Ron Bulman Posted October 30 Posted October 30 (edited) 3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said: Denny, Your question made me think of that classic rock album by Spirit-- The Family That Plays Together. Ruth Paine's family were all CIA. See you on that one W and raise, better guitar? Hair? Edited October 30 by Ron Bulman
Kirk Gallaway Posted October 30 Posted October 30 Denny:That Dulles would spearhead the assassination while also enthusiastically accepting a key role in the official investigation is also unbelievable......or is it? Unbelievable?, no it happened. But I probably don't believe as iron clad as you that Allen Dulles was the guy behind it, but I accept it as the most likely as a plurality in choices. But it sounds like the idea that it could be anyone else is also routinely rejected here by many folks as being too far fetched. like you heh heh . Denny:(Paine did attend an expensive Russian language school, didn't she? Maybe she had a little more experience/value than your average Dallas Quaker housewife. I might be also bold enough to suggest that any cursory examination of Paine at the time would have likely revealed her name of Forbes. I'm aware she denies being part of the more famous and wealthy Forbes family, but I just have to wonder if the revelation of that particular name might have opened some doors for her, or quietly closed some uncomfortable lines of inquiry.) Denny: I might be also bold enough to suggest that any cursory examination of Paine at the time would have likely revealed her name of Forbes. I'm aware she denies being part of the more famous and wealthy Forbes family, So you say you're aware she denies being part of the more famous and wealthy Forbes family? No I think your confusing Ruth Hyde Paine, with Ruth Forbes, great-granddaughter of Ralph Waldo Emerson and a niece of William Cameron Forbes Governor General of the Phillipines 1903-1909 who married Lyman Paine who is Michael's father. And there's no secret at all about their wealth! Denny: Still, the fact remains that Ruth Paine had at least two connections to the CIA: through her sister and through George de Mohrenschildt. I'm surprised you didn't include her Father, whose name incidentally was Hyde, who some think his world insurance business had ties to intelligence, or was an intelligence front. Denny:But the fact that Paine was onboard with the effort to frame Oswald almost immediately after the assassination indicates to me that she likely wouldn't have been opposed to the idea of being involved in such a high level operation with that specific goal. Let's parse this Denny:But the fact, was Paine onboard with the effort to frame Oswald almost immediately after the assassination That's not a fact at all. That's not true. I remember both Ruth and Michael at first expressed disbelief. Now you're making a lot of assumptions. Honestly nothing about their first denial and changing their story when confronted with the "official explanation" from the "authorities" is in any way strange. Denny continuing : indicates to me that she likely wouldn't have been opposed to the idea of being involved in such a high level operation with that specific goal. That's super hard core and very "witting." She's obviously not a fool. So you believe that RP has essentially performed probably the greatest spy feat in history. Keeping quiet about her obvious complicity for 60 years in aiding in the assassination of a U.S. President!, (once realizing that she was responsible for putting LHO in the TSBD.) and then you allege her becoming an accessory after the fact in a criminal coverup of the JFKA! Those are pretty serious crimes Denny. You better be sure you know what you're talking about, and your background knowledge in these examples seems weak. And then over those years RP responded to requests from every documentary, mock trial, personal speaking tours and just so many interviews, just to preserve this myth, that her handlers just felt no fear at all ,quite the opposite ,her media appearances just became giddy social events to Ruth's handlers. She did so well, they became the what-me-worry intelligence agency. And it was smooth sailing for decades! I mean to them, Ruth got it right. Why not just taunt the JFKA conspiracy people? What harm could possibly happen? Right Denny? Misc. Denny:It's well known that Paine was questioned by the Warren Commission more than any other witness. Her importance is undeniable. Of course it's undeniable, what's your point? In any investigation worth it's salt,* she would be a prime witness! * oh I forgot! I thought it wasn't worth it's salt. heh heh a joke!
Denny Zartman Posted October 30 Posted October 30 1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said: So you say you're aware she denies being part of the more famous and wealthy Forbes family? No I think your confusing Ruth Hyde Paine, with Ruth Forbes, great-granddaughter of Ralph Waldo Emerson and a niece of William Cameron Forbes Governor General of the Phillipines 1903-1909 who married Lyman Paine who is Michael's father. And there's no secret at all about their wealth! Have you seen Max Good's documentary on Ruth Paine? In it she denies being part of the wealthy and famous Forbes family. I'm not sure what you think you're countering here. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe their family name didn't influence any investigation. Maybe their one degree of separation from Allen Dulles never affected their treatment by the Warren Commission either. 1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said: That's not a fact at all. That's not true. I remember both Ruth and Michael at first expressed disbelief. That's precisely the reason why I said she was onboard "almost" immediately. I believe that "we both know who's responsible" discussion was part an overheard phone conversation, not an official statement knowingly given to investigators. In working with investigators and giving official statements and testimony she was 100% on board with incriminating Oswald. Am I wrong on that? Paine's deliberate failure to help Oswald obtain legal council is the most glaring example, imho. What kind of self-respecting ACLU member would neglect to help someone in a precarious legal predicament obtain an attorney? 1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said: That's super hard core and very "witting." She's obviously not a fool. So you believe that RP has essentially performed probably the greatest spy feat in history. Keeping quiet about her obvious complicity for 60 years in aiding in the assassination of a U.S. President!, (once realizing that she was responsible for putting LHO in the TSBD.) and then you allege her becoming an accessory after the fact in a criminal coverup of the JFKA! Those are pretty serious crimes Denny. You better be sure you know what you're talking about, and your background knowledge in these examples seems weak. Weak? Compared to you, who apparently thinks all this happened by chance? I'm sorry if you think my background knowledge in these examples seems weak, but honestly I haven't seen much evidence from you other than a variation of the argument "Come on, isn't this hard to believe?" My background knowledge in these examples is this: J. Walton Moore of the CIA contacted George de Mohrenschildt and suggested de Mohrenschildt meet Oswald. de Mohrenschildt introduced Oswald to Ruth Paine. Paine cold called the TSBD, and got Oswald his job there. Moore + de Mohrenschildt + Paine = The patsy in place. Do you believe that this all happened by chance? 2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said: And then over those years RP responded to requests from every documentary, mock trial, personal speaking tours and just so many interviews, just to preserve this myth, that her handlers just felt no fear at all ,quite the opposite ,her media appearances just became giddy social events to Ruth's handlers. She did so well, they became the what-me-worry intelligence agency. And it was smooth sailing for decades! I mean to them, Ruth got it right. Why not just taunt the JFKA conspiracy people? What harm could possibly happen? Right Denny? You got me there, Kirk. The fact that it's hard for you to believe is absolute proof that none of what I've alleged ever happened. Because it's hard to believe that Ruth Paine would have gone on speaking tours for 60 years, it magically erases the fact that her sister was employed by the CIA. Because it's hard to believe she would have done a mock trial, it erases the fact that she was associated with de Mohrenschildt, a man with connections to multiple intelligence agencies. Because it's hard to believe she would have done interviews for 60 years, it erases the fact that she cold-called the TSBD and got Oswald his job there. Because it's hard for you to believe that she would have appeared in documentaries over 60 years magically erases the fact that she personally chose Marina's interpreter and that she sat in on the interviews with Marina and knew precisely what Marina was telling investigators about Oswald. 2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said: But I probably don't believe as iron clad as you that Allen Dulles was the guy behind it, but I accept it as the most likely as a plurality in choices. But it sounds like the idea that it could be anyone else is also routinely rejected here by many folks as being too far fetched. like you heh heh I do not reject the idea that it could be anybody else but Dulles. I'm on the same page as you. I believe that Dulles is the most likely suspect, but not the only one. I've regularly said on this forum that I believe Lyndon Johnson is the individual that gained the most in the quickest period of time, and that traditionally when attempting to solve a crime one first asks "Who benefits?"
Greg Doudna Posted October 30 Posted October 30 (edited) 1 hour ago, Denny Zartman said: Paine's deliberate failure to help Oswald obtain legal council is the most glaring example, imho. What kind of self-respecting ACLU member would neglect to help someone in a precarious legal predicament obtain an attorney? Michael Paine testified that Ruth spoke to him Friday night of the lawyer issue and Michael testified that in consequence of that from Ruth he called the ACLU Saturday morning on behalf of getting counsel for Lee, and was told the ACLU was already on it. What is your basis for certainty this did not happen? You sound so certain. Why wouldn’t they have called the ACLU as Michael says they did? What kind of monsters do you think they were? She didn’t get Oswald that job. Oswald, Truly, Buell, and Linnie Mae got him that job. Ruth’s well-meaning attempt to help with a cold-call phone call was irrelevant to his getting that job. Just file that in the “no good deed goes unpunished” file for Ruth. Edited October 30 by Greg Doudna
Greg Doudna Posted October 30 Posted October 30 1 hour ago, Denny Zartman said: the fact that she was associated with de Mohrenschildt, a man with connections to multiple intelligence agencies. There was no relationship between de Mohrenschildt and Ruth. They did not know each other before the night of the Glover party, according to both of their testimonies, and there is no evidence otherwise. Nor were they in touch after that party until years later. And at the party Ruth was there to meet Marina and Marina was introduced by her by de Mohrenschildt who knew Lee and Marina. There is no indication de Mohrenschildt had anything to do with Ruth being invited to or her presence at that party. De Mohrenschildt reporting to the CIA and functioning as a babysitter for Lee seems clear enough to me—unlike the suspected Ruth CIA associations the de Mohrenschildt ones have evidence—which is not to say he was any other than good to Lee on a personal level. Where Ruth gets tied into this is just as de Mohrenschildt leaves for Haiti, Ruth enters Marina’s life (not Lee’s except indirectly via Marina). Was it a handoff of Marina? It can look like it was, but there is no evidence or proof of an agency babysitter role carried out by Ruth, and Ruth denies it. So that is where that stands, and without contesting the legitimacy of the question (because of appearances) I wish people in the interests of accuracy and the truth when voicing or considering such suspicions would in fairness disclose there has never been any known evidence or proof corroborating or confirming such suspicions.
Sandy Larsen Posted October 30 Posted October 30 1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said: There was no relationship between de Mohrenschildt and Ruth. Greg, In your opinion, how is it that Oswald just happened to get a job at the right place, ready to unwittingly play the role of JFKA patsy?
Greg Doudna Posted October 30 Posted October 30 2 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Greg, In your opinion, how is it that Oswald just happened to get a job at the right place, ready to unwittingly play the role of JFKA patsy? I think he got the job because Buell learned from his sister that Lee was in a bad way needing a job, and checked with Shelley at work who checked with Truly and Shelley told Buell send him in we’ll consider him. Buell told Linnie Mae who walked over to the neighborhood women and told that. Ruth and Marina passed on the message to Lee in his daily (nightly) phone call of the job possibility, which Lee acted on, applied, Truly decided he was OK and hired him. With Marina’s hopes up and support Ruth made her own attempt to assist by her phone call cold-call to Truly to put in a good word for Oswald. A cold call phone call from a housewife in Irving that Truly never met before cannot have been relied upon to cause a job to happen and therefore can be rejected out of hand as an advance component in the assassination planning. The job would have happened anyway if Ruth had not made that call, and if Truly was not in a hiring mood it is probably worse than even odds that a call from an unknown woman pleading a charity case hire would have swayed Truly. A lot of businesses do not regard themselves as in the charity business but in the economic self-interest business. I believe Oswald was innocent and set up in the assassination. The way I imagine that worked was the logistics of the assassination were wrapped around Dealey Plaza and a shooter from the TSBD sixth floor with infiltrated rifle to go to Oswald implicating him in an assassination conspiracy to be linked to Castro. I do not believe the assassination was planned to occur at Dealey Plaza specifically prior to Oswald’s obtaining his job there, and I do not assume Oswald was witting of the coming assassination attempt being planned—or if he was, that it would take place making use of his own workplace building. This is more a working conjectural theory of the case than cast in iron on my part, but that’s my direction of thinking. It’s a whole lot harder to solve the crime than it is to make the case for Oswald’s exoneration, two distinct issues.
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31 Posted October 31 1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said: I believe Oswald was innocent and set up in the assassination. The way I imagine that worked was the logistics of the assassination were wrapped around Dealey Plaza and a shooter from the TSBD sixth floor with infiltrated rifle to go to Oswald implicating him in an assassination conspiracy to be linked to Castro. I do not believe the assassination was planned to occur at Dealey Plaza specifically prior to Oswald’s obtaining his job there, and I do not assume Oswald was witting of the coming assassination attempt being planned—or if he was, that it would take place making use of his own workplace building. This is more a working conjectural theory of the case than cast in iron on my part, but that’s my direction of thinking. It’s a whole lot harder to solve the crime than it is to make the case for Oswald’s exoneration, two distinct issues. Thanks for your response, Greg. So you believe that the perpetrators planned the assassination, and then decided to frame LHO sometime between October 15 and November 22, 1963. And that at least one of the assassins took at least one shot from the TSBD. Further, you believe that the perpetrators planted the Carcano in the TSBD. Did I get that right? Do you believe that the perpetrators/assassins cased the TSBD and planned where they would shoot from, prior to November 22? Or do you believe they just snuck in the last minute with nobody's permission?
Greg Doudna Posted October 31 Posted October 31 7 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Thanks for your response, Greg. So you believe that the perpetrators planned the assassination, and then decided to frame LHO sometime between October 15 and November 22, 1963. And that at least one of the assassins took at least one shot from the TSBD. Further, you believe that the perpetrators planted the Carcano in the TSBD. Did I get that right? Do you believe that the perpetrators/assassins cased the TSBD and planned where they would shoot from, prior to November 22? Or do you believe they just snuck in the last minute with nobody's permission? Understanding this is conjecture, yes that is accurate except on the point of when Oswald was first considered as a potential patsy, which could have preceded the decision on where to stage the assassination attempt. On your last question, the ones planning the assassination attempt must have cased it prior to Nov 22. Got the rifle in there and perhaps a shooter in there before the morning of Nov 22 too. I believe the TSBD was more porous than has been assumed. Some contemporaries said that. I cannot imagine a competent assassination attempt not infiltrating and casing the building and prepping the rifle beforehand. Not that easy for a stranger to walk in the morning of Nov 22 with a rifle.
W. Niederhut Posted October 31 Posted October 31 (edited) Since this Joe Rogan thread has morphed into another debate about whether Ruth Paine is a CIA asset, I'm re-posting the Probe magazine history essays from the 1990s about Ruth Paine by Carol Hewett, et.al. Carol Hewett, Steve Jones, and Barbara La Monica Dissect the Paines Johnny Cairns also wrote an excellent two-part essay about Ruth Paine's most recent sales pitch for Allen Dulles's WCR. (My favorite part of Mr. Cairns' essay was the photo of Ruth Paine at a CIA picnic with Priscilla Johnson.) 😂 Our Lady of the Warren Commission: Part 1/2 To me, it seems obvious that Ruth Paine is a CIA asset who has spent the past 60 years framing and promoting the CIA's WCR narrative that Oswald was the Lone Nut assassin of JFK. And Greg Doudna's kindly Quaker lady was also pleased when Jack Ruby murdered Oswald in cold blood. Talk about your Society of Friends... 🙄 How could Ruth Paine not have known that her own sister worked for the Company, when questioned by Jim Garrison? Edited October 31 by W. Niederhut
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31 Posted October 31 1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said: Understanding this is conjecture, yes that is accurate except on the point of when Oswald was first considered as a potential patsy, which could have preceded the decision on where to stage the assassination attempt. On your last question, the ones planning the assassination attempt must have cased it prior to Nov 22. Got the rifle in there and perhaps a shooter in there before the morning of Nov 22 too. I believe the TSBD was more porous than has been assumed. Some contemporaries said that. I cannot imagine a competent assassination attempt not infiltrating and casing the building and prepping the rifle beforehand. Not that easy for a stranger to walk in the morning of Nov 22 with a rifle. Greg, If you don't mind, could you don your "assassination planner's cap" and give me an example of how the assassination planning and execution could have proceeded. For example: Pretend I'm the assassination team leader. I sent my guys in to case the joint in September. They first cut the TSBD's water main and then, dressed as city utility workers, they approached the TSBD maintenance guy saying that their water leak was creating a public hazard and that they were there to fix the problem. Under that cover they were able to case the joint. (And so forth and so on.) I just want to see if your hypothesis is viable. I'm particularly interested in 1) how they could have cased the joint, 2) how Oswald could have been picked as the patsy, and 3) how the shooters could have gotten in undetected. If you do this, please keep your story pithy. You are known for going on and on in your writing. I wish not to be overwhelmed with fifty paragraphs of writing. Remember, I am asking for one example... you don't need to explore every possibility. Thank you.
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31 Posted October 31 37 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said: My favorite part of Mr. Cairns' essay was the photo of Ruth Paine at a CIA picnic with Priscilla Johnson. OMG are you serious? I'd like to see that photo. But where can I find it, or Mr. Cairns' essay?
W. Niederhut Posted October 31 Posted October 31 27 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: OMG are you serious? I'd like to see that photo. But where can I find it, or Mr. Cairns' essay? Sandy, The photo is on the link above, to Johnny Cairns' essay, "Our Lady of the Warren Commission."
Greg Doudna Posted October 31 Posted October 31 2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said: And Greg Doudna's kindly Quaker lady was also pleased when Jack Ruby murdered Oswald in cold blood. Talk about your Society of Friends... 🙄 You know, you might learn some manners. I hope the moderators will take note. That comment is a distortion and has nothing to do with a topic under discussion. And you're trying to make me and a whole religious tradition own it. She said, "I was glad ... I wasn't glad Jack Ruby killed him. I was just glad it was over" (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=880). She believed he had killed her president. Yes, her statement was wrong. When you arrive at perfection W. you let me know. I think I've had enough of this thread.
W. Niederhut Posted October 31 Posted October 31 8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said: You know, you might learn some manners. I hope the moderators will take note. That comment is a distortion and has nothing to do with a topic under discussion. And you're trying to make me and a whole religious tradition own it. She said, "I was glad ... I wasn't glad Jack Ruby killed him. I was just glad it was over" (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=880). She believed he had killed her president. Yes, her statement was wrong. When you arrive at perfection W. you let me know. I think I've had enough of this thread. Manners, Greg? How about honesty? I don't appreciate dishonesty or hypocrisy. I have known some fine people who are Quakers, but I have serious doubts about Ruth Paine. She has been bearing false witness against Oswald for 60 years, and she was "relieved" to see her friend, Oswald, the patsy, murdered in cold blood. Not very Quaker-like. Two other questions. What happened to her celebrated friendship with Marina? Was she working as a "humanitarian" CIA/Contra informant in Nicaragua?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now