Jump to content

3 Times


Recommended Posts

Guest John Gillespie

Jim,

I have a different take on Oswald's "patsy" statement than you do. Yes, he had to know he was a patsy at that time, but he also must have had hope that he would not be completely abandoned, that somehow his co-conspirators or some benefactor would help him out of this predicament. (Hence his attempted call from jail to the mysterious John Hurt, possibly the Hurt you've been researching.)

I think he was just blowing smoke with his patsy statement. The "they" whom he was accusing of setting him up was the DPD, not his handlers. He was simply saying the DPD was on the spot and needed a patsy in a hurry, so they arrested him because they knew he had lived in Russia.

Oswald was not going to accuse his handlers of setting him up or of anything else at that point because they were the only people who could help him, as slim as that chance might be.

Ron

Ron,

I tend to believe that theory because of the flip manner in which Oswald said it, though he certainly was being hurried along. I think it was his way of simply announcing his innocence based on his conclusion that the DPD really had nothing that would stand up.

As for John Hurt, the apparent intended recipient of "The Raleigh Call," there are a number of good links, among them:

http://indyweek.com/durham/2003-11-19/porch.html

I CAN attest that so many of LHO's actions immediately following the assassination, i.e., taking the cab past his residence and walking back, ducking into the theater and this purported telephone call attempt are all Intelligence Agent 101 training. I want to add that he remains as one of the truly greatest Agents of all and, as Garrison said, one of the great patriots.

Regards Ron,

JAG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems Oswald was aware of the fact that he was a "patsy" when he made the statement, "They're taking me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm only a patsy." Most critics wish to use only the last four words of this statement while Oswald in fact used the sentence about Russia to preface his "patsy" statement.  If true, according to Oswald, his life as a "patsy" began in 1959, before Kennedy was elected, making the case for a "patsy" much more complicated than a simple "set-up" on November 22.

Jim,

I have a different take on Oswald's "patsy" statement than you do. Yes, he had to know he was a patsy at that time, but he also must have had hope that he would not be completely abandoned, that somehow his co-conspirators or some benefactor would help him out of this predicament. (Hence his attempted call from jail to the mysterious John Hurt, possibly the Hurt you've been researching.)

I think he was just blowing smoke with his patsy statement. The "they" whom he was accusing of setting him up was the DPD, not his handlers. He was simply saying the DPD was on the spot and needed a patsy in a hurry, so they arrested him because they knew he had lived in Russia.

Oswald was not going to accuse his handlers of setting him up or of anything else at that point because they were the only people who could help him, as slim as that chance might be.

Ron

Hi Ron

The other thing about the patsy statement is that it is typical tough guy talk right out of the gangster movies of the thirties and forties. I made the point on another thread that the arrest of Oswald at the movie theatre mirrored in some respects the end of gangster John Dillinger in the shootout with G-men outside the Biograph Theatre in Chicago. It was as if Oswald was set up to be viewed by the general American public as a bad guy in the Dillinger mold by being arrested there. Perhaps all that was intentional, and Oswald played along, the "patsy" statement being part of the act as well. Not sure what this tells us but those are my impressions.

All my best

Chris

Edited by Christopher T. George
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron

Similiar to the Assassination of Admiral Darlan during WWII where the young assassin waited for help until his death within two days.

I do find it interesting that "my" John Hurt was retired and out of country at the time of the assassiantion.

"Oswald was not going to accuse his handlers of setting him up or of anything else at that point because they were the only people who could help him, as slim as that chance might be." But Oswald did want Jonathon Abt, the Smith Act attorney, to represent him to the exclusion of all other offers of help. Why? Was it because he had a story to tell about his trip to the Soviet Union that preceeded his arrest for the assassination of JFK?

John

Oswald arrived back in the US about April of 1962. In September he meets George De Mohrenschildt, perhaps this is significant to the White House interest perhaps not.

It is my belief that the White House would be very interested in Lee Harvey Oswald if in fact he was involved with the shoot down of Francis Gary Powers and if he could associate Edwin Walker with his entry into the Soviet Union.

I point out once again, Walker's "Pro Blue Program" begins within days of the State Departments decission that Oswald will be allowed to return to the US. This leads to a total and complete discrediting of Walker the General and begins his new life as Walker the anti Kennedy "right winger." Coincidence?

Two points: 1) Walker always followed orders throughout his career and 2) To leagally spy on US citizens Walker would have to have a reason to resign (not retire) from the US Military.

It is my belief that Walker was assigned to spy on the right wing and he did so without question, becomming an enemy of the Kennedy administration by default and without knowing that Oswald was returning to the US. If Oswald could in fact accuse Walker of "helping" him into the Soviet Union, Walker the "right winger" would provide plausible deniability for American intelligence while at the same time protecting intelligence assets.

Would Walker have been willing to "fall on his own sword" if called upon? Imagine the reaction of Edwin Walker if the face he saw on the television screen in his Shreveport, LA hotel on November 22, 1963 was in fact the face of the young man who he had passed information to in October of 1959. Would Walker have believed that he was about to be set up as the "patsy?'" Would the story of Oswald's assassination attempt on the life of Walker provide a degree of "protection" to an obvious suspect in the assassination of the President? Would Walker have any reason to suspect a plot to assassinate the President that was initiated at the highest levels of government? Would these "plotters" be willing to silence him (read his testimony)?

Could this phone conversation to a German newspaper be the loose thread that leads to the unraveling of this mystery?

Compare the Soviets plausible reaction to Oswald leaving the Soviet Union....Yuri Nosenko makes contact with US Intelligence. After the assassination of JFK Nosenko "defects" with total knowledge of Oswald and his movement in the USSR, deflecting allegations of any possible association between the KGB and Oswald. Coincidence?

In my opinion there is alot of information about this "patsy" that we still do not know!

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jim

You wrote: "Would the story of Oswald's assassination attempt on the life of Walker provide a degree of 'protection' to an obvious suspect in the assassination of the President?"

I think this is a very plausible scenario. Oswald's alleged attempt on the life of Walker seems otherwise odd and contradictory. However, setting up Walker as another "victim" of Oswald could have helped give him immunity from suspicion as being a key person in the Kennedy assassination.

All the best

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, a couple of other factors to consider perhaps, though I haven't reasoned through how they fit in, are :

the Mail Opening operations had been going on since at least late '52. There are reports of it going on in San Francisco and New Orleans as well. As it was a highly secret and illegal operation, it probably went on in many places, Dallas for example (Harry D Holmes, FBI informant, Postal Insepctor, Dallas Post Ofiice Dealey Plaza.) . Databases were built as well from just adresses and names on enevelopes where the recipient was mailed a form to fill out asking if they would accept mail from such and such a place.

Helms was intimately involved and no doubt was kept informed. JE Day, the Postmaster General appointed by Kennedy who later in July 63 resigned 'over differences' with Kennedy, stated under oath that Roosevelt, Dulles and Helms came to him three weeks after starting work as Postmaster General to brief him in this, in Helms words , 'very secret' operation. Helms provided a statement that contradicted Days assertion that he didn't 'want to know' and in fact was thoroughly briefed.The postal Inspection Service was under him and the postal inspectors under the head of the Postal Inspection Service. Three steps away from Helms was Holmes. Holmes - FBI > etc. Holmes -> Day, Helms, Dulles.

and through Dulles > Walker?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris

And a letter from John J. McCloy to Edwin Walker, five months before the assassination of JFK and two months after the alledged attempt by Oswald on the life of Walker, just happened to be placed in an obvious place for researchers (or investigators) to find. But it was never found until recently.

How many people (and how high up the food chain) were worried about being connected to Walker and to Oswald prior to the assassination? Was this because they were aware of a future attempt to assassinate the President or were they worried about what information Oswald might have become aware of reguarding who had used him when he defected to Russia?

I lean toward the later.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

If Oswald's name was added to a "data base" of potential communists it would seem that that information would be used to keep Oswald form an assignment that would place him anywhere near the U-2 spy plane. But we find that the opposite was done. What does the reality of the Oswald trainnig then suggest?

In dealing with this we would have to believe that either Oswald's name was not identified by this mail opening program and that the Marines were not aware of Oswalds openly Socialist, pro Castro leaning and provided him, just by chance, with an opportunity to work with U-2's or that they were aware of his Trotskist bent and provided Oswald with an opportunity to work with U-2's.

One scenario suggests ignorance on the part of those tasked with protecting Americas most secrete and advanced spyplane and the other suggests a mission oriented plan.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...