Lee Harvey Osvaldovich

[Alan Johnstone]

Lee Harvey Oswald is frequently thought of in the context of a patsy.

Oswald was a self-styled Marxist since adolescence.

Lee’s brother Robert Oswald has confirmed that Lee was a communist from the age of fifteen.

Oswald took an early interest in socialism after picking up a leaflet about the coming execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who had been convicted of spying for Russia. “I was looking for a key to my environment, and then I discovered socialist literature,” Oswald wrote in his diary. “I had to dig for my books in the back of dusty shelves of libraries.”

When he was 16, he wrote the Socialist Party of America:
Dear Sirs;
I am sixteen years of age and would like more information about your youth League, I would like to know if there is a branch in my area, how to join, ect., I am a Marxist, and have been studying socialist principles for well over fifteen months I am very interested in your Y.P.S.L.
Sincerely
Lee Oswald

Later in life, he made membership inquiries to such organizations as the Socialist Workers Party, the Socialist Labor Party, The Gus Hall-Benjamin Davis Defense Committee, the Daily Worker, The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the Communist Party, USA

He went into the Marines not because he was patriotic—but to get away from his overbearing mother, following in the footsteps of both his elder brothers.

Fellow Marine, Owen Dejanovich, explained: “If you complained about, “Oh, we’ve got to go on a march this morning” or “We’ve got to do this this morning,” scrub barracks or whatever we had to do, if you were complaining about it, he would — he would say that that was the capitalist form of government making us do these things. Karl Marx and his form of government would alleviate that.”

Priscilla Johnson McMillan interviewed him and he informed her that he was a follower of Karl Marx. “I saw,” he said, explaining why he left the U.S., “that I would become either a worker exploited for capitalist profit or an exploiter or, since there are many in this category, I’d be one of the unemployed.”

Oswald's ideal of a Soviet Union utopia was soured by bureaucratic indifference he encountered when he defected to Russia, causing Oswald to adopt revolutionary Marxism as opposed to institutionalized Leninism, and was perhaps inspired by some Cuban students he befriended while living in Minsk.

By the time Oswald left the USSR in June 1962, Oswald sees in the Castro revolution a truer form of socialism — one not corrupted by Soviet Communist Party apparatchiks and nomenklatura and their perks.

Agent Hosty's testimony explained to the Warren Commission what they understood to be Oswald's politics
Mr. HOSTY. Agent Gary S. Wilson. Agent Wilson was a brand new agent out of training school. And it is the custom to assign a new agent to work with an older agent for a period of 6 weeks. They work with different agents every day to observe what they are doing. This is the only reason he was with me, the only reason I had another man.
We went to the front porch. I rang the bell, talked to Mrs. Paine, at which time she advised me that Lee Oswald had been out to visit her, visit his wife, at her house over the Weekend, but she had still not determined where he was living in Dallas, and she also made the remark that she (Mrs, Paine) considered him to be a very illogical person, that he (Oswald) had told her that weekend that he was a Trotskyite Communist. Since she did not have his address, I thanked her and left.
Representative FORD. Was this comment by Mrs. Paine that Oswald had said he was a Trotskyite----
Mr. HOSTY. Trotskyite Communist was the word she used; yes, sir,
Representative FORD. Was that new as far as your knowledge of your file was concerned?
Mr. HOSTY. Well, he was a self-admitted Marxist. He had stated that earlier. The New Orleans office had reported that. He had been on television and made that statement in New Orleans, so this appeared to be in keeping with his character.
Representative FORD. The use of the word Trotskyite didn't add anything to the previous Marxist identification?
Mr. HOSTY. Well, of course, that is a particular type of Marxism, Trotskyite, the followers of Leon Trotsky's particular deviation, but this did show that he was not a member of the Communist Party USA, follower of the Leninist-Stalinist-Khrushchev movement, but would be an independent Marxist would be what it would show me, not tied in with the regular Communist Party USA.
Mr. HOSTY. Well, yes. The Socialist Workers Party is the Trotskyite Party in the United States, and they are supposedly the key element in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee or were the key element in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. So this would tie in with the fact that he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and, therefore, he claimed to be a Trotskyite this would follow.

In his Dallas police interrogation, Oswald explained his religious beliefs.
“What religion am I? I have no faith, I suppose you mean, in the Bible. I have read the Bible. It is fair reading, but not very interesting. As a matter of fact, I am a student of philosophy and I don't consider the Bible as even a reasonable or intelligent philosophy. I don't think of it...”

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

Are you trying to imply that Lee Harvey Oswald was a dirty red? That's an interesting theory, but can you prove it?

[Hank Sienzant]

well, for starters, he defected to the Soviet Union.

[Bruce]

On Saturday, December 4, 2021 at 6:48:55 AM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:

"I would not care to live in the United States where being a worker means you are exploited by the capitalists. If I would remain in the United States, feeling as I do, under the capitalist system, I could never get ahead."

CE 1385.

[Alan Johnstone]

"Are you trying to imply that Lee Harvey Oswald was a dirty red? That's an interesting theory, but can you prove it?"

As commonly said, it takes one to know one

LHO - ' Hunter of Fascistss'

https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2015/2010s/no-1336-december-2015/lee-harvey-oswald-hunter-fascists/

[Steven Galbraith]

How would you respond, as a self-professed Marxist yourself, to the claim by the Oswald defenders that he wasn't really a Marxist, that he had a simplistic understanding of the ideology, of what it meant to be one, and that he never attended Marxist meetings or associated with other Marxists?
I'm not sure what they mean by the first; there is no test that one has to pass to become a Marxist or fascist or monarchist or liberal democrat. Second, whether he was a "true" Marxist (whatever that means), he repeatedly stated that he detested the American political and economic systems. He thought they were unjust and needed to be replaced.
On your point: Apparently the "Hunter of Fascists" writing on the back of the photo was perhaps written by Marina. Or someone else. The handwriting is certainly not Oswald's.
Finally, Marxism doesn't work. It has a completely erroneous view of human nature and how humans act. As James Madison said (read Federalist #51), "Men are not angels." We need government because human beings can be bad; but we need limits on government because bad human beings can attain power. Marx's idea that human nature can be perfected by removing classes is shown by history to be false. Before class divisions were created human beings did bad things. Removing the classes won't stop that. It didn't in the USSR and it won't here on this planet.

[Alan Johnstone]

Marina's sarcastic comment on LHO inflated ego and self-importance, perhaps?

You have somewhat widened the discussion.

To become a member of my organisation, you do require to pass a basic test of understanding, but that is neither here nor there, simply a sign of our integrity.

I am not sure just how widespread the locals were of the parties LHO was interested in to physically attend meetings. Today in the time of the internet forums. his actual interaction would be very much different. It is probably his self-taught theory and the lack of a structured knowledge of communism that gave rise to LHO confusion, in associating with such incompatible groups as Stalinists, Trotskyists and De Leonists.

As for your comments on Marxism being contrary to human nature, I hold that socialism doesn't require people to be any more altruistic than they are today. We will still be concerned primarily with ourselves, with satisfying our individual personal needs, our need to be well thought of by others as well as satisfying our material and fulfilling our sexual requirements and intimate relationships.

No doubt too, we will want to “possess” personal belongings and to feel secure in our physical occupation of the house we live in, but this will be just that – it will be our home and not a financial asset. Such “selfish” behaviour will still exist in socialism but the acquisitiveness encouraged by capitalism will no longer exist.

The coming of socialism will not require great changes in the way we behave, essentially only the accentuation of some of the behaviours which people exhibit today (friendliness, helpfulness, co-operation) at the expense of other more negative ones which capitalism encourages.  Since capitalism is a predatory social and economic system it is no wonder predatory personalities rise to prominence and power who view the world through a lens of aggression and sociopathic traits.

Marx repeatedly differentiated a socialist revolution from previous ones by insisting that it would be the first carried out by a majority.

"All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority." as he wrote in the Communist Manifesto

Throughout his political career he accepted that the emancipation of the workers must be the act of the workers themselves and when he used the term party, the emphasis was on the small p, not any monolithic Communist Party substituting itself for the working class.

I know full well the True Scotsman fallacy that usually underlines criticism when it is said that socialism has not been tried. Yet, when you make a cake, if the right ingredients are not used in its baking, you cannot expect it to turn out to be the cake you sought to eat and enjoy.

Despite, the limited information and only applying the Marxian Materialist Conception of History, the political movement I belong to could predict the ultimate failure of the Russian Revolution in 1918 when optimism and euphoria still abounded

As you wanted a serious discussion, my apologies for giving you the respect of a fuller Marxist answer than you might have expected.

I am sure you have not read what Engels said about a premature revolution when the conditions were not ready.

"The worst thing that can befall a leader of an extreme party is to be compelled to take over a government in an epoch when the movement is not yet ripe for the domination of the class which he represents and for the realisation of the measures which that domination would imply. What he can do depends not upon his will but upon the sharpness of the clash of interests between the various classes, and upon the degree of development of the material means of existence, the relations of production and means of communication upon which the clash of interests of the classes is based every time. What he ought to do, what his party demands of him, again depends not upon him, or upon the degree of development of the class struggle and its conditions. He is bound to his doctrines and the demands hitherto propounded which do not emanate from the interrelations of the social classes at a given moment, or from the more or less accidental level of relations of production and means of communication, but from his more or less penetrating insight into the general result of the social and political movement. Thus he necessarily finds himself in a dilemma. What he can do is in contrast to all his actions as hitherto practised, to all his principles and to the present interests of his party; what he ought to do cannot be achieved. In a word, he is compelled to represent not his party or his class, but the class for whom conditions are ripe for domination. In the interests of the movement itself, he is compelled to defend the interests of an alien class, and to feed his own class with phrases and promises, with the assertion that the interests of that alien class are their own interests. Whoever puts himself in this awkward position is irrevocably lost."

I am sure you see the similarity with the assumption of Lenin and the Bolsheviks in 1917 and how despite the adoption of socialist terminology to acquire political support, post-Revolution set about building a form of capitalism with State bureaucratic apparatchiks functioning and performing the role of the capitalists as the exploiting.

LHO with his personal experience in a Minsk factory came to understand the nature of the USSR. His mistake, IMHO, was that he transferred his aspirations and allegiance to Castro and Cuba, not quite realizing the reality there either. (Castro when inviting foreign investment said, “We are capitalists, but state capitalists. We are not private capitalists.”)

[Alan Johnstone]

On re-reading my reply, I am guilty of trumpeting my own organisation a little bit too much.

As amends, I should add that the Industrial Workers of the World (the Wobblies) refused to join the USSR front organisation, the Red International of Labor Unions (Profintern) and the Socialist Labor Party designated the USSR as a new type of class society rejected the Bolshevik claim of to be building a socialist society. The anarchists and the predominantly German council communists were also critical of what the USSR had grown into. The Socialist Party of America, while sympathetic to the USSR, declined to endorse the strategy and tactics of the 3rd International and maintained a political distance from the newly created Communist Party.

They all reached these conclusions while Trotsky still held authority in the government and well before the arrival of the gulags and show trials of Stalin.

It suited the intellectual apologists of capitalism to agree with the Bolsheviks as being the legitimate heirs to Marx as a means of discrediting Marxism as a revolutionary theory.

Again, distorting socialism into meaning government nationalization was something Marx never ever intended it to be. As Engels said "...since Bismarck went in for state-ownership of industrial establishments, a kind of spurious socialism has arisen, degenerating, now and again, into something of flunkeyism, that without more ado declares all state ownership, even of the Bismarckian sort, to be socialistic..."

[Greg Parker]

On Saturday, December 4, 2021 at 8:57:32 PM UTC+11, Alan Johnstone wrote:
> Lee Harvey Oswald is frequently thought of in the context of a patsy.
>
> Oswald was a self-styled Marxist since adolescence.

So... you can't be a communist AND a patsy???

> Lee’s brother Robert Oswald has confirmed that Lee was a communist from the age of fifteen.

Robert confirmed diddly squat. He was reciting what was written in a story post-assassination by Aline Mosby. Pity that story abut the pamphlet was not published in her original 1959 story. That would have made it more believable. As it is, she simply took the real story of Julius Rosenberg being given a pamphlet at 15 regarding the framing of a west cast unionist Tom Mooney, and applied ot to Oswald. But oops. Oswald was barely 14 wen he let New York. His real inteest in Marxism did not start until he was 15 and in the hands of David Ferrie wh was setting up anti-Communist units within his squadron.
https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Ethel_Rosenberg/8g6JU4hTJ2AC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=rosenberg%20fifteen%20pamphlet%20tom&pg=PA87&printsec=frontcover&bsq=rosenberg%20fifteen%20pamphlet%20tom

> Oswald took an early interest in socialism after picking up a leaflet about the coming execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who had been convicted of spying for Russia. “I was looking for a key to my environment, and then I discovered socialist literature,” Oswald wrote in his diary. “I had to dig for my books in the back of dusty shelves of libraries.”
>
> When he was 16, he wrote the Socialist Party of America:
> Dear Sirs;
> I am sixteen years of age and would like more information about your youth League, I would like to know if there is a branch in my area, how to join, ect., I am a Marxist, and have been studying socialist principles for well over fifteen months I am very interested in your Y.P.S.L.
> Sincerely
> Lee Oswald

He was nearly 17 when he wrote that letter. He had his interest in Marxism goes back around 15 months, That makes him 15 and in New Orleans under the influence of David Ferrie

But yes.... interesting thing to ask about.

From my Oswald biography:

QUOTE ON
There is no evidence that the Socialist Party ever replied to this superficially most provocative of letters.

The Socialist Party of America formed the Young People’s Socialist League (YPSL) in 1907 drawing from groups with names such as the Athenian Literary Society and the Social Science Study Club. By 1952, the YPSL had a total of 134 members, all of whom were being wooed to join rival socialist youth group, the Socialist Youth League (SYL). In August 1953, after repeated warnings by the Socialist Party to stay clear of the SYL, the YPSL was disaffiliated. In February, 1954, the YPSL joined the SYL to form a new youth group – the Young Socialist League (YSL).

In effect, Oswald was asking the Socialist Party of America about a youth group it had not only ceased supporting, but one which had joined an enemy organization.
QUOTE OFF

> Later in life, he made membership inquiries to such organizations as the Socialist Workers Party, the Socialist Labor Party, The Gus Hall-Benjamin Davis Defense Committee, the Daily Worker, The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the Communist Party, USA

Yet only joined the FPCC while writing to all of these other organizations ABOUT the FPCC. The FBI had just admitted that the FPCC was no longer under Communist influence. The sole reason for this flurry of letters was to try and show that the FPCC was still involved with those orgs.

Grasshopper... you need to look under the bonnet to see what is really running the car.

> He went into the Marines not because he was patriotic—but to get away from his overbearing mother, following in the footsteps of both his elder brothers.

Absolute bullshit which has not a even a whiff of supporting evidence.

> Fellow Marine, Owen Dejanovich, explained: “If you complained about, “Oh, we’ve got to go on a march this morning” or “We’ve got to do this this morning,” scrub barracks or whatever we had to do, if you were complaining about it, he would — he would say that that was the capitalist form of government making us do these things. Karl Marx and his form of government would alleviate that.”

Which sounds like Oswald cracking a joke that sailed right over the jughead.

> Priscilla Johnson McMillan interviewed him and he informed her that he was a follower of Karl Marx. “I saw,” he said, explaining why he left the U.S., “that I would become either a worker exploited for capitalist profit or an exploiter or, since there are many in this category, I’d be one of the unemployed.”

Whether or not that is the real or only reason he went, the basics of what he said are beyond dispute. The exploitation of labor is integral to capitalism. Where would American mass consumerism be without dollar a day workers in third world sweatshops?

> Oswald's ideal of a Soviet Union utopia was soured by bureaucratic indifference he encountered when he defected to Russia, causing Oswald to adopt revolutionary Marxism as opposed to institutionalized Leninism, and was perhaps inspired by some Cuban students he befriended while living in Minsk.

That could all be true (except the part about defecting which never happened), but it is not the reason he decided to return. His efforts to return only commenced after the CIA ceased the REDCAP program within Soviet Union borders. And that happened because their REDCAP agent in Minsk, Mikhail Platovsky was captured and executed.

But you won't find Platovsky mentioned anywhere in the 26 volumes.
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t46-mikhail-platovsky

> By the time Oswald left the USSR in June 1962, Oswald sees in the Castro revolution a truer form of socialism — one not corrupted by Soviet Communist Party apparatchiks and nomenklatura and their perks.

Jeese, you've got this commie narrative down pat, haven't you?

But according to his buddies in the Marines, he was keen on going to Cuba before he left the base to travel to Europe. At that time, Castro was not seen as a commie.

> Agent Hosty's testimony explained to the Warren Commission what they understood to be Oswald's politics

Was Special Agent Fuckface in the mind-reading business? Must have been since he never officially talked to him until the interrogations.

> Mr. HOSTY. Agent Gary S. Wilson. Agent Wilson was a brand new agent out of training school. And it is the custom to assign a new agent to work with an older agent for a period of 6 weeks. They work with different agents every day to observe what they are doing. This is the only reason he was with me, the only reason I had another man.
> We went to the front porch. I rang the bell, talked to Mrs. Paine, at which time she advised me that Lee Oswald had been out to visit her, visit his wife, at her house over the Weekend, but she had still not determined where he was living in Dallas, and she also made the remark that she (Mrs, Paine) considered him to be a very illogical person, that he (Oswald) had told her that weekend that he was a Trotskyite Communist. Since she did not have his address, I thanked her and left.
> Representative FORD. Was this comment by Mrs. Paine that Oswald had said he was a Trotskyite----
> Mr. HOSTY. Trotskyite Communist was the word she used; yes, sir,

Ah, I see... his understanding of Oswald's politics came from Ruth Paine who allegedly couldn't tell a Trotskyite from a Trotskyist or March from October!

> In his Dallas police interrogation, Oswald explained his religious beliefs.
> “What religion am I? I have no faith, I suppose you mean, in the Bible. I have read the Bible. It is fair reading, but not very interesting. As a matter of fact, I am a student of philosophy and I don't consider the Bible as even a reasonable or intelligent philosophy. I don't think of it...”

Why would a sane intelligent person not buy into virgin births, magicians living in the sky, the dead reanimating, people turning into pillars of salt and other fun things? The man was obviously nuts. Absolute nuts. He's have to be to kill the president!

[Alan Johnstone]

"He went into the Marines not because he was patriotic—but to get away from his overbearing mother, following in the footsteps of both his elder brothers. Absolute bullshit which has not a even a whiff of supporting evidence."

John Pic, LHO'shalf-brother, testified to the Warren Commission that Oswald's enlistment the motivation ''He did it for the same reasons that I did it and Robert did it, I assume, to get from out and under the yoke of oppression from my mother.''

His brother Robert on the subject
"Our mother was Lee’s most important person in his life. … That influence was just tremendous on him. But at the same time, he always was trying to get away from her"

If he is merely echoing Mosby, he was doing a fine job of repetition

Q. If you had to take a guess about when he got his political beliefs, how he was introduced to Marxism, what would you guess?

A. New York City. If somebody passed out a leaflet on the street that contained a political statement for Marxism or communism or what have you, and if Lee had not run across that before, I could envision him looking at it, keeping it and saying, “Well, I wonder what this is all about.” This might have been the first leaflet that he ever got from anybody on the street. I don’t know. But he would look at it. Maybe the next time he went to the library, he would follow up on it, and say “Well, let’s really see what this is about.” That to me is very plausible for him to do.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/interview-robert-oswald/

Perhaps not the standard of evidence you demand but more than a whiff.

Can you cite any evidence that LHO was active within any Ferrie's anti-communist or under Ferrie's direct influence. If I am guilty of making suppositions about his relationship with his mother, you are equally guilty. I am assuming that you suggest it was Ferrie who turned LHO into a double agent and to pretend to be a communist and live out LHO's fantasy of emulating the TV series "I lived three lives" using his fake communist credentials as a cover. But I may be wrong and stand to be corrected.

For what it is worth David Ferrie stated he had no recollection of LHO in his time with the Civil Air Patrol

A fellow high school student in New Orleans, William E. Wulf, does remember Oswald
"expounding the Communist doctrine and saying that he was highly interested in communism, that communism was the only way of life for the worker, et cetera, and then came out with a statement that he was looking for a Communist cell in town to join but he couldn't find any. He was a little dismayed at this, and he said that he couldn't find any that would show any interest in him as a Communist"

No mention of Ferrie, however

Short video worth a watch
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1349060/JFK-lee-harvey-oswald-assassination-history-news-us-politics-us-latest-news-spt

The SWP reply to his application to join

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339995/

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

Is it possible? Have we got an actual debate going here? In the Nuthouse? I like it. Or maybe, I lke it.

The Yoke of Oppression point goes to Johnstone. The cup of evidence runneth over. Marguerite is a beast of mythical proportions. This fact does not preclude patriotism, but do the oppressed even consider such noble thoughts before they are released from bondage?

But, yes, a dirty red may also be a patsy. Greg gets this one, though it is not clear that Johnstone meant it that way, nonetheless it is typical Nutter Logic that if one aspect of the Official Story is true, then it all must be true. It's a religion, and Johnestone seems to be doing a genuflect here.

And, yes, Special Agent Hosty could accurately be called "Fuckface," not necessarily because of his character, but because of his face. It's great to see the level of discourse being elevated here at alt.conspiracy.jfk. Keep up the good work!

[Alan Johnstone]

"Marguerite is a beast of mythical proportions."

It seems so.

The last gathering of the Oswald clan was for Thanksgiving in 1962 with Robert, his wife Vada and kids, LHO and Marina and their child June. Half-brother John Pic, his wife Margret, and their kids. The mother, Marguerite the only living parent and who lived fairly local was missing from the reunion.

Robert stated to the WC that their mother was not invited, never knew of the Thanksgiving dinner, and according to him, she was never mentioned at the occasion.

Something indicating a malfunctioning family?

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

Well, they couldn't very well invite over the Fugly Caretaker Marguerite. That would be awkward.

[Hank Sienzant]

On Sunday, December 5, 2021 at 9:41:55 PM UTC-5, gregr...@outlook.com wrote:
> On Saturday, December 4, 2021 at 8:57:32 PM UTC+11, Alan Johnstone wrote:
> > Lee Harvey Oswald is frequently thought of in the context of a patsy.
> >
> > Oswald was a self-styled Marxist since adolescence.
> So... you can't be a communist AND a patsy???

Not what he’s saying. You’re offering a rebuttal to a straw man argument.
Oswald himself claimed he was only arrested because he spent time in the Soviet Union.

> > Lee’s brother Robert Oswald has confirmed that Lee was a communist from the age of fifteen.
> Robert confirmed diddly squat. He was reciting what was written in a story post-assassination by Aline Mosby. Pity that story abut the pamphlet was not published in her original 1959 story. That would have made it more believable. As it is, she simply took the real story of Julius Rosenberg being given a pamphlet at 15 regarding the framing of a west cast unionist Tom Mooney, and applied ot to Oswald. But oops. Oswald was barely 14 wen he let New York.

So you’re arguing that history doesn’t repeat itself. That because it happened to Julius Rosenberg it could not happen to Oswald. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg was executed in June of 1953 — any “Save the Rosenbergs” pamphlets would have been given to Oswald prior to that date, when Oswald was 13 (he didn’t turn 14 until October of 1953). That puts his age at 13 — at which time he was having a lot of trouble in school, and socializing.

> His real inteest in Marxism did not start until he was 15 and in the hands of David Ferrie wh was setting up anti-Communist units within his squadron.

Evidence?


> https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Ethel_Rosenberg/8g6JU4hTJ2AC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=rosenberg%20fifteen%20pamphlet%20tom&pg=PA87&printsec=frontcover&bsq=rosenberg%20fifteen%20pamphlet%20tom

Don’t see anything there supporting the Oswald / Ferrie claim you made.

> > Oswald took an early interest in socialism after picking up a leaflet about the coming execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who had been convicted of spying for Russia. “I was looking for a key to my environment, and then I discovered socialist literature,” Oswald wrote in his diary. “I had to dig for my books in the back of dusty shelves of libraries.”

Oswald wrote that. He didn’t write that this was all a charade and he was really an anti-communist masquerading as a communist. Was he lying in his diary?

> >
> > When he was 16, he wrote the Socialist Party of America:
> > Dear Sirs;
> > I am sixteen years of age and would like more information about your youth League, I would like to know if there is a branch in my area, how to join, ect., I am a Marxist, and have been studying socialist principles for well over fifteen months I am very interested in your Y.P.S.L.
> > Sincerely
> > Lee Oswald
> He was nearly 17 when he wrote that letter. He had his interest in Marxism goes back around 15 months, That makes him 15 and in New Orleans under the influence of David Ferrie

Last time I looked, “nearly 17” is still 16.

And he said “more than 15 months” not “around 15 months”.
You are arguing that we should disregard everything Oswald wrote and said about himself throughout his life — disregard all the evidence — and believe something the evidence doesn’t support. Even after his arrest for the murder of police officer J.D.Tippit, he was insisting he was a Marxist:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0317b.htm
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0327a.htm

So you’re calling Oswald a liar about his life motivations, even when under arrest for murder. If that’s the case, why should we believe his protestations of innocence in the two murders committed the day of his arrest? Why would you?

>
> But yes.... interesting thing to ask about.
>
> From my Oswald biography:
>
> QUOTE ON
> There is no evidence that the Socialist Party ever replied to this superficially most provocative of letters.
>
> The Socialist Party of America formed the Young People’s Socialist League (YPSL) in 1907 drawing from groups with names such as the Athenian Literary Society and the Social Science Study Club. By 1952, the YPSL had a total of 134 members, all of whom were being wooed to join rival socialist youth group, the Socialist Youth League (SYL). In August 1953, after repeated warnings by the Socialist Party to stay clear of the SYL, the YPSL was disaffiliated. In February, 1954, the YPSL joined the SYL to form a new youth group – the Young Socialist League (YSL).
>
> In effect, Oswald was asking the Socialist Party of America about a youth group it had not only ceased supporting, but one which had joined an enemy organization.
> QUOTE OFF

Did Oswald know any of this? If not, it’s not pertinent.
His letter, detailed here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0085b.htm
also included a magazine ad clipped from ‘The Socialist Call’, so he was clearly reading this literature at that age. And the ad clipped from the publication renders your argument meaningless.

> > Later in life, he made membership inquiries to such organizations as the Socialist Workers Party, the Socialist Labor Party, The Gus Hall-Benjamin Davis Defense Committee, the Daily Worker, The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the Communist Party, USA
> Yet only joined the FPCC while writing to all of these other organizations ABOUT the FPCC. The FBI had just admitted that the FPCC was no longer under Communist influence.

See below for the logical fallacy you just committed here.
Pertinence? Source? Assuming it’s true for the sake of argument, If Oswald didn’t know this, what’s the pertinence? You need to establish that Oswald knew this *before* you jump to the conclusion about “The sole reason for this flurry of letters…”

So we’ll await your evidence.

> The sole reason for this flurry of letters was to try and show that the FPCC was still involved with those orgs.

Evidence?

>
> Grasshopper... you need to look under the bonnet to see what is really running the car.

Worker Ant… you need to stop assuming what you must prove.

> > He went into the Marines not because he was patriotic—but to get away from his overbearing mother, following in the footsteps of both his elder brothers.
> Absolute bullshit which has not a even a whiff of supporting evidence.

Except both his brother and half-brother’s testimony. It’s only what they both testified to. Is that what you mean by “not a even a whiff of supporting evidence”?
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/pic_j.htm

== quote ==
Mr. JENNER - His enlistment, when you learned about it, and how. He enlisted in October 1956. He was then 17 years old.
Mr. PIC - My mother told me some way or another, I don't remember, sir. This is how I learned about it, either by phone call or by letter or some way. Of course, I knew he would do it as soon as he reached the age.
Mr. JENNER - All right. Why did you know he would do it and tell us the circumstances upon which you, the facts upon which you base that observation?
Mr. PIC - He did it for the same reasons that I did it and Robert did it, I assume, to get from out and under.
Mr. JENNER - Out and under what?
Mr. PIC - The yoke of oppression from my mother.
== unquote ==

Robert said this about his own enlistment:
== quote ==
Mr. OSWALD. July 1952 I joined the Marine Corps.
Mr. JENNER. And in July 1952, when you joined the Marine Corps, what do you recall was your status as far as your schooling was concerned?
Mr. OSWALD. I completed my junior year in high school.
…
Mr. JENNER. Was there a discussion, a family discussion when you enlisted in the Marines, or prior to your enlisting in the Marines, as to your doing so, and quitting high school?
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir; there was not.
…
Mr. JENNER. What was the character of the discussion, Mr. Oswald? You had a family in which your mother was having some difficulty supporting you boys? You had a brother who needed to be supported. Was there any discussion--or was there a discussion of what would happen in the event that first John and then you joined the service?
Mr. OSWALD. I believe reflecting on what mother said to me when I made my decision to join the Marine Corps was that perhaps it was the best thing, where I would not be a burden to her to that extent, and also perhaps be able to help her when she needed help. And I think this would be in line with what was said when John left for the Coast Guard, that this would be, of course, one less for her to take care of at the house, to feed and to clothe, and so forth. And it would relieve her of her responsibility along that line it would help her, because of the limited amount of funds that she had coming in.
== unquote ==

> > Fellow Marine, Owen Dejanovich, explained: “If you complained about, “Oh, we’ve got to go on a march this morning” or “We’ve got to do this this morning,” scrub barracks or whatever we had to do, if you were complaining about it, he would — he would say that that was the capitalist form of government making us do these things. Karl Marx and his form of government would alleviate that.”
> Which sounds like Oswald cracking a joke that sailed right over the jughead.

Ok, you don’t think much of the intelligence of Oswald’s “Fellow Marine Owen Dejanovich”. But you speculation doesn’t move the needle in the other direction — the evidence still points to Oswald being a Marxist.

And the evidence doesn’t support your speculation either. Dejanovich was attending Arizona State College when interviewed by the FBI. Oswald was a high-school dropout who constantly misspelled words. So if anything, it might have been Dejanovich’s jokes going over Oswald’s head.
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/FBI%20Records%20Files/105-82555/105-82555%20Section%20037/105-37a.pdf

> > Priscilla Johnson McMillan interviewed him and he informed her that he was a follower of Karl Marx. “I saw,” he said, explaining why he left the U.S., “that I would become either a worker exploited for capitalist profit or an exploiter or, since there are many in this category, I’d be one of the unemployed.”
> Whether or not that is the real or only reason he went, the basics of what he said are beyond dispute. The exploitation of labor is integral to capitalism. Where would American mass consumerism be without dollar a day workers in third world sweatshops?

Ok, this isn’t, I thought, a lecture series on the comparative virtues and problems with capitalism vs socialism, but it’s clear from the above where you stand.

And you ignored the point made, other than to suggest it might not be the real or only reason.

> > Oswald's ideal of a Soviet Union utopia was soured by bureaucratic indifference he encountered when he defected to Russia, causing Oswald to adopt revolutionary Marxism as opposed to institutionalized Leninism, and was perhaps inspired by some Cuban students he befriended while living in Minsk.
> That could all be true (except the part about defecting which never happened),

He defected. He renounced his citizenship in the the US embassy, but never returned to complete the necessary paperwork. If he was “just visiting”, Mosby and Johnson wouldn’t have bothered to interview him.

defect2 /dɪˈfekt/ verb [intransitive] to leave your own country or group in order to go to or join an opposing one

> but it is not the reason he decided to return. His efforts to return only commenced after the CIA ceased the REDCAP program within Soviet Union borders.

The logical fallacy of post hoc ergo prompter hoc. Just because event A precedes event B does not mean Event A caused event B (or has any relationship whatsoever):
https://www.google.com/search?q=logical+fallacy+post+hoc+ergo+propter+hoc&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS932US932&oq=logical+fallacy+post+hoc&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i512l2j0i22i30l3.16086j0j7&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=W-6bKUrQT0fEUM

You committed this same logical fallacy above concerning the FPCC as well.

> And that happened because their REDCAP agent in Minsk, Mikhail Platovsky was captured and executed.
>
> But you won't find Platovsky mentioned anywhere in the 26 volumes.
> https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t46-mikhail-platovsky

You have not established pertinence.

> > By the time Oswald left the USSR in June 1962, Oswald sees in the Castro revolution a truer form of socialism — one not corrupted by Soviet Communist Party apparatchiks and nomenklatura and their perks.
> Jeese, you've got this commie narrative down pat, haven't you?

Not a rebuttal.

>
> But according to his buddies in the Marines, he was keen on going to Cuba before he left the base to travel to Europe. At that time, Castro was not seen as a commie.

But Oswald’s desire to get to Cuba persisted — even past the Cuban missile crisis. Was it not clear by then Castro was a communist?

> > Agent Hosty's testimony explained to the Warren Commission what they understood to be Oswald's politics
> Was Special Agent Fuckface in the mind-reading business? Must have been since he never officially talked to him until the interrogations.

And Oswald talked of his politics then, and claimed he was a Marxist.

> > Mr. HOSTY. Agent Gary S. Wilson. Agent Wilson was a brand new agent out of training school. And it is the custom to assign a new agent to work with an older agent for a period of 6 weeks. They work with different agents every day to observe what they are doing. This is the only reason he was with me, the only reason I had another man.
> > We went to the front porch. I rang the bell, talked to Mrs. Paine, at which time she advised me that Lee Oswald had been out to visit her, visit his wife, at her house over the Weekend, but she had still not determined where he was living in Dallas, and she also made the remark that she (Mrs, Paine) considered him to be a very illogical person, that he (Oswald) had told her that weekend that he was a Trotskyite Communist. Since she did not have his address, I thanked her and left.
> > Representative FORD. Was this comment by Mrs. Paine that Oswald had said he was a Trotskyite----
> > Mr. HOSTY. Trotskyite Communist was the word she used; yes, sir,
> Ah, I see... his understanding of Oswald's politics came from Ruth Paine who allegedly couldn't tell a Trotskyite from a Trotskyist or March from October!

That is hearsay. But Hosty sat in on the interogation sessions and heard Oswald call himself a Marxism.

> > In his Dallas police interrogation, Oswald explained his religious beliefs.
> > “What religion am I? I have no faith, I suppose you mean, in the Bible. I have read the Bible. It is fair reading, but not very interesting. As a matter of fact, I am a student of philosophy and I don't consider the Bible as even a reasonable or intelligent philosophy. I don't think of it...”
> Why would a sane intelligent person not buy into virgin births, magicians living in the sky, the dead reanimating, people turning into pillars of salt and other fun things? The man was obviously nuts. Absolute nuts. He's have to be to kill the president!

Straw man argument. Another logical fallacy.

[Steven Galbraith]

As to joining the Marines: Both John Pick and Robert Oswald said the same thing: that they believed that Lee joined the Marines to get away from his Mother. Who by all accounts, was difficult to live with. Yes, she tried, it was a hard life for her; but she impossible to live with.
It's interesting that Mr. Parker seems to admit, sort of, that Oswald was a Marxist as he understood it. So why join the Marines? To serve the US? Or, as his brothers said, to escape an awful life at home?
His experience in the Marines, for me, supports the latter. He was disciplined at first but afterwards, particularly after going to the brig, disenchanted with the service. Kerry Thornley, a fellow Marine who actually wrote about Oswald before the assassination, said Oswald was critical of the Marines, of their behavior in Japan, and that he, Oswald, believed that Marxism was a superior system to capitalism.
But again, if people think this was all an act on Oswald's part, that it was some sort of cover, then what can we do? If we show "A" and conspiracists say "No, that's not "A"" then where can be take this? It's a dead end.

[Hank Sienzant]

The only way they can say it’s not “A” is to claim all the evidence is faked. In other words, the same unsupported assertion they use everywhere else concerning Oswald.

So the only way they can assert Oswald did not kill JFK or Tippit is to claim all the evidence pointing to Oswald committing either act is faked. And the only way to claim Oswald was not a Marxist is to claim all the evidence pointing to that is subterfuge, faked to make Oswald only appear to be a Marxist, but really — trust us, ignore the evidence — Oswald was a patriotic American only pretending to be a Marxist.

[Steven Galbraith]

Correct. Which means in this conversation here we're at a dead end. Whatever evidence we present that Oswald was, as he understood it, a Marxist, is, for them evidence he was *not* a Marxist. Since he was pretending to be one. Herbert Philbrick and CIA and all of that nonsense.
Oswald's brothers said he joined the Marines to escape a dead end life with an unbearable mother. Not for any patriotic reasons. But the conspiracists will say that's a lie and is evidence that he was a patriot since it was a cover for his pro-US intelligence work.
Round and round we go and here we are almost 60 years later.

[Hank Sienzant]

It’s important to stress once more that only one side is relying on the evidence, and one side is relying on the assumption that the evidence is all faked.

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

That is important, Hanky Poo. You be sure to stress that, now. Everybody who disagrees with Hank assumes that all of the evidence is faked. And he pretends that is not an ad hominem attack. Fucking moron.

[Greg Parker]

On Monday, December 6, 2021 at 4:27:36 PM UTC+11, Alan Johnstone wrote:
> "He went into the Marines not because he was patriotic—but to get away from his overbearing mother, following in the footsteps of both his elder brothers. Absolute bullshit which has not a even a whiff of supporting evidence."
> John Pic, LHO'shalf-brother, testified to the Warren Commission that Oswald's enlistment the motivation ''He did it for the same reasons that I did it and Robert did it, I assume, to get from out and under the yoke of oppression from my mother.''

"I assume". Assumptions are not evidence.

Moreover, Marguerite was not "overbearing". What those cunts of sons resented was not that she was too strict - it was that she demanded that they get off their arses and go and get jobs to help family finances - a very common scenario in southern working class families in the 1950s.

She never made any demands of Lee. Lee was the apple of her eye. He was the one who ruled the roost.

> His brother Robert on the subject
> "Our mother was Lee’s most important person in his life. … That influence was just tremendous on him. But at the same time, he always was trying to get away from her"

Weird relationship for a teen to have with his mother. Not.

> If he is merely echoing Mosby, he was doing a fine job of repetition

Of course he was echoing Mosby - on what I said he was echoing her about. The friggin pamphlet bullshit.

> Q. If you had to take a guess about when he got his political beliefs, how he was introduced to Marxism, what would you guess?

It coincides with his entry into CAP.

He said he was 15 at the time he became interested. That is when he was in CAP.

When he wrote to the Socialist Party, he said his interest went back 15 months. That again, places his interest commencing when in the CAP.

The CAP announced in 1948 that it was instigating anti-Communist programs ad that "permission" would be sought from both the FBI and CIA - indicating that they intended operating internal programs as well as ones outside the US. Adverse publicity from the announcement caused the CAP to make no further statements on it other than to say they intended going ahead. The internal program would involve sleeper units ready to come to life in the event of a communist attack or revolution. It also involved informant programs. The external programs involved teaching Russian language, culture and military tactics among other training, including courier work.

Ferrie recruited from within his unit for the these programs - one he called the IMSU (Internal Mobile Security Unit, the other was known as The Omnipotents

Lee's attempts to get friends to join local Communists cells is classic entrapment. Had they done it, he would have informed on them.

It was also said by former CAP members that Ferrie would encourage them to join the Marines.

Recruitment officers do not make house-calls or encourage fraudulent enlistment. Ferrie liked playing dress-up in either priestly frocks or military uniforms. The so-called recruitment officer waiting with Lee for Marguerite to return home from work, was no doubt Ferrie. Lee was in his CAP uniform indicating that Ferrie had brought him home after a CAP meeting.

> A. New York City. If somebody passed out a leaflet on the street that contained a political statement for Marxism or communism or what have you, and if Lee had not run across that before, I could envision him looking at it, keeping it and saying, “Well, I wonder what this is all about.” This might have been the first leaflet that he ever got from anybody on the street. I don’t know. But he would look at it. Maybe the next time he went to the library, he would follow up on it, and say “Well, let’s really see what this is about.” That to me is very plausible for him to do.

Wow. You want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn? It is bullshit and lifted straight from the Rosenberg story. If it had a scintilla of truth to it, it would have been in the 1959 story by Mosby. It is a fucking great story and would not have been left out if he had actually said it.

> https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/interview-robert-oswald/

Frontline is a tool of propaganda and commercial rather than public interests.

> Perhaps not the standard of evidence you demand but more than a whiff.

I stand corrected. It has a definite whiff.

> Can you cite any evidence that LHO was active within any Ferrie's anti-communist or under Ferrie's direct influence. If I am guilty of making suppositions about his relationship with his mother, you are equally guilty. I am assuming that you suggest it was Ferrie who turned LHO into a double agent and to pretend to be a communist and live out LHO's fantasy of emulating the TV series "I lived three lives" using his fake communist credentials as a cover. But I may be wrong and stand to be corrected.

The "I Led 3 Lives" bullshit has been debunked. The timing of the show doesn't. As fot Ferrie - see above. More here.
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/lee-harvey-oswald-s-cold-war-why-the-kennedy-assassination-should-be-reinvestigated

> For what it is worth David Ferrie stated he had no recollection of LHO in his time with the Civil Air Patrol

LOL

> A fellow high school student in New Orleans, William E. Wulf, does remember Oswald
> "expounding the Communist doctrine and saying that he was highly interested in communism, that communism was the only way of life for the worker, et cetera, and then came out with a statement that he was looking for a Communist cell in town to join but he couldn't find any. He was a little dismayed at this, and he said that he couldn't find any that would show any interest in him as a Communist"

Covered above.

> No mention of Ferrie, however

Of course there wasn't. FFS. Why would you expect there would be? Why not just add there was no mention to Wilf either that this was a sting operation!

> Short video worth a watch
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1349060/JFK-lee-harvey-oswald-assassination-history-news-us-politics-us-latest-news-spt

Why the fuck would I be interested in watching the same surface shit that the public has been fed from day one? Again - look under the fucking bonnet and see what was really operating this car.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 11:44:17 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>It’s important to stress once more that only one side is relying on the evidence, and one side is relying on the assumption that the evidence is all faked.

You're lying again Huckster...

[Greg Parker]

On Tuesday, December 7, 2021 at 5:02:28 AM UTC+11, Hank Sienzant wrote:
> > > Lee Harvey Oswald is frequently thought of in the context of a patsy.

> > > Oswald was a self-styled Marxist since adolescence.
> > So... you can't be a communist AND a patsy???
> Not what he’s saying. You’re offering a rebuttal to a straw man argument.

I rebutted exactly what he said. Lee is frequently thought of in the context of a patsy [when really, he should be thought of in the context of being] a self-styled Marxist since adolescence

How the fuck else can it be interpreted?

> Oswald himself claimed he was only arrested because he spent time in the Soviet Union.

Yes. So?

> So you’re arguing that history doesn’t repeat itself. That because it happened to Julius Rosenberg it could not happen to Oswald. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg was executed in June of 1953 — any “Save the Rosenbergs” pamphlets would have been given to Oswald prior to that date, when Oswald was 13 (he didn’t turn 14 until October of 1953). That puts his age at 13 — at which time he was having a lot of trouble in school, and socializing.

No. I am saying the story has various issues indicating ot was lifted from the Rosenberg story.

1. The story is extremely impactful and full of human interest. If Oswald had truly said it, Mosby would have included it in her 1959 story.

2. Oswald apparently never made this claim to anyone else.

3. The timing does not work. Oswald was barely 14 when he left NY - yet the story says he was 15. Oswald would not forge hw old he was in New York. He also puts his Marxist conversion as about 15 months prior to his letter to the Socialist Party. That again brings it back to being 15 in New Orleans anda CAP member.

> > His real inteest in Marxism did not start until he was 15 and in the hands of David Ferrie wh was setting up anti-Communist units within his squadron.

> Evidence?

A far stronger circumstantial case for it than Mosby's bullshit story. That circumstantial evidence was in a previous reply along with a long to further evidence.

> > https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Ethel_Rosenberg/8g6JU4hTJ2AC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=rosenberg%20fifteen%20pamphlet%20tom&pg=PA87&printsec=frontcover&bsq=rosenberg%20fifteen%20pamphlet%20tom
>
> Don’t see anything there supporting the Oswald / Ferrie claim you made.

Don't be so obtuse. That, as you well know, was the Rosenberg story - which is essentially the same story Mosby told about Oswald. Pamphlet,. Street corner. New York. Age 15. Pamphlet about saving a jailed martyr to a cause.

> > > Oswald took an early interest in socialism after picking up a leaflet about the coming execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who had been convicted of spying for Russia. “I was looking for a key to my environment, and then I discovered socialist literature,” Oswald wrote in his diary. “I had to dig for my books in the back of dusty shelves of libraries.”
> Oswald wrote that. He didn’t write that this was all a charade and he was really an anti-communist masquerading as a communist. Was he lying in his diary?

FFS. Why would he write that he was faking it in his diary? But do note that here is nothing in his diary abut this mystical moment in NY with a Rosenberg supporter.

> Last time I looked, “nearly 17” is still 16.

Okay. Lt's cut the crap. He was about16 and 10 months. Go back 15 months and he is abut 15 and 7 months.

> And he said “more than 15 months” not “around 15 months”.

Okay. How much more? You need to go back 36 months to get him in New York. If someone says more than 15 months, they mean matybe it was 16 or 17 - not fucking 36.

> You are arguing that we should disregard everything Oswald wrote and said about himself throughout his life — disregard all the evidence — and believe something the evidence doesn’t support. Even after his arrest for the murder of police officer J.D.Tippit, he was insisting he was a Marxist:

I never said he wasn't one. It s possible he was. The most vociferous anti-communists were among the left https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-communism#Left-wing_anti-communism

> So you’re calling Oswald a liar about his life motivations, even when under arrest for murder. If that’s the case, why should we believe his protestations of innocence in the two murders committed the day of his arrest? Why would you?

Again, I never said he wasn't a Marxist. What I WILL Say is that it is immaterial to his innocence - as is whether or not he lied about it after his arrest. He clearly identified himself in any event, as anti- Russian Communist when he differentiated between being Marxist and Marxist-Leninist.

> > But yes.... interesting thing to ask about.
> >
> > From my Oswald biography:
> >
> > QUOTE ON
> > There is no evidence that the Socialist Party ever replied to this superficially most provocative of letters.
> >
> > The Socialist Party of America formed the Young People’s Socialist League (YPSL) in 1907 drawing from groups with names such as the Athenian Literary Society and the Social Science Study Club. By 1952, the YPSL had a total of 134 members, all of whom were being wooed to join rival socialist youth group, the Socialist Youth League (SYL). In August 1953, after repeated warnings by the Socialist Party to stay clear of the SYL, the YPSL was disaffiliated. In February, 1954, the YPSL joined the SYL to form a new youth group – the Young Socialist League (YSL).
> >
> > In effect, Oswald was asking the Socialist Party of America about a youth group it had not only ceased supporting, but one which had joined an enemy organization.
> > QUOTE OFF

> Did Oswald know any of this? If not, it’s not pertinent.

Which is your way of saying it IS pertinent if he knew about it.

> His letter, detailed here:
> https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0085b.htm
> also included a magazine ad clipped from ‘The Socialist Call’, so he was clearly reading this literature at that age. And the ad clipped from the publication renders your argument meaningless.
> > > Later in life, he made membership inquiries to such organizations as the Socialist Workers Party, the Socialist Labor Party, The Gus Hall-Benjamin Davis Defense Committee, the Daily Worker, The Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the Communist Party, USA
> > Yet only joined the FPCC while writing to all of these other organizations ABOUT the FPCC. The FBI had just admitted that the FPCC was no longer under Communist influence.
> See below for the logical fallacy you just committed here.

> Pertinence? Source? Assuming it’s true for the sake of argument, If Oswald didn’t know this, what’s the pertinence? You need to establish that Oswald knew this *before* you jump to the conclusion about “The sole reason for this flurry of letters…”

It was all done during FBI/CIA operations against the FPCC .

Oswald started receiving foreign communist literature through the mail at precisely the time a new law was introduced stating a person had to formerly notify the PO that they did want to receive this material. You'll recall that Oswald wrote on the bottom of the form that he objected to this. Was this another coincidence in timing?

> > Grasshopper... you need to look under the bonnet to see what is really running the car.
> Worker Ant… you need to stop assuming what you must prove.

It is easy being you, isn't it? History happened just as written and it never warranted to check veracity of the claims made in the history books. Oh if life were truly so so simple.

Do you watch the news with the same lack of curiosity about what they may be concealing from the story? What may be a not entirely honest spin on the facts?

> > > He went into the Marines not because he was patriotic—but to get away from his overbearing mother, following in the footsteps of both his elder brothers.
> > Absolute bullshit which has not a even a whiff of supporting evidence.
> Except both his brother and half-brother’s testimony.

Pic admitted he was making an assumption. His "yoke of oppression" line - straight from the old testament.

It’s only what they both testified to. Is that what you mean by “not a even a whiff of supporting evidence”?
> https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/pic_j.htm

Robert's testimony describes a typical teen/mother relationship when he spoke of Lee's relationship to Marguerite.

> > Which sounds like Oswald cracking a joke that sailed right over the jughead.
> Ok, you don’t think much of the intelligence of Oswald’s “Fellow Marine Owen Dejanovich”. But you speculation doesn’t move the needle in the other direction — the evidence still points to Oswald being a Marxist.

And his true politics remains a non-issue. Except to those needing it to somehow blame communism for what happened.

He could have been a goose-stepping White Supremacist. He was still innocent based on the veracity of his alibi.

> And the evidence doesn’t support your speculation either. Dejanovich was attending Arizona State College when interviewed by the FBI. Oswald was a high-school dropout who constantly misspelled words. So if anything, it might have been Dejanovich’s jokes going over Oswald’s head.

We are talking about IQ dear boy, not schooling.

> http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/FBI%20Records%20Files/105-82555/105-82555%20Section%20037/105-37a.pdf
> > > Priscilla Johnson McMillan interviewed him and he informed her that he was a follower of Karl Marx. “I saw,” he said, explaining why he left the U.S., “that I would become either a worker exploited for capitalist profit or an exploiter or, since there are many in this category, I’d be one of the unemployed.”
> > Whether or not that is the real or only reason he went, the basics of what he said are beyond dispute. The exploitation of labor is integral to capitalism. Where would American mass consumerism be without dollar a day workers in third world sweatshops?
> Ok, this isn’t, I thought, a lecture series on the comparative virtues and problems with capitalism vs socialism, but it’s clear from the above where you stand.

The comment was in the context of Oswald being a liar. But in regard to the exploitation of workers under capitalism, he was spot on. So what the fuck do you mean by "where I stand"? I stand with the facts - not a fucking ideology. If you stand with an ideology over facts, that's your problem, and one of the reasons you are blind to real history.

FFS, how can you deny that workers in third world sweatshops are exploited to satisfy cheap goods for western consumers? If you are that retarted, this ends right here. You are beyond reaching.

> And you ignored the point made, other than to suggest it might not be the real or only reason.

There was no point made, only a quote given.

> > > Oswald's ideal of a Soviet Union utopia was soured by bureaucratic indifference he encountered when he defected to Russia, causing Oswald to adopt revolutionary Marxism as opposed to institutionalized Leninism, and was perhaps inspired by some Cuban students he befriended while living in Minsk.
> > That could all be true (except the part about defecting which never happened),
> He defected. He renounced his citizenship in the the US embassy, but never returned to complete the necessary paperwork. If he was “just visiting”, Mosby and Johnson wouldn’t have bothered to interview him.

That is still not a defection, no matter how red in the face you go.

> defect2 /dɪˈfekt/ verb [intransitive] to leave your own country or group in order to go to or join an opposing one

He never "joined" an opposing country. He stayed there for what was always going to be a temporary arrangement. He joined no union, no political organization, no foreign army and never gave up US citizenship. To give up US citizenship, he needed to formalize the correct paperwork OR join a foreign union, political group or army.

> > but it is not the reason he decided to return. His efforts to return only commenced after the CIA ceased the REDCAP program within Soviet Union borders.
> The logical fallacy of post hoc ergo prompter hoc. Just because event A precedes event B does not mean Event A caused event B (or has any relationship whatsoever):

Clever boy!

But it does not mean there ISN"T a relationship. It is a CLUE to a POSSIBLE relationship.

What nails it down in the case of Oswald is that his actions correlate many many many times with government actions.

The CIA put out a memo to increase operations inside the Soviet Union. That same day, via a honey trap operation, the Soviet Consul in Helsinki begins dishing out quick visas to US citicens. Tw days later, Lee applies for his passport.

As already stated, he started getting cforeign commie newspapers at the same time new laws were introduced about that very thing and his letter writing to commie orgs in NY in regard to the FPCC coincided both with internal FBI memos admitting the FPCC was no longer under commie influence AND with FBI and CIA ops against the FPCC.

Those are just off the top. There are other examples, but I do think 4 is enough to outweigh your coincidence theory.

> https://www.google.com/search?q=logical+fallacy+post+hoc+ergo+propter+hoc&rlz=1C9BKJA_enUS932US932&oq=logical+fallacy+post+hoc&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i512l2j0i22i30l3.16086j0j7&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#imgrc=W-6bKUrQT0fEUM
>
> You committed this same logical fallacy above concerning the FPCC as well.

Yada yada yada. Yes. Lee's life was full of exploits that you would call coincidences.

> > And that happened because their REDCAP agent in Minsk, Mikhail Platovsky was captured and executed.
> >
> > But you won't find Platovsky mentioned anywhere in the 26 volumes.
> > https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t46-mikhail-platovsky
> You have not established pertinence.
> > > By the time Oswald left the USSR in June 1962, Oswald sees in the Castro revolution a truer form of socialism — one not corrupted by Soviet Communist Party apparatchiks and nomenklatura and their perks.
> > Jeese, you've got this commie narrative down pat, haven't you?
> Not a rebuttal.

Was an observation, not a rebuttal. And this is not a high school debate where we are each given one side of an argument to make cases for. I am not on any side of any pretend debate. I am on the side of fact-finding. What about you? You seem to think the bebate is what matters, not what can be f=drawn from it.

> > But according to his buddies in the Marines, he was keen on going to Cuba before he left the base to travel to Europe. At that time, Castro was not seen as a commie.
> But Oswald’s desire to get to Cuba persisted — even past the Cuban missile crisis. Was it not clear by then Castro was a communist?

Nope. Only to those who are clueless.

> > > Agent Hosty's testimony explained to the Warren Commission what they understood to be Oswald's politics
> > Was Special Agent Fuckface in the mind-reading business? Must have been since he never officially talked to him until the interrogations.
> And Oswald talked of his politics then, and claimed he was a Marxist.
> > > Mr. HOSTY. Agent Gary S. Wilson. Agent Wilson was a brand new agent out of training school. And it is the custom to assign a new agent to work with an older agent for a period of 6 weeks. They work with different agents every day to observe what they are doing. This is the only reason he was with me, the only reason I had another man.
> > > We went to the front porch. I rang the bell, talked to Mrs. Paine, at which time she advised me that Lee Oswald had been out to visit her, visit his wife, at her house over the Weekend, but she had still not determined where he was living in Dallas, and she also made the remark that she (Mrs, Paine) considered him to be a very illogical person, that he (Oswald) had told her that weekend that he was a Trotskyite Communist. Since she did not have his address, I thanked her and left.
> > > Representative FORD. Was this comment by Mrs. Paine that Oswald had said he was a Trotskyite----
> > > Mr. HOSTY. Trotskyite Communist was the word she used; yes, sir,
> > Ah, I see... his understanding of Oswald's politics came from Ruth Paine who allegedly couldn't tell a Trotskyite from a Trotskyist or March from October!

> That is hearsay. But Hosty sat in on the interogation sessions and heard Oswald call himself a Marxism.

So now we believe everything Oswald said in the interrogations? Or are we still cherry-picking. Oh, he lied about not shooting anyone. His prints! yada yada yada.

He also said he was out front watching the parade. Film frames may confirm. Will you support getting them? He said prior to that he was in the domino room having lunch with a coke he got from the second floor. He saw Jarman and Norman reenter to go upstairs. He could not have seen that from 6th floor.

> > > In his Dallas police interrogation, Oswald explained his religious beliefs.
> > > “What religion am I? I have no faith, I suppose you mean, in the Bible. I have read the Bible. It is fair reading, but not very interesting. As a matter of fact, I am a student of philosophy and I don't consider the Bible as even a reasonable or intelligent philosophy. I don't think of it...”
> > Why would a sane intelligent person not buy into virgin births, magicians living in the sky, the dead reanimating, people turning into pillars of salt and other fun things? The man was obviously nuts. Absolute nuts. He's have to be to kill the president!
> Straw man argument. Another logical fallacy.

I agree! Introducing his religious beliefs or lack thereof, is a starw argument if ever there was one!

[Alan Johnstone]

Was Oswald an agent of the CIA sent to infiltrate the USSR for some undetermined purpose? That he had been groomed from his teenage years for the role of a spy.

Okay, I run with that for the sake of exploring its relevance to the assassination.

Will you present your case that the CIA (or at least rogue elements within it although, IMHO, to be successful it would require extensive involvement from large numbers of CIA personnel) used LHO as either the assassin or the fall-guy to take the blame and divert suspicion away from any CIA involvement? Can you furnish your proof that CIA killed JFK?

From the history of the UK, we know that some of the intelligence services (Peter Wright) were convinced that the Head of State, the Prime Minister of the UK, Harold Wilson, was indeed a Russian asset. So it is not beyond reason that there were people in the CIA who believed JFK was a security risk deserving of summary execution. Surely not because one covert operation failed leading to the sacking and replacement of various individuals. Or a reappraisal of policy and strategy. ( My reference to British Guinea was to suggest, regards his illegal acts in foreign policy, JFK had not changed his spots after failing in Cuba)

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

Ed Lopez (of the HSCA Lopez Report) said that "the CIA has contacts everywhere." It's not really the CIA that done it. It's the secret network of intelligence contacts. Some DPD officers were military intelligence contacts. Military intelligence naturally has CIA contacts, and the CIA has contacts "everywhere." These are not honor Scouts. Just look at what US intelligence did from 1945-1963. That's these folks. "Fine, but show me the proof!" You want a smoking gun document, but these folks are not so stupid as you demand them to be. The smoking gun is the body of evidence. Not just your cherry-picked Official Story evidence, but all of it. The explanation of all of the evidence is the proof. If it were presented to you, you would not bother to read it. If you read it, then you still would not understand it. You need to know the evidence. Maybe not every piece of it, but much of it, and not simply dismiss everything that challeges your theory as "mistaken."

[Alan Johnstone]

The whole LHO was working undercover for the CIA, or a department of it is predicated on that the CIA was involved. As I implied, if it was as you say simply a network of individuals in the intelligence community and not the organisation as a whole I would have expected internal investigations to bring to the surface details of such a coordinated conspiracy.

Couldn't I easily use similar unsupported suppositions to build a scenario that LHO was turned by the KGB and carried out the assassination at the behest of Moscow and Havana?

As you say I don't need to find the smoking gun because an organisation as capable of as the KGB (again this is a period of history where the most senior elements of the British secret service were found to be KGB moles) could create plausible deniability of any complicity in the assassination.

I'm sure with time and resources both you and I could go through the mountain of information, discover coincidences and suspicious connections and declare it was after all the KGB who did it. One of the biggest KGB sources used to dismiss the involvement of the KGB, Nosenko, is still thought of by some as a plant and not a genuine defector.

What has happened over the decades is pieces of a jigsaw have been found and regardless of their shape they are forced into fitting the theory.

I have a feeling that those who believe the CIA did it never followed the evidence but instead worked backwards from the conclusion and searched for the evidence to fit the story. I am not so sure of the scientific validity of such an investigation.

But if it was the CIA, could you make clear the motive to me.

I struggle to accept it was pay-back for the Bay of Pigs or the potential future de-escalation of the Vietnam war.

But perhaps you can enlighten me.

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

On Tuesday, December 7, 2021 at 7:55:18 AM UTC, Alan Johnstone wrote:
> The whole LHO was working undercover for the CIA, or a department of it is predicated on that the CIA was involved. As I implied, if it was as you say simply a network of individuals in the intelligence community and not the organisation as a whole I would have expected internal investigations to bring to the surface details of such a coordinated conspiracy.

There would be no effective investigations if the network included the bosses, the people not subjected to "compartmentalization."

>
> Couldn't I easily use similar unsupported suppositions to build a scenario that LHO was turned by the KGB and carried out the assassination at the behest of Moscow and Havana?

Maybe you could and maybe he did, but you could not adequately explain the evidence with only a Soviet or Cuban plot. The evidence demands an inside job conclusion, which does not exclude Soviet and Cuban involvement.

>
> As you say I don't need to find the smoking gun because an organisation as capable of as the KGB (again this is a period of history where the most senior elements of the British secret service were found to be KGB moles) could create plausible deniability of any complicity in the assassination.
>
> I'm sure with time and resources both you and I could go through the mountain of information, discover coincidences and suspicious connections and declare it was after all the KGB who did it. One of the biggest KGB sources used to dismiss the involvement of the KGB, Nosenko, is still thought of by some as a plant and not a genuine defector.

I think Nosenko was a Soviet plant, but that does not necessarily mean that the Soviets sent Oswald to kill Kennedy. It means that the Soviets were involved with Oswald in a way which they have not explained.

>
> What has happened over the decades is pieces of a jigsaw have been found and regardless of their shape they are forced into fitting the theory.

Have you ever tried to put together a jigsaw puzzle by forcing the pieces together? That's not as easy as you make it sound.

>
> I have a feeling that those who believe the CIA did it never followed the evidence but instead worked backwards from the conclusion and searched for the evidence to fit the story. I am not so sure of the scientific validity of such an investigation.

Your feelings are not always correct.

>
> But if it was the CIA, could you make clear the motive to me.

The motive thing is necessarily speculation, which is why Nutter love to steer the discussion that way. My speculation is that JFK wanted to get along with the Soviets and not treat them as enemies, and that this was not acceptable to the murderers. But how can I know exactly why murderers do what they do?

[Alan Johnstone]

"My speculation is that JFK wanted to get along with the Soviets and not treat them as enemies, and that this was not acceptable to the murderers."

This comment relates to my other post on whether JFK was a dove or a hawk.

Discussion tends to focus on two events - the Cuba missile crisis and Vietnam plus perhaps the Berlin Wall. However, I have mentioned the case of British Guinea but we can add to this JFK's plans for the CIA to orchestrate a coup in Brasil. There was the Dominican Rep. A coup in Iraq. He continued to use the CIA to shape foreign policy of containment.

I think the topic is legitimately up for debate from both viewpoints. I'm not so sure there is a clear answer either way.

And whatever position he did have, would it have contributed to a reason for removing him by assassination?

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

There you go. You asked me to speculate on their motivations, and then you make JFK's intentions into the topic. We have evidence. We know that JFK refused to invade Cuba when the Bay of Pigs thing failed. We know that JFK cut a deal with the Soviets to end the Cuban Missile Crisis. That is enough evidence to supply his murderers with a motive. They had seen him in action. They had made their judgement that he was an appeaser of the Soviets. That's enough. It doesn't matter whether you or I think JFK was a hawk or a dove. He is actions showed that he was an appeaser in their eyes. It wasn't because he fired Dulles and Cabell, though that might have influenced some. It wasn't because he failed to invade Cuba, though that might have influenced others. It was because he cut a deal with the Soviets over Cuba, not one that rubbed their noses in the dirt, but a fair deal. That's why they killed him. They discovered that he was an unreliable Cold Warrior.

[Alan Johnstone]

> There you go. You asked me to speculate on their motivations, and then you make JFK's intentions into the topic. We have evidence. We know that JFK refused to invade Cuba when the Bay of Pigs thing failed. We know that JFK cut a deal with the Soviets to end the Cuban Missile Crisis. That is enough evidence to supply his murderers with a motive. They had seen him in action. They had made their judgement that he was an appeaser of the Soviets. That's enough. It doesn't matter whether you or I think JFK was a hawk or a dove. He is actions showed that he was an appeaser in their eyes. It wasn't because he fired Dulles and Cabell, though that might have influenced some. It wasn't because he failed to invade Cuba, though that might have influenced others. It was because he cut a deal with the Soviets over Cuba, not one that rubbed their noses in the dirt, but a fair deal. That's why they killed him. They discovered that he was an unreliable Cold Warrior."

The way government policy and decision making is conducted begins with constructing a political case among the relevant departments and exchanging viewpoints and positions. In short, it always begins with persuasive arguments. There is an accepted process that tries to reach a consensus and agreement.

Were there any discussions and consultations that provided grounds to accuse JFK of such serious appeasement? Can you identify the group of those you describe as "they", "their" from any internal lobbying?

Could we say that there was already in existence a "deep state" that was threatened by JFK?

I think Jack Ruby was particularly upset by the Right-wing accusing JFK of treason, an example being this
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-warren-commission-exhibit-right-wing-anti-communist-broadside-posted-52435126.html

As well as leaflets outright accusing JFK of treason.

But weren't these political outsiders and as someone already said somewhere on the forum, there required to be extensive Establishment participation in the conspiracy - back to that "deep state" again which is so anonymous.

[Alan Johnstone]

On further reflection, there was Operation Northwoods, more extreme than Operation Mongoose, where the plan was to commit criminal acts and atrocities against fellow Americans upon American soil to provide a reason for taking retaliatory action. JFK vetoed its implementation.

Those who thought up such an illegal plot showed they were willing and capable of instigating a conspiracy and carrying out an assassination.

But aren't those who designed Northwoods known to many others in government? Were they investigated? Surely a cover-up of those individuals would have surfaced in the ensuing years with new and impartial operatives.

[Greg Parker]

On Tuesday, December 7, 2021 at 5:14:35 AM UTC+11, Steven Galbraith wrote:

> It's interesting that Mr. Parker seems to admit, sort of, that Oswald was a Marxist as he understood it. So why join the Marines? To serve the US? Or, as his brothers said, to escape an awful life at home?

Either/or bullshit.

Mr. ELY. What was your rank at this time?
Mr. DONOVAN. First lieutenant.
Our function at that base was to surveil for aircraft, but basically ***TO TRAIN BOTH ENLISTED AND OFFICERS FOR LATER ASSIGNMENTS OVERSEAS***. Some of my fellow officers there had served with Oswald in Japan, and as all ranks, from generals to privates probably do, they discussed their contemporaries and how to get along with them.
I WAS INFORMED TAT OSWALD WAS VERY COMPETENT< BUT A LITTLE BIT NUTS ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

> His experience in the Marines, for me, supports the latter. He was disciplined at first but afterwards, particularly after going to the brig, disenchanted with the service. Kerry Thornley, a fellow Marine who actually wrote about Oswald before the assassination, said Oswald was critical of the Marines, of their behavior in Japan, and that he, Oswald, believed that Marxism was a superior system to capitalism.

Mr. ELY. But your general impression is that he was not especially----
Mr. DONOVAN. Sloppy--no; he was not sloppy.
Mr. ELY. I wonder, Mr. Donovan, if you could return to your description of the way Oswald performed his job, perhaps with particular reference to how he reacted to stress situations.
Mr. DONOVAN. Yes. I have been on watch with him when an emergency arose, and in turning around and reporting it to the crew chief and to myself---and to me, simultaneously, he would tell you what the status of the emergency was, if anyone could tell, and what he thought the obvious action we should take. And he was right. There was usually an obvious solution. Then he waited for you to tell him what to do, and he did it, no matter what you told him.

> But again, if people think this was all an act on Oswald's part, that it was some sort of cover, then what can we do? If we show "A" and conspiracists say "No, that's not "A"" then where can be take this? It's a dead end.

LOL. If you say so.

[Greg Parker]

On Tuesday, December 7, 2021 at 5:34:39 AM UTC+11, Hank Sienzant wrote:

> So the only way they can assert Oswald did not kill JFK or Tippit is to claim all the evidence pointing to Oswald committing either act is faked. And the only way to claim Oswald was not a Marxist is to claim all the evidence pointing to that is subterfuge, faked to make Oswald only appear to be a Marxist, but really — trust us, ignore the evidence — Oswald was a patriotic American only pretending to be a Marxist.

What the fuck are mumbling about now?

He may have been a Marxist. He may have been pretending to be one. Doesn't matter. US agencies did use real leftists to help steer the left away from Communism. It also used them for operational purposes.

That said. you cannot deny that there were long-term plants in the left and right in the US and its allies. These people were often recruited from military reserves, school cadet forces, and organizations such as CAP.

We have our own famous case here. A 19 year old guy named Phil Geri in the Citizens Military Force (army reserves) was recommended to ASIO by his commanding officer. ASIO was a kind f cross between FBI and CIA.

ASIO convinced him to join the Communist Party and inform on it and steer it if he could get into a position to do so.
Of course, it was an easy sell for them - just playing up the James Bond glamor and the Patriotic Duty angles. That was in 1962 in a rural town. He joined the CP and spied for ASIO for over 20 years at the end of which they spat him out, leaving a broken marriage and many needlessly broken lives n his wake, including his own.

Geri had much in common with Oswald. He was from a working class family, had a poor education and worked in unskilled jobs.
https://slackbastard.anarchobase.com/?p=35478

So please cut out the either /or crap and trying to insinuate no one ever gets recruited for this shit anyway. We did it here ON ORDERS from you guys, Whatever we were doing, you were were doing at least 10 times as much.

[Sky Throne 19efppp]

My research hasn't taken me very deep into the deep state, but know it is still there because of the things they do. They murdered a million people in Iraq, because...why? It's not because Saddam was a nasty. They give full support to the murderous Saudi campaign in Yemen. They meddle and try to overthrow and even appoint a president for Venezuela, while imposing embargoes which are acts of war and crimes against humanity. Why? Because they are sociopaths and they still run the show. It's the same regime that murdered JFK, and there will be no real investigation while they still rule. But I don't know all of their names and relationships. It's just our capitalist ruling class operating without genuine democratic input. You know, what they call "freedom."

[Alan Johnstone]

>>>They murdered a million people in Iraq, because...why? It's not because Saddam was a nasty. They give full support to the murderous Saudi campaign in Yemen. They meddle and try to overthrow and even appoint a president for Venezuela, while imposing embargoes which are acts of war and crimes against humanity. Why? Because they are sociopaths and they still run the show.

The shocking reality is that these are not secrets but simply never feature in the news reports most receive from the mainstream media. This isn't a case of the Deep State operating behind the scenes but the normal behaviour of every government to put what they deem as in the national interest before all other considerations.

When it was revealed that Iraq's WMDs had no basis in fact, the politicians ran for cover denying that they ever had evidence that refuted the WMD claim and blamed the intelligence services for misleading them. As each and every claim surfaced to justify the invasion, the views of the anti-war experts were discounted. Who can forget the way Hans Blix and El-Baradei had their conclusions twisted, with the full complicity of the media. Fortunately for politicians, the public has a very short memory and political scene shifts to the next issue

What is shocking is that liberal middle-of-the-road politicians blindly followed a party-line for the most part careerism. And yes, these people remain in power such as Biden. Tony Blair is regularly featured as a commentator on the media despite being proved to be Tony Bliar.

Sanctions is siege warfare aimed at inflicting misery on innocent civilians and I wrote about it here
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2019/no-1375-march-2019/sanctions-waging-war-without-bullets/