Brian Baccus on Ruth Paine

[James DiEugenio]

If its not the Post then Carol may have made a mistake on the paper of record.

Nice catch on Ruth and the NYT.

[Adam Johnson]

Hi Max,

From your research and interviews can you tell us how involved(if at all) with the Russian emigre community was Ruth or Michael in the immediate years following the assassination? Did she ever teach any other young students? Or did they have no contact post assassination with anything of a Russian nature?

Many thanks for your efforts and time,

A.J

[Richard Booth]

54 minutes ago, Max Good said:

@James DiEugenio

Jim, in one of your interviews with me, you said that:

Is this correct?  Was it the Houston Post or the Chronicle?  I haven't been able to find a mention of this online.  Anyone have any info?

Interestingly, I also found a March 1964 article in the NYT where Ruth is the source linking Oswald to the Walker shooting. https://www.nytimes.com/1964/03/20/archives/oswald-is-linked-to-shot-at-walker.html

 

A piece from 12/6/1963 says that "Dallas police said the day following the assassination that they were checking the possibility that the assassin and the Walker sniper were the same person"

Interesting, that's some quick detective work...

I searched the Houston Chronicle but the archive I used (Newsbank) doesn't go back that far. 

[Jean Ceulemans]

On 12/1/2023 at 2:17 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Jean,

If you really want to see some evasiveness look at the interview Garrison did with Ruth before the grand jury.

In that one, she could not even remember the proper city or state that her sister lived in!

 

She didn't remember in first, seemed a little confused, hesitating, but a little later she did mention Falls Church in that interview.  @Sandy LarsenSo where is the perjury (a proven one i.r.o. Garrison). Garrison filed charges against some (12?) others, not on Ruth. I´m always willing to learn. Nothing more, just looking for some things she was accused of in articles, but later appeared to be different, to say the least, or based on incorrect data.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Jean Ceulemans

[Richard Booth]

https://imgur.com/kO7ZqKV

Here is the 12/6/1963 UPI piece - "FBI Looks at Firing On Walker"

"The FBI is looking into the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sniper who fired a rifle bullet into the home of former Maj. Gen. Edwin Walker in Dallas last April, it was learned Friday"

"Dallas Police said the day following the assassination that they were checking the possibility that the assassin and the Walker sniper were the same person"

It'd be interesting to see the 11/23/63 piece mentioned wherein Michael Paine supposedly floats the idea that it was Oswald who did it.

DeMohrenschildt, much later, suggested that he suspected Oswald fired at Walker and there is something there re: the Paines and the DeMohrenschildts. We don't know what it is yet, but we can see the form of something distinct there.

[Greg Doudna]

57 minutes ago, Richard Booth said:

Regarding Ruth Paine I think the truth is self-evident, regardless of what hard evidence exists or doesn't exist. 

That’s a hard one to refute. A first problem with that is that what Ruth is suspected of and accused of, is all over the map with no consensus on definition of what you say is self evident guilt without need for evidence. 

And how self-evident is it? You act like it is a settled question long ago that is astonishing and disruptive to CT truth to question. 

Well, a sinister Ruth Paine is not found that I have ever seen in the extensive published work of John Newman or David Talbot or Larry Hancock.

Or in any of the HSCA investigation, or the Warren Commission or FBI or Secret Service or any other investigation before HSCA, save the sole and lone exception, the evidence-free and demagogic suspicions of Garrison’s Grand Jury in New Orleans.

And even Garrison wasn’t willing to do what Salandria seriously at the time pressed him to do, which was indict and charge Ruth Paine for conspiracy to assassinate JFK, which Garrisons staff regarded as lunatic on Salandria’s part given that there was not a shred of evidence for it.

Weisburg, first generation and to this day one of the strongest and most credible WC critics, didn’t accuse Ruth Paine. Most of the best CT works written, counting both statistically by numbers and by aggregate weight of reputation, have not. Oliver Stone’s recent JFK Revisited doesn’t, and that surely was an overruling over DiEugenio on that point who has long been the leading attack dog pushing unbelievable allegations against Ruth.

The well-presented, comprehensive, and eloquent presentation of the sober and serious Johnny Cairns just put up yesterday or today on Kennedy and Kings doesn’t. 

Jeff Meek, a journalist and serious CT writer, articles which can be found online and a book, interviewed Ruth Paine and reported on those interviews.

Meek robustly concluded she is clean on all counts right down the line.

Meek concluded no different than me on that, and others similarly.

[Richard Booth]

14 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

long appeal to authority based reply

You are wasting your time, we obviously do not agree and that is how it will remain.

 

[Tony Krome]

25 minutes ago, Richard Booth said:

It'd be interesting to see the 11/23/63 piece mentioned wherein Michael Paine supposedly floats the idea that it was Oswald who did it.

It was a guy in the Dallas Police Headquarters hallway crowd that blurted out the name Walker in relation to Oswald. 

[Bill Fite]

By chance ran across this today, which might be interesting:

December 3—17, 1963, times unstated, Arlington/Dallas, Texas. Marina Oswald, a guest of the federal government in a motel before she departed to the home of Katya and Declan Ford where everyone seemed to have their eyes on the cash register, was interviewed repeatedly by FBI S/As James Hosty, James Ward, Bardwell Odum, Arthur E. Carter, Anatole Boguslav, and Wallace Heitman.

This was a “let’s check her earlier stories” series of interviews, out of which came stories of the Walker event ALONG WITH repeated denials that Marina ever saw Oswald come or go with the rifle, or take target practice with it, or, for that matter, that she never saw anything more than the bare butt of the gun as it was in the Paine-garage blanket. (Commission Exhibit 1403, 22H 765—784)

Ruth Paine was questioned first, as it was the ever-pious “St. Ruth” who, out of pure goodness, took three books that had belonged to Marina to the Irving, Texas, police station. Marina was not in contact with her, and wanted no contact, but Ruth wanted her to have the books—two of which were about raising children, in Russian, and Mrs. Paine worried that Marina would be lost without the Russian books. There then followed, quickly, a few “chain of possession” interviews regarding the books, until it is learned that there was a note in one of the books. It was exhibited to Ruth Paine and she was asked about it, but she claimed she had no knowledge of it whatsoever. “While the Secret Service agent held it up she read the first line or two but did not get to complete it. She recalls reading something to the effect that “here is the key to the post office.” Clearly, this is intended to be the “Shroud of Turin” Oswald—Walker note (if in fact, it ever was written in relation to Walker, as Sylvia Meagher put a wholly different yet possibly more plausible explanation to that document), and Ruth Paine put it right into the hands of the feds. But the Oswald-Walker note was in Russian.

Brown Ph.D, Walt. Master Chronology of JFK Assassination Book III: Disappointment . Vigliano Books. Kindle Edition. 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

16 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

More on Oswald's TSBD job and the location of the assassination

After Oswald was hired at TSBD Oct 15-16, he applied for other jobs elsewhere, all of which were on the likely parade route. ...  in the Laura Kittrell Texas Employment Commission story, she says Oswald told her early Oct when he was at the TEC with her that he wanted an office job in a building downtown, ... she was never called to testify.

 

I'm glad you bring that up because it perfectly supports my working theory. (To newbies: My theory is very similar to ones adopted by a number of well-respected researchers. It's not "way out there.")

According to Laura Kittrell of the Texas Employment Commission, it was an Oswald IMPOSTER who appeared before her on October 17, the day after Oswald took the TSBD job. He didn't tell her that he was working for the TSBD.

(It is likely that this is the reason Kittrell was not asked to testify before the WC.)

As I said, the CIA had set up Oswald to make it look like he had an assassination team and was negotiating with the Cubans and Russians to assassinate Kennedy. This story was all fabricated by the CIA with the exception of a short blond Oswald imposter who visited the Cuban consulate to make an impression on them. (There is a reason that the Oswald imposter chosen was short and blond, BTW.)

The CIA potters goal was for the FBI to discover, in their post-assassination investigation, that Oswald was the American ring leader who carried out the act for the communists. For this fabricated story to be believable, it had to show how Oswald happened to have access to a building along the presidential parade route. The plotters intended for the FBI to discover that Oswald sought employment at various places along the route. For what reason exactly, I'm not sure. Maybe because (according to the fabricated story) Oswald felt that the TSBD wasn't the ideal place for the shooters.

Oswald's job (according to the fabricated story) was to prepare a way for the shooters to get in and out of the building that was finally chosen.

 

16 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Lee looked for jobs before and after his hiring at TSBD.

 

Oswald was allowed by his handler to look for jobs before being employed by the TSBD so that he could collect unemployment insurance checks. Seeking employment was a requirement for that.

He didn't seek employment after he got a job at the TSBD. An Oswald imposter did, as Laura Kittrell stated.

 

[Tony Krome]

18 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

He didn't seek employment after he got a job at the TSBD. An Oswald imposter did, as Laura Kittrell stated.

And GD, if he has a think about it, should be able to figure out who that person was.

[Greg Doudna]

11 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

According to Laura Kittrell of the Texas Employment Commission, it was an Oswald IMPOSTER who appeared before her on October 17, the day after Oswald took the TSBD job. He didn't tell her that he was working for the TSBD.

(. . .)

He didn't seek employment after he got a job at the TSBD. An Oswald imposter did, as Laura Kittrell stated.

I have studied that Kittrell mss rather thoroughly and it is clear she is conflating separate instances of two persons as if they are the single person Oswald. But I do not think that was any impersonator. Rather that is Kittrell’s mistake in identification in telling her story later from memory. One was Oswald, and the other is not a mystery, it was Curtis Craford. The task is to reconstruct which parts of her narrative reflect Oswald and which Craford, nobody impersonating anyone, she simply confused in storytelling memory. 

I worked that out tentatively in some notes and the business of wanting a job in an office building downtown was Oswald and it was before he got the job at TSBD (not through TEC). 

[Jean Ceulemans]

2 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

You are wasting your time, we obviously do not agree and that is how it will remain.

 

You made some serious accusations. It would be fair to substantiate those before backing out

[Sandy Larsen]

19 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Vince Palamara probably has the information on when the motorcade was fixed or changed to go past the TSBD on Elm, but as I recall it was a lot later than Oct 16. For what it is worth, Bill Sloan with Jean Hill, JFK The Last Dissenting Witness  (1992), 113, speaking of motorcycle cop Billy Joe Martin who was at the left rear of the presidential limousine when JFK was assassinated:

 "He hesitated for a long moment. 'If I tell you about this, Norma Jean, you've got to promise me you'll never breathe a word of it to anybody,' he said softly. 'Not even to Mary or your mother or your kids. Not to anybody, understand?'

"'Okay, sure,' she said, a little taken aback by the gravity of his tone. 'I won't tell a soul, I promise.'

"'Well, when Kennedy was busy shaking hands with all the wellwishers at the airport, Johnson's Secret Service people came over to the motorcycle cops and gave us a bunch of instructions. The damnedest thing was, they told us the parade route through Dealey Plaza was being changed.'

"'Changed? How"?'

"'It was originally supposed to go straight down Main Street,' J.B. said, 'but they said for us to disregard that. Instead, we were told to make the little jog on Houston and cut over to Elm.'

"Jean felt her mouth drop open. 'My God,' she said in amazement, 'if you'd stayed on Main, Kennedy might've been completely out of range of whoever was shooting at him' (. . .)

"J.B. stared at her with a straight face. 'Maybe that's why they changed the route,' he said bluntly, 'but that's not all. They also ordered us into the damnedest escort formation I've ever seen. Ordinarily, you bracket the car with four motorcycles, one on each fender. But this time, they told the four of us assigned to the president's car there'd be no forward escorts. We were to say well to the back and not let ourselves get ahead of the car's rear wheels under any circumstances. I'd never heard of a formation like that, much less ridden in one, but they said they wanted to let the crowds have an unrestricted view of the president. Well, I guess somebody got an "unrestricted view" of him, all right.'"

19 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

 @Sandy Larsen, this suggests a different picture than your certainty that the TSBD location was selected by plotters as Oswald's location before Oswald was hired at TSBD and before there was knowledge the motorcade would go by the TSBD.

 

It suggests no such thing.

It's obvious that the path on Elm Street past the TSBD was chosen by the plotters as being ideal for the shooting. It's also obvious that that part of the motorcade route was left out till the end, because having it in from the beginning risked being pointed out as being a danger for the president. What that tells us is that the person who changed the route very likely was in on the plot.

The only thing the story you presented (quoted above) does is support what many of us have long thought... that someone high in the Secret Service was also in on the plot.

 

 

19 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Instead of the other possibility, Sandy, that Ruth made that phone call to Truly to, you know, try to be helpful with no guarantee of success, on her own initiative.

 

Greg,

The TSBD was a front company for the CIA. The CIA plotters used it to kill president Kennedy.

Roy Truly had been instructed to hire Oswald. Therefore there was definitely a guarantee of success. You're the one who peddles his beliefs in chance, not me.

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

3 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

https://imgur.com/kO7ZqKV

Here is the 12/6/1963 UPI piece - "FBI Looks at Firing On Walker"

"The FBI is looking into the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sniper who fired a rifle bullet into the home of former Maj. Gen. Edwin Walker in Dallas last April, it was learned Friday"

"Dallas Police said the day following the assassination that they were checking the possibility that the assassin and the Walker sniper were the same person"

It'd be interesting to see the 11/23/63 piece mentioned wherein Michael Paine supposedly floats the idea that it was Oswald who did it.

DeMohrenschildt, much later, suggested that he suspected Oswald fired at Walker and there is something there re: the Paines and the DeMohrenschildts. We don't know what it is yet, but we can see the form of something distinct there.

Ok, We know all that. But Dec.  6th sounds about right.

Richard, taking this in a completely different direction than you and Greg. Let me ask a question that I asked before on this thread several times before to no answer from Jim,but in fairness the only one who answered is Sandy, with his explanation that I see as a rather hybrid, explanation that neither you, as I understand, or I would embrace. I've addressed Sandy about the flaws I've seen in his theory, as Greg has recently on this thread.

 

But here's what it seems your theory implies.

 

 

Under the normal practice  of spy craft,  Ruth having been an accomplice to the the killing of the POTUS, would have spent the rest of her life in seclusion, away from the public eye! She was told to do so by her CIA handlers, who could well have threatened her life! After all, these are the same people who killed a President, killed LHO and numerous others shortly after the assassination and then years later, when they became more sophisticated,  took down a sitting President from office ( Nixon) for knowing too much.Do you believe that Richard? If so, fine.

 

 

But when asked to retire, Ruth would have none of it, and told her handlers to got to hell! Because she was going to take on all comers who question the findings in the WR,  And then a decade later, anxious to return to the limelight, Ruth  insisted on continuing her spy activities in Nicaragua!, because she saw herself as indispensable to the agency, and no one was going to tell her differently!

 

To believe your account RP accomplished greatest public spy feat of the 20th and 21st century. She been taking on all comers ever since, open to every  interview , mockumentary and tv  shows for the next 60 years after the assassination and shuts down every tough interviewer.

Such an infamously stellar career, I would think has to be begrudgingly acknowledged by you.

 

Do you believe this story? Feel free to modify it.