Lee Harvey Oswald's TSBD Work Application
David Von Pein
Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0118b.htm
Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
* = So there's just one more time we can label Lee Harvey as a "liar"
-- the lie he told his superiors in the Marines in '59, when he
insisted he had to return home to take care of his injured/ailing
mother, Marguerite.
However, even though Marguerite suffered a very minor injury at work
shortly before Oswald requested his discharge from the USMC (which
undoubtedly gave LHO the whole idea of using that as an excuse in the
first place), Mrs. Oswald was not disabled in any major way, and
recovered in a very short amount of time.
Marguerite's wonderful and ultra-considerate son (Lee Harvey), on the
other hand, decided he'd go to Russia just DAYS after arriving back in
the United States following his discharge from the
Marines....illustrating once more how Oswald would manipulate and use
people to serve his own needs and selfish desires.
When examining the above-linked work application (which served as
official Warren Commission Exhibit #496), let's take a quick inventory
of the several lies that Oswald serves up to Book Depository
Superintendent Roy S. Truly via that document.....
1.) Oswald lists his address incorrectly. He was really living at 1026
Beckley in Oak Cliff at the time. But, instead, lists his address as
Ruth Paine's home in Irving (where Marina was residing, but not Lee
himself). Oswald had been living at the Beckley roominghouse for just
one day prior to filling out that TSBD application (he rented the
Beckley Avenue room under the alias O.H. Lee on October 14, 1963).
So I suppose we could give Lee Harvey a break re. this lie -- because
it's possible (but not certain) that he just simply couldn't remember
the precise address of the roominghouse he just moved into 24 hours
earlier in Oak Cliff. And, perhaps, Oswald didn't feel comfortable
just leaving the "Address" line blank (or putting a question mark in
there).
2.) Re. the question "Where did you last work?", Oswald lists the
Marine Corps ("U.S.M.C."), which is a lie. Oswald had several jobs (in
Dallas and New Orleans) after leaving the Marines in 1959.
3.) Related to Lie #1, under "Do you room and board?", Oswald answered
"No" .... which is also a lie. He was "boarding" at the Beckley Avenue
roominghouse, but he evidently didn't want his Depository boss, Roy
Truly, to know he was living at a roominghouse (exact address being
known by Oswald at the time or not).
4.) He also falsely claims that he's lived in Dallas "continuously".
This is inaccurate. Within just the previous year or two, he had also
lived in Fort Worth and New Orleans.
A fifth falsehood could be added here as well, when we look at
Oswald's answer of "No" to the question on the application about
"defects". However, it does only ask about the applicant's "physical"
defects, which wouldn't, of course, take into account Oswald's warped
mental state as of October 1963.
But if the word "physical" were to be removed from that question, Mr.
Oswald would have been forced to say this in response to such an
inquiry.....
"Yes -- I'm a fruitcake, a wife-beater, a defector to Russia, and an
assassin, having attempted to end the life of a human being (Retired
General Edwin Walker), in April of this year (1963). I sincerely hope
that my tendencies toward political assassinations do not dissuade you
from considering employing me with your company. Everybody, after all,
has SOME little black marks about their persona. Mine, unfortunately,
is that I'm prone to killing top political figures. But I can push a
mean two-wheeled cart filled with books! Yours truly, Lee H.
Oswald". :)
Oswald was hired at the Book Depository that very day he filled out
that application (October 15, 1963). He started to work, as an "order
filler" [for the then-minimum wage of $1.25 per hour], the next
morning, Wednesday, October 16, 1963, which was the beginning of a new
pay period at the Depository.
Hindsight is 20/20 (obviously) -- But I look at that application form
and think: If only Mr. Truly had passed on hiring Lee Oswald. Just
think of how history would have been altered by just that one fairly-
minor (at the time) decision made by Roy S. Truly of the Texas School
Book Depository Company.
Oswald, of course (who knows), might still have found some way to kill
President Kennedy on 11/22/63 as the motorcade made its way through
the Dallas, Texas, streets. But that is doubtful, since he probably
would not have had the golden opportunity that he was presented with
by being employed in a tall building right along the parade route.
I often wonder, though, if Oswald just might have tried to find a way
to use his Carcano rifle that November day, even if he hadn't been
employed at the Depository. That "What If?" is not of any significance
now, of course, but is something to ponder upon occasion.
======================================================
MORE OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S LIES (FOLLOWING HIS ARREST IN NOV. 1963):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ea04b9e6141f0098
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/beb8390c3526124d
======================================================
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184840390.7...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
guybann...@aol.com
> While looking at some documents connected with President John F.
> Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
> below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
> School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
> before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
> application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
> any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
> Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
>
> Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
> from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
> about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
> discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
Anyone in Oswald's situation would have had good reason to have been
pissed-off: He got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to
his mother, when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to
"defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers (and, after
reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee," I'm more convinced than
ever that James Angleton -- the only U.S. Government official to have
an honorary statue of himself erected in Israel by that country's
government -- was at the center of the sheep-dipping of LHO as a phony
defector.
No doubt before his fake defection Oswald was assured that his
Marines discharge would be honorable; to subsequently have its
honorable character revoked and replaced with "dishonorable" would
have understandably infuriated Oswald.
But what was he to do? He was STILL (in Louisiana and Texas) working
for the feds post-discharge and could hardly threaten to reveal his
U.S. government connections. At the same time, his government handlers
were probably loathe to make efforts to overturn the new
"dishonorable" discharge as doing so would have constituted a clue to
who Oswald really was. I wouldn't be surprised if some not-in-the-loop
government Pentagon bureaucrat was the one who originally, and quite
understandably, had overturned LHO's "honorable" discharge and had it
changed to "dishonorable". However, it would have raised eyebrows to
then have personnel from another government agency -- say, Angleton's
CIA -- plead Oswald's case for getting his "honorable" discharge back.
David Von Pein
Yes, I am assuming that. (Naturally.)
Would you prefer this version of events re. Oswald's TSBD
employment?.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a893216f84ce90be
David Von Pein
Yeah, poor Sweet Lee Harvey. (Or should that be just "Harvey"? There
were so many LHO doubles running around Dallas, Russia, Mexico, Fort
Worth, and New Orleans in '63, it's impossible to keep them all
straight. Even Marguerite, Marina, and Ruth Paine couldn't tell the
fakes from the real McCoy. Go figure.)
>>> "He {Saint Oz} got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to his mother, when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to "defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers." <<<
And were those "handlers" already thinking ahead to 11/22/63 way back
in September of 1959? Or was 19-year-old Lee Oswald going to be used
for other type work/assassinations by his "handlers"? If so, what
"work" did he supposedly do for them prior to the Walker shooting in
April '63? Anything at all?
Would you like to continue to speculate and pull some additional info
from LHO's "handlers" out of your anal crack? (Just curious.)
IOW: Why stop speculating now? The world's at your feet.
>>> "...And, after reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee," I'm more convinced than ever that James Angleton...was at the center of the sheep-dipping of LHO as a phony defector." <<<
CTers who could possibly believe Mr. Armstrong's silliness have,
themselves, been "sheep-dipped" (and/or brainwashed). Is there ANY
theory too crazy for CTers? Any at all?
Via Vince Bugliosi's book (re. Armstrong's absurdities):
============================
"John Armstrong actually went on to publish a 983-page book in 2003
called "Harvey and Lee: How the CIA Framed Oswald", in which he
carries his fantasy about a double Oswald to such absurd lengths that
not only doesn't it deserve to be dignified in the main text of my
book, but I resent even having to waste a word on it in this
endnote. ....
"Obviously, if Armstrong had a source for any of the things he
charges, he would be only too eager to give it. Instead, his only
source is his exceptionally fertile imagination. ....
"On the day of the assassination, Armstrong has both Lee Harvey Oswald
and Harvey Oswald, two people {per looney author Armstrong} who are
spitting images of each other, in the Depository. .... At the moment
of the assassination, HARVEY Oswald was in the second-floor lunchroom
having lunch and LEE Harvey Oswald was on the sixth floor firing at
Kennedy. ....
"Lee Harvey Oswald escaped arrest, but Armstrong doesn't tell his
readers what happened to him thereafter, though...he tells them near
the beginning of the book that he may be "very much alive"." -- V.
Bugliosi; Pages 565-567 of "Reclaiming History's" endnotes
============================
guybann...@aol.com
> While looking at some documents connected with President John F.
> Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
> below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
> School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
> before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
> application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
> any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
> Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
>
> Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
> from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
> about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
> discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
Anyone in Oswald's situation would have had good reason to have been
pissed-off: He got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to
his mother, when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to
"defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers (and, after
reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee," I'm more convinced than
ever that James Angleton -- the only U.S. Government official to have
an honorary statue of himself erected in Israel by that country's
government -- was at the center of the sheep-dipping of LHO as a phony
defector.
No doubt before his fake defection Oswald was assured that his
clarkw...@hotmail.com
<guybanniste...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 19, 3:19 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > While looking at some documents connected with President John F.
> > Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
> > below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
> > School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
> > before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
>
> >http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> > Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
> > application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
> > any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
> > Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
>
> > Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
> > from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
> > about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
> > discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
There is no surprise that Lee would hide this from a potential
employer.
>
> Anyone in Oswald's situation would have had good reason to have been
> pissed-off: He got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to
> his mother,
"purportedly" is correct and believed only by LNer's. In fact, Lee was
discharged without the evidence for hardship even being presented. It's
yet another LN fantasy of imaginary evidence.
>when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to
> "defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers (and, after
> reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee,"
You'll have to be more precise than "government handlers" or stand in
line behind a lot of other CTer's with no evidence.
> I'm more convinced than
> ever that James Angleton -- the only U.S. Government official to have
> an honorary statue of himself erected in Israel by that country's
> government -- was at the center of the sheep-dipping of LHO as a phony
> defector.
Israel has nothing to do with JFK's assassination, contrary to the wishful
fantasies of anti-Semites. Angleton was an alcoholic paranoid who was
given the job, not of sheep dipping Oswald, but of making it appear it
worked.
>
> No doubt before his fake defection Oswald was assured that his
> Marines discharge would be honorable; to subsequently have its
> honorable character revoked and replaced with "dishonorable" would
> have understandably infuriated Oswald.
I have never been able to confirm, or deny, the above as Lee produced a
vigorous defense (Which he could not possibly write without US assistance)
that his discharge status not be changed. While this demonstrates an
"infuriated" Oswald, the whole time he lived in NO in 1963 he never tried
to reverse the decision even though it was the NO board that produced the
decision which contradicts an "infuriated" Oswald.
>
> But what was he to do? He was STILL (in Louisiana and Texas) working
> for the feds post-discharge and could hardly threaten to reveal his
> U.S. government connections.
Or what would happen?
> At the same time, his government handlers
> were probably loathe to make efforts to overturn the new
> "dishonorable" discharge as doing so would have constituted a clue to
> who Oswald really was.
AFAIK, the change of discharge status originated from Hoover.
> I wouldn't be surprised if some not-in-the-loop
> government Pentagon bureaucrat was the one who originally, and quite
> understandably, had overturned LHO's "honorable" discharge and had it
> changed to "dishonorable".
The bureaucrat's name was J. Edgar Hoover.
>However, it would have raised eyebrows to
> then have personnel from another government agency -- say, Angleton's
> CIA -- plead Oswald's case for getting his "honorable" discharge back.-
Lee never woirked for the CIA and had no "assurances" from them at all.
You're going to have to move higher up the food chain to find Lee's
"employer".
Just a thought.
::Clark::
Anthony Marsh
> On Jul 20, 11:34 am, "GeorgeWashingtonAdmi...@adelphia.com"
> <guybanniste...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 19, 3:19 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> While looking at some documents connected with President John F.
>>> Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
>>> below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
>>> School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
>>> before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
>>> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>>> Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
>>> application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
>>> any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
>>> Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
>>> Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
>>> from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
>>> about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
>>> discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
>
> There is no surprise that Lee would hide this from a potential
> employer.
>
Oswald was paranoid that the FBI was out to get him fired.
>> Anyone in Oswald's situation would have had good reason to have been
>> pissed-off: He got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to
>> his mother,
>
> "purportedly" is correct and believed only by LNer's. In fact, Lee was
> discharged without the evidence for hardship even being presented. It's
> yet another LN fantasy of imaginary evidence.
>
Please quote for us from his trial.
>
>
>> when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to
>> "defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers (and, after
>> reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee,"
>
> You'll have to be more precise than "government handlers" or stand in
> line behind a lot of other CTer's with no evidence.
>
James Jesus Angleton.
What? Hoover was head of the FBI. He had nothing to do with the Marine
Corps.
>> I wouldn't be surprised if some not-in-the-loop
>> government Pentagon bureaucrat was the one who originally, and quite
>> understandably, had overturned LHO's "honorable" discharge and had it
>> changed to "dishonorable".
>
> The bureaucrat's name was J. Edgar Hoover.
>
You pretend to be an expert on such matters and then you make a silly
statement like Hoover as the head of the FBI changing Oswald's military
records.
Oswald's discharge was changed from Honorable to Undesirable by the Navy
Discharge Review Board. Here are the documents:
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_780.pdf
clarkw...@hotmail.com
> clarkwilk...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 20, 11:34 am, "GeorgeWashingtonAdmi...@adelphia.com"
> > <guybanniste...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On Jul 19, 3:19 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >>> While looking at some documents connected with President John F.
> >>> Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
> >>> below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
> >>> School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
> >>> before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
> >>>http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
> >>> Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
> >>> application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
> >>> any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
> >>> Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
> >>> Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
> >>> from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
> >>> about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
> >>> discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
>
> > There is no surprise that Lee would hide this from a potential
> > employer.
>
> Oswald was paranoid that the FBI was out to get him fired.
The FBI would not know the TSBD had hired him.
>
> >> Anyone in Oswald's situation would have had good reason to have been
> >> pissed-off: He got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to
> >> his mother,
>
> > "purportedly" is correct and believed only by LNer's. In fact, Lee was
> > discharged without the evidence for hardship even being presented. It's
> > yet another LN fantasy of imaginary evidence.
>
> Please quote for us from his trial.
>
There was no "trial" for Lee's discharge. It was conducted by a
Review Board that approved his discharge without waiting for Mrs.
Oswald to produce any evidence of hardship.
The idea that such evidence was presented is an LN fantasy.
>
>
> >> when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to
> >> "defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers (and, after
> >> reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee,"
>
> > You'll have to be more precise than "government handlers" or stand in
> > line behind a lot of other CTer's with no evidence.
>
> James Jesus Angleton.
>
Angleton did not handle any agents for the CIA.
Wow! How brilliant of you to notice that.
Now compare Hoover's work on locating Oswald in the USSR and compare
it to the timing of Lee's change of discharge status.
> >> I wouldn't be surprised if some not-in-the-loop
> >> government Pentagon bureaucrat was the one who originally, and quite
> >> understandably, had overturned LHO's "honorable" discharge and had it
> >> changed to "dishonorable".
>
> > The bureaucrat's name was J. Edgar Hoover.
>
> You pretend to be an expert on such matters and then you make a silly
> statement like Hoover as the head of the FBI changing Oswald's military
> records.
W/o Hoover there would be no change in Oswald's discharge status. If
you wish to claim the Navy got the idea on their own, then they would
have begun the process when they were notified of Lee's "defection"
with willingness to provide "radar secrets" in 1959.
So did they?
If not, you have created an imaginary connection...rather like you
have Angleton running agents.
> Oswald's discharge was changed from Honorable to Undesirable by the Navy
> Discharge Review Board. Here are the documents:
>
> http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_780.pdf
>
Thanks for proving my case. The dates are right there. No action was
taken on Lee's "defection" until July 29, 1960 based on "reliable
information" that Lee had defected.
Who produced this "reliable information" since Lee had not, in fact,
defected (as the State Department itself determined)?
::Clark::
Anthony Marsh
> On Jul 21, 5:49 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> clarkwilk...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jul 20, 11:34 am, "GeorgeWashingtonAdmi...@adelphia.com"
>>> <guybanniste...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jul 19, 3:19 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> While looking at some documents connected with President John F.
>>>>> Kennedy's assassination, I noticed this interesting item (linked
>>>>> below) --- Lee Harvey Oswald's application for employment at the Texas
>>>>> School Book Depository (which was filled out by Oswald only 38 days
>>>>> before he killed the President from that very workplace)......
>>>>> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>>>>> Oswald tells multiple lies in the course of filling out that
>>>>> application in late 1963 -- and one lie (or at least a 'half-lie' at
>>>>> any rate) that I don't even mention in my list below is the lie about
>>>>> Oswald getting an "Honorable Discharge" from the Marine Corps.
>>>>> Now it's true that ORIGINALLY Oswald was given an HONORABLE discharge
>>>>> from the Marines in 1959. But when the USMC discovered Oswald lied
>>>>> about why he wanted to get out of the Marines and return home, the
>>>>> discharge was changed to "Dishonorable".*
>>> There is no surprise that Lee would hide this from a potential
>>> employer.
>> Oswald was paranoid that the FBI was out to get him fired.
>
> The FBI would not know the TSBD had hired him.
>
Huh? Only because Hosty was sleeping on the job. It was Hosty's job to
keep tabs on Oswald.
>>>> Anyone in Oswald's situation would have had good reason to have been
>>>> pissed-off: He got out of the Marines early, purportedly to tend to
>>>> his mother,
>>> "purportedly" is correct and believed only by LNer's. In fact, Lee was
>>> discharged without the evidence for hardship even being presented. It's
>>> yet another LN fantasy of imaginary evidence.
>> Please quote for us from his trial.
>>
>
> There was no "trial" for Lee's discharge. It was conducted by a
Yeah, that's my point. How is Oswald going to get from Russia to the
trial?
> Review Board that approved his discharge without waiting for Mrs.
> Oswald to produce any evidence of hardship.
>
The issue was not his hardship discharge. The issue was his defection.
Did you actually read the documents?
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_780.pdf
> The idea that such evidence was presented is an LN fantasy.
>
>>
>>>> when the real reason was that he'd been ordered to
>>>> "defect" to the Soviet Union by his government handlers (and, after
>>>> reading John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee,"
>>> You'll have to be more precise than "government handlers" or stand in
>>> line behind a lot of other CTer's with no evidence.
>> James Jesus Angleton.
>>
>
> Angleton did not handle any agents for the CIA.
>
>
Huh?
Angleton ran the defector program.
Different issue.
>>>> I wouldn't be surprised if some not-in-the-loop
>>>> government Pentagon bureaucrat was the one who originally, and quite
>>>> understandably, had overturned LHO's "honorable" discharge and had it
>>>> changed to "dishonorable".
>>> The bureaucrat's name was J. Edgar Hoover.
>> You pretend to be an expert on such matters and then you make a silly
>> statement like Hoover as the head of the FBI changing Oswald's military
>> records.
>
> W/o Hoover there would be no change in Oswald's discharge status. If
> you wish to claim the Navy got the idea on their own, then they would
> have begun the process when they were notified of Lee's "defection"
> with willingness to provide "radar secrets" in 1959.
>
News of Oswald's defection did not come from Hoover.
> So did they?
>
Yes.
> If not, you have created an imaginary connection...rather like you
> have Angleton running agents.
>
>> Oswald's discharge was changed from Honorable to Undesirable by the Navy
>> Discharge Review Board. Here are the documents:
>>
>> http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_780.pdf
>>
>
> Thanks for proving my case. The dates are right there. No action was
> taken on Lee's "defection" until July 29, 1960 based on "reliable
> information" that Lee had defected.
>
> Who produced this "reliable information" since Lee had not, in fact,
> defected (as the State Department itself determined)?
>
Sounds like the Review board did not buy Oswald's story even with the
State Department's help.
>
> ::Clark::