thread - Gene just said he didn’t think it was possible that Marina was involved in the rifle order, and there is a mountain of evidence suggesting that she was, or at least could have been, that the FBI and WC went to positively absurd lengths to avoid. Sandy, yes I am aware of the evidence suggesting that Oswald didn’t order the rifle. I was actually inspired to look into this angle by David’s rifle essay on K&K, and I did in considerable depth. I have a very detailed record of the FBI rifle trace investigation, which I obtained by requesting from NARA all the early cable traffic and memos from FBI field office files that are not online. I’ve written 30k+ words on the rifle investigation too that I’ll eventually finish and publish at some point. I now disagree with a lot of David’s essay, but I can’t fully rule out the possibility that some of the rifle purchase/shipping records were tampered with and/or fabricated, and believe me I tried. The New York angle especially is such an immense clusterf*!% that the NYFO was either incompetent to the point of idiocy or there was something shady going on. I’ll explain what I think whenever I finally release my extremely long, extremely boring essay on the rifle, but until then I think this will suffice: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62264#relPageId=68 It took over 24 hours of “exhaustive” searching for those records to finally be found, and 8-10 of those hours were after New York received the invoice number. Is that really reasonable? I’ll gladly debate the nuances of the rifle investigation and the Oswalds’ postal records with anyone - but David is right, this thread is about MC, so we can move that to another thread if anyone wants to. Edited January 7, 2023 by Tom Gram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 11 hours ago, David Josephs said: Of the 4 pages in the HENCH MEMO I only have 1 page thanks to John Armstrong's daily visits to the Archives and his copying a treasure trove of documents not offered anywhere else. Maybe send this to Russell to close the loop? How does this change your humble opinion? IMHO, this memo appears to confirm that Nagell was likely "intermittently" employed as an informant for the CIA from August 1962 through October of 1963. I admire the research done to unearth this memo. I am not sure who was Hench, or who he worked for, from this memo. Also, would the CIA divulge sources and methods to Hench, if Hench was not CIA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: My Fake Conspiracy theory explains this. (As do the similar theories by Peter Dale Scott and others.) Recall that the Fake Conspiracy is a pretend story of Oswald arranging the killing of JFK with the Cubans and Russians. After the assassination, the U.S. investigators were supposed to find the evidence of this and believe that it really happened. That CIA document you linked to is just a part of that fake evidence made to create the Fake Conspiracy. What's reported in it never happened. At least not by the real Oswald. SL-- I agree, with you and with John Newman, that the LHO-Russian Embassy connection was manufactured, either to promote war with Cuba or to stifle any investigation into the JFKA (or a false flag failed JFKA). My only difference with you is that I believe the LHO-Russia connection was contrived, or manufactured, and was indeed pulled off. LHO did meet Kostikov. I am little uneasy deciding that this intel memo is real and that memo is fake. We see in this thread the Hench memo. Is it real or faked? Is all the info in the Hench memo accurate? How would Hench, who has been represented as a non-CIA employee, know who the CIA hired as an informant? Is the CIA in the habit of disclosing sources and methods? Could LHO been flown down to MC by the CIA in a Cessna? Did Russian authorities, or anybody in the Russian Embassy, through back-channels or publicly, ever say, "We never met this guy LHO"? The evidence that LHO was impersonated at the Cuban Embassy seems solid. The evidence that LHO showed up for real at the Russian Embassy is also plausible. If I had to guess, I think that is part of what is being covered up: LHO was somehow couriered down to MC, and showed up at the Russian Embassy. I speculate LHO took a Cessna or whatnot. Which indicates sponsorship or confederates. Just IMHO. Edited January 7, 2023 by Benjamin Cole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 My personal preference is to see arguments presented in what amounts to a layman's version of a legal brief. As an example, the WCR is basically a prosecutorial brief for civilians to read. Rush to Judgement was the first of what I would call a brief from the defense. Legal briefs are best presented in the most convincing manner possible, and to withstand others poking holes in the assertions. Generally speaking, saying evidence is fabricated doesn't work for convincing me personally, because in reality fabricating evidence is difficult to do in secrecy, and never done unless all other possible options have been exhausted first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 43 minutes ago, Matt Allison said: My personal preference is to see arguments presented in what amounts to a layman's version of a legal brief. As an example, the WCR is basically a prosecutorial brief for civilians to read. Rush to Judgement was the first of what I would call a brief from the defense. Legal briefs are best presented in the most convincing manner possible, and to withstand others poking holes in the assertions. Generally speaking, saying evidence is fabricated doesn't work for convincing me personally, because in reality fabricating evidence is difficult to do in secrecy, and never done unless all other possible options have been exhausted first. I tend to agree. A lot of time and effort has been put into proving this or that piece of evidence is fake, when this or that piece of evidence is often grounds to suspect a conspiracy, once properly interpreted. As far as Mexico City, I suspect John Newman will have a lot to say about Oswald's visit in years to come... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 9 minutes ago, Pat Speer said: I tend to agree. A lot of time and effort has been put into proving this or that piece of evidence is fake, when this or that piece of evidence is often grounds to suspect a conspiracy, once properly interpreted. As far as Mexico City, I suspect John Newman will have a lot to say about Oswald's visit in years to come... Well, I hope Newman hurries up. None of us is getting younger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 On 1/6/2023 at 8:49 PM, David Josephs said: Opinions are wonderful places to start looking for supporting evidence so your opinion can move to a hypothesis and in turn be approached with some level of scientific process to prove or disprove.... Given your extensive research into the subject what brings you to that conclusion? "added to the manifest after the trip"? DJ--- Yes, you are showing documents that indicate LHO was likely impersonated at the Cuban Embassy. That LHO took a bus to MC is also not proven. One might wonder how strict Mexican busses were in 1963 at ascertaining the ID of riders. One note seems to indicate a rider could use an alias to board a bus to MC--that "known aliases" were checked, such as "Hidell". What if LHO ID'ed himself as "Tom Jones" on a bus ride to MC? Would that somehow be found out in paperwork? In any event, I proposing that LHO in fact visited the Soviet Embassy. How would you go about verifying, or disproving, that LHO visited the Russians? To be sure, the CIA never presented any photos of LHO near the Russian Embassy, or anywhere for that matter, in Mexico. What if LHO had given the thumb's up to the CIA camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cummings Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 One of the two "busses" Oswald didn't take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said: DJ--- Yes, you are showing documents that indicate LHO was likely impersonated at the Cuban Embassy. That LHO took a bus to MC is also not proven. One might wonder how strict Mexican busses were in 1963 at ascertaining the ID of riders. One note seems to indicate a rider could use an alias to board a bus to MC--that "known aliases" were checked, such as "Hidell". What if LHO ID'ed himself as "Tom Jones" on a bus ride to MC? Would that somehow be found out in paperwork? In any event, I proposing that LHO in fact visited the Soviet Embassy. How would you go about verifying, or disproving, that LHO visited the Russians? To be sure, the CIA never presented any photos of LHO near the Russian Embassy, or anywhere for that matter, in Mexico. What if LHO had given the thumb's up to the CIA camera? There are 5 chapters at K&K that go about the task of verifying Oswald never made that trip... My HYPOTHESIS, not yet proven, is that there is a real possibility the entire "visit" was a False Mystery made of paper statements... the no one specifically impersonated Oswald but like so much of the bus evidence, real people in real circumstances are substituted for Oswald... a man not Oswald but sitting next to Bowen is morphed into it being Oswald with the most dubious of supporting evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 14 hours ago, Matt Allison said: Generally speaking, saying evidence is fabricated doesn't work for convincing me personally, because in reality fabricating evidence is difficult to do in secrecy, and never done unless all other possible options have been exhausted first. In my Fake Conspiracy theory, the whole thing was fabricated. And virtually everybody who has studied it agrees that it was, including the FBI and conspiracy theorists. If it was NOT fabricated, that would mean it was real. And that would mean that Oswald really did conspire with the Cubans and Russians to kill Kennedy, and really was paid $6500 in the Cuban Consulate to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Cohen Posted January 7, 2023 Share Posted January 7, 2023 56 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: And virtually everybody who has studied it agrees that it was, including the FBI and conspiracy theorists. "Virtually everybody" ? You're joking, right? I can think of dozens of highly experienced researchers, many of whom frequent this forum, who profoundly disagree with your ceaseless insistence that all the evidence is fake, particularly as it pertains to Oswald's visit to Mexico City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now