The truth of Ruth

[Cory Santos]

14 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Of course the 11/4/63 FBI Airtel isn't forged. But Ruth's explanation is entirely reasonable and is not inconsistent in the slightest way with the Nov. 4 Airtel.

What part of this sentence uttered by Ruth Paine don't you understand, Cory? .....

"I was not aware, hadn't taken in the idea of there being two buildings and that there was one on Elm, though I copied the address from the telephone book, and could well have made that notation in my mind but I didn't."

 

Oh David…

[David Von Pein]

1 minute ago, Cory Santos said:

Oh David…

Oh Cory...

[Cory Santos]

9 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Oh Cory...

No, oh David.   

[Kevin Balch]

12 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

You did bring this up before Cory.

Of course, why wasn't everybody in Dallas there?

Cory:  Namely, why she did not go down to the parade with Marina and children?

Do you have kids Cory?  Ruth Paine had 2 kids 4 and 2. Marina had 2 kids, one kid was 1 and a half, and one daughter was one month old!

I assume if you had kids, that question wouldn't be such a mystery.

At the time they would have to leave Fort Worth to drive to Dallas and find parking, the weather was still iffy. It was even more iffy if they had tried to see the president in Fort Worth. So not surprising.

Still, the role of the Paines is curious.

[Joe Bauer]

12 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Cory:  Namely, why she did not go down to the parade with Marina and children?

Do you have kids Cory?  Ruth Paine had 2 kids 4 and 2. Marina had 2 kids, one kid was 1 and a half, and one daughter was one month old!

I assume if you had kids, that question wouldn't be such a mystery.

Totally agree.

Fight heavy traffic. Try and find parking. Massive crowds.  With 4 very young kids under tow? Including a one month old baby? Probably being breast fed? Marina tired from giving birth just a month earlier and not getting much sleep tending to her baby? Marina also maybe arguing with Lee the night before as well?  Cold wet weather up until late morning?

Ridiculous!  

I hate crowds for all the reasons above. And I never had 4 young kids in tow like Ruth and Marina.

And of all the places Ruth could have chosen to see any part of the motorcade, why would she just pick Dealey Plaza?

Non issue here. imo.

 

[Ron Bulman]

8 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

At the time they would have to leave Fort Worth to drive to Dallas and find parking, the weather was still iffy. It was even more iffy if they had tried to see the president in Fort Worth. So not surprising.

Still, the role of the Paines is curious.

Ruth, Marina and children lived in Irving, maybe 10 miles from Dealy Plaza.  Two women taking a 4, 2, 1 1/2 yr olds plus a 1 month old to the parade would have been a chore.  Bottles, diapers, where to change them when needed, a stroller if they had one, keeping the older ones occupied/track of the.

The role of the Paine's is more than curious.  That has been discussed in depth on the forum many times, check the back threads.   One thing I don't remember reading much about is their politics.  Given their elite east coast family connections I have to wonder if maybe they voted for Nixon and Ruth had no interest at all in seeing JFK.

[Greg Doudna]

3 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Ruth, Marina and children lived in Irving, maybe 10 miles from Dealy Plaza.  Two women taking a 4, 2, 1 1/2 yr olds plus a 1 month old to the parade would have been a chore.  Bottles, diapers, where to change them when needed, a stroller if they had one, keeping the older ones occupied/track of the.

The role of the Paine's is more than curious.  That has been discussed in depth on the forum many times, check the back threads.   One thing I don't remember reading much about is their politics.  Given their elite east coast family connections I have to wonder if maybe they voted for Nixon and Ruth had no interest at all in seeing JFK.

Ruth said she voted for Kennedy. I don't remember where I read it but thats what she said.

No evidence she ever voted for or supported Nixon.

I doubt very many Quakers voted for Nixon, despite Nixon claiming to be one. 

Ruth Paine as a member of the ACLU, supporter of civil rights, etc., would be "liberal"/JFK aligned.

When I knew Ruth in the St. Petersburg Friends Meeting nobody else there was voting Republican (Bush II years), I doubt Ruth was.

My father who grew up in the most conservative branch of Friends in North America, the Conservative Friends of Ohio who wear black and white, speak "thee" and "thou" and only a few hundred are left today, said when he grew up those rural farming Friends always voted Republican. That was before WW2 and Franklin D. Roosevelt where a shift happened. But before WW2 the Republicans were the party of Lincoln who freed the slaves, staunch quaker loyalty for that. Also, Herbert Hoover was a Quaker who became president and he was Republican (and Herbert Hoover was well-regarded among Quakers, unlike Nixon). But from FDR on, there was a shift to voting more Democratic. 

Edited April 16 by Greg Doudna

[Ron Bulman]

I've considered the kind, quiet, salt of the earth aspect of Michael and Ruth being Quakers.  Kind of out of their element in Irving.  Michael in a position at high level security at Bell Helicopter, a company his step father founded, after he flunked out at Harvard.  Still receiving a Forbes family trust fund.  Ruth, dad in AID, a CIA front, brother in law in AID, Sister worked for CIA (but Ruth couldn't remember that).  Her trip to Naushon Island in the summer of 1963, before she picked Marina up on the way back to Dallas, via New Orleans.  

Maybe David Talbot asked her the best question ever, so far.

"there was only a fleeting moment when Ruth acknowledged that Oswald might have been a pawn in a historical drama much larger than himself.  When her visitor suggested that dreamy-eyed adventurers like Oswald can become easy prey for those with cynical intentions, she quickly nodded .  "Mu parents had a name for that: 'shut-eyed liberals."

In the end Mr. Talbot concludes, "Marina would wish she had never met her rescuer."  Pages 535-536, Devils' Chessboard.

[Adam Johnson]

Hi Folks,

Great find Cory, this airtel throws up some interesting stuff...

Here's some things i noticed and raises some questions....

For some reason special agents in Little Rock Arkansas think LHO is in their area in October 63'   why? 

New Orleans special agent Kraak doesn't know LHO whereabouts on 31st October 63' and neither does the bureau head office on October 30th.

The words chosen in shanklins report of the 4TH November 63' implies that Hoover and others know who Ruth Paine is, no explanation describing who the person is offering up the information about LHO is placed in the airtel.

The initials JPH appear underneath the number of copies routed to sections.....therefore logically James P Hosty was the one reporting Ruth's comments to Shanklin.

The way shanklin writes the opening lines of the report implies the Ruth Paine was a previous fbi information source...he is crediting her without explanation for this latest information. 

Do we have any previous verification as to the actual date Hosty called out to Irving and interviewed Ruth and Marina....because if it wasnt the eveñing of October 31st or the morning of November 1st....the information in this airtel would have to have been phoned in by Ruth Paine to James Hosty.

Interesting that this airtel was seen by the National Intelligence Secretary, the Mexico City station and the Russia division of CIA all on or before Tuesday November 19th 1963.

Regards,

A.J

[Cory Santos]

6 hours ago, Adam Johnson said:

Hi Folks,

Great find Cory, this airtel throws up some interesting stuff...

Here's some things i noticed and raises some questions....

For some reason special agents in Little Rock Arkansas think LHO is in their area in October 63'   why? 

New Orleans special agent Kraak doesn't know LHO whereabouts on 31st October 63' and neither does the bureau head office on October 30th.

The words chosen in shanklins report of the 4TH November 63' implies that Hoover and others know who Ruth Paine is, no explanation describing who the person is offering up the information about LHO is placed in the airtel.

The initials JPH appear underneath the number of copies routed to sections.....therefore logically James P Hosty was the one reporting Ruth's comments to Shanklin.

The way shanklin writes the opening lines of the report implies the Ruth Paine was a previous fbi information source...he is crediting her without explanation for this latest information. 

Do we have any previous verification as to the actual date Hosty called out to Irving and interviewed Ruth and Marina....because if it wasnt the eveñing of October 31st or the morning of November 1st....the information in this airtel would have to have been phoned in by Ruth Paine to James Hosty.

Interesting that this airtel was seen by the National Intelligence Secretary, the Mexico City station and the Russia division of CIA all on or before Tuesday November 19th 1963.

Regards,

A.J

Finally.  Thank you for reading it.  There is a little more meat there too regarding Shanklin but I am so busy I haven’t had a chance to write anything.  I am not sure why it took this long for anyone to notice these things.  

[Max Good]

Cory, nothing is suspicious about Ruth Paine.  There is always an explanation for every issue you could bring up.

Even though you have produced a document that states that she told the FBI the correct TSBD address on 11/1/1963, Ruth must really not have known, because there is no possible way she could have been anything less than honest at any point over the last 60 years, no, the last 91 years.

Here is another version of this document that you found, although of course, it is absolutely devoid of evidentiary value because Ruth Paine has never lied.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57690#relPageId=225

[Cory Santos]

1 hour ago, Max Good said:

Cory, nothing is suspicious about Ruth Paine.  There is always an explanation for every issue you could bring up.

Even though you have produced a document that states that she told the FBI the correct TSBD address on 11/1/1963, Ruth must really not have known, because there is no possible way she could have been anything less than honest at any point over the last 60 years, no, the last 91 years.

Here is another version of this document that you found, although of course, it is absolutely devoid of evidentiary value because Ruth Paine has never lied.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57690#relPageId=225

Max this is your area and you are the expert here on her.  Please continue.   Your thoughts on Shanklin, etc.  

[Max Good]

My sarcasm was directed at some of the above posters who have never been able to acknowledge that a single point made about Ruth's deep involvement in this case is worthy of suspicion.  Those people are saying that two plus two does not equal 4, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm no more of an expert on Ruth than many other researchers.  Ruth seems to have been very adamant that she had no idea Oswald could be a suspect until the police showed up.  That's why the wrong address is necessary.  I think the police report, where two officers recounted that she said, "We've been expecting you." when they arrived, is more important than many of us realized.  Ruth, of course, completely denies that she ever said that to them.  The "we both know who is responsible" phone call also points to the Paines being aware of Oswald as a suspect/culprit before the police showed up or it was announced in the media.

Hosty did interview Ruth (and Marina) at her house on 11/1/63.

[Cory Santos]

2 hours ago, Max Good said:

My sarcasm was directed at some of the above posters who have never been able to acknowledge that a single point made about Ruth's deep involvement in this case is worthy of suspicion.  Those people are saying that two plus two does not equal 4, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm no more of an expert on Ruth than many other researchers.  Ruth seems to have been very adamant that she had no idea Oswald could be a suspect until the police showed up.  That's why the wrong address is necessary.  I think the police report, where two officers recounted that she said, "We've been expecting you." when they arrived, is more important than many of us realized.  Ruth, of course, completely denies that she ever said that to them.  The "we both know who is responsible" phone call also points to the Paines being aware of Oswald as a suspect/culprit before the police showed up or it was announced in the media.

Hosty did interview Ruth (and Marina) at her house on 11/1/63.

Thank you.  Well done.