Will the real Lee Harvey Oswald please come forward

[Paul Brancato]

So many posts, so many decades, books, articles. When I first started researching for my trading cards I interviewed Peter Dale Scott, and he put me in contact with Paul Hoch, who I met a few times. I once asked him if he thought Oswald was a real leftie and he said ‘no, what do you think’? I said yes. That was over 30 years ago. I’ve had ample time to figure this out, and I’ve come to agree firmly with Mr. Hoch. Why was this so hard? Because there were so many reasons to see him as a Marxist, including his own statements, DeMohrenschildt’s writings and testimony, his Russian sojourn and wife. And I’ve often said he was being set up as a patsy because he was a Marxist. Now I think it was all a show, but so convincing that whoever designated him as Patsy felt secure in doing so. 
When I listened to him on radio in New Orleans with Ed Butler he sounded so phony. He reminded me of two narcs I ran into as a student. All the lingo, the hip language, the posturing was there, but the delivery wasn’t convincing. Thankfully I figured both of them out before I fell for their act. Well, that’s the way Oswald sounds - like it’s an act. While he was in the service he was getting Communist periodicals sent to him, he’s learning Russian, being called Oswaldovich. All a show. Then he defects to the USSR in spectacular fashion, going to just the right place, being ushered across the border, threatening to give secrets to the Russians. He comes back, paid for by our government, no problems at all, married to a Russian Intelligence connected woman, a ‘sparrow’. He becomes friends with George DeMohrenschildt? Completely unlikely scenario. Later he goes to New Orleans and plays the part of provocateur. I could go on. This isn’t just footprints of Intelligence, this is working for US Intelligence, CIA or Military. What Communist or Marxist gets to do that? 

I’m probably preaching to the choir. Does anyone take any of his leftist credentials seriously? Assuming he is innocent of the crime of assassination, which I do, what’s he doing working at the TSBD? What Intelligence assignment is he on? Maybe none. But placing an Intelligence asset in that building, intending to convict him in the public eye of murdering the President? Who could ever expect his leftist credentials to hold up under scrutiny? Were the conspirators hoping that we would go into action immediately and nuke the Russians and Cubans before anyone had a chance to examine evidence? Well, perhaps that is the truth. And perhaps LBJ saved us all. I think that’s more likely than presuming him behind the whole shebang. 
 

[Charles Blackmon]

Yes it appears to me that Oswald was doing what he was told to do in order to build his left-wing 'legend'. In order to take part in something at some point. The assassination? Not sure.

I just want to know what if any involvement LHO had in the events of 11/22/63. He can't tell us because he was permanently silenced. 

[Ron Bulman]

3 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

So many posts, so many decades, books, articles. When I first started researching for my trading cards I interviewed Peter Dale Scott, and he put me in contact with Paul Hoch, who I met a few times. I once asked him if he thought Oswald was a real leftie and he said ‘no, what do you think’? I said yes. That was over 30 years ago. I’ve had ample time to figure this out, and I’ve come to agree firmly with Mr. Hoch. Why was this so hard? Because there were so many reasons to see him as a Marxist, including his own statements, DeMohrenschildt’s writings and testimony, his Russian sojourn and wife. And I’ve often said he was being set up as a patsy because he was a Marxist. Now I think it was all a show, but so convincing that whoever designated him as Patsy felt secure in doing so. 
When I listened to him on radio in New Orleans with Ed Butler he sounded so phony. He reminded me of two narcs I ran into as a student. All the lingo, the hip language, the posturing was there, but the delivery wasn’t convincing. Thankfully I figured both of them out before I fell for their act. Well, that’s the way Oswald sounds - like it’s an act. While he was in the service he was getting Communist periodicals sent to him, he’s learning Russian, being called Oswaldovich. All a show. Then he defects to the USSR in spectacular fashion, going to just the right place, being ushered across the border, threatening to give secrets to the Russians. He comes back, paid for by our government, no problems at all, married to a Russian Intelligence connected woman, a ‘sparrow’. He becomes friends with George DeMohrenschildt? Completely unlikely scenario. Later he goes to New Orleans and plays the part of provocateur. I could go on. This isn’t just footprints of Intelligence, this is working for US Intelligence, CIA or Military. What Communist or Marxist gets to do that? 

I’m probably preaching to the choir. Does anyone take any of his leftist credentials seriously? Assuming he is innocent of the crime of assassination, which I do, what’s he doing working at the TSBD? What Intelligence assignment is he on? Maybe none. But placing an Intelligence asset in that building, intending to convict him in the public eye of murdering the President? Who could ever expect his leftist credentials to hold up under scrutiny? Were the conspirators hoping that we would go into action immediately and nuke the Russians and Cubans before anyone had a chance to examine evidence? Well, perhaps that is the truth. And perhaps LBJ saved us all. I think that’s more likely than presuming him behind the whole shebang. 
 

A great post Paul.  I don't think Oswald was a leftie or a righty, just following orders, right up to 12:30 11/22/63, then again after he was caught.  He never professed any right-wing view's I'm aware of.  I do believe the Communist/Marxist facade was a charade.  So, what to make of the man in the middle but a pawn? 

[James DiEugenio]

Hoch said that? It seems he has changed his tune since.

BTW, about Oswald at the TSBD, this is what I was looking for in the Lifton manuscript.

 

[Benjamin Cole]

My take on the LHO in the TSBD....

The CIA in the early-mid 1960s had literally thousands of human and institutional assets in the US, due to the Cuban situation, the Cold War and the Cuban diaspora. LHO was one of thousands. Remember, just in Dallas we know of Walter Moore, DeMohrenschildt, the mayor Earle Cabell, Jack Ruby (gun running), likely LHO...who am I forgetting...people tied to the DRE? 

So, these CIA assets were often "kept on the shelf" until needed. Maybe never needed--remember, the CIA is not a profit-making organization. If they have an asset in Town X who does nothing for seven years...that is fine. "They also serve who only stand and wait."

My guess is that an anti-Castro false flag op was readied when it was found out JFK would visit Dallas. LHO was available, and there had been a biography build on LHO. 

But someone piggy-backed on the false flag op and made it real.

 

 

 

[Paul Cummings]

My question isn't why LHO worked at TSBD but why he was allowed to leave at 12:40 PM on 11/22/63?

[Steve Thomas]

On 6/19/2023 at 5:22 AM, Paul Cummings said:

My question isn't why LHO worked at TSBD but why he was allowed to leave at 12:40 PM on 11/22/63?

Deleted

Steve Thomas

 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Steve Thomas

[Charles Blackmon]

34 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

 

My question has always been, if Oswald was the shooter, why did he hang around for so long?

 

 

Probably because he wasn't the shooter.

[Paul Cummings]

1 hour ago, Steve Thomas said:

Paul,

I don't think he did.

After the assassination, George Lumpkin returned to the TSBD and took command there.

[Report from Charles Batchelor to Chief J. E. Curry, November 30, 1963] Page: 43 of 70

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338584/m1/43/?q=Stevenson

pp21-22.

 

According to the Dispatch Tapes, George Lumpkin had arrived at the TSBD by 12:49 PM

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/

15 (Captain C.E. Talbert): “15 is at the scene. We... the building's the Old Purse Company on the east side of Houston. Somebody cut off the back side, will you? Make sure nobody leaves there.”

Dispatcher: “10-4, 15”

15: “15's in charge down here. Correction 5's (Deputy Chief Lumpkin) in charge.”

 

(It appears that Talbert had the wrong building in mind).

 

It was Kaminsky who Deputy Chief Lumpkin had positioned at the front door of the TSBD.

Portal to Texas History

[Report from Charles Batchelor to Chief J. E. Curry, November 30, 1963] Page: 43 of 70

 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338584/m1/43/?q=Stevenson

pp21-22.

This matches exactly what Postal Inspector, Harry Holmes wrote in his Report of Oswald's interrogation on Sunday, November 24^th.

See Warren Report, Appendix XI page 636

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=660&tab=page

My question has always been, if Oswald was the shooter, why did he hang around for so long?

Steve Thomas

 

Steve, I believe it's the Altgens photo has Roger Craig on the southside of Elm with the TSBD sign showing 12:40 PM with the Rambler in front of the TSBD. How many minutes has elasped after the JFKA did they sealed off the TSBD? 

[Steve Thomas]

1 hour ago, Paul Cummings said:

Steve, I believe it's the Altgens photo has Roger Craig on the southside of Elm with the TSBD sign showing 12:40 PM with the Rambler in front of the TSBD. How many minutes has elasped after the JFKA did they sealed off the TSBD? 

Paul,

That's kind of vexing. I once tried (to no avail), to determine who was the "first" person to order that the building be sealed off.

Sawyer said he ordered it. Fritz said he did. Lumpkin also said he did. Who was first?

I don't know.

Steve Thomas

[Paul Brancato]

11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Hoch said that? It seems he has changed his tune since.

BTW, about Oswald at the TSBD, this is what I was looking for in the Lifton manuscript.

 

Is there a Lifton unpublished manuscript? 
Hoch now believes Oswald did it - is that correct? It’s possible I misremember that conversation when I asked him if Oswald was really a Marxist. 

 

11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

A great post Paul.  I don't think Oswald was a leftie or a righty, just following orders, right up to 12:30 11/22/63, then again after he was caught.  He never professed any right-wing view's I'm aware of.  I do believe the Communist/Marxist facade was a charade.  So, what to make of the man in the middle but a pawn? 

Certainly no leftie, and I don’t recall him espousing right wing views. But while masquerading as a leftist for years he targeted the left - the USSR, the FPCC, and worked in coordination with the DRE, with INCA, with Bannister, and possibly with Edwin Walker, all far right. As they say, actions speak louder than words. I think the final stumbling block for me was DeM I’m a Patsy, which makes very believable reading, as it purports to be a first hand account of Oswald by his friend George. But can we believe anything coming from DeMohrenschildt, a man whose life left us with way more questions than answers. Like Oswald he seems to be masquerading as something other than how he presents himself. At the very least he is a CIA asset. His post Dallas Haiti interlude is exceedingly strange. He brings Haitian banker Clemard Charles to NY and DC, supposedly to sell his bonafides to Army Intelligence as a leader should the US overthrow Duvalier. What an obvious cover story. There was even a second cover story - sisal plantations. But he meets with Colonel Sam Kail, ACSI’s Dorothy Matlack, a crony of George Bush named Devine. So - no - we should not believe a word the George says about Oswald, to whom he was assigned by CIA’s J Walton Moore, and this goes for his WC testimony too about the rifle and ‘Hunter of fascists’ photo. We need to break away from misconceptions about Oswald if we still have them. 

[Gene Kelly]

Paul

Great post ... who/what Oswald was is the toughest question of them all.   What sticks out to me is that he was just a young man (barely 24 years old) and was obviously being used/manipulated. He had a Cuban escort or "shepherd" that last summer of his life. Some of the most telling anecdotes include:

1. Oswald starts a Fair Play for Cuba Committee chapter in New Orleans (of which he is the only member) - a group infested with informants and linked to David Phillips, James McCord and William Harvey. Oswald frequents 544 Camp Street, an address on his FPCC literature, and a hub for right-wing, anti-Castro activities centered around the office of Guy Banister, as well as Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Sergio Smith and intelligence-backed Cuban exiles.  He doesn't appear to behave as a leftist. 

2. Also in the summer of 1963, Kerry Thornley steps into the picture in New Orleans where witnesses saw him with Oswald either in public or at Oswald’s apartment (plus Thornley picked up Fair Play for Cuba flyers for Oswald). On June 16th, he distributes FPCC literature at the Dumaine Street wharf.  

3. On August 9th, Carlos Bringuier confronts LHO when he sees him distributing FPCC literature on Canal Street. On August 21st, he debates Bringuier and Ed Butler, right-wing extremists, on a television program. Participating in the leaflet incidents and appearing on television was obvious sheep-dipping, which Oswald had to have understood (though its purpose may have been concealed from him).

4. In early September, Clay Shaw, David Ferrie and Oswald visit the villages of Jackson and Clinton to the north of New Orleans, after the anti-FPCC campaign in New Orleans. Oswald is likely unaware that he is being set up as one of the patsies. 

5. On a Saturday morning in late September, two men arrived at Robert McKeown's house. One man introduced himself as Lee Oswald (his friend was called Hernandez). Oswald said he was willing to pay $10,000 for four rifles, 300 Savage automatics and a telescopic sight. McKeown refused as he thought he was being set-up.

I don't think that George DeMohrenschildt was his "friend", nor was his wife (a KGB "swallow") to be trusted.  All of this brings to mind the "useful idiot" characterization by CIA's William Kent.  It appears that DRE and CIA utilized young Oswald in a Castro revenge plot.  I recall a comment by one of his daughters who said, "he was a young guy who got in over his head".  Larry Hancock's "Tipping Point (Part 2: Enter Lee Oswald)" outlines Oswald's last year very well:

Oswald's personal feelings of 1962 are in dramatic contrast to his actions and written communications of the following year. They are totally opposite from the language and attitudes found in Oswald's letters to CPUSA in late September and early October, 1963 . Something seminal occurred with regard to Lee Oswald early in 1963; it would lead to a far different image for Oswald than we find in his memoire, prepared only months earlier. 

Gene

 

[Steve Thomas]

1 hour ago, Gene Kelly said:

 Larry Hancock's "Tipping Point (Part 2: Enter Lee Oswald)" outlines Oswald's last year very well:

... Something seminal occurred with regard to Lee Oswald early in 1963; it would lead to a far different image for Oswald than we find in his memoire, prepared only months earlier. 

Gene

 

Gene,

I wonder if it had anything to do with the missing two weeks from October 19 - November 3, 1962 when nobody knew where Oswald was living.

Not his friends, not his co-workers, not his bosses, not his wife.

Those two weeks were also when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall.

Steve Thomas

[Larry Hancock]

Well I will offer the best insight into that comment in Tipping Point - one likely to be rather contrarian - in my Lancer conference presentation this coming November.  At that point, for better or worse, I'll have spent the better part of a year revisiting Lee Oswald from the most objective perspective I can muster.

[Paul Cummings]

39 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Well I will offer the best insight into that comment in Tipping Point - one likely to be rather contrarian - in my Lancer conference presentation this coming November.  At that point, for better or worse, I'll have spent the better part of a year revisiting Lee Oswald from the most objective perspective I can muster.

Looking forward to it.