Sunday, June 20, 2010
==please go to Scribd.com to see this article with all photos and with better editing...this is the original version!==
LEE OSWALD, CALLED A LIAR: A REFUTATION, PART TWO
AN ARTICLE, POSTED ON AN ATTACK WEBSITE AGAINST LEE OSWALD, ARGUES TO THE UNINFORMED PERSON THAT LEE OSWALD WAS A CONSUMMATE LIAR. BUT WAS HE LYING BECAUSE HE WAS A BAD GUY, OR DID HE LIE BECAUSE HE WAS A DOUBLE AGENT, WORKING FOR THE CIA? THE ARTICLE, “LEE’S LIES” WAS WRITTEN BY A SOPHISTICATED PROFESSIONALWHO HAS BEEN A LOBBYIST. THIS WRITER KNEW A GREAT DEAL ABOUT LEE H. OSWALD, YET FAILED TO MENTION ANYWHERE IN HIS ARTICLE THAT LEE’S LIES MIGHT HAVE BEEN FOR A HIGHER CAUSE AS A DOUBLE AGENT. EXPLORE THIS ARTICLE WITH ME, AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF IF THE ARTICLE WAS ‘FAIR.’ JVB
Reinvestigating the article “Lee's Lies”
LOOKING AT “LEE’S LIES” BY Brian Dautch
WITH CORRECTIONS AND COMMENTS BY JUDYTH VARY BAKER
Brian Dautch works in Washington, D.C. He was a former member of the Council for Marketing and Opinion Research, Director of Government Affairs.
Review: Part One ended with a comment that an intelligent and sophisticated accountant, George Bouhe, was well-connected to George DeMohrenschildt (CIA ties), to geologists, to oil magnates, and also to the Paines, who were closely associated with the Oswalds: Lee Oswald’s wife was living with Ruth Paine.
Dautch reported that Lee Oswald failed to tell Bouhe, who had given him some significant help, enough details about his private life. He also complained that Oswald was also too short with him in phone calls. Dautch criticizes Oswald for his::
“When the befuddled Bouhe finally asked Oswald where he was staying, Oswald told him he was at the Carlton Boarding House in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas. In truth, Oswald had never been there at all.(13) Later, Oswald would use Bouhe and others as references for job applications without their knowledge, and would usually provide the potential employer with inaccurate addresses for such acquaintances.(14) “
Let’s forget about the fact that where Oswald was staying at the time was not necessarily anybody’s business. Oswald was calling Bouhe regularly, as agreed. Once again, Dautch never mentions the possibility that Oswald may have had reasons not to tell Bouhe additional details. For example, I (a witness—see the book Me & Lee: How I Came to Know, Love and Lose Lee Harvey Oswald) ) and former secret service agent for JFK, Abraham Bolden (see James Douglass’ excellent book, JFK and the Unspeakable –Why He Died and Why It Matters) both testify that Lee was trying to save President Kennedy. Lee gave me enough information to convince me that he had good reasons to become “friendly” with those hostile to Kennedy in order to try to learn more information useful in saving Kennedy’s life. When Oswald returned from the Soviet Union to Texas, it was not long before he found himself and his Russian wife the center of attention of White Russians and other anti-communist groups associated with Big Oil. Anti-Kennedy talk was rampant in Texas: I, myself was a resident there from 1965 through 1985, and again in 2000-2001 (anti-Kennedy sentiments in Dallas, at least, persisted—talk to any Dallas policeman and find out for yourself. Also ask yourself why a man who, himself, is an icon in the Kennedy assassination --Robert Groden-- and others in Dallas who were selling or advertising “conspiracy theory” books in Dealey Plaza were arrested in mid-June, 2010 by the Dallas Police – while the Oswald-did-it circus act in the Sixth Floor Museum there won’t sell any of those books!).
But back to the matter of a “lying Oswald” -- and why he lied.
Since Texas oil men included many right-wing cheerleaders, such as Hunt, Murchison and Byrd, who were vehemently anti-Kennedy, it behooved Oswald not to disclose details about his interest in Kennedy and his desire to protect him. All honest researchers who have investigated the matter know that Oswald admired Kennedy. Since he also denied shooting Kennedy, seeking fame for such an action has no basis in fact.
However, the “official versions” in the case stress that Oswald was having difficulties with his wife, and in a hissy-fit, decided to shoot Kennedy. It is particularly inconvenient to the aficionados of the “official version” that I have come forward stating that Oswald and I were having a love affair and that Oswald had no intention of returning to his wife. Perhaps this is why I have been driven overseas due to threats and harassment.
The “official version” systematically uses testimony that supports the “Oswald did it” theme, while ignoring evidence and witnesses who might have disputed it. Certainly nobody came looking for me, nor for the Clinton-Jackson witnesses who saw Lee Oswald with Clay Shaw and David Ferrie. Witnesses such as Orest Pina, who testified seeing Oswald with FBI agents, or Dr. Michael Kurtz, a noteworthy historian in Louisiana who personally saw Oswald working with Guy Banister, are typically not mentioned or their statements are ignored, attacked, or minimized.
Shamefully, witnesses who supported the “official version” sometimes had “help” to make sure they wouldn’t change their stories or submit to interviews by researchers who might ask the wrong questions.
If you visit “The Realist Archive Project” at http://www.ep.tc/realist/53/12.html, you will land on a lengthy interview and article about Marguerite Oswald, Oswald’s mother (“The Unsinkable Marguerite Oswald”) who is described as an intelligent, if frustrated woman seeking justice for her slain son. I have personally never seen a mainstream article (this is an underground magazine from 1964) that gave Marguerite anything but body blows, using her as a punching bag to convince everybody about how bad her son must have been, since his mother was such a mercenary and silly clod.
But of even greater interest, to me, was the experience the writer of the article, Harold Feldman, had with Helen Markham and her husband. Who was Markham? She was the witness who identified Oswald in a lineup as having shot Officer J. D. Tippit half an hour before Oswald’s arrest in a movie theater where, according to several witnesses, Oswald had been au locale for half an hour.
The troubling truth is that we cannot be certain who ducked into the theater without paying fifteen minutes after Oswald was reported to have gone into the theater, where he purchased a bag of popcorn for himself and then proceeded, after a stint in the balcony, to go to the main floor and sit beside several different people, as if seeking a contact among them (his final choice was a pregnant woman). We do know that a witness reported seeing an Oswald lookalike being removed forcibly from the back of the theater while Oswald was being dragged out the front. For years the witness thought Oswald was taken away through the back door of that theater. It doesn’t help matters that police reported finding a wallet at the Tippit murder scene with Oswald’s ID in it at almost the same time that police in the patrol car, driving from the theater, reported finding a wallet on Oswald’s person with Oswald ID. An overkill of evidence in this case – and not the only instance of such – does not set our minds at ease.
Nor does the fact that “Dallas DNA” has uncovered way too many innocents convicted of crimes they never committed in that famed bastion of Texas justice and police integrity. A glance at the Internet brings forth a few interesting websites:
About the Show : Dallas DNA : Investigation Discovery
Backed by the Innocence Project of Texas, this is a groundbreaking project to open the Texas Justice system and get many people exonerated.
investigation.discovery.com/tv/dallas-dna/about.html - Cached -
'Dallas DNA' questions strength of our convictions 28 Apr 2009 ... No other reality show on television can offer a prize even close to the one given to the winners on Investigation Discovery's new "Dallas ...
Feldman, author of “The Unsinkable Marguerite Oswald” related a disturbing event that I had never seen quoted anywhere until researcher Linda Minor brought it up: Feldman actually took Marguerite Oswald to meet Helen Markham and her husband. He wanted to check out Helen’s story about seeing Oswald shoot Tippit for himself, since it is well known that Markham had been coached to pick out Oswald in the line-up. Here’s a little of what Feldman had to say about the visit:
So we would be wise to ask ourselves just how much Lee Oswald thought he could trust those right-wing folks in Dallas who so quickly befriended him and his wife. The “official version” does have its flaws.
An examination of Dautch’s references show that all of them come from “Oswald-did-it” sources, especially from the “official version” biography, Marina and Lee, by Patricia McMillan. In fact, this entire damning essay about Lee Oswald makes use of only four sources, of the thousands available. And all of them are notoriously hostile concerning the accused assassin. The Warren Commission Report and Marina and Lee are used as sources for 23 of the 26 citations. The other two sources are Oswald’s Game, by Jean Davison (2 citations), and Case Closed by Gerald Posner (1 citation).
It’s only fair that we should look a few more places for information about Bouhe and why he was upset about the fact that Oswald didn’t tell him he correct address. Here is what A. J. Weberman says about Bouhe (most of his information is revelatory, though I don’t always agree with his analyses—but then, he didn’t know Oswald):
“ …OSWALD'S whereabouts from October 19, 1962, to November 2, 1962, were not discoverable by the Warren Commission. He was not with Marina Oswald, who had moved out of their apartment on Mercedes Street in Fort Worth that OSWALD had rented in August 1962. With the help of Russian exile George Bouhe who had contact with the Texas Employment Commission, OSWALD was referred to the Jagger-Chiles-Stovall Photographic Company on October 11, 1962. On October 12, 1962, he began work there as a trainee. From October 9, 1962, when OSWALD listed Gary Taylor's address on his application for a Post Office Box, until October 11, 1962, OSWALD was [also] unaccounted for.”(Nodule 10)
Stop the presses! Bouhe had referred Lee to the Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall job where Lee told me he had memorized maps (this is a direct contradiction to what George DeMohrenschild said, according to researcher Bruce Campbell Adamson -- that Lee got his job through an employment agency. I’ll go with Adamson’s statement until corrected, since in New Orleans, Lee preended to get his job through an employment agency: that was his regular explanation for both pre-arranged jobs.). Lee worked at J-C-S six days a week, usually alone there on Saturdays. Later, JCS bosses would say Oswald was a very poor worker who caused problems—if so, why did he get so much overtime, and why do we have meticulous record-keeping by Oswald, showing consistent and constant work completed? Lee told me he was forced to leave J-C-S as his work there for a government agency assignment was finished. JCS did all kinds of photography work, but they also created classified maps for the Department of Defense.
Robert Walker stated that he interviewed a part-JGS owner, Bill Chiles.
He reported to a newsgroup on Aug 13, 2007 that “Bill stated that Oswald was generally a crappy employee, that we [sic] wore thick black military-type boots, was surly, and to the concern of Bill at least, walked around speaking in Russian….Bill told me the [sic] hired Oswald through the state employment agency (whatever that was at the time)… Since they did some work for the US Government, Bill was concerned about this guy enough to call the FBI. Bill told the FBI that this guy named Oswald was clunking around in military boots, speaking in Russian and making a nuisance of himself. Bill said the FBI put him on hold, and then came back with (and I am paraphrasing here) "...yeah, we know about Oswald, he's okay."
However, Lee told me that near the end of what he considered a good assignment that he liked there, that he had to provide an excuse to get asked to leave. Peculiarly, Lee did not tell me that he was fired, but only asked to leave. Could it be possible that Chiles is repeating some old lines from a script played out years earlier? Let’s look a little closer at Lee’s work record at J-C-S:
First of all, Lee was working at least 54 hours a week, as his own hand-written work records reveal.
A typical work day for Oswald was more than 9 hours---about 56 hours a week, not 40 hours a week as reported by Dautch. So who is doing the lying now?
Mr. Chiles still complains, decades later, that Oswald was a poor worker. But why? Would Oswald be working there so many weeks, including overtime-- and get paid for it—if he happened to be such a poor employee?
Let’s look at what one researcher found out: “Innocent looking Gates
Advertisement leads us to Lee Harvey Oswald! “
A blogger (http://press.kscdirect.com/?p=2330 posted an article (in 2007, I’m told) where he relates to us what he learned in the “official version” about Oswald working at J-C-S. It’s the negative stuff we’ve already heard about. But then he does some thinking for himself.
“OK, now all of the above is the “official” story of Oswald’s work history with Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall. Some theories point out some other information and testimony that leads to conjecture.
For instance…Oswald’s meticulously kept logs… seem to show a very hard worker who frequently put in extra hours. In fact, he was such a highly regarded employee that he frequently was allowed to work in the building on the weekends, all by himself. So did he see classified material? No one seems to know for sure, but it’s doubtful that Mr. Stovall would have wanted to admit as much before the Warren Commission. But some of Oswald’s co-workers suggested that might have been the case. The main work that Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall did for the DoD involved maps, including maps of Cuba which Oswald may or may not have memorized. Who knows?”
[insert from this witness --Judyth Vary Baker: I know. Lee told me he had memorized maps about Cuba when he was in Texas to prepare himself for a possible assignment into Cuba. Lee loved maps and could rattle off not only every city and town, but even the names of rivers, mountains and coves in Cuba. I have mentioned this since 1999.]
“Doesn’t it seem odd that a hard worker who worked long hours and kept such meticulous logs would be fired for “inefficiency, lack of precision, (and) inattention”. One theory holds that Oswald was let go on April 1st so he could pursue the career picked out for him by the CIA (or other entity): the April 10th attempted assassination of General Edwin Walker. Oh my, this just keeps getting better and better!
Very interesting sidenote: As noted above, Oswald was fired from Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall on April 1, 1963. That happens to be the day after the famous pictures of him holding a rifle in his backyard were taken by his wife, Marina. That is of course assuming that she was actually the person who took the pictures. They could be fakes, right?”
(Source retrieved: press.kscdirect.com/?p=233 March, 2010.)
[note from Judyth Vary Baker: Lee was told he was fired on April 1st, but continued working through April 6.] Please see Dr. James Fetzer and Jim Marrs’ front-page Op-Ed article about the fakery associated with the infamous backyard photos, at:
Poor Marina Oswald was under great pressure to lie.
It seems all sorts of people are lying concerning the article “Lee’s Lies.” But let us continue with our discussion and observations. So far, Dautch hasn’t impressed us with anything close to accuracy. He mentioned Lee having a forty-hour work week when it was generally 54 hours a week. But we will be generous. He was quoting the Warren Report. It’s not constructed to make Oswald look decent, let alone a hard worker. Remember that the next time you read in Wikipedia that ‘two government investigations concluded that Oswald killed Kennedy.’ Surely our boy Dautch is going to come up with something that can blacken Oswald’s character without any doubts or restrictions. He next accusation is a doozy, and seems to fit the bill—about Lee Oswald, his wife and the matter of paying for the treatment of their sick baby, June Lee, at Parkland Hospital:
“Lee and Marina's infant daughter, June, became sick and had to be taken to (of all places) Parkland Memorial Hospital, where President Kennedy was taken after being fatally wounded. Lee felt he would be unable to pay the bill, and consequently told an incredible series of lies to try to avoid paying for June's treatment (which consisted only of brief examinations for the baby's fever of 103 degrees). He lied about his address, said he was not employed (he was, at an advertising photography firm called Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, making as much as $1.50 per hour for a forty-hour work week [note from JVB: we can’t blame Dautch for just looking at the Official Version of Lee’s 56-hour-work weeks at J-C-S: apparently he believed the Warren Report which says: “He worked a 40-hour week at approximately $1.35 per hour” (Appendix 13, p 719)]…
“… and that he did not receive unemployment compensation of any kind.(15) Finally, Lee received, and paid, a bill for only two dollars.(16)
Time to see if there are any problems with this story.
We find from WC testimony that the witness to the event, Lydia Dymitruk, was not yet an American citizen. Russian-born; she says she was a friend of Bouhe, who met the Oswalds at George DeMohrenschildt’s home (she calls him, familiarly, “George” in her testimony). The account given by Mrs. Dymitruk is at first sight 100% believable, and Lee Oswald comes off looking very badly: the baby had been ill at least three days, and Oswald did not want to take the baby to the hospital because he said they couldn’t afford it. Mrs. Dymitruk [though unmarried, on her own in the US at that time, she is identified as a married woman by the WC ] stated that Oswald and his wife argued about taking the baby to the hospital. It seems that Oswald did not think the baby was that sick and did not want to spend the money.
Mr. JENNER. He did not want to go?
Mrs. DYMIITRUK. …no. So then he decide that he want to go to the hospital
and take his baby. I said, “All right.” So, we went to the hospital and we found a doctor. And there were children waiting and we wait. So he took care of the baby. He-the doctor took a blood test and took a X-ray-a lung X-ray and, I don’t know, all kind of tests, right away. So, on the way back-he got some kind of papers, I think it was two copies or
three copies of papers-
Mr. JENNER. From the hospital?
Mrs. DYMITRUK. From the doctor to go to the service desk….so.copies of papers-
Mr. JENNER. From the hospital?
Mrs. DYMITRUK. From the doctor to go to the service desk.
Mk. JENNER. Yes.
Mrs. DYMIITRUK. So, at the service desk-he was standing here [indicating],
I was behind him, and Marina was behind me with the baby… the
service desk asked question-the address and if he’s working, and he said “No.”
Mr. JENKER. Not working?
Mrs. DYMITRUK. No. ‘Then she said, “Do you have unemployment-do you
get some unemployment money?”
He said “No”
And she’ said: “ Well, how do you live then?”
He said, “Well, friends helping me.”
And Marina-she was behind me-and she says, “What a liar !”
And they argue again.
[WHOA! Our witness is telling the WC that way back in November, 1962, not very long in the USA, Marina Oswald understood the questions the service desk attendant asked Lee Oswald in English ---about whether he was employed, whether he had unemployment checks, and so on – and that Marina, elsewhere described as knowing only the words “yes” and “no” in English, pointing at things in the grocery store, as described by George DeMohrenschildt, here clearly understands what Lee Oswald is being asked in English, and she is disgusted and angry. Right in the hospital, she starts arguing with Oswald!]
Mr. JENNEK They argued-
Mrs. DYMITRUK. Yeah. You know, one thing, he said, “1 don’t want to pay
any penny. It’s suppose to be free. Doctors and everything in Russia is free.
It’s suppose to be free here, too.”
I didn’t like that at all. I was disgusted.
Mr. JENNEB. You were disgusted-
Mrs. DYMITBUK. Yes. [pp. 67-68]
.[I am rather worried that this testimony is accepted at face value, since in November, 1963, over a year later, Marine Oswald states that she cannot speak or understand any English and had been isolated from learning any English by her husband. However, I understood from Lee that Marina did know English. Perhaps Marina “blew her cover” by saying that Lee was lying to the person at the service desk.
That she knew English must be established now, as my witness, Anna Lewis, relates how Marina called Anna at her work at Thompson’s Restaurant, in New Orleans, asking if her husband was there. Anna, knowing very well that Lee and I had miserable marriages and were having an affair, replied that she never kept tabs like that on her customers. How did Marina know about Thompson’s restaurant? Answer: the restaurant gave away free matches with covers showing the restaurant’s name, address and phone number, and both Lee and I brought them home to light our gas stoves.
==MARINA OSWALD AND HER KNOWLEDGE OF ENGLISH===
[By the way, people change. What I mention here is the Marina Oswald who was an orphan, forced to find a way for herself in a hostile world where her only way to be employed and rise in the world was through cooperation with her government in certain affairs with foreign men, and an education (she got a degree in Pharmacy).
We are not in her shoes and it’s cruel to judge her. She raised two daughters who became responsible, fine citizens despite the onus and pressure on her and on them. Marina worked for years in Dallas at an Army-Navy store and had another child by a second marriage. I repeat—people change. Now to the facts of the girl who met Lee when she was 19 years old: only a portion of the article is mentioned here. For more details, visit: http://oswaldsmother.blogspot.com/2009/10/from-marina-prusakova-with-love.html]
“From Marina Prusakova, with Love” by George Bailey
One apparent falsehood Marina maintained for years is that she did not speak English when she arrived in America with her defector husband. In her Warren Commission testimony she required the need of a translator to answer questions. Years later in Garrison grand jury testimony, when asked who she spoke to when they landed in New York, she said no one as she didn’t speak English. In fact she stated numerous times in her testimony that she didn’t speak English at all in her first years in America. She also said in grand jury testimony that back in 1963 she was taking English lessons from George Bola who just happened to be Jack Ruby’s next-door neighbor. However, her statements of not being able to speak and understand English is at odds with the facts as we now know them.
Here is a list of points that dispel this myth:
In 1961 while still in Russia, Lee mails Marina a letter written in English… Robert Webster, another American defector, said he knew Marina and she spoke good English with a heavy accent…Descriptions on the back of photos taken in Russia are in Marina’s handwriting in Russian and English…Warren Commission, CE-100. Marina’s stenographic notebook found by the Dallas Police written in English. They also found a second notebook with Marina’s handwriting in English. There are other notebooks with her English writing in the National Archives.
• Business manager James Martin testified that she understood everything said to her in English…Robert Oswald in an FBI affidavit said Marina spoke to him in English, without a translator, in regards to a business contract with James Martin. A contract written only in English… Marguerite Oswald in Warren Commission testimony mentions numerous conversations with Marina—all in English…Marina gets trapped in Garrison grand jury testimony saying she called Reily Coffee Company looking for Lee. She was asked how should could do that, she replied she knew “a few words.”
Though filled with inconsistencies in the evidence the WC fails to explore these apparent contractions. As usual, don’t tell us more than we want to know. Marina knowing English well enough to write and speak would raise questions of where she learned it; she was after all, a graduate of pharmacy school. And why would she need it anyway? She would only need if she were an operative for the State. And Oswald was not the only American defector she met in Russia. She also met and spoke with Robert Webster, though she denies this though her address book had the address of the apartment building he stayed in.
Interestingly, Lee Oswald spoke excellent Russian but not much of it in Russia. Befriended by the Ziger family, they report Oswald only spoke in English with their father translating. We know from released transcripts that his apartment was bugged by the KGB and fluent Russian speaking could have brought about an arrest for espionage. The Russians were already suspicious of him upon his arrival. It seems he only spoke Russian to Marina as she said he spoke well enough to have a Baltic accent. But why did he trust her to the exclusion of all others? It may be that she was an operative and needed him as her ticket out of Russia and into the United States. Former KGB defector, Petr Deryabin said that any Russian woman that wanted to marry a foreigner and leave had to agree
to work for the KGB. Marina got her permission slip fast—in 7 days. Marriage certificates were issued by the secret police, which were also issued promptly.”
…[She marries a] foreigner after only knowing him for 6 weeks, having a child with him, and then uprooting her life to move to another country where she does not speak the language (obviously false) or know anyone ….If she married a foreigner to come over to play spy all plans were shattered with the assassination of John Kennedy. The KGB wanted no part of that. For the Warren Commission she went along with the flow. Now she says her late husband was innocent of any crime. “
So Marina knew English well enough to understand that her husband had lied. I note that the hospital sent the baby home after the tests, only handing them a bill. The witness said she drove them home again. Little June was at the right age for having fevers from teething. There is no mention of stopping at a pharmacy, or of any medications ordered. Perhaps Oswald lied for a good reason: they had recently moved to a new apartment, trying to patch up their shaky marriage, and money was tight. They would visit Robert Oswald, Lee’s brother, that Thanksgiving, in a family get-together. General reports abound that Oswald adored June and cared about her health. He was not so assiduous about Marina’s health, failing to get her much-needed dental treatment that year. Marina’s friends in Dallas got her teeth taken care of. The marriage was not going well: the couple had serious physical battles going on until they split again and Oswald moved to New Orleans. After Marina rejoined Oswald in New Orleans, physical abuse on his part ceased, as noted by researchers. Their inability to get along may explain some of Oswald’s actions during this period.
But Dautch doesn’t see it that way:
“At this point, Lee's lies had now included his wife, those who tried to befriend him, and hospital personnel who only wanted to help improve the health of his only daughter. The web of deception was growing ever larger.”
But was it? Oswald and his family returned to the US in June, 1962. The incident at the hospital apparently occurred well after November 17. The family had been in Texas close to six months by that time, and if they had been there only another fortnight, they would have qualified for vastly reduced rates due to their very low income level. Lee
Oswald lies and says he isn’t employed. Even so, he doesn’t get ‘free’ treatment—but he pays only the equivalent of $20 in today’s fund—a true pittance.
Interestingly, it is Ruth Paine who lied about the “six month rule” concerning Parkland and charges for Marina Oswald in the third week of October, 1963 when she arranged for vastly reduced rates for Rachel’s birth there, asserting that Marina had been living in Texas for six months, when in fact, Marina had been outside Texas between May and September of 1963 and no longer qualified for reduced fees. So Ruth Paine lied, just as Lee Oswald did, about hospital charges.
But we do have to chalk this one up as a real LIE. Good going, Mr. Dautch! What does he have to show us next?
“Oswald purchased two firearms in the year 1963, both of which would be implicated in the Kennedy Assassination and the subsequent murder of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit. In ordering the firearms, he lied about two major pieces of information, one of which did not seem to present Oswald with an advantage of any kind. When purchasing the rifle, he lied about his name, citing it as "A. Hidell" on the money order when sending away for the gun on March 12, 1963 to Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago for the total sum of $21.45.(17) “
Dautch assumes the firearms were purchased by Oswald. Linda Minor and others have assembled much information contending that he did not. In fact, the very name “Hidell” has been found on other ID cards One researcher, who is basically anti-Oswald, wrote:
“The best explanation that I have read on the origin of the Hidell name is from Dick Russell's book on Richard Case Nagell. The "Hid" part of the name is an acronym for HQ Intelligence Division, which was a branch of Army Intelligence active in the Far East. The "ell" part of the name comes from the last three names of the surname of the man who gave Oswald his alias--Nagell himself. The Man Who Knew Too Much (NY: Carroll and Graf, 1992, pp. 170-174).
From my own blog:
Controversy in the case resides in the fact that Oswald, and the rifle associated with the murder of JFK, cannot be decisively linked to each other. Lee Harvey Oswald indeed was accused of using a 6.5 x 52 mm Italian Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifle, serial number C2766. And it is true that the rifle was sold as military surplus through Klein's Sporting Goods Company. However, records indicate that
Oswald was at work at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall at the time he supposedly mailed a money order and order form to obtain the rifle.
Oswald kept a meticulous work sheet, accounting for what he was doing every fifteen minutes or so. The order for the rifle was sent from a post office over 6 miles distant. Oswald's lunch period was too short to have made the trip there and back, as he had no car and bus service to there did not exist. Further, [according to testimony] Oswald never left his workplace with others. The order was sent from Dallas to Chicago, IL but arrived, somehow, the very next day, even though it was not sent air mail. Atop that, the order was filled that same day and the rifle was shipped the same day --we are talking about some 24 hours of elapsed time between Dallas and the rifle getting shipped out-- a physical impossibility at the time.
The serial number of the money order form used shows it was issued late in 1963, not in 1962. The order form was also sloppily written, when Oswald, in fact, due to problems with dyslexia, always carefully printed out such forms. A second order form, for a revolver 'discovered' later, is carefully printed, as if forgers finally learned how to create a better forgery. Belief that the order form was manufactured to frame Oswald is also based on the fact that no box of cartridges was ever found in Oswald's possessions, and that only four bullets could be found. It implies that Oswald never fired the rifle before Nov. 22nd because he had no ammunition.
Dautch is correct that by using the name “Hidell” that Oswald obtained no advantage by doing so. In fact, “Hidell” is the ONLY link between the gun purchases and Oswald—through an ID card the WC wants us to believe was cooked up while he worked at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.. But then, Lee Oswald was supposed to have trekked some 6 miles without a car on his half-hour lunch break to mail one of the mail-order coupons from a post office further away than a nearby drop-box. And quite surprising about “Hidell”—–James Fetzer vetted the witness, Chauncey Holt, who said HE made the ID for Oswald. Holt’s daughter, Karyn, told me she agreed on that matter as well.
Dautch doesn’t give the reader a clue that there is another side to the “Hidell” story. Why didn’t Dautch tell us about the problem with the Klein order? Why didn’t he mention Chauncy Holt ? Perhaps Holt isn’t mentioned because he has been systematically discredited on “official version” websites, despite the fact that photographs of Holt have been identified by a forensics expert: see Wim Dankbaar’s information about Holt at http://www.JFKmurdersolved.com , and be sure to visit the Forum located there.
Along with civil debate at the Deep Politics Forum, at http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com, which I hope will continue to honor Peter Dale Scott, who has done so much to open the eyes of America about Kennedy’s murder, Dankbaar’s website is the only one that presents information about James Files, the only person whose confession to having shot at Kennedy has been steadily attacked by the Oswald-did-it contingent. This suggests to me that James Files’ account needs to be taken more seriously, particularly since his confession has been subjected to a voice-stress analysis test where Files came out looking pretty good.
To return to our problems with the Klein order, there is so much wrong about the Klein order that it would take an entire essay to show how far from the truth Mr. Dautch has taken the reader by now. I am tempted to call his article “Dautch’s Lies” at this point.
He even believes that “Hidell” is pronounced the way marina told everybody:
“Hidell, which rhymes with the name of Oswald's political hero "Fidel,"”… was the fictitious name of the only member of Oswald's Fair Play for Cuba Committee.(18) Prior to this, when purchasing the .38 special Smith and Wesson revolver cited as the murder weapon against Officer Tippit, he claimed his age was 28, when in fact he was 23 at the time. It was not necessary for Oswald to tell this lie, since at the age of 23 he was easily old enough to purchase a gun, and revealing his actual age to Klein's would not have been problematic in the least.(19)
=== Let’s be reasonable. If Lee Oswald used a fake name, why would he use a REAL birthdate? First we have to determine that Lee wrote out the order, which Dautch entirely neglects to prove. I have serious doubts about the authenticity of the first form “found” after seeing how sloppily it was made out:
You can have all the tiny arrows you like, pointing to where it’s “Oswald’s handwriting” but nothing can make up for the sloppiness used to fill out the form, and Oswald wasn’t sloppy on order forms. He could be sloppy on envelopes and letters, where an error could be easily corrected. If we ignore this matter, there is a more important one, regarding the length of the rifle barrel that was ordered. Researcher Tom Purvis stated the problem well, in a post to an Internet forum:
Thomas H. Purvis
Aug 25 2005, 04:43 AM
Many persons have argued the premise that LHO ordered the 36-inch length TS Carbine, and therefore, this is what he should have received from Klein's.
However, the Klein's documents claim that the weapon shipped to LHO, serial# C2766 was one of 100 rifles which were 40.2-inchs in length (Short Rifle), and of which C2766 was one of these rifles which was ultimately shipped to LHO.
In support of this claim, the WC & Kleins have provided the order; shipping; & receiving invoices (previously referenced), as well as the packing list for each of the ten crates of rifles shipped. These packing list were completed by Crescent Firearms and included with each carton/crate of rifles shipped and which constitutes the listing by serial number of the 10 weapons shipped in each of the 10 cartons/crates which were shipped by Lipschultz Freight and received by Klein's Sporting Goods.
Waldman Exhibit No. 3
Adequate evidence to dispute the claim of the 100 rifle shipment having been the 40.2--inch length Short Rifle has always been available from these documents.
Just that not unlike many other aspects of the evidence, no one has taken the time to evaluate it.
The Shipping Invoice, as completed by Lipschultz Fast Freight, (the shipping company), indicates a total weight for the shipment as having been 750 pounds.
With 10 crates/cartons, this would equate to a weight of 75 pounds per carton.
Therefore, 10 of whatever rifle was shipped, plus the weight of the shipping carton/crate/package which Crescent Firearms packed the 10 weapons in, weighed in at an even 75 pounds.
Unloaded weight for the 6.5mm Carcano M91/38 Short Rifle (40.2 inch length) is 7.6279 pounds per rifle.
Therefore, 10 of these weapons, by themselves, without any shipping carton or crate, would weigh in at 76.279 pounds.
And, 100 of these weapons alone, without the weight of the shipping crates/cartons, would weigh in at 762.79 pounds.
12.79 pounds more than was the total shipping weight of 750 pounds which included the rifles and the cartons/crates/containers in which the rifles were packed.
However, the unloaded weight of the 6.5mm Carcano M91/38 TS Carbine (36 inch length) is 7.0988 pounds per weapon.
10 rifles would equate to 70.988 pounds, and 100 of these rifles would equate to a weight of 709.88 pounds of actual rifle.
Thereby leaving approximately 40.12 pounds of weight for the shipping cartons/crates/containers.
Or, a weight of 4.012 pounds of weight for each of the 10 cartons in which the weapons were shipped.
Based upon the independent and separate weighing of the weapons and their carton/crate/container, by an independent third party, (Lifschultz Freight), these 100 weapons could not have been the 6.5mm Carcano M91/38 Short Rifle, as the weight of the rifles alone would have exceeded the total shipping weight of the rifles and cartons/crates/containers as determined by the shipping company and billed to and paid by Klein's Sporting Goods.
[NOTE by JVB: the weight discrepancy was reported years earlier by John Armstrong, as well]
Lee was careful filling out order forms, employment records, etc., because he had a mild form of dyslexia and could likely wreck the coupon or form. He generally printed them--carefully. Sure enough, by the time the FBI ‘found’ the second coupon, it was nicely PRINTED. Perhaps the forgers involved got better – and learned. This is the other side of the coin, my friends.
I do not see anything in the Klein coupons and orders that should persuade us that Lee Oswald lied. However, we can be persuaded that SOMEBODY likely created some lies about Oswald having ever created the first money order. How BOTH packages arrived THE SAME DAY at the post office is also a matter of interest, since they were ordered separately and on different DAYS.====
The W.C.’s handwriting examiners concluded that almost everything they had was written by Oswald, including the order forms.
….but let’s soldier on…..here’s Dautch’s next set of “Lee’s Lies”:
“Lee as Political Activist”
“Speaking of the aforementioned Fair Play for Cuba Committee, the
information provided to pedestrians walking the streets of New Orleans also contained a number of less than truthful statements. First of all, the pamphlet, distributed in early June 1963, contained the name "A.J. Hidell," Oswald's alternate identity (rhyming with "Fidel," as mentioned earlier).
[and which pronunciation JVB contends is not true, as mentioned earlier…]
“Oswald would also have Marina sign the name "Hidell", who was "President" of the New Orleans Chapter of the F.P.C.C., on Oswald's so-called membership card.(20) “
===Poor Marina! She testified that Lee Oswald forced her to write the false name “Hidell” on Oswald’s FPCC membership card, and that she didn’t want to do anything nasty like that. Let’s think about this for a moment. The Warren Commission said “Purtell and McNally conclude the name "A. J. Hidell" was written on the 1963 Fair Play for Cuba card by the same person who wrote the exemplars attributed to Marina Oswald.”
We know Marina Oswald wrote addresses in English on letters she wrote while in the US. She was able to handle cursive English, even as she was telling people she could not understand any form of English. Cursive, of course, is an advanced way to write English for foreigners, who begin with block letters. The ‘ignorant’ Marina is forced to sign “Hidell” for Lee Oswald -- because she is perfectly able to do so. Her objections to doing so may be regarded as an example of her dedication to total honesty, such as her testimony regarding her inability to understand English. Though we are looking at a list of “Lee’s Lies” we somehow keep adding items to a list of “Marina’s Lies.”
============Dautch continues on:
“Secondly, the pamphlet stated that "lectures" would be included in Committee Activities, although he would undoubtedly have been the only person doing any "lecturing."(21)
===But Mr. Dautch, if nobody joined, why hold lectures? Talk about fishing for something to object to! Oswald actually wasn’t interested in holding meetings or having anybody “join” –he was interested –and so was the CIA and the FBI – in who took handbills. Who would be interested. Who would care about contacting Oswald about the FPCC. More than anything else, Oswald was creating an image for himself as a pro-Castroite—even though he had been seen working with Guy Banister: even the researcher Reitzes [before he turned into a McAdams acolyte] has provided convincing information about Lee Oswald working with Guy Banister, as reported by the noted historian and
Michael Kurtz to researcher D. Reitzes: (those of you who already know this information can scroll down to my comments on the matter):
"One feature of Oswald's five-month sojourn in New Orleans that has never been revealed is the fact that he made several trips to Baton Rouge in the summer of 1963. According to witnesses, Oswald accompanied a prominent leader of the White Citizens' Council and of other segregationist organizations to Baton Rouge six or eight times in July and August…Oswald…was wearing what appeared to be 'dressy clothes.’…
"…in May 1963, Michael Kurtz attended an informal meeting in an unoccupied LSU-NO classroom where Guy Banister debated a number of students on the issue of integration. Banister was introduced by an LSU student named George Higganbothan.”
“ Kurtz knew of Banister; he'd seen him on campus on perhaps a half-dozen occasions to this and would see him a few times more. Guy Banister brought a young man to the meeting with him; Banister introduced the young man…Lee Oswald. Banister debated integration with the students, arguing for a return to full segregation and criticizing the group for attending an integrated school. ..”(Author's interview of October 5, 1998).”
“George Higgenbothan told Kurtz that Oswald and Banister made a second visit to LSU, however, and the second time it was the alleged leftist OSWALD who argued passionately against desegregation” (Interview with
Michael L. Kurtz, December 2, 1998). Higgenbothan had told the Orleans Parish DA's office in 1967 that he indeed had known Oswald (Garrison files)…Kurtz saw Banister and Oswald together once more, when he was working that summer for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, located across the street from the Newman Building at 544 Camp Street and 531 Lafayette…After the assassination, Kurtz informed the FBI of Oswald's connection to Banister. "They didn't seem too interested," he says. Kurtz wrote a book about the assassination in 1978, Crime of the Century: The Kennedy Assassination from a Historian's Perspective, in which he mentioned the incident in passing. (The book was reissued in 1993 with some new material; the Oswald-Banister incidents are discussed on pages xxxviii-xl of the introduction.)…”
How much of this information does Dautch bring up? None of it. Dautch never tells the reader that the Fair Play for Cuba Committee matter was possibly run by Oswald to attract pro-Catroites, and that the CIA and FBI wanted the FPCC to be associated with communists so it could get discredited. Oswald wrote to the Communist Party during this same time period.
If Oswald was posing for the FBI/CIA in the matter, then the FPCC chapter he organized, that never had a meeting and never had a list of members, was simply a ploy-- and of course, it will be replete with all the trappings of a ploy. Though Dautch plods on, the reader needs to keep in mind that the FPCC activities involving Lee Oswald may have been conducted for reasons uninspected by Dautch:
“Finally, the pamphlet by its nature, mentioning prominently the "New Orleans Charter Member Branch," clearly implied that the organization was quite large, when in truth Oswald was its one and only member. Now, Oswald's web of deception was growing to include people he did not even know.”
How one can say that designating an organization as a Chapter, in order to start the organization, constitutes a “lie” because the chapter was not “quite large” as its name “implied”? The very word “Branch” actually implies that it’s just a twig, not a mighty oak yet. Hmmmmm! Is this the best Dautch can do? He plods on to his next argument, which seems to be crafted to convince only those who never look at any other article about Oswald:
“Oswald was not reluctant to lie to the United States government, including statements he made to Agent Louis Quigley of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). While being held on the charge of disturbing the peace, Oswald asked to speak to an FBI agent, who turned out to be Quigley.”
It happens to be Saturday, when the FBI office downtown is essentially closed – but lo and behold, a guy who was arrested for handing out pamphlets asks for an FBI agent to come visit him—and somebody shows up. Oswald and three others were arrested, but only Oswald ended up getting charged – he was the “pro Castro sympathizer” after all.
But Dautch is telling us something that’s rather extraordinary—that he is somebody the FBI would respond to. The event would be recorded in the FBI office. If Oswald was trying to establish credentials to enter Cuba safely, an FBI interrogation after being arrested as a pro-Castro sympathizer would help. It would provide Oswald with a patina of importance, should he enter Cuba for the US government. Whether Quigley knew it or not, this was all part of a sheep-dipping operation to create a legend for Lee Oswald as “pro-Castro.”
He needed it. Oswald had been on campuses until college classes closed down for the summer, with former FBI agent and anti-Castro activist Guy Banister. Now he had to erase all that conservative crud clinging to him, and create a new persona. But Dautch
makes no comment about any of that. It is obviously not his job to introduce the other side of things at any time– we have had to do that for you. Dautch hurries on to make his next point:
“Oswald told Agent Quigley about some very basic personal information which the Bureau knew to be false.(22) For example, Oswald lied about Marina's maiden name, claiming it was "Prossa" and claimed to have been married to her in Fort Worth, TX. When these comments are taken in combination with Oswald's reticence on the topic of the F.P.C.C. and its specific details in talking with Quigley, the interview essentially boiled down to Oswald requesting permission to talk to the FBI purely so he could lie to them.”
Comment: If Lee Oswald planned to go into Cuba and wanted this record to show he was “pro-Castro” he would not necessarily give 100% correct information. Why should he? Would he tell the U.S. FBI his Russian wife’s real name? On the other hand, how much of the information the FBI gave us about this interview can be trusted? Look elsewhere for evidence rigging, such as the disappearance of Oswald’s Minox spy camera. The FBI pressured the Dallas Police to change the Minox camera –used by spies—to a Minox “light meter.” As if the man would own a Minox light meter –and rolls of Minox film, too -- but not the camera? However, the camera had a unique number if it had been issued for spy purposes. It therefore had to vanish. Not only does evidence vanish, but also articvles about the evidence: Dr. Howard Platzman’s article about the Minox cannot be found (at least by me, today, in June, 2010) has vanished, while an Oswald-did-it website proclaims that nobody can ‘prove’ the Minox ever existed. That same website attacks me, as well, because I—a living witness- saw the Minox on May 9, 1963, in New Orleans, the day Lee Oswald and I were hired together by the William B. Reily Coffee Company.
Getting tired of Dautch’s omissions? We’re almost finished.
Lee's "Revolutionary Resume"
Later in the summer of 1963, Oswald spent a good deal of time preparing, for the New York School for Marxist Study, a resume of his life and many of the activities it had (or had not) included. Often referred to as the "Revolutionary Resume" (for reasons I will discuss momentarily), it spoke of time he spent as a "Radio Speaker and Lecturer" (he was once soundly routed in a radio debate in New Orleans),
But Oswald was on TV briefly, was in a 5-minue radio interview, and then was in a nearly half-hour radio debate with three others. … “soundly routed” hardly describes the situation, where Oswald held up well against three others, only being flustered when his defection was brought up, out of the blue. Listen to the ‘debate’ yourself online – and you’ll possibly agree with me that this 23-year-old young man did well—though that is hardly the point. He was a “radio speaker” – and yes, he was a “lecturer” – which matter is totally ignored by Dautch. Dautch never mentions any debates on campus with Banister. Remember this?:
George Higgenbothan told Kurtz that Oswald and Banister made a second
visit to LSU, however, and the second time it was the alleged leftist
OSWALD who argued passionately against desegregation (Interview with Michael L. Kurtz, December 2, 1998, by D. Reitzes)
Nor does Dautche reveal that Oswald spoke for an hour and ten minutes at Spring Hill College, lecturing a full hall of graduate students studying for the priesthood at Seminary, there, accompanied by their professors, who were mostly astute Jesuits. Oswald then fielded questions for another twenty minutes. Why does Dautch not mention this? [The Jesuits would have reminded Dautch that omission is a sin, just as is commission.]
“ ….his "Street Agitation" (a reference to the time
Correction: we have two leaflettting events in New Orleans, one in Dallas, and one at the Dumaine Wharf (which was street-side), One resulted in arrest…the Dumaine Wharf event resulted in a warning…nor is there any mention of Oswald’s being among those who demonstrated against Adlai Stevenson…we might say Oswald stretched things a bit, but again, as his actions with banister, etc. demonstrate, he was writing up these ‘credentials’ to look good to the enemy, which did not happen to be the USA (Dautch would no doubt disagree).
“…..he handed out the F.P.C.C. documents in New Orleans, for which he was arrested and soon released after a charge of disturbing the peace was filed), an "Organizer" (meaning, presumably, the one-man New Orleans Chapter of the F.P.C.C. itself), a "Photographer" (meaning the time he spend working at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall),
Whoops! Yet another error on Dautch’s part. Oswald owned sophisticated camera equipment and George DeMohrenschildt commented on the fine quality of Oswald’s framed black-and-white photos, which Oswald had dark-room processed himself. Oswald placed “photographer” on many of his job application forms and it was his desire to work as a photographer; simply because he could not get hired as one does not mean that he was “just” a J-C-S employee—he was doing photo pre-productions, worked with mattes and Exacto knives there (personal knowledge) and blew up or reduced photos. Where is the “lie” here? It is Dautch who is hiding many details from the reader.
“…a "Marxist," "Defector," and "Resident of U.S.S.R."(23)
Remember for whom this was written. Is Dauch trying to tell us that Lee Oswald was NOT a defector? Not a Marxist? At last—a glimmer of hope for Dautch! But no—he also mentions “Resident of U.S.S.R” – does he imply this is a lie, too? At any rate, having described the document and its mixed bag of “qualifications”, Dautch then states:
“…Later, Oswald took this resume to Mexico City, hoping to impress the Cuban Embassy with the qualifications it represented. Oswald wanted to gain entry to Cuba in order to fight for the man he often called "Uncle Fidel."(24)
We have Marina (as always, a reliable witness) telling us what Oswald thought of “Uncle Fidel” – and then we have the truth, of which Dautch has nary a clue. Oswald had an assignment in Mexico City –not the subject of his paper—and prepared information he felt he might need to fulfill it. The whole incident must be the focus of another paper. But briefly, Dautch’s omission of such items as REAL lectures betrays only his own reluctance to be totally honest.
“On October 14, 1963, Oswald rented an eight-by-twelve foot room at 1026 North Beckley Street, in Dallas' Oak Cliff neighborhood, using the name O.H. Lee. At this point, Oswald was lying to virtually anyone who asked what his name was, including the landlady and manager at this particular boarding house, Gladys Johnson.(25)
What a big, bad lie! Has anyone looked into what the term “safe house” means?
This is the house to which Oswald fled after the assassination, before the slaying of Officer Tippit.
Even Dautch dare not say Oswald killed JFK and then Tippit, but by using the word ‘fled’ he makes it seem that way. Oswald ‘fled’ – if we are to believe the Warren Commission and the Dallas Police—by means of public transport—a BUS—a CAB—and then, after leaving the boarding house, he ‘fled’ to a movie theater, where he bought popcorn.
Not long after visiting this, his last residence, Oswald was lying yet again.
Lee in Custody
Oswald was questioned about his involvement in both cases between the afternoon of November 22 and the morning of November 24. Although
many of the notes from the interrogation were destroyed, some of Oswald's statements were made on the record.
NOTE: should we trust what police SAY Oswald said? Maybe he said it---but maybe not. We do know that Oswald was not allowed legal representation—while the Official Word from the police actually said Oswald refused a lawyer, though arraigned for two important murders in the middle of the night, out of the public eye, and even though, in public Oswald asked for legal representation, and at another point bitterly sated he had been denied legal representation in what he called a “short and sweet” hearing. So much for what the police reported as to Oswald’s statements, though Dautch wants the reader to believe every word they report.
We cannot take the statements that Dautch offers without a close look at the provenance of each statement. We already have evidence that Dautch will not give us ALL the information—just what he can use that can incriminate Oswald.
Among them were claims that he purchased the revolver in Fort Worth, that he did not receive any packages addressed to "Hidell," at his P.O. Box, such as that which contained the rifle, [but the postal service ‘lost’ the receipts thereof] and that he did not in fact, own a rifle at all….(26) [
I wish to attest here that Oswald also told me he did not own a rifle. He said it could not easily be carried without being noticed. I often consider the fact that Oswald, to “try to shoot Walker” had to transport the rifle on a city bus, then supposedly buried it, unburied it, then supposedly used it, then BURIED it again (!) according to Marina. After a few days. He supposedly unburied the rifle and brought it home again—presumably by bus as well—hidden in what? – a cello case?
Even more telling is Marina’s statement, which I believe was extorted from her, that her husband practiced firing his rifle by shooting at leaves – in the city limits!
“When it was discovered that Oswald was not telling the truth with regard to any of these claims, the lies finally caught up to Oswald--the police and FBI refused to believe much of anything he said.”
This could also be worded the following way: “Kill the President, will you?” was shouted out when Oswald was arrested. He could have been St. Francis of Assisi and they would have assumed he was lying.
“Now, he had nowhere left to turn, no place left to run, no one left to deceive. Lee Harvey Oswald's years of lies had finally caught up
to him. Everything he had gotten away with had come full circle, and he was seemingly paying all at once for a lifetime of deceit.
What Oswald paid for, with his life, was the pricer he paid for serving his country as a spy who could be sacrificed as a patsy by the very government that had trained this young patriot.
Had Oswald trapped himself because, when his penultimate scheme (to get into Cuba) failed and his life was "spinning out of control" (Gerald Posner's term) he resorted in desperation to the one final act that would give him the place in history he believed he deserved?
Dautch must bring this up because nobody has ever been able to establish a TRUE MOTIVE for Oswald’s supposed assassination of a President of which even Marina testified, from Oswald, she had only heard good things.
But then , I suppose we should discard this statement from Marina, since she lied so often. Yet I think I believe her when she said that when she heard Kennedy was dead, she wept. Dautch now wishes the reader to believe that some kind of Karma finally was at work—all those lies had come around full circle, and he was trapped…but did Oswald really want a “place in history he believed he deserved? “
If so, why did Oswald deny killing anybody? A voice stress analysis test proves that Oswald told the truth. VSA analyses are more accurate than lie detector tests. The VSA said Oswald was telling the truth. Place that against what Dautch has to say, and use your good sense.
Or was Oswald's love of spy games, aliases, and false fronts turned against him by people vastly better at that sort of thing than he was?
Only now does Dautch hint that he understands that Oswald was involved in “spy games.” What a “game”—to enter the USSR at the height of the Cold War and to get out alive! See my book Me & Lee –How I Came to Know, Love and Lose Lee Harvey Oswald – for more information about how he managed to do that.
Regardless, it is hard to avoid the feeling that Lee Harvey Oswald's web of deceit wound up ensnaring him.
A professional writer, a lobbyist, has just offered you, the reader, a great example of the kind of disinfo that has paralyzed the American people so that the murder of John F. Kennedy –and those who profited by it—has gone without an honest
government-sponsored investigation. No fox can be expected to guard the henhouse. Lee Oswald was an innocent man. Intelligent readers will find the information is out there. The cat is out of the bag, folks. Enough of us who have survived to speak out to you have come forth with our testimonies. Though Oswald was blamed -- just as the Conspiracists planned – the truth is coming out. Let nothing stop it, for our country’s sake. For the sake of democracy. For the sake of yourselves, and your children.
----References used by the author of “Lee’s Lies” (shame on him!):
1. MacMillan, Priscilla, Marina and Lee, Harper and Row, New York, 1977, p. 62.
3. Ibid., pp. 162-5.
4. Ibid., p. 80.
5. Ibid., p. 115.
6. Ibid., p. 80
7. Ibid., p. 98.
8. Davison, Jean, Oswald's Game, W.W. Norton, New York, 1983, p. 99.
9. Ibid., p. 100.
10. Marina and Lee, p. 117.
11. Ibid., p. 115.
12. Ibid., p. 205.
14. Ibid., p. 205, p. 312.
15. Ibid., p. 236.
17. Warren Commission Report, p. 119.
18. Ibid., p. 122.
19. Marina and Lee, p. 253.
20. Ibid., p. 324.
21. Ibid., p. 321.
22. Warren Commission Report, p. 436.
23. Marina and Lee, p. 364.
24. Ibid., p. 329.
25. Posner, Gerald, Case Closed, Random House, New York, 1993, p. 201.
26. Warren Commission Report, p. 181.
Posted by Judyth Vary Baker at 7:23 PM
Saturday, June 12, 2010
THIS HAPPY MARINE HAS BEEN DESCRIBED AS SULLEN, MOROSE, A LIAR, AND, OF COURSE, AS JOHN F. KENNEDY'S KILLER-WITHOUT-A-REASON. DON'T BELIEVE IT.
LEE'S LIES" RE-EXAMINED
AN ARTICLE, POSTED ON AN ATTACK WEBSITE AGAINST LEE OSWALD, TELLS THE UNINFORMED PERSON THAT LEE OSWALD WAS A CONSUMMATE LIAR. BUT WAS HE LYING BECAUSE HE WAS A BAD GUY, OR DID HE LIE BECAUSE HE WAS A DOUBLE AGENT, WORKING FOR THE CIA? THE ARTICLE, “LEE’S LIES” WAS WRITTEN BY A SOPHISTICATED PROFESSIONALWHO HAS BEEN A LOBBYIST. THIS WRITER KNEW A GREAT DEAL ABOUT LEE H. OSWALD, YET FAILED TO MENTION ANYWHERE IN HIS ARTICLE THAT LEE’S LIES MIGHT HAVE BEEN FOR A HIGHER CAUSE AS A DOUBLE AGENT. EXPLORE THIS ARTICLE WITH ME, AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF IF THE ARTICLE WAS ‘FAIR.’ JVB
Reinvestigating the article
By Brian Dautch TWITTER NAME: DCProgressive
WITH CORRECTIONS AND COMMENTS BY JUDYTH VARY BAKER
• First, who is Brian Dautch? On the Internet, we learn that he has been based in Washington, D.C. He was a former member of the Council for Marketing and Opinion Research, Director of Government Affairs. He was reachable at firstname.lastname@example.org. One Source says:
“Brian D. Dautch is CMOR's Director of Government Affairs. After arriving in Washington in 2001, Brian worked on the U.S. v. Microsoft settlement, then moved into the realm of advocacy, government affairs, and policy analysis with the International Reading Association. He holds a B.A. degree in politics from Ithaca College, a master's degree in political science from Marquette University (note from JVB: the biggest anti-Oswald websites are hosted by Marquette University’s server)., and a law degree from Case Western Reserve University. Brian has spent over 10 years analyzing legislation and lobbying tactics, and has put those skills to use throughout his professional career. A resident of the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, DC, Brian originally hails from Buffalo, NY. “
• Dautch is a strong Democrat who appears to be progressive and well-informed. Who taught him, then, to despise Lee Oswald? Was it Marquette University?
“19 Jan 2010 ... Brian Dautch is a political analyst currently residing in
Washington, DC.” Dautch is intelligent, organized, and “a political analyst.” We are now ready to look at BD’s analysis of Lee Harvey Oswald as an inveterate liar.
Marquette University-supported attack sites against Lee Oswald have an impact nimpact on students and others interested in Lee Harvey Oswald’s life who read the article “Lee’s Lies,” and conclude that Oswald was a lying creep who deserved everything that happened to him. Those of us who knew Oswald personally would have to disagree. BD’s article, below, is presented first with my added comments.. The entire text of concern is then repeated in toto at the end of this discourse.
BEGINNING THE ANALYSIS: PART ONE
“Lee Harvey Oswald was, throughout his life, a liar.”
==This calumnious statement is designed to immediatelyprejudice the reader. It is not factual. Was Lee Oswald a liar at age 1? 2? 8? 10? “a calumnious statement” means “a false and malicious statement designed to injure the reputation of someone.” ==
“He consistently deceived, manipulated, and hoodwinked, with varying degrees of success. The web of deception wove its way through not only strangers and acquaintances, but friends and loved ones as well. In the final analysis, it becomes apparent that Lee Harvey Oswald lied to nearly every person with whom he shared any meaningful encounter, and that the lies are perhaps as strong a testament as any to the path which led him to his ultimate demise.”
==DB essentially repeats his first statement, adding that “Lee’s lies” led ‘to his ultimate demise.” He is establishing a false correlation between lies (“bad person”) and demise (“bad person deserves to die”).==
“To understand that Oswald was a liar is not to necessarily say that he was a lone nut assassin.”
==When damning statements are made, a pretense of ‘balance’ is then offered to the reader, to convince the reader that the accuser is ‘fair’ and ‘honest.’===
“His frequent lies, many to government agencies like the State Department and the FBI, might have marked him as a plausible patsy.”
==DB uses repetition to convince the reader that LHO is a liar. He now links “bad person=liar” to “Patsy” to lead the reader into imagining that LHO’s lies “might have marked him” as a “plausible patsy.” There is no logical connection between “liar” and being a “plausible patsy” however. The argument is simply another opportunity to repeat the “Lee =liar” theme. He more often that is repeated, the more likely the reader is likely to believe the accusation.
In addition, DB is actually doing is saying that it was LHO’s FAULT that he become a patsy, due to his lies. DB has presented no evidence for this, but he influences naïve readers to consider the following links of logical assumptions:
“LIAR = BAD MAN” :: “BAD MAN = DESERVES TO DIE” :: “IT IS OK IF HE BECAME A PATSY BECAUSE HE WAS A BAD MAN.” -- this leads the unsuspecting reader to decide that “Oswald had it coming to him” without a smidgen of evidence yet to be presented.
But the clver writer has now laid the groundwork. Next, he will present a list of “Lee’s lies,” but not before he repeats the “lesson” again, to make sure the reader has “learned” it well: ===
“And his scheming and conniving might suggest that he was the sort who could be manipulated -- hoodwinked, turned into a patsy -- by people who were much more competent schemers and liars than Lee Oswald. “
===There is no logical correlation between a ‘schemer“ and a “conniver” and the ease with which such people can be manipulated. In actuality, most schemers and connivers are NOT easily manipulated. They manipulate others. That’s what their skill set is all about.
But then, LHO could not become a ‘patsy’ that easily, could he? So DB creates the idea that LHO was a ‘stupid’ schemer and conniver: therefore, the “bad” connotation is repeated twice with these two descriptors, and then it is suggested that such a person can be “manipulated.”
DB then launches into his propaganda I have underlined places where there are problems with his argument, with additional comments below:
“Oswald, born in 1939, had begun his term of enlistment in the Marine Corps on October 26, 1956, at the tender young age of 17.(1) A trivial fact on the surface, perhaps, butmeaningful in terms of the chain of events set off by his military stint; many, including his half brother John Pic and his full brother Robert Oswald, presumed that Lee was
attempting to get out from under the "yoke of oppression" of their mother.(2) Marguerite Oswald raised Lee alone, since his father had died suddenly, and did not provide for their food and clothing as well as she could have, and was exceedingly controlling.(3) It was not the first time Oswald would significantly alter his surroundings to escape persecution, real or imagined. In fact, it was this very same driving force which led Oswald to Russia, where he met his future wife, Marina Prusakova.
===We are asked to take DB’s word for it that to “escape persecution, real or imagined” LHO was “led…to Russia…” An examination of the facts show us LHO received an honorable discharge when he went into the Marine reserves, prior to leaving for Russia on a trip that showed he must have had insider’s information to accomplish as he did. There was no overt reason to believe LHO was trying to ‘escape persecution, real or imagined” when he entered Russia. Why did DB write such a thing? He is counting on the ignorance of the reader: Swallow what I tell you! We must remember that this is a very bright individual who knows he is setting up LHO to look as bad as possible, while trying to preserve a veneer of fairness.
He states, as if fact, that Marguerite “did not provide for their food and clothing as well as she could have” , The cruel statement avoids the fact that a single female parent with three sons to raise alone, who was also proud and independent, had few resources in the 1940’s-1950’s. Women were not paid the wages men were. Marguerite was employed, one way or another, her entire life. That she was a controlling and domineering woman is true, and there is no doubt that LHO was anxious to leave home and stop being a burden to her.
What DB fails to tell us is that both of LHO’s brothers left home as soon as they could, too. All three sons entered the military. But then DB would have three boys, not one, to accuse: did each of the three boys wish to “significantly alter his surroundings to escape persecution, real or imagined.”? Leaving out potent and important details such as this skews the reader against LHO. It’s clever, and a bit dishonest. LHO’s mother, Marguerite, stated Lee’s brother Robert inspired him to become a Marine. DB failed to tell us that LHO’s motives for becoming a Marine might have been wholly normal and natural, under the circumstances.
Lee and Marina
“Oswald told Marina a series of lies well before they were married. Almost immediately, he told her he was 24 years old, the same age as another suitor of Marina's, so she wouldn't think he was young and immature.(4)”
===Neither the first, nor the last young man to lie about his age, when trying to impress the ladies, Lee was two years older than Marina, so the lie was not significant. DB never mentions that Marina was an experienced young woman concerning men, especially foreign men. She was aware of the fact that defectors were in a special category. DB does not mention that LHO is now considered to have been a fake defector by many honest researchers. By failing to bring up the fact that Lee Oswald might have been a fake defector, DB gives the naïve reader – such as an enquiring student --no opportunity to consider why Oswald might have lied about personal data.==
“Knowing Marina's family would not want her to leave Russia for America, Lee told Marina and her relatives that he couldn't get back into America even if he wanted to, having permanently defected. In reality, Lee had not fully renounced his citizenship from the United States because he failed to fill out all the official paperwork necessary for complete expatriation, so returning to the U.S. would hardly be problematic for either of them, especially since they were to be married before going to America.(5) To garner her sympathy, he also claimed to Marina that his mother was dead.(6) In fact, not only was Marguerite Oswald still quite alive at the time, she outlived Oswald himself by several (sic)years. “
===1) Returning alive to the US was problematic for any American former Marine entering the USSR, then wishing to leave again, with a Russian wife and a baby, no less, at the height of the Cold War—a Cold War never mentioned by DB.
Concerning what LHO told Marina and her family about returning to America, Lee had to assert this in order to get Marina’s uncle’s permission to marry; was Marina’s big dream to marry an American and have a chance to move to the USA, the land of the free? Is this why she married Oswald only six weeks after they met?
As for paperwork to fill out, there are two approaches to the matter:
1) Would a not-yet 20-year-old Oswald know he had ‘failed to fill out’ all the necessary paperwork, unless he had been told?
2) Here’s the argument that shows DB is inserting prejudice into his article:
a) If told to finish filling out the papers, and yet LHO ‘failed’ to do so, then he had no intention of renouncing his citizenship – meaning he was a fake defector. Then the James Bond mode kicks in: you say what you have to say, to everybody, to save your life and reduce suspicion. For example, LHO returned from the USSR fluent in Russian, yet in the USSR, the Ziger family and others said LHO did not speak Russian at all. A fake defector, trained to understand Russian, but never speaking it, could hear a lot and learn a lot without anyone getting suspicious.
b) If LHO failed to fill out the forms by accident, he would not know he could return to America. In every possible way, this accusation does not count as a lie.
Re the appellation “orphan”: technically the word ‘orphan’ applies (especially in older dictionaries) to one who has lost just one parent, or who has “been deprived of parental care and has not been adopted.”
DB failed to tell the reader that Lee was placed with his aunt and uncle for over a year, and was then put into an orphanage at the age of three, with his two brothers, where he remained almost three years. LHO supposedly told Marina that his mother was dead. It counts as a lie, but this, again, was early in their relationship and ranks with the “wrong age” lie. Later, he did not hide the letters that his mother sent to him; he also wrote numerous letters to his mother and brother Robert, as well as to other family members.
“This third falsehood held special significance, because later Lee lied again to his wife about the circumstances of his dislike for his mother. Rather than explain his past to the woman who loved him, he merely brushed her off by stating that the only reason behind his anger toward his mother was that he didn't like Marguerite's treatment of Robert's wife, mentioning nothing of the difficult childhood he endured under her harsh rule.(7) In sum, Lee was forced to tell a lie to cover up an earlier lie, and the initial components of Oswald's web of deception had been established.”
==== But did LHO “brush her off” ? We have since learned that Marina hid many aspects of her own former life from Lee. Is “brushed her off” the right phrase to use when describing the unwillingness of LHO to speak of his miserable past to his wife? We don’t know if he felt he could even trust her: they knew each other only six weeks before they married, and her uncle, with whom she had been living, was the equivalent of a police officer. In addition, LHO and marina both knew that their apartment was bugged. How much, under these circumstances, was LHO willing to confide? None of these problems are mentioned by DB.==
We next have a leap in logic from DB: LHO’s unwillingness to confide his past fully to his Russian wife is called a lie to cover up “an earlier lie.”
The “earlier lie” was that his mother, Marguerite, was dead. But now Lee admitted he didn’t like his mother, and gave a reason why. Now he is being criticized by DB for finally giving reasons why he dislikes his mother. Rather than dump his past on Marina, LHO gave her an example of why he didn’t like Marguerite. That was typical of LHO, known as a master of understatement. There is no logical connection between LHO saying Marguerite was dead and then later stating that he did not like his mother, as being a lie to cover up an earlier lie. Stating that he did not like his mother is merely a parallel statement, unrelated to the fact that he said she was dead.
Lee's "Historic Diary"
Among Oswald's possessions originating in Russia was something he called his "Historic Diary," an account of the time he spent in that country. The use of the phrase "diary" is a misnomer, however, since Oswald did not write up the accounts contained in its twelve pages until long after the dates he wrote on each page.(8) The Warren Commission noticed a number of anachronisms in the document, since some entries referred to events which had not yet occurred. Also, the exceedingly melodramatic tone (and title) of the diary indicated that Oswald was attempting to spice up the events to hold the interest of future readers. For instance, the diary asserts that Oswald was offered citizenship in the Soviet Union, but he refused; similarly, it states that he was asked to address a meeting of workers in Minsk, and that he humbly declined that proposal as well.(9)”
===LHO prepared two kinds of speeches in case reporters learned he was returning, and might come asking questions.
One speech was about how he ‘liked it’ in the Soviet Union; the other was about how he ‘did not like it’ in the Soviet Union. A number of honest researchers believe LHO did not know which one his handlers would want him to use at the time he wrote them. These two different versions, of themselves, go far to persuade an unprejudiced researcher that Lee’s activities were being directed by others.
The Historic Diary actually contains many interesting observations about daily life in the USSR. And diaries do not have to be written day-by-day to qualify as a diary. Definition of a diary: a record of events, transactions, or observations kept daily or at frequent intervals. LHO reconstructed the events as he recalled them from day to day while he was on a ship crossing the Atlantic ocean, with nothing else to do. It was a good way to spend his time.
The Diary was indeed written for outsiders, but many honest researchers believe it is not for the reason that DB presents, which seems to suggest narcissism. According to information I have personally received, Lee created the Diary to provide himself a fake timeline to cover certain activities in Russia, the USSR, and elsewhere that had to be kept secret. As a fake defector, it was necessary to ‘account’ for his time as being spent only in innocuous activities. LHO needed a reconstructed timeline to refer to because the real timeline might have actually been accidentally revealed later. By recreating a set of events and memories that did exist, and filling in the gaps, his “Un-Historic Diary” was Lee’s pocket guide for future reference, to the outside world. In fact, DB was smart enough to bring up that possibility. But he didn’t. As in every other instance so far, DB didn’t breathe a word about “fake defector.’==
Lee and Marina in Dallas
"...arriving in Dallas with Marina, Oswald had a chance to begin anew, with an utterly clean slate. His wife, unable to speak English, apparently felt no need to hold Lee's lies against him, since she was forced to rely upon him for everything. Marina could not speak English, and Lee was in no rush to help her learn.(10) Rather than deal honestly with some of the new people he met in Texas, Lee chose to continue his untruthful ways”
Having brought up only a few examples over Lee Oswald’s entire lifetime, and now nearing the end of Lee’s life, DB repeats that LHO has “lying ways” that he “chose to continue.” We will look at the various examples DB brings forth:
.”This is the point in Lee's life when he began to tell a certain type of lie: the type which was absolutely needless and unnecessary.”
Absolutely needless and unnecessary? How does DB know that? Was he there?
I wish to insert here an example of what Patricia McMillan-Johnson, author of the ‘official version’ biography, Marina and Lee, wrote about Lee’s telling his wife that he worked at the Leon Israel Coffee Company, located some blocks down, actually, from the Reily Coffee Company, on the same street—Magazine Street. DB is picking up McMillan’s charge: she says Lee told “another of his…pointless lies” when naming Leon Israel instead of Reily as his place of work.
But it wasn’t “another of his…pointless lies.” Lee and I had commenced a love affair and sometimes could be seen together coming to or from Reily’s. Lee didn’t want Marina to see us together. For awhile he even told her he worked as a photographer. When he was fired, Lee did not tell Marina. She thought Lee was working when he left every day for the next four, five or six weeks (depending on her changing testimony and letters).
Marina herself was caught in many lies to the Warren Commission --I do not blame her one bit—she a new mother, alone, and threatened with deportation --so portions of her testimony, such as claiming Lee planned to shoot Nixon when Nixon wasn’t even in town, had to be discarded even by the Commission, who kept only those parts they could plausibly use against Oswald.
I am under no such duress as was Marina, though I have been forced by threats to live in exile.
I freely testify that Lee Oswald was working with both the CIA and the FBI in New Orleans. He had significant active contacts with Customs and with the Mafia as well. He was a courier and lab assistant in addition, and was a very busy man – nothing like the indolent creature described by the Warren Commission. LHO’s time-sheet records at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall show Lee’s strong work ethic for six long days a week, plus overtime, with only a half-hour off for lunch, sometimes taken an hour late due to his work. LHO kept those records meticulously, as if he’d been in a lab, and he was in one—a photo lab. I have records you can inspect in my book Me & Lee, available summer 2010.
Interestingly, Lee’s half brother, John Pic, ran a section of a military hospital’s pathology lab in Texas in 1963. A love of science seemed to be shared by these half-brothers. Lee is also on record as listing biology and astronomy as subjects of interest to him. But back to DB, who tells the naïve reader that Lee’s lies are “needless and unnecessary” – and the reader is expected to swallow it.
“After returning to the United States, Lee seemed to lie at least as much out of habit as of necessity, to the point where it struck people other than Marina that Lee appeared to simply enjoy lying for the opportunity to conceal.(11) “
===== Who were these people? DB does not name them. Instead, DB again repeats his accusations against LHO. Repetition, after all, convinces the naïve reader, though no evidence is offered. DB tells us that LHO is still telling lots of lies, though he has no really convincing sets of lies to paste in here. What do we have on the “lie list,” so far?
1) Lee added two years to his actual age when dating Marina
2) Lee told Marina his mother was dead, when he was actually an orphan via his father and had been placed in an orphanage by his mother at a critical developmental stage of his life. Later, he admits his mother is alive.
3) Lee did not tell Marina all the reasons he disliked his mother. Did he have to?
4) Lee wrote a diary that has disinformation in it, which the analyst believes was simply to be dramatic –though a return alive from the USSR with a Russian wife and baby at age 22 was in itself dramatic, and worthy of a written record.
====a total of three accusations of questionable worth, and a disinfo-filled diary====
“In Dallas, Oswald met a man named George Bouhe, who helped him get settled in the new town, and may even have tided him over with occasional monetary supplements.(12) Asking Lee to keep in touch, Bouhe assumed that Lee would provide him with occasional updates of his whereabouts and employment situation. Instead, Lee would only call Bouhefrom a pay phone every few days, mutter "I'm doing fine" into the phone, and hang up.”
====Note that LHO contacted Bouhe “every few days.” We do not know from where [this may be important]. The word “mutter”makes a difference. On top of this, Lee is reported calling Bouhe "every few days." That does not sound irresponsible.
Who was Bouhe?
Bruce C. Adamson tells us “Ruby's neighbor [was] George Bouhe; Bouhe took Oswald out for job interviews.” Bouhe: said Oswald "had a mind of his own, and I think it was a diseased one.” What a nice characer reference DB chose. But what about Bouhe's character?
Researcher Linda Minor tells us that Bouhe was employed as a personal accountant by Everette DeGolyer, a geologist linked to Michael Paine through “Michael’s uncle, Eric Schroeder, …a friend and investment associate of…DeGolyer and a cousin of Alexander "Sandy" Forbes, former director of United Fruit…” A. J. Weberman says he is a Russian in exile.
Bouhe is part of the Dallas gang of Magnolia Oil: they had close ties to the Power Elite, and now surrounded Lee and Marina through White Russian links. Minor’s research goes into much more detail, but let this suffice:
“Bouhe was closely tied to George DeMohrenschildt, who later became famous as the White Russian assigned to "handle" Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas. It was DeMohrenschildt who had taken the Oswalds to a party where they met Volkmar Schmidt, and then a later party at the same house where they met Michael Paine. DeMohrenschildt was also the one in charge of getting Marina a place to stay at Ruth Paine’s home, and it was Ruth Paine who found Oswald the job at the book depository office in the building owned by D.H. Byrd,”
DB never told us that Bouhe was well-connected to George DeMohrenschildt (CIA ties), that he was also well-connected to the Paines (CIA ties)– and that they were all friends. He just says “Oswald met a man named George Bouhe” –who acted as LHO’s and Marina’s babysitter (just as deMohrenschildt did, and just as the Paines
did). Lee and Marina were not getting along, and in fact, the marriage was already progressing to a separation. Marina’s mistreatment during this time by Oswald is described by DeMohrenschildt as a result of her behavior (but Oswald alone is responsible for controlling himself—he had a lot of growing up to do when it came to problems with Marina. However, he stopped mistreating her in May, 1963.).
END PART ONE