The Adventures of Lee Harvey Oswald

[Paul Brancato]

I’ve often thought that endlessly researching Oswald was somewhat of a distraction, because rightly or wrongly I decided early on that he wasn’t a shooter at Dealey Plaza, and I was much more interested in the shooters than the patsy. But like everyone else I’ve read numerous books exploring in detail what is known about Oswald’s life. After recent conversations with the gifted Robert Montenegro I began to question some basic assumptions I had made about Oswald, such as he was clueless, reckless, not particularly bright, a pawn in someone’s game, a husband and father who could barely keep himself together, a somewhat ordinary guy who got caught up in things beyond his control, a man of uncertain morals working for an array of largely unseen handlers. Kind of a Where’s Waldo surrounded by the footprints of intelligence doing what he was told yet not understanding why. You get the picture. But is that real? 
 

Edited Saturday at 02:27 PM by Paul Brancato

[Paul Cummings]

22 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I’ve often thought that endlessly researching Oswald was somewhat of a distraction, because rightly or wrongly I decided early on that he wasn’t a shooter at Dealey Plaza, and I was much more interested in the shooters than the patsy. But like everyone else I’ve read numerous books exploring in detail what is known about Oswald’s life. After recent conversations with the gifted Robert Montenegro I began to question some basic assumptions I had made about Oswald, such as he was clueless, reckless, not particularly bright, a pawn in someone’s game, a husband and father who could barely keep himself together, a somewhat ordinary guy who got caught up in things beyond his control, a man of uncertain morals working for an array of largely unseen handlers. Kind of a Where’s Waldo surrounded by the footprints of intelligence doing what he was told yet not understanding why. You get the picture. But is that real? 
 

You'll love @Larry Hancock new book coming out later.

[Jean Ceulemans]

15 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said:

You'll love @Larry Hancock new book coming out later.

Ha, I was thinking the same.

One of the questions I personally have is, why did he go to the SU... He often  ignored or avoided that question when asked (he was asked by people of all sorts, not just agents, also ´regular´ people). 

There is a lot more we do not know about him and his actions.  The people he contacted, his political statements, his relations to the FPCC, CP, pro- and anti- Castro,... suggest some kind of intell, as they sure were part of very different groups.

[Larry Hancock]

Well I'm not sure everyone will "love it" as it represents a strong effort to be balanced, is without doubt contrarian in many respects, and goes to great lengths to let "Oswald be Oswald" rather than fitting him into a particular mold, the original sin of the Warren Commission and something which unintentionally came to entrap too many of us over the  years.

Oswald was actually quite unique for his time, as attested to by a good number of people who knew him, but whose commentary had to be shunted into the WC volumes rather than put up front in the report itself - because they raise way too many questions in regard to the 'look' the Commission needed to present. The WC really did not want to showcase sources such as a Marine officer who was willing to state that Oswald was as well or better versed in contemporary geopolitics than he was himself, but who had to kick him off a Corps football team because Oswald kept wanting to call plays.

Bottom line, David Boylan and I started from scratch, let Oswald be Oswald as our foundation, and simply took that where it led us. That includes some extended speculation on what might have been going on with him that let him to become both independently mysterious, and a patsy on November 22. A patsy initially useful, but ultimately ineffective for the certain of the conspiracies goals. 

Enough of that, just wanted to be clear that we think the book does justice to Oswald, that was our first concern.

-- Larry

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jean Ceulemans]

Oh, perhaps he was a partisan

Cover here below by Leonard C., but be sure to check the wiki page of this song, I have personally known quite a number of Belgian resistance fighters, a number of them - the partisans - were sponsored by Russia (some only found THAT out post WWII..).

I´have also wondered, what if LHO was spying on GDM... 😎

 

Edited Saturday at 04:21 PM by Jean Ceulemans

[Jean Ceulemans]

Oops, the last part was meant to be in the topic about GdM... was going to add GdM trying to get a job in Intell during WWII when he contacted Vanderbilt

[Paul Brancato]

‘What if LHO was spying on GDM’? A question no one to my knowledge has ever asked, an interesting one. GDM had a lot to say about LHO, but how much of it should we believe? And what would LHO have said about George had he lived? 
It’s good to know that Hancock and Boylan are looking anew at Oswald. 
We’ve examined his time in the Soviet Uinion and how he got there, yet still don’t have all questions answered. We know far less about what he was up to in Japan (as an 18 yr old), or when and how he learned Russian. 
What occurs to me rather overwhelmingly is that when viewed in its entirety it’s an impressive resume, and for such a young man. Larry says, and I agree, to paraphrase, that the WC flooded us with words about him, yet slanted their overall picture of him to fit the facts as they needed them to be. In some way it’s a miracle LHO got to Dealey Plaza in one piece. Blind luck? I’d say street smarts, intuition, training under pressure. Whether we call him an agent or asset, he was a highly skilled one able to penetrate behind enemy lines and navigate to safer shores. It’s hard to put oneself in his young shoes at the age of 17 when he writes to the Socialist Party three weeks before joining the Marines. He was a chameleon. Descriptions of him, behaviors and beliefs, vary greatly. I recall listening to his radio ‘confrontations’ in New Orleans, and having the distinct impression he was playing a part, that in some way he and Ed Butler were on the same team. 
Bottom line - no dummy, hyper intelligent and clever. Even now no can say for sure what he believed. 
 

[Jean Ceulemans]

I often try reversing things, trying to see them differently.

Sending O. to GdM would probably not work (if M. had not sanctioned it, etc).

GdM did not go to O. alone..., he was escorted.

That person (and Moore giving the ok) got him to O.

If you can not get O. to GdM, you do the opposite...

I´m pretty sure GdM knew a lot of "secrets", those were of interest to.... who knows... a lot of people for sure... also commercial).  GdM had connections all over the globe, and would be a liaison for anyone that paid him (as he had been doing all his life).  Best to keep an eye one these guys, at all times. 

Well, we know they talked a lot... but GdM was also carefull, e.g. have O. do some writing...

Checking each other out in a way.

Or was GdM the old partisan, now the song makes more sense...

In Haiti GdM did have a friend\relation that worked at the Polish consulate (or embassy, not sure) he´d meet him regularly at his house.

The US was not helping him to get rid of Papa Doc, did they knew more through a certain person in his past?

Many questions..

Why drop O., that´s a question for CI, was someone a double agent? Things got heated in the autumn of 1963, O wanted to go to Cuba/Russia... (if that is true).

Were was O actually financially indipendent... we know.. Russia.

Why is that so hard to grasp? 

Or do you think the usa would be happy to announce jfk was killed by a double agent of some kind? Nah... let alone a Russian one, or a Cuban one. Or not? On the Mexico story, the fake calls,... Very very much still open questions...

Edited Saturday at 07:33 PM by Jean Ceulemans

[Benjamin Cole]

Looking forward  to Hankock's book.

My take is LHO was obviously smart. His report on Russia upon his return shows real promise for someone with so little formal training. 

GDM, Titovits, and a guy named Donovan in the Marines, all smart guys, all enjoyed conversations with LHO.

 

 

 

[Robert Morrow]

6 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Well I'm not sure everyone will "love it" as it represents a strong effort to be balanced, is without doubt contrarian in many respects, and goes to great lengths to let "Oswald be Oswald" rather than fitting him into a particular mold, the original sin of the Warren Commission and something which unintentionally came to entrap too many of us over the  years.

Oswald was actually quite unique for his time, as attested to by a good number of people who knew him, but whose commentary had to be shunted into the WC volumes rather than put up front in the report itself - because they raise way too many questions in regard to the 'look' the Commission needed to present. The WC really did not want to showcase sources such as a Marine officer who was willing to state that Oswald was as well or better versed in contemporary geopolitics than he was himself, but who had to kick him off a Corps football team because Oswald kept wanting to call plays.

Bottom line, David Boylan and I started from scratch, let Oswald be Oswald as our foundation, and simply took that where it led us. That includes some extended speculation on what might have been going on with him that let him to become both independently mysterious, and a patsy on November 22. A patsy initially useful, but ultimately ineffective for the certain of the conspiracies goals. 

Enough of that, just wanted to be clear that we think the book does justice to Oswald, that was our first concern.

-- Larry

 

 

 

 

 

 

David Lifton told me that he interviewed one of Oswald's friends in New Orleans, someone who knew him as a teen William Wulf? I am not sure.

This friend told Lifton that teen Lee Harvey Oswald's favorite movie star was JOHN WAYNE and his favorite movie was "THE SANDS OF IWO JIMA."

Some "communist!"

 

 

Edited Saturday at 10:36 PM by Robert Morrow

[Robert Morrow]

7 hours ago, Jean Ceulemans said:

Ha, I was thinking the same.

One of the questions I personally have is, why did he go to the SU... He often  ignored or avoided that question when asked (he was asked by people of all sorts, not just agents, also ´regular´ people). 

There is a lot more we do not know about him and his actions.  The people he contacted, his political statements, his relations to the FPCC, CP, pro- and anti- Castro,... suggest some kind of intell, as they sure were part of very different groups.

Here is the most important thing you will ever learn about Lee Harvey Oswald: he was modeling himself as the next Herbert Philbrick, i.e. SOMEONE WORKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT WHILE PRETENDING TO BE A "COMMUNIST."

Robert Oswald said that his brother Lee Harvey Oswald’s favorite TV show was I Led Three Lives about an FBI informant Herbert Philbrick who pretended to be a Communist. I wonder if this is what inspired completely innocent CIA Oswald to go into counterintelligence for the U.S. government?

A key page from Robert Oswald’s book – https://twitter.com/CONELRAD6401240/status/1259856311585583109/photo/1

QUOTE

          The center of Lee’s fantasy world shifted from radio to television when Mother bought a television set in 1948. When it was new, all of us spent far too much time watching variety shows, dramas and old movies. Lee, particularly, was fascinated. One of his favorite programs was I Led Three Lives, the story of Herbert Philbrick, the FBI informant who posed as a Communist spy. In the early 1950’s, Lee watched that show every week without fail. When I left home to join the Marines, he was still watching the reruns.

UNQUOTE

[Robert Oswald, Lee: Portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald by His Brother, p. 47]

I Led Three Lives starring with Richard Carlson, ran on TV from 1953 to 1956.

Note: Oswald was born on Oct. 18, 1939: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald

The TV drama I Led Three Lives ran from Oct. 1, 1953 to Jan. 1, 1956. Oswald would have been age 13-16 during this time period: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Led_3_Lives

There was also a radio version of I Led Three Lives that I think ran before the TV show did.

Edited Saturday at 10:34 PM by Robert Morrow

[Robert Morrow]

8 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I’ve often thought that endlessly researching Oswald was somewhat of a distraction, because rightly or wrongly I decided early on that he wasn’t a shooter at Dealey Plaza, and I was much more interested in the shooters than the patsy. But like everyone else I’ve read numerous books exploring in detail what is known about Oswald’s life. After recent conversations with the gifted Robert Montenegro I began to question some basic assumptions I had made about Oswald, such as he was clueless, reckless, not particularly bright, a pawn in someone’s game, a husband and father who could barely keep himself together, a somewhat ordinary guy who got caught up in things beyond his control, a man of uncertain morals working for an array of largely unseen handlers. Kind of a Where’s Waldo surrounded by the footprints of intelligence doing what he was told yet not understanding why. You get the picture. But is that real? 
 

Jim Garrison once said that at the Clay Shaw trial, when an American general admitted that Oswald had been TESTED ON HIS RUSSIAN LANGUAGE SKILLS BY THE MILITARY was as stunning as "A DOG TALKING" because it implied that the government was testing Oswald on his Russian because they were going to use Oswald as a spy/fake defector to the USSR.

Which is precisely what Oswald was: a low-level CIA spy for the U.S. government and Oswald was very likely a low-level agent of the Office of Naval Intelligence as well.

[Ron Bulman]

Larry and David, of course I look forward to reading your new book on Oswald.  I'm finally about 1/4 way through In Denial.  Something I've wanted to see for a while now is everything known at this point about Oswald that Angleton knew, when.  I've read the file on him originated in the latter 1950's, that JJA kept it "close to the vest."  Was he managed from close to the top from near the start of his USMC time?  Assistance in learning Russian fluently seems essential and a key to me.  

Edited Sunday at 12:57 PM by Ron Bulman

[Robert Morrow]

5 hours ago, Jean Ceulemans said:

I often try reversing things, trying to see them differently.

Sending O. to GdM would probably not work (if M. had not sanctioned it, etc).

GdM did not go to O. alone..., he was escorted.

That person (and Moore giving the ok) got him to O.

If you can not get O. to GdM, you do the opposite...

I´m pretty sure GdM knew a lot of "secrets", those were of interest to.... who knows... a lot of people for sure... also commercial).  GdM had connections all over the globe, and would be a liaison for anyone that paid him (as he had been doing all his life).  Best to keep an eye one these guys, at all times. 

Well, we know they talked a lot... but GdM was also carefull, e.g. have O. do some writing...

Checking each other out in a way.

Or was GdM the old partisan, now the song makes more sense...

In Haiti GdM did have a friend\relation that worked at the Polish consulate (or embassy, not sure) he´d meet him regularly at his house.

The US was not helping him to get rid of Papa Doc, did they knew more through a certain person in his past?

Many questions..

Why drop O., that´s a question for CI, was someone a double agent? Things got heated in the autumn of 1963, O wanted to go to Cuba/Russia... (if that is true).

Were was O actually financially indipendent... we know.. Russia.

Why is that so hard to grasp? 

Or do you think the usa would be happy to announce jfk was killed by a double agent of some kind? Nah... let alone a Russian one, or a Cuban one. Or not? On the Mexico story, the fake calls,... Very very much still open questions...

George DeMohrenschildt had the unlisted phone number of LBJ's top military aide Howard Burris – source Gus Russo

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/09/who-is-jim-dieugenio.html 

 [“Who is Jim DiEugenio?,” Gus Russo, Spring, 1999]

 Gus Russo:

 QUOTE

 DiEugenio appears bemused by my interest in Delk Simpson. Of course, I had learned of and interviewed Simpson years before DiEugenio ever heard the name. Simpson was of interest since his son had told the HSCA that his father had been involved, in the Kennedy assassination with his buddy, LBJ’s military aide Col. Howard Burris. I had come learn of these names in 1986, after deciphering them from a manuscript of Robert Morrow's The Senator Must Die. Although Morrow did not divulge their names, he gave enough clues that allowed me conduct a long examination of State Department records and deduce their identities. To say Morrow was floored when I called him with their real names is putting it mildly. My interest elevated when I obtained a copy of George DeMohrenschildt’s address book which listed, among other curiosities the unlisted phone number of Howard Burris. Neither Simpson’s son nor Morrow was aware of this. It seemed pretty intriguing. In 1991, Frontline assigned me and two other reporters to run down the story.

  UNQUOTE

 

A 1968 U.S. Army document describes George De Mohrenschildt as “a business associate of Vice President Lyndon Johnson”

https://jfkfacts.org/did-george-de-mohrenschildt-know-lyndon-johnson/

Jefferson Morley blog post of April 5, 2015:

As the Washington Post and CNN have reported, JFK Facts was the first news organization to expose Fox News host Bill O’Reilly for fibbing about JFK reporting in the 1970s. In his book Killing Kennedy O’Reilly wrote (on p. 300) that he was knocking on the door of the south Florida home of George de Mohrenschildt, a friend of Lee Harvey Oswald, when De Mohrenschildt committed suicide on March 29, 1977. O’Reilly said he heard the sound of the fatal shotgun blast.

Audio recordings, first published here in 2013, prove that O’Reilly, then a TV reporter for WFAA in Dallas, was actually in Texas at the time and planning to “come to Florida” as soon as possible. O’Reilly didn’t get to south Florida until the next day, as this WFAA video shows.

In O’Reilly’s defense, he really was chasing the De Mohrenschildt story at the time — and for good reason.

Not only did De Mohrenschildt know Lee Oswald and think he was innocent of killing JFK. Not only did De Mohrenschildt write a letter seeking help from this friend, then-CIA director (and future president) George H.W. Bush in September 1976. De Mohrenschildt also knew JFK’s successor Lyndon Johnson, according to a September 1968 U.S. Army Intelligence document. In the report, found by the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), De Mohrenschildt was described as “a business associate of Vice President Lyndon Johnson.”

The document was pointed out to me by Doug Horne, former ARRB military analyst, who wrote about it in Volume 5 of his book, Inside the ARRB. This report is unconfirmed. The author of the memo didn’t know the nature of De Mohrenschildt’s alleged relationship with Johnson and was merely reporting something he had heard. But the author, an intelligence officer, found it credible enough to mention in official channels.

This report certainly demands clarification. Thanks to official secrecy that never happened. Neither the Warren Commission nor the House Select Committee on Assassination ever investigated the reported relationship between Oswald’s friend and JFK’s successor. Why? Because Army Intelligence didn’t share the document with assassination investigators. The document only came to light in the late 1990s.

So did De Mohrenschildt know LBJ? The question cannot be answered definitively but an unconfirmed U.S. Army Intelligence report raises the possibility.

I’ve asked Bill O’Reilly and Joan Mellen for comment.

April 18, 1963 Walter Jenkins the top aide to Vice President Lyndon Johnson responds to a letter from George DeMohrenschildt and offers him a meeting with Col. Howard Burris, who was LBJ's top military attache:

https://www.quora.com/Was-George-de-Mohrenschildt-significant-in-the-JFK-assassination

 

[Ron Bulman]

Since Larry mentioned Oswald possibly playing (?) football in the USMC and Robert being from Austin.  One more time.  I know Larry prefers the original by Homer Henderson.  But this one's more dramatic.