Let's help Anthony learn to do his homework

[Pamela Brown]

Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not. I have referred him
to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
refuses to read it. Instead, he makes up silly claims.

Let's help him out. Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
he was offered citizenship:

(131)

On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
requested his residential passport be extended .

Here is a link to the study:
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/HSCA_Vol12_DefectorStudy.pdf

Of course, Anthony may attempt to object to this statement, saying that
LHO lied. Nevertheless, LHO did remain in the USSR for some time and
never became a Soviet citizen. And there is nothing in the defector study
that claims LHO was lying when he made that statement. So doesn't the door
need to remain open as to whether this was at his choice or that of the
USSR?

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Canuck]

On Feb 9, 8:31 am, Pamela Brown <pamelaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> refuses to read it.  Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
> Let's help him out.  Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> he was offered citizenship:
>
> (131)
>
> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> requested his residential passport be extended .
>

> Here is a link to the study:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/...

>
> Of course, Anthony may attempt to object to this statement, saying that
> LHO lied.  Nevertheless, LHO did remain in the USSR for some time and
> never became a Soviet citizen. And there is nothing in the defector study
> that claims LHO was lying when he made that statement. So doesn't the door
> need to remain open as to whether this was at his choice or that of the
> USSR?
>
> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

Thanks for providing this report, Pamela. It's hard to believe that the
USSR would offer Oswald citizenship so quickly. As for his suicide
attempt, the report indicates that he only received four stitches, which
suggests it was a minor wound and not a serious attempted suicide. Aline
Mosby is mentioned, although her first name is given as "Alice". As I
recall, she interviewed Oswald for about two hours; Oswald claims he
refused an interview with her and another UPI reporter. No mention is
made of Priscilla Johnson's interview a week or so after Aline's. No
mention is made of the birthplace error on Oswald's exit visa, in which he
listed it as "New Orleans, Texas, USA" (in Russian, translated by the U.S.
State Dep't with "sic" next to "Texas"). According to Marina, as told to
Priscilla, Lee had brought home five copies of the exit visa application,
in case he made a mistake. Priscilla was not aware of this error, when I
asked her about it in the late 1980s, but Marina was (possibly through her
contact with Michael Eddowes). The report indicates Oswald was not
debriefed by the CIA, even though Robert Webster was (extensively). -
prwhitmey

[John McAdams]

On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
>citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not. I have referred him
>to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
>refuses to read it. Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
>Let's help him out. Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
>he was offered citizenship:
>
>(131)
>
>On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
>office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
>requested his residential passport be extended .
>
>Here is a link to the study:
>http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/HSCA_Vol12_DefectorStudy.pdf
>

I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=95835&relPageId=27

.John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Canuck]

On Feb 9, 8:31 am, Pamela Brown <pamelaj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> refuses to read it.  Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
> Let's help him out.  Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> he was offered citizenship:
>
> (131)
>
> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> requested his residential passport be extended .
>

> Here is a link to the study:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/...

>
> Of course, Anthony may attempt to object to this statement, saying that
> LHO lied.  Nevertheless, LHO did remain in the USSR for some time and
> never became a Soviet citizen. And there is nothing in the defector study
> that claims LHO was lying when he made that statement. So doesn't the door
> need to remain open as to whether this was at his choice or that of the
> USSR?
>
> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

I wrote about my brief contact with Aline Mosby in the late 1990s, and
the article is available at Clint Bradford's site:
http://www.jfk-info.com/whitmey7.htm. - prw

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing

More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.

> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not. I have referred him

And as usual you have to make up false claims to create strawman
arguments. You are forgetting about one very important factor. Time. At
the time that Oswald got to Russian he really did want to be granted
Soviet citizenship. Not so much after actually living there for a year.
It's one thing to have a rosy view of some place you've never been to. The
reality of living there is different.

> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> refuses to read it. Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>

I read it long before you did.

> Let's help him out. Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> he was offered citizenship:
>
> (131)
>
> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> requested his residential passport be extended .
>

Look at the damn date. 1961 for Christ's sake. Oswald tried to renounce
his US citizenship and gain Soviet citizenship almost immediately when he
arrived in Russia.

On October 31, Oswald appeared at the United States embassy in Moscow,
declaring a desire to renounce his U.S. citizenship.[35][36] Oswald told
the interviewing officer at the U.S. embassy, Richard Snyder, "...that he
had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps and that he had voluntarily
stated to unnamed Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make
known to them such information concerning the Marine Corps and his
specialty as he possessed. He intimated that he might know something of
special interest."[37] (Such statements led to Oswald's hardship/honorable
military discharge being changed to undesirable.)[38] The Associated Press
story of the defection of a U.S. Marine to the Soviet Union was reported
on the front pages of some newspapers in 1959.[39] But Oswald grew bored
in Minsk.[43] He wrote in his diary in January 1961: "I am starting to
reconsider my desire about staying. The work is drab, the money I get has
nowhere to be spent. No nightclubs or bowling alleys, no places of
recreation except the trade union dances. I have had enough."[44] Shortly
afterwards, Oswald (who had never formally renounced his U.S. citizenship)
wrote to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow requesting return of his American
passport, and proposing to return to the U.S. if any charges against him
would be dropped.[45]

It's called a change of heart. Maybe you've never had one so you don't
know what it means. But Oswald became disillusioned with Russia. It was
not the worker's paradise he imagined.

You can blame it all on Minsk if you like. I prefer that explanation.
Oswald wanted to live in Moscow where there is at least some cultural and
intellectual life. But he was shunted off to Minsk to be a daily worker
instead of being feted as a hero.

Imagine going to a Michellin 5-star restaurant and ordering the roast
lamb. Three hours later the waiter comes out and asks if you still want
the lamb.

> Here is a link to the study:
> http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/HSCA_Vol12_DefectorStudy.pdf
>
> Of course, Anthony may attempt to object to this statement, saying that
> LHO lied. Nevertheless, LHO did remain in the USSR for some time and

No, I don't object to the oversimplified study. It fulfilled its purpose
at the time. I don't think we have to be limited to what was written then.
Especially when they still keep the background material Top Secret for
another 100 years.

> never became a Soviet citizen. And there is nothing in the defector study
> that claims LHO was lying when he made that statement. So doesn't the door
> need to remain open as to whether this was at his choice or that of the
> USSR?
>

Oswald was not lying either time. He simply changed his mind. But I really
don't think the Soviets were going to grant him citizenship. They were
very suspicious of this fellow, but didn't want to kill him outright or
expel him. That's why they sent him to Minsk to be forgotten.

> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>

[Anthony Marsh]

I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
refers only to the INITIAL decision. She is talking about a later offer. I
don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
Oswald refused.

[John McAdams]

On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh

But look at the document.

The conversation with Kudryavtsev was *post* marriage to Marina, and
*post* birth of June.

.John

[John McAdams]

On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:

Here you have, post-assassination, a statement from the Soviet
government that they never gave him citizenship.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=95835&relPageId=29

I suppose you could say it was just CYA. But it's credible, and I
would want more than Oswald's word that he ever got an offer of Soviet
citizenship.

.John

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/9/2012 3:36 PM, Canuck wrote:
> On Feb 9, 8:31 am, Pamela Brown<pamelaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
>> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not. I have referred him
>> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
>> refuses to read it. Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>>
>> Let's help him out. Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
>> he was offered citizenship:
>>
>> (131)
>>
>> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
>> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
>> requested his residential passport be extended .
>>
>> Here is a link to the study:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/...
>>
>> Of course, Anthony may attempt to object to this statement, saying that
>> LHO lied. Nevertheless, LHO did remain in the USSR for some time and
>> never became a Soviet citizen. And there is nothing in the defector study
>> that claims LHO was lying when he made that statement. So doesn't the door
>> need to remain open as to whether this was at his choice or that of the
>> USSR?
>>
>> Pamela Brown
>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>
> Thanks for providing this report, Pamela. It's hard to believe that the
> USSR would offer Oswald citizenship so quickly. As for his suicide

1961 is not "so quickly." It is a year later.
The initial decision was to deny Oswald citizenship.

> attempt, the report indicates that he only received four stitches, which
> suggests it was a minor wound and not a serious attempted suicide. Aline
> Mosby is mentioned, although her first name is given as "Alice". As I
> recall, she interviewed Oswald for about two hours; Oswald claims he
> refused an interview with her and another UPI reporter. No mention is
> made of Priscilla Johnson's interview a week or so after Aline's. No
> mention is made of the birthplace error on Oswald's exit visa, in which he
> listed it as "New Orleans, Texas, USA" (in Russian, translated by the U.S.

Yeah, every Russian knew that New Orleans is in Texas.

> State Dep't with "sic" next to "Texas"). According to Marina, as told to
> Priscilla, Lee had brought home five copies of the exit visa application,
> in case he made a mistake. Priscilla was not aware of this error, when I
> asked her about it in the late 1980s, but Marina was (possibly through her
> contact with Michael Eddowes). The report indicates Oswald was not
> debriefed by the CIA, even though Robert Webster was (extensively). -
> prwhitmey
>

See John Newman's research about the debriefing of Oswald.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/9/2012 7:59 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/9/2012 3:47 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>> On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown<pamel...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
>>> citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:
>>>
>>> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=95835&relPageId=27
>>>
>>
>> I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
>> refers only to the INITIAL decision. She is talking about a later offer. I
>> don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
>> Oswald refused.
>>
>
> Here you have, post-assassination, a statement from the Soviet
> government that they never gave him citizenship.
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=95835&relPageId=29
>

Thanks for NOT answering the question and instead answering the question
you wanted to be asked. I forget what they call that in classical
rhetoric. The bone of contention Pamela and I had was the idea that the
Soviets OFFERED Oswald citizenship. Your cite is about where they actually
went ahead and actually granted it. We already knew they didn't. This is
like getting confused over whether Oswald OFFERED to give classified
information to the Soviets or it he actually did.

We can also argue about whether he knew anything important enough to give
them. But he did tell Snyder that he made the offer. Problem is we don't
know how serious he was and how credible his offer was. We know that the
Soviets initially denied Oswald citizenship, but Pamela seems to think
that they later had a change of heart and decided to offer him
citizenship. I don't see it that way. I see it as trying to decided what
to do with Oswald and double-checking to see if he was still interested in
Citizenship.

> I suppose you could say it was just CYA. But it's credible, and I
> would want more than Oswald's word that he ever got an offer of Soviet
> citizenship.
>

I don't see it as CYA. I see it as a simple fact of what they actually
did. If you want more than Oswald's word, force the CIA to release the
tapes of their bugging. The Soviets never offered Oswald citizenship. They
said, "First, show us what you've got and then we'll talk." Oswald had
nothing exciting.

[Anthony Marsh]

The events he was talking about were just after Oswald defected.

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 9, 2:36 pm, Canuck <prwhit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 9, 8:31 am, Pamela Brown <pamelaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
> > research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> > citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
> > to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> > refuses to read it.  Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
> > Let's help him out.  Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> > he was offered citizenship:
>
> > (131)
>
> > On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> > office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> > requested his residential passport be extended .
>
> > Here is a link to the study:http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/...
>
> > Of course, Anthony may attempt to object to this statement, saying that
> > LHO lied.  Nevertheless, LHO did remain in the USSR for some time and
> > never became a Soviet citizen. And there is nothing in the defector study
> > that claims LHO was lying when he made that statement. So doesn't the door
> > need to remain open as to whether this was at his choice or that of the
> > USSR?
>
> > Pamela Brown
> > marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>
> Thanks for providing this report, Pamela.  It's hard to believe that the
> USSR would offer Oswald citizenship so quickly.

I am currently testing the hypothesis that LHO went to USSR with the
intent of committing treason by providing them with information about the
U-2 that he thought they didn't have, not to become a Soviet citizen. By
this hypothesis, once he had given the information, he would then want to
leave. That is what occurred. He may have been offered Soviet
citizenship when he went to renew his papers, and possibly when he was
brought to Moscow to see Powers during his trial. He also stated at one
point that he was never forced to take Soviet citizenship (words to that
effect), which, under the thought that he was seriously pursuing
citizenship makes no sense, but under the hypothesis of his going there
with a different intent, does make sense, as he wanted to leave a door
open to leave.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 9, 6:54 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/9/2012 3:47 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown<pamelaj...@gmail.com>

> > wrote:
>
> >> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
> >> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> >> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
> >> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> >> refuses to read it.  Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
> >> Let's help him out.  Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> >> he was offered citizenship:
>
> >> (131)
>
> >> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> >> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> >> requested his residential passport be extended .
>
> >> Here is a link to the study:

> >>http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/pdf/...

>
> > I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
> > citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:
>

> >http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=958...

>
> I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
> refers only to the INITIAL decision.

What LHO seemed to object to when he initially went to the USSR was that
he was told to leave, not that he was offered or not offered citizenship
initially per se. If we follow my hypothesis that LHO was there to commit
treason, not to become a citizen, the 'suicide attempt' makes sense.

>She is talking about a later offer. I
> don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
> Oswald refused.

It is possible that LHO was offered Soviet citizenship, or at least
believed that door was open to him, both when he went to renew his papers
and when he was brought to Moscow to see Powers. But that was not what he
wanted.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> > Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>
> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.

Excuse me? Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
that I posted?

>
> > research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> > citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
>
> And as usual you have to make up false claims to create strawman
> arguments.

Not so. Is it not you who claimed that LHO wanted citizenship in
exchange for secrets? By my hypothesis, that is a strawman.

You are forgetting about one very important factor. Time. At
> the time that Oswald got to Russian he really did want to be granted
> Soviet citizenship.

I disagree. He was told he had to leave the USSR. It is that that
prompted his 'suicide attempt'. That is not the same as being granted

citizenship.


>Not so much after actually living there for a year.

I disagree. LHO sent a letter to Snyder that December that apparently
he didn't receive. It is possible LHO intended to leave when he had
conveyed the 'secret' information.

> It's one thing to have a rosy view of some place you've never been to. The
> reality of living there is different.

That is a nice excuse, the kind WC defenders love to make about LHO.
I don't think it applies.

>
> > to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> > refuses to read it.  Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
> I read it long before you did.

If you read it with comprehension, how did you miss what it said?

>
> > Let's help him out.  Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> > he was offered citizenship:
>
> > (131)
>
> > On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> > office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> > requested his residential passport be extended .
>
> Look at the damn date. 1961 for Christ's sake. Oswald tried to renounce
> his US citizenship and gain Soviet citizenship almost immediately when he
> arrived in Russia.

"Tried"? Not very hard. He made a big stink at the US Embassy
office, certainly loud enough for those bugging it to overhear that he
had secret information to convey to the Soviets. But he didn't follow
through. Not initially. Not at all.

>
> On October 31, Oswald appeared at the United States embassy in Moscow,
> declaring a desire to renounce his U.S. citizenship.[35][36] Oswald told
> the interviewing officer at the U.S. embassy, Richard Snyder, "...that he
> had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps and that he had voluntarily
> stated to unnamed Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make
> known to them such information concerning the Marine Corps and his
> specialty as he possessed. He intimated that he might know something of
> special interest."[37] (Such statements led to Oswald's hardship/honorable
> military discharge being changed to undesirable.)[38] The Associated Press
> story of the defection of a U.S. Marine to the Soviet Union was reported
> on the front pages of some newspapers in 1959.[39] But Oswald grew bored
> in Minsk.[43] He wrote in his diary in January 1961: "I am starting to
> reconsider my desire about staying. The work is drab, the money I get has
> nowhere to be spent. No nightclubs or bowling alleys, no places of
> recreation except the trade union dances. I have had enough."[44] Shortly
> afterwards, Oswald (who had never formally renounced his U.S. citizenship)
> wrote to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow requesting return of his American
> passport, and proposing to return to the U.S. if any charges against him
> would be dropped.[45]
>
> It's called a change of heart.

I disagree. It is called a strategy. I think LHO may have had one.
Citizenship in Russia was not a part of it.

Maybe you've never had one so you don't
> know what it means.

Unfair and untrue. How else could I have put up with all your wacky
theories? Well, maybe that takes a sense of humor. :-)

>But Oswald became disillusioned with Russia. It was
> not the worker's paradise he imagined.

Convenient excuse, but doesn't take into account the fact that he
never really tried to obtain citizenship in the USSR. He just made a
big stink about it.

>
> You can blame it all on Minsk if you like. I prefer that explanation.
> Oswald wanted to live in Moscow where there is at least some cultural and
> intellectual life. But he was shunted off to Minsk to be a daily worker
> instead of being feted as a hero.

I think he may have had another objective all along. He was using the
Soviets to get what he really wanted.

>
> Imagine going to a Michellin 5-star restaurant and ordering the roast
> lamb. Three hours later the waiter comes out and asks if you still want
> the lamb.

I have been to the Hofbrau House in Munich, where, I believe, Hitler
spoke. I was the only one wearing a USS John F. Kennedy cap. I
ordered my meal. Everyone around me was served, but I was not. I was
charged for the meal though. I know exactly how that feels. And no,
I did not end up paying for something I did not receive.

In LHO's case, we know that he made a big stink about giving secret
information to the Soviets. He did not really renounce his
citizenship, which he reminded Snyder of when he wanted to return. I
think the door should be left open to the possibility that citizenship
in USSR was not what he wanted, and that he may have had another plan.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 9, 6:59 pm, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
> On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >On 2/9/2012 3:47 PM, John McAdams wrote:

> >> On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown<pamelaj...@gmail.com>

> >> wrote:
>
> >> I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
> >> citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:
>

> >>http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=958...

>
> >I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
> >refers only to the INITIAL decision. She is talking about a later offer. I
> >don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
> >Oswald refused.
>
> Here you have, post-assassination, a statement from the Soviet
> government that they never gave him citizenship.

Whatever the USSR said after the assassination must be weighed in
light of the implications of LHO having any tangible connection with
the Russians or having been of any interest to them.

>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=958...

>
> I suppose you could say it was just CYA.  But it's credible, and I
> would want more than Oswald's word that he ever got an offer of Soviet
> citizenship.
>

Just the same, LHO did stay in USSR, did not renounce his US citizenship,
and left the door open to return, which he then did. If we take as an
hypothesis that citizenship in USSR was not what he was after, the entire
picture changes.

[Anthony Marsh]

Sure, that sounds like fun. Many wannabe spies think they know something
that no one else knows and try to make money out of it.

Like all the Cuban exiles trying to get money from Miami reporters by
telling them that the CIA was trying to kill Castro, like Castro didn't
already know.

> this hypothesis, once he had given the information, he would then want to
> leave. That is what occurred. He may have been offered Soviet

No. Oswald did not leave immediately. He wanted to live in Moscow, but
they shipped him off to Minsk. He was lucky they didn't send him to
Siberia.

> citizenship when he went to renew his papers, and possibly when he was
> brought to Moscow to see Powers during his trial. He also stated at one
> point that he was never forced to take Soviet citizenship (words to that
> effect), which, under the thought that he was seriously pursuing
> citizenship makes no sense, but under the hypothesis of his going there
> with a different intent, does make sense, as he wanted to leave a door
> open to leave.
>

He also never went through with his threat to revoke his US citizenship.

> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

I don't think he did it for money. I think that is a rabbit trail.

>
> Like all the Cuban exiles trying to get money from Miami reporters by
> telling them that the CIA was trying to kill Castro, like Castro didn't
> already know.
>
> > this hypothesis, once he had given the information, he would then want to
> > leave.  That is what occurred.  He may have been offered Soviet
>
> No. Oswald did not leave immediately.

He said he sent a letter to Snyder in December, 1960.

.He wanted to live in Moscow, but

> they shipped him off to Minsk. He was lucky they didn't send him to
> Siberia.

That is secondary to the fact that he never even followed through with his
threat at the US embassy to revoke his US citizenship. If h were serious,
why would he not do that?

>
> > citizenship when he went to renew his papers, and possibly when he was
> > brought to Moscow to see Powers during his trial.  He also stated at one
> > point that he was never forced to take Soviet citizenship (words to that
> > effect), which, under the thought that he was seriously pursuing
> > citizenship makes no sense, but under the hypothesis of his going there
> > with a different intent, does make sense, as he wanted to leave a door
> > open to leave.
>
> He also never went through with his threat to revoke his US citizenship.

Exactly. He made a big stink, then a half-hearted attempt, then turned
tail and wanted to return to the US, for the time being anyway.

You seem to think LHO was incapable of having a plan that used both
governments. I don't.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/10/2012 7:45 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> On Feb 9, 6:59 pm, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
>> On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/9/2012 3:47 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>>> On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown<pamelaj...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>> I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
>>>> citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:
>>
>>>> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=958...
>>
>>> I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
>>> refers only to the INITIAL decision. She is talking about a later offer. I
>>> don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
>>> Oswald refused.
>>
>> Here you have, post-assassination, a statement from the Soviet
>> government that they never gave him citizenship.
>
> Whatever the USSR said after the assassination must be weighed in
> light of the implications of LHO having any tangible connection with
> the Russians or having been of any interest to them.
>

You have to separate all those various elements of the story.
The Soviets lied about not having any interest in Oswald.
They told the truth about not recruiting him or using him.
They told the truth about not granting him citizenship.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/10/2012 4:55 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>>
>> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
>> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.
>
> Excuse me? Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
> Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
> that I posted?

As I said, I read it long before you did.

>>
>>> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
>>> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not. I have referred him
>>
>> And as usual you have to make up false claims to create strawman
>> arguments.
>
> Not so. Is it not you who claimed that LHO wanted citizenship in
> exchange for secrets? By my hypothesis, that is a strawman.
>

Offered. I didn't make that up from my imagination. It's what Oswald
himself said.
Your hypothesis would see it as a ruse.

>
> You are forgetting about one very important factor. Time. At
>> the time that Oswald got to Russian he really did want to be granted
>> Soviet citizenship.
>
> I disagree. He was told he had to leave the USSR. It is that that
> prompted his 'suicide attempt'. That is not the same as being granted
> citizenship.
>

What you said has nothing to do with what I said.

>
>> Not so much after actually living there for a year.
>
> I disagree. LHO sent a letter to Snyder that December that apparently
> he didn't receive. It is possible LHO intended to leave when he had
> conveyed the 'secret' information.
>

Conveying what secret information and how? By writing it in his diary?

>> It's one thing to have a rosy view of some place you've never been to. The
>> reality of living there is different.
>
> That is a nice excuse, the kind WC defenders love to make about LHO.
> I don't think it applies.
>>
>>> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
>>> refuses to read it. Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>>
>> I read it long before you did.
>
> If you read it with comprehension, how did you miss what it said?

I didn't miss anything. You didn't have a point.

>>
>>> Let's help him out. Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
>>> he was offered citizenship:
>>
>>> (131)
>>
>>> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
>>> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
>>> requested his residential passport be extended .
>>
>> Look at the damn date. 1961 for Christ's sake. Oswald tried to renounce
>> his US citizenship and gain Soviet citizenship almost immediately when he
>> arrived in Russia.
>
> "Tried"? Not very hard. He made a big stink at the US Embassy
> office, certainly loud enough for those bugging it to overhear that he
> had secret information to convey to the Soviets. But he didn't follow
> through. Not initially. Not at all.

Did he say the word "Secret" or is that your guess? But that couldn't be
about the U-2 because that project was the highest Top Secret.

>>
>> On October 31, Oswald appeared at the United States embassy in Moscow,
>> declaring a desire to renounce his U.S. citizenship.[35][36] Oswald told
>> the interviewing officer at the U.S. embassy, Richard Snyder, "...that he
>> had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps and that he had voluntarily
>> stated to unnamed Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make
>> known to them such information concerning the Marine Corps and his
>> specialty as he possessed. He intimated that he might know something of
>> special interest."[37] (Such statements led to Oswald's hardship/honorable
>> military discharge being changed to undesirable.)[38] The Associated Press
>> story of the defection of a U.S. Marine to the Soviet Union was reported
>> on the front pages of some newspapers in 1959.[39] But Oswald grew bored
>> in Minsk.[43] He wrote in his diary in January 1961: "I am starting to
>> reconsider my desire about staying. The work is drab, the money I get has
>> nowhere to be spent. No nightclubs or bowling alleys, no places of
>> recreation except the trade union dances. I have had enough."[44] Shortly
>> afterwards, Oswald (who had never formally renounced his U.S. citizenship)
>> wrote to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow requesting return of his American
>> passport, and proposing to return to the U.S. if any charges against him
>> would be dropped.[45]
>>
>> It's called a change of heart.
>
> I disagree. It is called a strategy. I think LHO may have had one.
> Citizenship in Russia was not a part of it.
>

You can call it a bargaining chip. In the trade it is called a dangle.

> Maybe you've never had one so you don't
>> know what it means.
>
> Unfair and untrue. How else could I have put up with all your wacky
> theories? Well, maybe that takes a sense of humor. :-)
>
>> But Oswald became disillusioned with Russia. It was
>> not the worker's paradise he imagined.
>
> Convenient excuse, but doesn't take into account the fact that he
> never really tried to obtain citizenship in the USSR. He just made a
> big stink about it.

He made the offer.

>>
>> You can blame it all on Minsk if you like. I prefer that explanation.
>> Oswald wanted to live in Moscow where there is at least some cultural and
>> intellectual life. But he was shunted off to Minsk to be a daily worker
>> instead of being feted as a hero.
>
> I think he may have had another objective all along. He was using the
> Soviets to get what he really wanted.
>>
>> Imagine going to a Michellin 5-star restaurant and ordering the roast
>> lamb. Three hours later the waiter comes out and asks if you still want
>> the lamb.
>
> I have been to the Hofbrau House in Munich, where, I believe, Hitler
> spoke. I was the only one wearing a USS John F. Kennedy cap. I
> ordered my meal. Everyone around me was served, but I was not. I was
> charged for the meal though. I know exactly how that feels. And no,
> I did not end up paying for something I did not receive.
>
> In LHO's case, we know that he made a big stink about giving secret
> information to the Soviets. He did not really renounce his
> citizenship, which he reminded Snyder of when he wanted to return. I

So you admit that he wanted to return. Why didn't he return right after
Powers was downed if THAT was his mission? If he was so successful in
helping bring down Powers then surely the KGB would have moved him to
Moscow to use for future flights.

> think the door should be left open to the possibility that citizenship
> in USSR was not what he wanted, and that he may have had another plan.
>

Keep me posted. Please post the documents you get declassified.

> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

You assert something without offering any proof of it. Prove that
someone brought him to Moscow just to see Powers.

> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Because the Soviets did not grant him citizenship.

>>
>>> citizenship when he went to renew his papers, and possibly when he was
>>> brought to Moscow to see Powers during his trial. He also stated at one
>>> point that he was never forced to take Soviet citizenship (words to that
>>> effect), which, under the thought that he was seriously pursuing
>>> citizenship makes no sense, but under the hypothesis of his going there
>>> with a different intent, does make sense, as he wanted to leave a door
>>> open to leave.
>>
>> He also never went through with his threat to revoke his US citizenship.
>
> Exactly. He made a big stink, then a half-hearted attempt, then turned
> tail and wanted to return to the US, for the time being anyway.
>
> You seem to think LHO was incapable of having a plan that used both
> governments. I don't.
>

How about playing one off the other?

> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 11, 7:12 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 7:45 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 9, 6:59 pm, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
> >> On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh
>
> >> <anthony.ma...@comcast.net>  wrote:
> >>> On 2/9/2012 3:47 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> >>>> On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown<pamelaj...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>> I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
> >>>> citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:
>
> >>>>http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=958...
>
> >>> I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
> >>> refers only to the INITIAL decision. She is talking about a later offer. I
> >>> don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
> >>> Oswald refused.
>
> >> Here you have, post-assassination, a statement from the Soviet
> >> government that they never gave him citizenship.
>
> > Whatever the USSR said after the assassination must be weighed in
> > light of the implications of LHO having any tangible connection with
> > the Russians or having been of any interest to them.
>
> You have to separate all those various elements of the story.

That's only part of it.

> The Soviets lied about not having any interest in Oswald.

Agreed. But I think they were interested in the secret information
LHO promised to provide. You don't.

> They told the truth about not recruiting him or using him.

If he did transmit information that was used to help shoot down
Powers' U-2, that is not exactly true. Agreed he was not recruited as
a spy.

> They told the truth about not granting him citizenship.

They may not have told the whole truth. That would be a typical Soviet
trick.
LHO may have been offered it and declined.

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 11, 7:13 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/10/2012 4:55 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> > On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net>  wrote:
> >> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> >>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>
> >> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
> >> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.
>
> > Excuse me?  Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
> > Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
> > that I posted?
>
> As I said, I read it long before you did.

"Saying" is one thing; demonstrating is another.

You have evidenced no understanding of the fact that the HSCA did not seem
to find it implausible that LHO was offered citizenship and turned it
down. This statement is anathema to the WC defenders and others who think
LHO went to the USSR to become a citizen. You attempted to block
discussion of this point. If you knew what you were blocking, that is all
the more puzzling.

>
>
>
> >>> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> >>> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
>
> >> And as usual you have to make up false claims to create strawman
> >> arguments.
>
> > Not so.  Is it not you who claimed that LHO wanted citizenship in
> > exchange for secrets?  By my hypothesis, that is a strawman.
>
> Offered. I didn't make that up from my imagination. It's what Oswald
> himself said.

You refuse to accept what LHO said about being offered citizenship and
refusing and yet accept something else you think he said?

> Your hypothesis would see it as a ruse.

What LHO did on his arrival in Moscow was not clearcut. It takes
insight to get all, or most, of the pieces to fall into place.

>
>
>
> > You are forgetting about one very important factor. Time. At
> >> the time that Oswald got to Russian he really did want to be granted
> >> Soviet citizenship.
>
> > I disagree.  He was told he had to leave the USSR.  It is that that
> > prompted his 'suicide attempt'.  That is not the same as being granted
> > citizenship.
>
> What you said has nothing to do with what I said

Well then you and I disagree that he ever really wanted citizenship.
I think that was a ruse.

>
>
>
> >> Not so much after actually living there for a year.
>
> > I disagree.  LHO sent a letter to Snyder that December that apparently
> > he didn't receive.  It is possible LHO intended to leave when he had
> > conveyed the 'secret' information.
>
> Conveying what secret information and how? By writing it in his diary?

Why are you playing tabulae rasa? We have already discussed this. He
yelled at Snyder that he had secret information to give the Soviets,
making sure it was loud enough to be picked up by the bugs at the Embassy.
They could have followed up on that.

>
> >> It's one thing to have a rosy view of some place you've never been to. The
> >> reality of living there is different.
>
> > That is a nice excuse, the kind WC defenders love to make about LHO.
> > I don't think it applies.
>
> >>> to the HSCA defector report on numerous occasions, but he apparently
> >>> refuses to read it.  Instead, he makes up silly claims.
>
> >> I read it long before you did.
>
> > If you read it with comprehension, how did you miss what it said?
>
> I didn't miss anything. You didn't have a point.

I do have a point. It just demolishes yours so you don't like it.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> Let's help him out.  Here is a passage that discusses LHO saying that
> >>> he was offered citizenship:
>
> >>> (131)
>
> >>> On January 4, 1961. Oswald wrote that he was called into the passport
> >>> office and asked if he wanted Soviet citizenship. He said no,-- but
> >>> requested his residential passport be extended .
>
> >> Look at the damn date. 1961 for Christ's sake. Oswald tried to renounce
> >> his US citizenship and gain Soviet citizenship almost immediately when he
> >> arrived in Russia.
>
> > "Tried"?  Not very hard.  He made a big stink at the US Embassy
> > office, certainly loud enough for those bugging it to overhear that he
> > had secret information to convey to the Soviets. But he didn't follow
> > through.  Not initially.  Not at all.
>
> Did he say the word "Secret" or is that your guess? But that couldn't be
> about the U-2 because that project was the highest Top Secret.

I think McVickar said he used that word. U-2 was not a secret to LHO.
He tracked them as a radar operator at Atsugi. Who knows what else he
picked up.

I have held a brick from one of the space shuttles. I have no clearance
whatsoever. I can describe its weight and feel and texture. That
information in some places might not be common knowledge.

LHO could have heard or experienced secret information about the U-2.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> On October 31, Oswald appeared at the United States embassy in Moscow,
> >> declaring a desire to renounce his U.S. citizenship.[35][36] Oswald told
> >> the interviewing officer at the U.S. embassy, Richard Snyder, "...that he
> >> had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps and that he had voluntarily
> >> stated to unnamed Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make
> >> known to them such information concerning the Marine Corps and his
> >> specialty as he possessed. He intimated that he might know something of
> >> special interest."[37] (Such statements led to Oswald's hardship/honorable
> >> military discharge being changed to undesirable.)[38] The Associated Press
> >> story of the defection of a U.S. Marine to the Soviet Union was reported
> >> on the front pages of some newspapers in 1959.[39] But Oswald grew bored
> >> in Minsk.[43] He wrote in his diary in January 1961: "I am starting to
> >> reconsider my desire about staying. The work is drab, the money I get has
> >> nowhere to be spent. No nightclubs or bowling alleys, no places of
> >> recreation except the trade union dances. I have had enough."[44] Shortly
> >> afterwards, Oswald (who had never formally renounced his U.S. citizenship)
> >> wrote to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow requesting return of his American
> >> passport, and proposing to return to the U.S. if any charges against him
> >> would be dropped.[45]
>
> >> It's called a change of heart.
>
> > I disagree.  It is called a strategy.  I think LHO may have had one.
> > Citizenship in Russia was not a part of it.
>
> You can call it a bargaining chip. In the trade it is called a dangle.

There is no 'trade'. LHO was not a spy. He may have been a traitor.
If anything, he 'dangled' himself.

>
> >   Maybe you've never had one so you don't
> >> know what it means.
>
> > Unfair and untrue.  How else could I have put up with all your wacky
> > theories?  Well, maybe that takes a sense of humor. :-)
>
> >> But Oswald became disillusioned with Russia. It was
> >> not the worker's paradise he imagined.
>
> > Convenient excuse, but doesn't take into account the fact that he
> > never really tried to obtain citizenship in the USSR.  He just made a
> > big stink about it.
>
> He made the offer.

And did nothing to follow through with it. Half-hearted at best;
perhaps just a ruse.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> You can blame it all on Minsk if you like. I prefer that explanation.
> >> Oswald wanted to live in Moscow where there is at least some cultural and
> >> intellectual life. But he was shunted off to Minsk to be a daily worker
> >> instead of being feted as a hero.
>
> > I think he may have had another objective all along.  He was using the
> > Soviets to get what he really wanted.
>
> >> Imagine going to a Michellin 5-star restaurant and ordering the roast
> >> lamb. Three hours later the waiter comes out and asks if you still want
> >> the lamb.
>
> > I have been to the Hofbrau House in Munich, where, I believe, Hitler
> > spoke.  I was  the only one wearing a USS John F. Kennedy cap.  I
> > ordered my meal.  Everyone around me was served, but I was not.  I was
> > charged for the meal though.  I know exactly how that feels.  And no,
> > I did not end up paying for something I did not receive.
>
> > In LHO's case, we know that he made a big stink about giving secret
> > information to the Soviets.  He did not really renounce his
> > citizenship, which he reminded Snyder of when he wanted to return.  I
>
> So you admit that he wanted to return.

What are you talking about? In my hypothesis he always intended to

return.


> Why didn't he return right after
> Powers was downed if THAT was his mission?

He sent a letter to Snyder that December.

If he was so successful in
> helping bring down Powers then surely the KGB would have moved him to
> Moscow to use for future flights.

False assumption -- the military had already taken action to correct
whatever damage LHO had done. That is why his discharge was downgraded.
They knew the Sovets were onto them. Unless LHO had returned to Atsugi,
or someplace with U-2's, I doubt they thought he could provide any more
information of value.

>
> > think the door should be left open to the possibility that citizenship
> > in USSR was not what he wanted, and that he may have had another plan.
>
> Keep me posted. Please post the documents you get declassified.

Why not look at LHO himself? In my hypothesis, if I am correct, all the
dominos will fall. We will understand his motivation for all, or nearly
all, of the decisions he made.

Nobody has been able to provide a motive for LHO's actions. Maybe they
just didn't try hard enough.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

"Just" to see Powers? I didn't say that. LHO said he saw Powers,
which meant he was in Moscow during the trial.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Pamela Brown
> > marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

Because he was after something else.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> citizenship when he went to renew his papers, and possibly when he was
> >>> brought to Moscow to see Powers during his trial.  He also stated at one
> >>> point that he was never forced to take Soviet citizenship (words to that
> >>> effect), which, under the thought that he was seriously pursuing
> >>> citizenship makes no sense, but under the hypothesis of his going there
> >>> with a different intent, does make sense, as he wanted to leave a door
> >>> open to leave.
>
> >> He also never went through with his threat to revoke his US citizenship.
>
> > Exactly. He made a big stink, then a half-hearted attempt, then turned
> > tail and wanted to return to the US, for the time being anyway.
>
> > You seem to think LHO was incapable of having a plan that used both
> > governments.  I don't.
>
> How about playing one off the other?
>

Something like that.

>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Pamela Brown
> > marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/11/2012 5:40 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> On Feb 11, 7:13 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 2/10/2012 4:55 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>>>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>>
>>>> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
>>>> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.
>>
>>> Excuse me? Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
>>> Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
>>> that I posted?
>>
>> As I said, I read it long before you did.
>
> "Saying" is one thing; demonstrating is another.
>
> You have evidenced no understanding of the fact that the HSCA did not seem
> to find it implausible that LHO was offered citizenship and turned it

I don't care what the HSCA said. You are talking about two different time
frames. In 1959 Oswald offered to trade information for citizenship. The
Russians said no. Then in 1961 the Russians wanted to get rid of Oswald
and they asked him if he still wanted to become a citizen. He said no.

> down. This statement is anathema to the WC defenders and others who think
> LHO went to the USSR to become a citizen. You attempted to block

I don't give a damn what the WC defenders think. It is irrelevant to this
discussion because they refuse to read the evidence. I don't think
Oswald's goal was to become a citizen. It was to defect and become
important.

> discussion of this point. If you knew what you were blocking, that is all
> the more puzzling.

I am not blocking anything. Let your imagination run wild. I don't care.

>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
>>>>> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not. I have referred him
>>
>>>> And as usual you have to make up false claims to create strawman
>>>> arguments.
>>
>>> Not so. Is it not you who claimed that LHO wanted citizenship in
>>> exchange for secrets? By my hypothesis, that is a strawman.
>>
>> Offered. I didn't make that up from my imagination. It's what Oswald
>> himself said.
>
> You refuse to accept what LHO said about being offered citizenship and
> refusing and yet accept something else you think he said?
>

Quote for me EXACTLY what Oswald said about being offered citizenship
and more importantly EXACTLY when.

>> Your hypothesis would see it as a ruse.
>
> What LHO did on his arrival in Moscow was not clearcut. It takes
> insight to get all, or most, of the pieces to fall into place.
>

Except to the CIA.

>>
>>
>>
>>> You are forgetting about one very important factor. Time. At
>>>> the time that Oswald got to Russian he really did want to be granted
>>>> Soviet citizenship.
>>
>>> I disagree. He was told he had to leave the USSR. It is that that
>>> prompted his 'suicide attempt'. That is not the same as being granted
>>> citizenship.
>>
>> What you said has nothing to do with what I said
>
> Well then you and I disagree that he ever really wanted citizenship.
> I think that was a ruse.
>

It was a bargaining chip.
He wanted to stay in Moscow.

>>
>>
>>
>>>> Not so much after actually living there for a year.
>>
>>> I disagree. LHO sent a letter to Snyder that December that apparently
>>> he didn't receive. It is possible LHO intended to leave when he had
>>> conveyed the 'secret' information.
>>
>> Conveying what secret information and how? By writing it in his diary?
>
> Why are you playing tabulae rasa? We have already discussed this. He
> yelled at Snyder that he had secret information to give the Soviets,
> making sure it was loud enough to be picked up by the bugs at the Embassy.
> They could have followed up on that.
>

Please quote for me where he used the word "SECRET." You keep making these
nutty claims but when challenged you can't back them up.

And it could not possibly refer to the U-2 because that was TOP SECRET.
What I'd like to see you do is publish a transcript of his conversation
were he said the word EIDER.

It's like when I asked Fletcher Prouty if he had Yankee Blue and he didn't
even know what that meant. Who else would have known what those words
mean?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/11/2012 5:38 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> On Feb 11, 7:12 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 2/10/2012 7:45 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 9, 6:59 pm, john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
>>>> On 9 Feb 2012 19:54:22 -0500, Anthony Marsh
>>
>>>> <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/9/2012 3:47 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>>>>> On 9 Feb 2012 11:31:59 -0500, Pamela Brown<pamelaj...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> I've seen nothing to indicate that Oswald was ever offered Soviet
>>>>>> citizenship, and indeed, this document clearly says he was not:
>>
>>>>>> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=958...
>>
>>>>> I don't want to speak for Pamela, but I think her point is that this
>>>>> refers only to the INITIAL decision. She is talking about a later offer. I
>>>>> don't see the later offer as serious, just a pro forma checkback which
>>>>> Oswald refused.
>>
>>>> Here you have, post-assassination, a statement from the Soviet
>>>> government that they never gave him citizenship.
>>
>>> Whatever the USSR said after the assassination must be weighed in
>>> light of the implications of LHO having any tangible connection with
>>> the Russians or having been of any interest to them.
>>
>> You have to separate all those various elements of the story.
>
> That's only part of it.
>

I think you read some wild theory on a kook site and you are fascinated
by it, but have no way to check it out.

>> The Soviets lied about not having any interest in Oswald.
>
> Agreed. But I think they were interested in the secret information
> LHO promised to provide. You don't.
>

Yuriy Nosenko flatly said: "We had better information already coming from
KGB sources than he could ever give us." Oswald was debriefed, but as one
official later said: "There were conversations, but this was such outdated
information, the kind we say the sparrows had already chirped to the
entire world, and now Oswald tells us about it." Such as Dunlap, whom you
didn't even know about.

>> They told the truth about not recruiting him or using him.
>
> If he did transmit information that was used to help shoot down
> Powers' U-2, that is not exactly true. Agreed he was not recruited as
> a spy.
>

He could not possibly have any information which would help the Soviets
shoot down the U-2.

>> They told the truth about not granting him citizenship.
>
> They may not have told the whole truth. That would be a typical Soviet
> trick.
> LHO may have been offered it and declined.
>
>

Two different years. You are conflating.

>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

As always only vague hints. Never any proof of anything.

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Pamela Brown
>>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

You said and I quote, "he was brought to Moscow to see Powers." Prove
that. Who brought him? And was the purpose for his being there to see
Powers?

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Pamela Brown
>>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>
>

[Pamela Brown]

As always making false assumptions. There may have been a third party
involved.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> Pamela Brown
> >>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

Apparently you have yet to become oriented to the concept of an historical
process using an hypothesis. Otherwise you would quit making silly
statements such as that.

>
> >> The Soviets lied about not having any interest in Oswald.
>
> > Agreed.  But I think they were interested in the secret information
> > LHO promised to provide.  You don't.
>
> Yuriy Nosenko flatly said: "We had better information already coming from
> KGB sources than he could ever give us."

Haven't we already agreed that Nosenko did not know the whole story about
LHO because he was not in the inner KGB? Has it occurred to you that
Nosenko's statements need to be weighed and evaluated on that basis?
Aren't you the one with the sleuth background? Why haven't you thought of
that?

>Oswald was debriefed, but as one
> official later said: "There were conversations, but this was such outdated
> information, the kind we say the sparrows had already chirped to the
> entire world, and now Oswald tells us about it." Such as Dunlap, whom you
> didn't even know about.

Same thing. Do you take the Soviet 'officials' at their word without
weighing and evaluating what they are saying? Of course it was pragmatic
to distance themselves as much as possible from LHO. That doesn't mean
that is what happened.

>
> >> They told the truth about not recruiting him or using him.
>
> > If he did transmit information that was used to help shoot down
> > Powers' U-2, that is not exactly true.  Agreed he was not recruited as
> > a spy.
>
> He could not possibly have any information which would help the Soviets
> shoot down the U-2.

Your opinion. I think you are mistaken. Let's not go around in
circles again on this issues; why not agree-to-disagree and move on?

>
> >> They told the truth about not granting him citizenship.
>
> > They may not have told the whole truth. That would be a typical Soviet
> > trick.
> > LHO may have been offered it and declined.
>
> Two different years. You are conflating.
>

Untrue. LHO did not push for Soviet citizenship. He later downplayed
what he did do. I don't think it was his goal.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

LHO said he saw Powers. That would have been in Moscow during the trial.
Since LHO needed permission to travel, someone else had to have been
involved. For what other purpose than as a perk to someone who had
contributed to Powers' being shot down would that happen?


>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> Pamela Brown
> >>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 11, 9:47 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/11/2012 5:40 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 11, 7:13 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net>  wrote:
> >> On 2/10/2012 4:55 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> >>> On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net>    wrote:
> >>>> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> >>>>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>
> >>>> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
> >>>> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.
>
> >>> Excuse me?  Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
> >>> Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
> >>> that I posted?
>
> >> As I said, I read it long before you did.
>
> > "Saying" is one thing; demonstrating is another.
>
> > You have evidenced no understanding of the fact that the HSCA did not seem
> > to find it implausible that LHO was offered citizenship and turned it
>
> I don't care what the HSCA said.

You see, that is the difference between us. I weigh and evaluate all
known evidence and you cherrypick. I am demonstrating to you how to use
an historical process. Why not learn from that?

>You are talking about two different time
> frames.

No. That is your strawman. I have made it clear I am talking about
1959.

> In 1959 Oswald offered to trade information for citizenship.

He may have said something to that effect. I don't think that is what
he did.


>The
> Russians said no.

I don't think it was a quid pro quo.

>Then in 1961 the Russians wanted to get rid of Oswald
> and they asked him if he still wanted to become a citizen.

You finally acknowledge that LHO was offered citizenship. Perhaps
there is hope.

I think that offer may have been made earlier than 1961. Perhaps when he
was in Moscow and saw Powers during the trial.

>He said no.

He did not follow through in 1959 either. He may not have wanted
citizenship at all. He may have wanted to remain in the USSR in order to
provide them with information. Then he may have wanted to find a wife.

>
> > down.  This statement is anathema to the WC defenders and others who think
> > LHO went to the USSR to become a citizen.  You attempted to block
>
> I don't give a damn what the WC defenders think.

Why not at least acknowledge when your position is no different that
theirs?

> It is irrelevant to this
> discussion because they refuse to read the evidence.

How is that different from your refusal to even acknowledge what the
HSCA Defector Study said?

> I don't think
> Oswald's goal was to become a citizen.

Nice to see we agree on that.

>It was to defect and become
> important.

I don't think that was the main goal.

>
> > discussion of this point.  If you knew what you were blocking, that is all
> > the more puzzling.
>
> I am not blocking anything. Let your imagination run wild. I don't care.

Fine. Then step aside.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> research, has made repeated claims that LHO would have accepted Soviet
> >>>>> citizenship if offerred to him, and that it was not.  I have referred him
>
> >>>> And as usual you have to make up false claims to create strawman
> >>>> arguments.
>
> >>> Not so.  Is it not you who claimed that LHO wanted citizenship in
> >>> exchange for secrets?  By my hypothesis, that is a strawman.
>
> >> Offered. I didn't make that up from my imagination. It's what Oswald
> >> himself said.
>
> > You refuse to accept what LHO said about being offered citizenship and
> > refusing and yet accept something else you think he said?
>
> Quote for me EXACTLY what Oswald said about being offered citizenship
> and more importantly EXACTLY when.

You have said different things. In this post, you finally admit he
said he had been in 1961.

>
> >> Your hypothesis would see it as a ruse.
>
> > What LHO did on his arrival in Moscow was not clearcut.  It takes
> > insight to get all, or most, of the pieces to fall into place.
>
> Except to the CIA.

There is no need for CIA. LHO was doing this on his own. Why not take
all the kooky spy theories out of the mix and look at what actually
happened?

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> You are forgetting about one very important factor. Time. At
> >>>> the time that Oswald got to Russian he really did want to be granted
> >>>> Soviet citizenship.
>
> >>> I disagree.  He was told he had to leave the USSR.  It is that that
> >>> prompted his 'suicide attempt'.  That is not the same as being granted
> >>> citizenship.
>
> >> What you said has nothing to do with what I said
>
> > Well then you and I disagree that he ever really wanted citizenship.
> > I think that was a ruse.
>
> It was a bargaining chip.
> He wanted to stay in Moscow.

I don't think that was the goal.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> Not so much after actually living there for a year.
>
> >>> I disagree.  LHO sent a letter to Snyder that December that apparently
> >>> he didn't receive.  It is possible LHO intended to leave when he had
> >>> conveyed the 'secret' information.
>
> >> Conveying what secret information and how? By writing it in his diary?
>
> > Why are you playing tabulae rasa?  We have already discussed this.  He
> > yelled at Snyder that he had secret information to give the Soviets,
> > making sure it was loud enough to be picked up by the bugs at the Embassy.
> > They could have followed up on that.
>
> Please quote for me where he used the word "SECRET." You keep making these
> nutty claims but when challenged you can't back them up.

Strawman. He said he would devulge secrete. Are you now trying to
claim that his assurance that he would devulge any secrets he learned
in the Marines was false?

>
> And it could not possibly refer to the U-2 because that was TOP SECRET.

LHO was stationed at Atsugi. He was a radar operator. He tracked
U-2's. Security may have been poor there. Who knows what LHO knew?

> What I'd like to see you do is publish a transcript of his conversation
> were he said the word EIDER.
>

Fallacy of false alternatives. We have already been over this. I
have had access to secret information without any security clearance.
It can happen.

> It's like when I asked Fletcher Prouty if he had Yankee Blue and he didn't
> even know what that meant. Who else would have known what those words

> mean?[...]

Fallacy of false alternatives again. There are other sources of secret
information than those coming from direct involvement in a project.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/13/2012 11:49 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> On Feb 11, 9:47 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 2/11/2012 5:40 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 11, 7:13 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2/10/2012 4:55 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>>
>>>>>> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
>>>>>> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.
>>
>>>>> Excuse me? Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
>>>>> Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
>>>>> that I posted?
>>
>>>> As I said, I read it long before you did.
>>
>>> "Saying" is one thing; demonstrating is another.
>>
>>> You have evidenced no understanding of the fact that the HSCA did not seem
>>> to find it implausible that LHO was offered citizenship and turned it
>>
>> I don't care what the HSCA said.
>
> You see, that is the difference between us. I weigh and evaluate all
> known evidence and you cherrypick. I am demonstrating to you how to use
> an historical process. Why not learn from that?
>

I examine things you didn't even know about.

>> You are talking about two different time
>> frames.
>
> No. That is your strawman. I have made it clear I am talking about
> 1959.
>

No, you said that Soviets offered Oswald citizenship and he turned it
down. That happened in 1961 not 1959.

>> In 1959 Oswald offered to trade information for citizenship.
>
> He may have said something to that effect. I don't think that is what
> he did.
>

No one says that he actually did trade information for citizenship. He
told Snyder that he made that offer. In the business we call it a dangle.
The Soviets weren't biting, because they knew he could not possibly have
anything of value.

>
>> The
>> Russians said no.
>
> I don't think it was a quid pro quo.
>

That was the deal. The Soviets refused the deal.

>
>> Then in 1961 the Russians wanted to get rid of Oswald
>> and they asked him if he still wanted to become a citizen.
>
>
> You finally acknowledge that LHO was offered citizenship. Perhaps
> there is hope.
>

Yes, which disagrees with that you were saying.

> I think that offer may have been made earlier than 1961. Perhaps when he
> was in Moscow and saw Powers during the trial.
>

That's why I complain about what you say. We know it didn't happen until
1961, but you GUESS that maybe it happened earlier. No facts. I could
guess that it happened in 1939 and if you object I could come back that
you are "blocking my process."

>> He said no.
>
> He did not follow through in 1959 either. He may not have wanted
> citizenship at all. He may have wanted to remain in the USSR in order to
> provide them with information. Then he may have wanted to find a wife.
>

May have.
May have.
May have.

You call that research?

>>
>>> down. This statement is anathema to the WC defenders and others who think
>>> LHO went to the USSR to become a citizen. You attempted to block
>>
>> I don't give a damn what the WC defenders think.
>
> Why not at least acknowledge when your position is no different that
> theirs?
>

So when you keep shooting at me and missing you want to hand me the gun
and ask me to shoot myself? I told you before I don't care what the WC
defenders think.
They think the Zapruder film is authentic.
I proved that the Zapruder film is authentic.
Therefore the kooks conclude that I am a WC defender.
You can only make yourself the hero by making everyone else the enemy.

>> It is irrelevant to this
>> discussion because they refuse to read the evidence.
>
> How is that different from your refusal to even acknowledge what the
> HSCA Defector Study said?
>

I have discussed it many times before.

>> I don't think
>> Oswald's goal was to become a citizen.
>
> Nice to see we agree on that.
>
>> It was to defect and become
>> important.
>
> I don't think that was the main goal.
>
>>
>>> discussion of this point. If you knew what you were blocking, that is all
>>> the more puzzling.
>>
>> I am not blocking anything. Let your imagination run wild. I don't care.
>
> Fine. Then step aside.

Get off the dark path you've chosen.

Security poor? Explain that.
He just looked at his radar screen.

>> What I'd like to see you do is publish a transcript of his conversation
>> were he said the word EIDER.
>>
>
> Fallacy of false alternatives. We have already been over this. I
> have had access to secret information without any security clearance.
> It can happen.
>
>> It's like when I asked Fletcher Prouty if he had Yankee Blue and he didn't
>> even know what that meant. Who else would have known what those words
>> mean?[...]
>
> Fallacy of false alternatives again. There are other sources of secret
> information than those coming from direct involvement in a project.
>

Show me.
You are merely guessing.

> Pamela Brown
> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>

[Anthony Marsh]

You are fantasizing. I asked you to prove that someone brought Oswald to
see Powers. You could not. So don't claim it. You can claim that Oswald
went to Moscow only to see Powers. That's fine. It was a show trial. But
you claimed that someone brought Oswald to Moscow and you don't have any
proof of that.

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Pamela Brown
>>>>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

First look at the facts. Don't start by making up a hypothesis and then
go around looking for ONLY the facts which support your hypothesis.

>>
>>>> The Soviets lied about not having any interest in Oswald.
>>
>>> Agreed. But I think they were interested in the secret information
>>> LHO promised to provide. You don't.
>>
>> Yuriy Nosenko flatly said: "We had better information already coming from
>> KGB sources than he could ever give us."
>
> Haven't we already agreed that Nosenko did not know the whole story about
> LHO because he was not in the inner KGB? Has it occurred to you that
> Nosenko's statements need to be weighed and evaluated on that basis?
> Aren't you the one with the sleuth background? Why haven't you thought of
> that?

Then show me what Nosenko did not know.

>
>> Oswald was debriefed, but as one
>> official later said: "There were conversations, but this was such outdated
>> information, the kind we say the sparrows had already chirped to the
>> entire world, and now Oswald tells us about it." Such as Dunlap, whom you
>> didn't even know about.
>
> Same thing. Do you take the Soviet 'officials' at their word without
> weighing and evaluating what they are saying? Of course it was pragmatic
> to distance themselves as much as possible from LHO. That doesn't mean
> that is what happened.
>

Simple facts, not guessing.

>>
>>>> They told the truth about not recruiting him or using him.
>>
>>> If he did transmit information that was used to help shoot down
>>> Powers' U-2, that is not exactly true. Agreed he was not recruited as
>>> a spy.
>>
>> He could not possibly have any information which would help the Soviets
>> shoot down the U-2.
>
> Your opinion. I think you are mistaken. Let's not go around in
> circles again on this issues; why not agree-to-disagree and move on?
>

When you move on try doing some actual research.

[Anthony Marsh]

May have.
May have.
May have.

Never any facts.

>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Pamela Brown
>>>>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com
>
>

[Pamela Brown]

You have yet to understand that an hypothesis is being tested. It is
a possibility. I am asking myself if all, or most, of the known
evidence falls in line with it or not.

When I want to demonstrate a thesis, I will do it in an article. Why
not acknowledge that I know what I am doing and quit making silly
statements that do nothing to move things forward?

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

On Feb 13, 3:14 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/13/2012 11:49 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 11, 9:47 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net>  wrote:
> >> On 2/11/2012 5:40 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> >>> On Feb 11, 7:13 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net>    wrote:
> >>>> On 2/10/2012 4:55 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Feb 9, 2:49 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net>      wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2/9/2012 11:31 AM, Pamela Brown wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> Anthony Marsh, who appears to enjoy chastizing others for not doing
>
> >>>>>> More mindless attacks because you've decided that you need to create
> >>>>>> enemies to puff up your importance. Tilting at windmills.
>
> >>>>> Excuse me?  Don't you regularly tell others to do their homework?
> >>>>> Have you even bothered to read the HSCA Defector Study with the link
> >>>>> that I posted?
>
> >>>> As I said, I read it long before you did.
>
> >>> "Saying" is one thing; demonstrating is another.
>
> >>> You have evidenced no understanding of the fact that the HSCA did not seem
> >>> to find it implausible that LHO was offered citizenship and turned it
>
> >> I don't care what the HSCA said.
>
> > You see, that is the difference between us.  I weigh and evaluate all
> > known evidence and you cherrypick.  I am demonstrating to you how to use
> > an historical process.  Why not learn from that?
>
> I examine things you didn't even know about.

Were that the case, you would have tested my hypothesis long ago.

>
> >> You are talking about two different time
> >> frames.
>
> > No.  That is your strawman.  I have made it clear I am talking about
> > 1959.
>
> No, you said that Soviets offered Oswald citizenship and he turned it
> down. That happened in 1961 not 1959.

No. There is documentation, which you finally acknowledge, that LHO said
he was offered citizenshp in 1961. It is part of my hypothesis that he
may have been offered citizenship even earlier and turned it down.

>
> >> In 1959 Oswald offered to trade information for citizenship.
>
> > He may have said something to that effect.  I don't think that is what
> > he did.
>
> No one says that he actually did trade information for citizenship.

Of course not. But you claim the strawman that LHO would not have
given up his secret information without citizenship. I disagree.

>He
> told Snyder that he made that offer.

He told Snyder loud enough to be picked up by the bugs in the embassy that
he was making that offer. What actually occurred, however, might have
been something slightly different.

>In the business we call it a dangle.

Ridiculous. "In the spy business"? You jump to the conclusion that LHO
was some sort of spy? In my hypothesis he is not a part of any 'business'
except his own.

Your position also fails to address the documented evidence that LHO
frequently said two different things at the same time and/or two opposing
things at the same time. In addition, he may say one thing and actually
do something else. That is called an agenda. I think he may have had
one.

> The Soviets weren't biting, because they knew he could not possibly have
> anything of value.

Your position. I disagree. That is just what KGB and the WC want us
to think. I ask why.

> >> The
> >> Russians said no.
>
> > I don't think it was a quid pro quo.
>
> That was the deal. The Soviets refused the deal.

No. That is your position. I think it is false. It was not the
deal. LHO was making his own deal.

>
>
>
> >> Then in 1961 the Russians wanted to get rid of Oswald
> >> and they asked him if he still wanted to become a citizen.
>
> > You finally acknowledge that LHO was offered citizenship.  Perhaps
> > there is hope.
>
> Yes,  which disagrees with that you were saying.

No it does not. You finally acknowledge the evidence for 1961. You
refuse to acknowledge the possibility that the initial offer of
citizenship came earlier than that.

>
> > I think that offer may have been made earlier than 1961.  Perhaps when he
> > was in Moscow and saw Powers during the trial.
>
> That's why I complain about what you say. We know it didn't happen until
> 1961, but you GUESS that maybe it happened earlier.

Sloppy logic. Let me correct it for you. There is evidence that it
happened in 1961. Based on events that occurred we may infer than an
offer was made in 1960 when LHO went to Moscow and saw Powers.

> No facts. I could
> guess that it happened in 1939 and if you object I could come back that
> you are "blocking my process."

You just need to have the blips in the faulty logic corrected. No big
deal. I am used to it.

>
> >> He said no.
>
> > He did not follow through in 1959 either.  He may not have wanted
> > citizenship at all.  He may have wanted to remain in the USSR in order to
> > provide them with information.  Then he may have wanted to find a wife.
>
> May have.
> May have.
> May have.
>
> You call that research?

I call it testing an hypothesis. Why do you refuse to acknowledge
that? I am giving you as much help as I can...

>

>
>
> >>> down.  This statement is anathema to the WC defenders and others who think
> >>> LHO went to the USSR to become a citizen.  You attempted to block
>
> >> I don't give a damn what the WC defenders think.
>
> > Why not at least acknowledge when your position is no different that
> > theirs?
>
> So when you keep shooting at me and missing you want to hand me the gun
> and ask me to shoot myself? I told you before I don't care what the WC
> defenders think.

Fine. Your position on LHO and the U-2 is the same as theirs.

> They think the Zapruder film is authentic.
> I proved that the Zapruder film is authentic.

No, you proved only to your own satisfaction that you think the Z-
film(s) are authentic. You have not persuaded me.

> Therefore the kooks conclude that I am a WC defender.

You have positions consistent with those of a WC defender. Plus, you
seem to have a very difficult time questioning the evidence.

> You can only make yourself the hero by making everyone else the enemy.

If you don't like the heat...

>
> >> It is irrelevant to this
> >> discussion because they refuse to read the evidence.
>
> > How is that different from your refusal to even acknowledge what the
> > HSCA Defector Study said?
>
> I have discussed it many times before.

No, you ignored my discussion of it until I started this thread.

>
> >> I don't think
> >> Oswald's goal was to become a citizen.
>
> > Nice to see we agree on that.
>
> >> It was to defect and become
> >> important.
>
> > I don't think that was the main goal.
>
> >>> discussion of this point.  If you knew what you were blocking, that is all
> >>> the more puzzling.
>
> >> I am not blocking anything. Let your imagination run wild. I don't care.
>
> > Fine.  Then step aside.
>
> Get off the dark path you've chosen.

My hypothesis is pulling subtleties out of your false claims. You don't
like that.

Nobody as yet has been able to provide a motive for LHO that includes and
takes into account all of the significant things that he did. Perhaps I
will, because I am able to reason with logic and not simply swallow whole
platitudes about LHO and his involvement with the USSR.

Security at Atsugi. Who knows what LHO may have had access to?

If someone such as I can walk off the street into NASA at Edwards AFB in
1991 with a family friend, and, after touching the underbelly of the SR-71
Blackbird (which you are not supposed to do), spend part of a day with the
F22 , then in development and secret enough to get me kicked out when the
Germans finally realized I was there, I think it is wrong to close the
door on that possibility..

>
> >> What I'd like to see you do is publish a transcript of his conversation
> >> were he said the word EIDER.
>
> > Fallacy of false alternatives.  We have already been over this.  I
> > have had access to secret information without any security clearance.
> > It can happen.
>
> >> It's like when I asked Fletcher Prouty if he had Yankee Blue and he didn't
> >> even know what that meant. Who else would have known what those words
> >> mean?[...]
>
> > Fallacy of false alternatives again.  There are other sources of secret
> > information than those coming from direct involvement in a project.
>
> Show me.
> You are merely guessing.

You refuse to acknowledge that I am testing an hypothesis. That is the
equivalent of saying 'what if?' I am doing my best to demonstrate this to
you.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

What hypothesis?

>>
>>>> You are talking about two different time
>>>> frames.
>>
>>> No. That is your strawman. I have made it clear I am talking about
>>> 1959.
>>
>> No, you said that Soviets offered Oswald citizenship and he turned it
>> down. That happened in 1961 not 1959.
>
> No. There is documentation, which you finally acknowledge, that LHO said
> he was offered citizenshp in 1961. It is part of my hypothesis that he
> may have been offered citizenship even earlier and turned it down.
>

Silly.

>>
>>>> In 1959 Oswald offered to trade information for citizenship.
>>
>>> He may have said something to that effect. I don't think that is what
>>> he did.
>>
>> No one says that he actually did trade information for citizenship.
>
> Of course not. But you claim the strawman that LHO would not have
> given up his secret information without citizenship. I disagree.
>
>> He
>> told Snyder that he made that offer.
>
> He told Snyder loud enough to be picked up by the bugs in the embassy that
> he was making that offer. What actually occurred, however, might have
> been something slightly different.
>

And it probably was recorded.

>> In the business we call it a dangle.
>
> Ridiculous. "In the spy business"? You jump to the conclusion that LHO
> was some sort of spy? In my hypothesis he is not a part of any 'business'
> except his own.

He was a spy wannabe. Why else defect?
Ordinary folk do not defect.

[Pamela Brown]

Are you still playing tabulae rasa?

For about a month I have been testing the hypothesis that LHO was a
traitor but not a spy who may have had an agenda other than
citizenship in the USSR but may have provided secret information to
them that contriubted to the downing of Powers U-2.

>
>
>
> >>>> You are talking about two different time
> >>>> frames.
>
> >>> No.  That is your strawman.  I have made it clear I am talking about
> >>> 1959.
>
> >> No, you said that Soviets offered Oswald citizenship and he turned it
> >> down. That happened in 1961 not 1959.
>
> > No.  There is documentation, which you finally acknowledge, that LHO said
> > he was offered citizenshp in 1961.  It is part of my hypothesis that he
> > may have been offered citizenship even earlier and turned it down.
>
> Silly.

Keep those blinders firmly in place.

How can you dismiss the curious coincidences that LHO, a radar
operator at Atsugi, a home of the U-2, just happens to pop up in
Moscow claiming that he will divulge information of special interest
to the Russians; after which Powers' U-2 is shot down, wrecking an
upcoming summit, in the single most humiliating event in US
diplomacy? He then claims to have seen Powers. And Powers believed
LHO did provide information contriuting to the shootdown.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> In 1959 Oswald offered to trade information for citizenship.
>
> >>> He may have said something to that effect.  I don't think that is what
> >>> he did.
>
> >> No one says that he actually did trade information for citizenship.
>
> > Of course not.  But you claim the strawman that LHO would not have
> > given up his secret information without citizenship.  I disagree.
>
> >> He
> >> told Snyder that he made that offer.
>
> > He told Snyder loud enough to be picked up by the bugs in the embassy that
> > he was making that offer.  What actually occurred, however, might have
> > been something slightly different.
>
> And it probably was recorded.

You are the one with the spook background. Since when would something
being done in secret *have* to be recorded?

>
> >> In the business we call it a dangle.
>
> > Ridiculous.  "In the spy business"?  You jump to the conclusion that LHO
> > was some sort of spy?  In my hypothesis he is not a part of any 'business'
> > except his own.
>
> He was a spy wannabe.

That is part of the WC defender position.

> Why else defect?

What about your belief that JJA was running a false defector program
that included LHO?

I can think of a number of reasons to appear to 'defect'.

> Ordinary folk do not defect.[...]

Whoever said LHO was ordinary? Only WC defenders, who just dismiss
him as a nut.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

False. There is evidence that LHO says he saw Powers. It is a matter of
connecting the dots; something somebody with a spook background should
have no trouble doing.

>I asked you to prove that someone brought Oswald to
> see Powers. You could not.

False. I am opening the door to the possibility. How many times do I
have to say that you don't prove an hypothesis; you test it.

>So don't claim it. You can claim that Oswald
> went to Moscow only to see Powers. That's fine. It was a show trial. But
> you claimed that someone brought Oswald to Moscow and you don't have any
> proof of that.

Why try to throw the baby out with the bathwater? If LHO went to Moscow
to see Powers, how did that happen? Who was involved. Are you saying LHO
traveled without permission? What evidence do you have of that?

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> Pamela Brown
> >>>>> marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Pamela Brown]

Ditto.

I take all the information into account and weigh and evalute it. I don't
ignore what I don't like or cherrypick as you seem to. That is the
difference between us. I can explain my logic. You cannot.

>
>
>
> >>>> The Soviets lied about not having any interest in Oswald.
>
> >>> Agreed.  But I think they were interested in the secret information
> >>> LHO promised to provide.  You don't.
>
> >> Yuriy Nosenko flatly said: "We had better information already coming from
> >> KGB sources than he could ever give us."
>
> > Haven't we already agreed that Nosenko did not know the whole story about
> > LHO because he was not in the inner KGB?  Has it occurred to you that
> > Nosenko's statements need to be weighed and evaluated on that basis?
> > Aren't you the one with the sleuth background?  Why haven't you thought of
> > that?
>
> Then show me what Nosenko did not know.

Do you mean demonstrate?

JJA demonstrated that he did not believe Nosenko by imprisoning and
torturing him. Are you ignoring that?

>
>
>
> >> Oswald was debriefed, but as one
> >> official later said: "There were conversations, but this was such outdated
> >> information, the kind we say the sparrows had already chirped to the
> >> entire world, and now Oswald tells us about it." Such as Dunlap, whom you
> >> didn't even know about.
>
> > Same thing.  Do you take the Soviet 'officials' at their word without
> > weighing and evaluating what they are saying?  Of course it was pragmatic
> > to distance themselves as much as possible from LHO.  That doesn't mean
> > that is what happened.
>
> Simple facts, not guessing.

KGB is similar to a set of Russian dolls. You should know that you
can't just swallow whatever it is they say.

>
>
>
> >>>> They told the truth about not recruiting him or using him.
>
> >>> If he did transmit information that was used to help shoot down
> >>> Powers' U-2, that is not exactly true.  Agreed he was not recruited as
> >>> a spy.
>
> >> He could not possibly have any information which would help the Soviets
> >> shoot down the U-2.
>
> > Your opinion.  I think you are mistaken.  Let's not go around in
> > circles again on this issues; why not agree-to-disagree and move on?
>
> When you move on try doing some actual research.

How long will it take you to acknowledge that is just what I am doing,
in spite of the little roadblocks you are trying to throw out?

[Anthony Marsh]

Post Hoc Fallacy.

> to the Russians; after which Powers' U-2 is shot down, wrecking an
> upcoming summit, in the single most humiliating event in US
> diplomacy? He then claims to have seen Powers. And Powers believed
> LHO did provide information contriuting to the shootdown.
>

Like you he was only speculating.
Oswald could not have known anything which would allow the Soviets to
shoot down the U-2.
Some people also believe that the CIA sabotaged Powers' helicopter so
why don't you investigate that?

[Anthony Marsh]

You are ignoring the fact that the CIA eventually determined that
Angleton was wrong and Nosenko was genuine.
Angleton never did find the real mole. But he ruined the CIA in the process.

>>
>>
>>
>>>> Oswald was debriefed, but as one
>>>> official later said: "There were conversations, but this was such outdated
>>>> information, the kind we say the sparrows had already chirped to the
>>>> entire world, and now Oswald tells us about it." Such as Dunlap, whom you
>>>> didn't even know about.
>>
>>> Same thing. Do you take the Soviet 'officials' at their word without
>>> weighing and evaluating what they are saying? Of course it was pragmatic
>>> to distance themselves as much as possible from LHO. That doesn't mean
>>> that is what happened.
>>
>> Simple facts, not guessing.
>
> KGB is similar to a set of Russian dolls. You should know that you
> can't just swallow whatever it is they say.
>

I never have.

[Pamela Brown]

Unlike you he had first-hand information.

> Oswald could not have known anything which would allow the Soviets to
> shoot down the U-2.

Same shibboleth pushed by WC defenders and KGB. You won't bother to
ask why. I have to do that.

> Some people also believe that the CIA sabotaged Powers' helicopter so
> why don't you investigate that?

What does that have to do with LHO?

[Anthony Marsh]

Not much on the U-2. I know more than he did.

>> Oswald could not have known anything which would allow the Soviets to
>> shoot down the U-2.
>
> Same shibboleth pushed by WC defenders and KGB. You won't bother to
> ask why. I have to do that.
>

Why what? Why he could not?

>> Some people also believe that the CIA sabotaged Powers' helicopter so
>> why don't you investigate that?
>
> What does that have to do with LHO?
>

If you really want to consider every hypothesis so your research is not
blocked then you should also look into the death of Powers. It is part
of that conspiracy theory.

[Pamela Brown]

False assumption. I ignore nothing. I thought we already agreed that
Noseko was telling the truth because he didn't know everything, not being
in the inner KGB.

JJA was sufficiently unsophisticated not to have taken that consideration
seriously. Or worse, just wore blinders.

> Angleton never did find the real mole. But he ruined the CIA in the process.

Yet you believe the CI baloney he had put out on LHO and the USSR? JJA was
CIA liaison to the WC. He told them what he wanted them to know; not
necessarily the truth.

[Pamela Brown]

Unbelievable. Powers flew a U-2. You read books.

>
> >> Oswald could not have known anything which would allow the Soviets to
> >> shoot down the U-2.
>
> > Same shibboleth pushed by WC defenders and KGB.  You won't bother to
> > ask why.  I have to do that.
>
> Why what? Why he could not?

You cannot say he "could not" have known secret information about the U-2.
You can only say you don't think so.

>
> >> Some people also believe that the CIA sabotaged Powers' helicopter so
> >> why don't you investigate that?
>
> > What does that have to do with LHO?
>
> If you really want to consider every hypothesis so your research is not
> blocked then you should also look into the death of Powers. It is part
> of that conspiracy theory.

GP was allowed to live for quite a while after the U-2 shootdown and after
the asassination. If he was to be silenced regarding what he knew, why
wait so long?

[Anthony Marsh]

Not what I said. I said that Nosenko told the truth in general as he knew
it. He did lie about some minor things to try to puff up his importance.
This is a routine problem with defectors. They want to be taken seriously
and accepted as somebody important. You also have to remember that Nosenko
started out as a double agent and only defected when he realized that he
had been discovered. This is why he was fed the story from the KGB about
Oswald and the scared into defecting. It's like when Washington put the
double agent into the guard house after feeding him a story and put the
key to the guard house in his pocket to let him escape and tell the story
to the British. And they fell for it. A classic deception.

> JJA was sufficiently unsophisticated not to have taken that consideration
> seriously. Or worse, just wore blinders.
>

I don't remember the exact timing, but I believe that Angleton had
already been forced out before Nosenko was officially cleared.

>> Angleton never did find the real mole. But he ruined the CIA in the process.
>
> Yet you believe the CI baloney he had put out on LHO and the USSR? JJA was
> CIA liaison to the WC. He told them what he wanted them to know; not
> necessarily the truth.
>
>
>

What exactly did JJA put out?
It was a simple fact that Oswald had talked to Kostikov at the embassy
in Mexico. JJA did not push the Pedro Charles story.

[Pamela Brown]

Agreed.

>
> > JJA was sufficiently unsophisticated not to have taken that consideration
> > seriously.  Or worse, just wore blinders.
>
> I don't remember the exact timing, but I believe that Angleton had
> already been forced out before Nosenko was officially cleared.

I think that is correct.

>
> >> Angleton never did find the real mole. But he ruined the CIA in the process.
>
> > Yet you believe the CI baloney he had put out on LHO and the USSR? JJA was
> > CIA liaison to the WC.  He told them what he wanted them to know; not
> > necessarily the truth.
>
> What exactly did JJA put out?

Since JJA was the liaison to the WC, and he could at times be a clever
manipulator, it seems appropriate to take as a working hypothesis that
whatever the WC was allowed to *know* had his sanction. For example, as
Nosenko was imprisoned and being tortured, the WC was not supposed to
*know* about him. Therefore, he did not give testimony to the WC.

Ironically, it seems that JJA may have been putting forth the immature
amateur spy and braggart (who had no info of value to the Soviets) image
to the WC, while not long after coaxing Epstein into a portrayal of LHO
that was intended to provide us with the rabbit trail that either he or
Marina (or both) might have been spies. Following my hypothesis, however,
that is not likely (at least with LHO).

> It was a simple fact that Oswald had talked to Kostikov at the embassy

Agreed. We don't know, though, if he knew him from the USSR.

> in Mexico. JJA did not push the Pedro Charles story.

Agreed.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

But the WC did know about Nosenko and were intentionally not given access
to him. Everything had to be filtered through Angleton.

> Ironically, it seems that JJA may have been putting forth the immature
> amateur spy and braggart (who had no info of value to the Soviets) image
> to the WC, while not long after coaxing Epstein into a portrayal of LHO
> that was intended to provide us with the rabbit trail that either he or
> Marina (or both) might have been spies. Following my hypothesis, however,
> that is not likely (at least with LHO).
>

Angleton's theory was that Nosenko was a master spy sent on a
disinformation mission.

[Pamela Brown]

Agreed. The WC was not allowed to understand Nosenko's possible
significance. It seems similar to evidence not admissible at a
trial. They weren't allowed to weigh and evaluate what he had to
say.

> Everything had to be filtered through Angleton.

Yes.

>
> > Ironically, it seems that JJA may have been putting forth the immature
> > amateur spy and braggart (who had no info of value to the Soviets) image
> > to the WC, while not long after coaxing Epstein into a portrayal of LHO
> > that was intended to provide us with the rabbit trail that either he or
> > Marina (or both) might have been spies.  Following my hypothesis, however,
> > that is not likely (at least with LHO).
>
> Angleton's theory was that Nosenko was a master spy sent on a
> disinformation mission.
>

Agreed. Surprising (or is it) that nobody tried to unravel this eccentric
theory. If Nosenko was going to give the WC what they wanted to hear, why
would JJA be afraid of what he had to say?

JJA seemed to manage to hold the great threat of 'possible' Soviet
involvement in the assassination over the WC's head successfully, so
nobody was even able to ask questions about what was going on. So,
perhaps, if the WC were to realize that Nosenko was telling the truth (of
what he knew, at least) that there really was no threat of Soviet
involvement, did JJA feel he would lose power over them?

[Anthony Marsh]

Because being the professional that he was he could not conceive of the
Russians not being at all interested in an American defector.

> JJA seemed to manage to hold the great threat of 'possible' Soviet
> involvement in the assassination over the WC's head successfully, so
> nobody was even able to ask questions about what was going on. So,

Some people think that was the purpose of the hoaxes, to neutralize the
investigation into conspiracy.

> perhaps, if the WC were to realize that Nosenko was telling the truth (of
> what he knew, at least) that there really was no threat of Soviet
> involvement, did JJA feel he would lose power over them?
>

With a story that complex it is hard to decide what is true and what is
deception. The WC was not up to the task.

[Pamela Brown]

I don't consider JJA much of a professional; more of a bungler. And I
don't think his treatment of Noseko should be given any appearance of
virtue.

Why, if he in CI/CIA merely monitored LHO to see where he was going and
what he was up to, as they did all defectors, could he not conceive of KGB
doing the same thing?

>
> > JJA seemed to manage to hold the great threat of 'possible' Soviet
> > involvement in the assassination over the WC's head successfully, so
> > nobody was even able to ask questions about what was going on.  So,
>
> Some people think that was the purpose of the hoaxes, to neutralize the
> investigation into conspiracy.

It helps to place the WC in an appropriate historical context.

Ironic that in all of the U-2 documents, Dulles' name also pops up as a
great deceiver from the Soviet side. He too was positioned on the WC so
as to protect his/CIA's interests, and to keep the whole truth from coming
out.

>
> > perhaps, if the WC were to realize that Nosenko was telling the truth (of
> > what he knew, at least) that there really was no threat of Soviet
> > involvement, did JJA feel he would lose power over them?
>
> With a story that complex it is hard to decide what is true and what is
> deception. The WC was not up to the task.

Nor were they even allowed to be faced with the challenge of doing so.
If only WC defenders could understand the WCR in historical context.
They would see how limited its scope was, due to the shenanigans of Dulles
and JJA.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

Sometimes the most professional have a fatal flaw.

> Why, if he in CI/CIA merely monitored LHO to see where he was going and
> what he was up to, as they did all defectors, could he not conceive of KGB
> doing the same thing?
>

My theory is that Angleton sent Oswald as a dry run to see how the KGB
would vet a defector. It is similar to a trick that some desk officers
use of feeding false information to a known double agent to see where
the alarm bells are set off in the opposition. And check to see if the
double agent is still believed by the other side.

[Pamela Brown]

If that flaw renders them unprofessional, they are simply useless.

>
> > Why, if he in CI/CIA merely monitored LHO to see where he was going and
> > what he was up to, as they did all defectors, could he not conceive of KGB
> > doing the same thing?
>
> My theory is that Angleton sent Oswald as a dry run to see how the KGB
> would vet a defector.

Just why would he do that? What do you mean by 'sent'? Do you have any
proof, or are you just picking up ideas from conspiracy books?

>It is similar to a trick that some desk officers
> use of feeding false information to a known double agent to see where
> the alarm bells are set off in the opposition.

If this is the same Angleton whom you said investigated everyone whose
name began with a certain letter, you are probably not talking about
someone with a capacity to enact a strategy like that.

>And check to see if the

> double agent is still believed by the other side.[...]

Why not 'send' someone he could trust, rather than a conflicted
troublemaker with delusions of grandeur such as you seem to consider LHO?

It's one thing to bandy about spy games and claim this and that. Its
something else to prove it. There seems to be no documentation of any JJA
'false defector program'. It is merely something a few CTs seem to claim
'existed' without any evidence.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

No. Can you ahow me any conspiracy book that includes that theory?
I didn't think so. I certainly hope that on one else has thought of
this. My concept is that Angleton would borrow Oswald from the ONI and
send him to Moscow as a sleeper agent.

>> It is similar to a trick that some desk officers
>> use of feeding false information to a known double agent to see where
>> the alarm bells are set off in the opposition.
>
> If this is the same Angleton whom you said investigated everyone whose
> name began with a certain letter, you are probably not talking about
> someone with a capacity to enact a strategy like that.
>

Angleton had a very complex mind and he could play slowly and plan far
ahead.

>> And check to see if the
>> double agent is still believed by the other side.[...]
>
> Why not 'send' someone he could trust, rather than a conflicted
> troublemaker with delusions of grandeur such as you seem to consider LHO?
>

Because that person would be instantly identified as a CIA officer or
agent. Why not send Richard Helms for Christ's sake? Why not stamp SPY
on his forehead.

> It's one thing to bandy about spy games and claim this and that. Its
> something else to prove it. There seems to be no documentation of any JJA

I have no interest in proving it. Just like no authors can prove that
Oswald was part of Angleton's fake defector program.

[Pamela Brown]

I have seen some, such as Mellon, discuss this 'false defector program' as
though it was a reality, though without bothering to prove anything. And
of course Epstein, being fed disinfo from JJA, put out a number of trolls
that LHO had intelligence connections. So do Melanson and Newman. But it
is all very vague and certainly unproven. Then there's the fellow who
wrote PROGRAMMED TO KILL, who had a nice canned story about LHO being used
by the Soviets. Take your pick. That's just a reversal of the CIA
theory.

> I didn't think so.

You may have your own version of a prevalent nebulous and unproven
idea.

>I certainly hope that on one else has thought of
> this. My concept is that Angleton would borrow Oswald from the ONI and
> send him to Moscow as a sleeper agent.

What? How did you get LHO linked up with ONI? Sounds like you've been
watching too many reruns of Kevin Costner in JFK.

Based on your previous statements about the immature and amateurish nature
of LHO, how could you then turn around and claim that he would have the
maturity or intelligence to be any sort of an agent, sleeping or awake?
:-0

>
> >> It is similar to a trick that some desk officers
> >> use of feeding false information to a known double agent to see where
> >> the alarm bells are set off in the opposition.
>
> > If this is the same Angleton whom you said investigated everyone whose
> > name began with a certain letter, you are probably not talking about
> > someone with a capacity to enact a strategy like that.
>
> Angleton had a very complex mind and he could play slowly and plan far
> ahead.

If you want to understand JJA you have to get inside his head, not read
his resume. The truth is he was paranoid and a mass of contradictions
that rendered himself his own worst enemy and just about destroyed CIA.
If he had been able to plan far ahead, he would have caught the mole. He
didn't.

>
> >> And check to see if the
> >> double agent is still believed by the other side.[...]
>
> > Why not 'send' someone he could trust, rather than a conflicted
> > troublemaker with delusions of grandeur such as you seem to consider LHO?
>
> Because that person would be instantly identified as a CIA officer or

> agent. Why not send Richard Helms for Christ's sake? Why not ...
>

Why not send a smart and savvy young defector instead of a poseur such

as you seem to consider LHO?

Better yet, why not just monitor the poor malcontents that always want to
leave the US and chart a new course elsewhere? Why is there any need to
have direct involvement with them, when they will on their own do all your
work for you? That is, if you think far ahead...

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

Those are not the same as the theory I proposed.
I hope that I am the only one who thought of the dry run theory.
Should I copyright it?

>> I didn't think so.
>
> You may have your own version of a prevalent nebulous and unproven
> idea.
>
>> I certainly hope that on one else has thought of
>> this. My concept is that Angleton would borrow Oswald from the ONI and
>> send him to Moscow as a sleeper agent.
>
> What? How did you get LHO linked up with ONI? Sounds like you've been
> watching too many reruns of Kevin Costner in JFK.
>

I doubt that Army would recruit Oswald as he was a Marine.

> Based on your previous statements about the immature and amateurish nature
> of LHO, how could you then turn around and claim that he would have the
> maturity or intelligence to be any sort of an agent, sleeping or awake?
> :-0
>

I didn't say he did. The beauty of a dry run is that the person does not
have to be a professional.

>>
>>>> It is similar to a trick that some desk officers
>>>> use of feeding false information to a known double agent to see where
>>>> the alarm bells are set off in the opposition.
>>
>>> If this is the same Angleton whom you said investigated everyone whose
>>> name began with a certain letter, you are probably not talking about
>>> someone with a capacity to enact a strategy like that.
>>
>> Angleton had a very complex mind and he could play slowly and plan far
>> ahead.
>
> If you want to understand JJA you have to get inside his head, not read
> his resume. The truth is he was paranoid and a mass of contradictions
> that rendered himself his own worst enemy and just about destroyed CIA.
> If he had been able to plan far ahead, he would have caught the mole. He
> didn't.
>

No, he couldn't imagine his vulnerability.

>>
>>>> And check to see if the
>>>> double agent is still believed by the other side.[...]
>>
>>> Why not 'send' someone he could trust, rather than a conflicted
>>> troublemaker with delusions of grandeur such as you seem to consider LHO?
>>
>> Because that person would be instantly identified as a CIA officer or
>> agent. Why not send Richard Helms for Christ's sake? Why not ...
>>
>
> Why not send a smart and savvy young defector instead of a poseur such
> as you seem to consider LHO?
>

Because he would be easily spotted.

> Better yet, why not just monitor the poor malcontents that always want to

Monitor implies that you have to assign several well-trained and valuable
agents who then would be in harm's way in Moscow and easily detected. Do
you understand the concept of a sleeper agent?

[Pamela Brown]

> I hope that I am the only one who ...
>

They are similar in that they posit a spy connection without any evidence
and then run with it. If you have any actual documentation to support
your version, why not share it?

[Anthony Marsh]

Not yet. Just as I do not have all the documentation for the theory I
believe about Helms ordering the assassination. There are three main
elements to the story and so far I have only found one. I am close to
finding the other and may get lucky and find it when all the documents are
released. Right now the Kennedy Library itself is the biggest cover-up.

[Pamela Brown]

With all due respect, when someone such as Judyth comes forward and says
something like, 'oh yeah, Lee and Ruby and I hung out in New Orleans that
summer" everyone dogpiles on them, because they are making assumptions,
rather than demonstrating a truth.

It seems that in order to demonstrate your theory, you would need to
divide it into parts and prove the parts. If you posit LHO was connected
in some way to JJA, that is one area. If he was connected to another
agency, etc.

> Just as I do not have all the documentation for the theory I
> believe about Helms ordering the assassination.

That is a good one. I can find a motive for JJA wanting to get rid of
JFK, but why Helms?

> There are three main
> elements to the story and so far I have only found one.

Good luck.

It might be possible to work backwards. Both JJA and LBJ, for example,
seemed to pretty much have breakdowns after the assassination. Or, for
JJA, perhaps it was a completion of a breakdown that had started earlier.

But what about Helms? Did he change after the assassination? It is my
thinking that those responsible for the assassination firmly believed they
were doing the country a favor, and this false sense of 'patriotism'
helped them to keep their secrets. But, human nature being what it is, a
few seem to have reacted anyhow.

> I am close to
> finding the other and may get lucky and find it when all the documents are
> released.

Unfortunately, what still exists has been gutted. You may need a stroke
of luck, such as NARA mistakenly sending me the Ferguson memo when it was
still supposed to be suppressed.

> Right now the Kennedy Library itself is the biggest cover-up.

They are idiots. I didn't even leave them a copy of CAR CRASH CULTURE
with my essay "SS-100-X" in it. They wouldn't have known what to do with
it. The JFK Library is only focused on pretending that JFK is still
alive. They do have an incomparable photo collection, though.

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes, but two of those elements may be impossible to prove because the
government has destroyed the documents. That is the main reason why I can
not be certain about some things in this case. It may be possible to work
around that problem or find the "destroyed" evidence, just as the ARRB
found the "destroyed" autopsy photos. Or you may remember some old
Sherlock Holmes movies where he finds the pad that the suspect wrote on
and used graphite to bring up the indentations on the sheet underneath the
sheet he destroyed. So yes the evidence was destroyed, but a faint copy
was created. There is a similar phenomenon with some government documents.
In one example they whited out the typed text on the face of the document,
but by examining the back of the document I could read the text from the
hammer indentations. Or when they copy a series of documents the old Xerox
was so bright that it would faintly copy the second sheet behind the first
sheet.

Another example is when ink from the second page seeps onto the back of
the first page. That is how John Newman found the code that indicated that
Oswald had been debriefed by the CIA. Or a historical document which was
questioned because a name was misspelled, but that additional stroke came
from bleedthrough from the other side of the paper. This is what real
researchers do and why it is called research rather than guessing.

>> Just as I do not have all the documentation for the theory I
>> believe about Helms ordering the assassination.
>
> That is a good one. I can find a motive for JJA wanting to get rid of
> JFK, but why Helms?
>

I explained before about 20 times that it goes back to the theory that
Helms lied to Kennedy about Barghoorn and Kennedy was going to fire him.

>> There are three main
>> elements to the story and so far I have only found one.
>
> Good luck.
>
> It might be possible to work backwards. Both JJA and LBJ, for example,
> seemed to pretty much have breakdowns after the assassination. Or, for
> JJA, perhaps it was a completion of a breakdown that had started earlier.
>
> But what about Helms? Did he change after the assassination? It is my
> thinking that those responsible for the assassination firmly believed they
> were doing the country a favor, and this false sense of 'patriotism'
> helped them to keep their secrets. But, human nature being what it is, a
> few seem to have reacted anyhow.
>

Nixon really seemed to think that all his crimes were patriotic. So did
Bush. So did Hitler.

>> I am close to
>> finding the other and may get lucky and find it when all the documents are
>> released.
>
> Unfortunately, what still exists has been gutted. You may need a stroke
> of luck, such as NARA mistakenly sending me the Ferguson memo when it was
> still supposed to be suppressed.
>
>> Right now the Kennedy Library itself is the biggest cover-up.
>
> They are idiots. I didn't even leave them a copy of CAR CRASH CULTURE
> with my essay "SS-100-X" in it. They wouldn't have known what to do with
> it. The JFK Library is only focused on pretending that JFK is still
> alive. They do have an incomparable photo collection, though.
>

And they have kept it out of public view for many years. And they are
still withholding a lot of photos. It took me about 20 years to get the
reinterment photos. They still refuse to release 4 transcripts of WH
tapes.

[Pamela Brown]

Then you have set yourself up with a catch-22. Either you can
persuade people or not.

>That is the main reason why I can
> not be certain about some things in this case.

You also seem to be making the assumption that something as top secret
as assassinating JFK would be documented in any tangible form.

> It may be possible to work
> around that problem or find the "destroyed" evidence, just as the ARRB
> found the "destroyed" autopsy photos. Or you may remember some old
> Sherlock Holmes movies where he finds the pad that the suspect wrote on
> and used graphite to bring up the indentations on the sheet underneath the
> sheet he destroyed. So yes the evidence was destroyed, but a faint copy
> was created. There is a similar phenomenon with some government documents.
> In one example they whited out the typed text on the face of the document,
> but by examining the back of the document I could read the text from the
> hammer indentations. Or when they copy a series of documents the old Xerox
> was so bright that it would faintly copy the second sheet behind the first
> sheet.

You are assuming there was documentation to begin with. That may not
be the case. More like the dog that didn't bark.

>
> Another example is when ink from the second page seeps onto the back of
> the first page. That is how John Newman found the code that indicated that
> Oswald had been debriefed by the CIA.

That's how he is interpreting it.

> Or a historical document which was
> questioned because a name was misspelled, but that additional stroke came
> from bleedthrough from the other side of the paper. This is what real
> researchers do and why it is called research rather than guessing.

I have no difficulty guessing that no spy in their right mind would
knowingly leave a paper trail of any sort to the assassination. That
would be most unprofessional.

How can you, on the one hand, claim that Helms and JJA were true
professionals, and on the other that they were no better than two of
the three stooges?

>
> >> Just as I do not have all the documentation for the theory I
> >> believe about Helms ordering the assassination.
>
> > That is a good one.  I can find a motive for JJA wanting to get rid of
> > JFK, but why Helms?
>
> I explained before about 20 times that it goes back to the theory that
> Helms lied to Kennedy about Barghoorn and Kennedy was going to fire him.

JFK said he was going to smash CIA into a thousand pieces long before
the Barghoorn issue came to the public. Why wasn't Helms gunning for
him all along?

>
> >> There are three main
> >> elements to the story and so far I have only found one.
>
> > Good luck.
>
> > It might be possible to work backwards.  Both JJA and LBJ, for example,
> > seemed to pretty much have breakdowns after the assassination.  Or, for
> > JJA, perhaps it was a completion of a breakdown that had started earlier.
>
> > But what about Helms?  Did he change after the assassination?  It is my
> > thinking that those responsible for the assassination firmly believed they
> > were doing the country a favor, and this false sense of 'patriotism'
> > helped them to keep their secrets.  But, human nature being what it is, a
> > few seem to have reacted anyhow.
>
> Nixon really seemed to think that all his crimes were patriotic. So did
> Bush. So did Hitler.

Agreed. Even Hitler came apart after Wolffschanze; but some of that
had to do with the reality of defeat setting in.

The assassination of JFK has been the best-kept secret in US history
just because it was done 'for our own good'.

>
> >> I am close to
> >> finding the other and may get lucky and find it when all the documents are
> >> released.
>
> > Unfortunately, what still exists has been gutted.  You may need a stroke
> > of luck, such as NARA mistakenly sending me the Ferguson memo when it was
> > still supposed to be suppressed.
>
> >> Right now the Kennedy Library itself is the biggest cover-up.
>
> > They are idiots.  I didn't even leave them a copy of CAR CRASH CULTURE
> > with my essay "SS-100-X" in it.  They wouldn't have known what to do with
> > it.  The JFK Library is only focused on pretending that JFK is still
> > alive.  They do have an incomparable photo collection, though.
>
> And they have kept it out of public view for many years. And they are
> still withholding a lot of photos. It took me about 20 years to get the
> reinterment photos. They still refuse to release 4 transcripts of WH
> tapes.

Why should they, when their only interest in history is to make JFK
look good?

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com

[Anthony Marsh]

I am not interested in persuading you. I did not persuade Martin about
the ghost images while I was only speculating. I persuaded Roland Zavada
when I completed my article.

>> That is the main reason why I can
>> not be certain about some things in this case.
>
> You also seem to be making the assumption that something as top secret
> as assassinating JFK would be documented in any tangible form.
>

No, but there might be clues.
Just like people used to assume that something as top secret as
assassinating Fidel Castro would not be documented in any tangible form.
And if we had not discovered that one remaining copy of the Inspector
General's Report the WC defenders could keep claiming it never happened
and we kooks made it up.

>> It may be possible to work
>> around that problem or find the "destroyed" evidence, just as the ARRB
>> found the "destroyed" autopsy photos. Or you may remember some old
>> Sherlock Holmes movies where he finds the pad that the suspect wrote on
>> and used graphite to bring up the indentations on the sheet underneath the
>> sheet he destroyed. So yes the evidence was destroyed, but a faint copy
>> was created. There is a similar phenomenon with some government documents.
>> In one example they whited out the typed text on the face of the document,
>> but by examining the back of the document I could read the text from the
>> hammer indentations. Or when they copy a series of documents the old Xerox
>> was so bright that it would faintly copy the second sheet behind the first
>> sheet.
>
> You are assuming there was documentation to begin with. That may not
> be the case. More like the dog that didn't bark.
>

Not directly. Many indirectly. I told you that I found one document by
serendipity. Others by piecing together the puzzle pieces.
Others by persistence.

>>
>> Another example is when ink from the second page seeps onto the back of
>> the first page. That is how John Newman found the code that indicated that
>> Oswald had been debriefed by the CIA.
>
> That's how he is interpreting it.
>

Silly.

>> Or a historical document which was
>> questioned because a name was misspelled, but that additional stroke came
>> from bleedthrough from the other side of the paper. This is what real
>> researchers do and why it is called research rather than guessing.
>
> I have no difficulty guessing that no spy in their right mind would
> knowingly leave a paper trail of any sort to the assassination. That
> would be most unprofessional.
>

WHoever said they are in their right minds. That's why their superior
had to send them a memo saying to stop talking about assassination and
use euphemsisms.

> How can you, on the one hand, claim that Helms and JJA were true
> professionals, and on the other that they were no better than two of
> the three stooges?
>

I never said that.

>>
>>>> Just as I do not have all the documentation for the theory I
>>>> believe about Helms ordering the assassination.
>>
>>> That is a good one. I can find a motive for JJA wanting to get rid of
>>> JFK, but why Helms?
>>
>> I explained before about 20 times that it goes back to the theory that
>> Helms lied to Kennedy about Barghoorn and Kennedy was going to fire him.
>
> JFK said he was going to smash CIA into a thousand pieces long before
> the Barghoorn issue came to the public. Why wasn't Helms gunning for
> him all along?
>

I wasn't talking about that incident. That was about the CIA as a whole.
The Barghoorn incident was about one specific agent who lied to him.