Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August '63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro (when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so- called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_g
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 6:03:52 PM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald" sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is, indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August '63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro (when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin] Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so- called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his 2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gDid Hoover know about it because O. was in the employ of the FBI?
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August '63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro (when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so- called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_g
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August '63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro (when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so- called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_g
If you start with erroneous data, you will generally reach erroneous conclusions.
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:07:47 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
If you start with erroneous data, you will generally reach erroneous conclusions.Tell us what the erroneous data that you used to justify your wacky
belief that the "A.B.C.D." of the Autopsy Report describe the location
of the large wound.
But you won't... you're a coward, and will, as always, run...
As you do...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Anybody can say anything, especially if they are not familiar with the evidence.Such as your claim that the throat wound was dissected?
Can you cite for your claim?
Go ahead, we’ll wait.
Go ahead, we'll wait.
Or let's see if any other conspiracy theorist...
I reject your silly notion that a troll is a Critic.
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald" sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is, indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August '63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro (when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin] Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so- called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his 2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald" sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various "sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November 22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63). But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is, indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August '63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro (when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one- man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin] Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so- called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his 2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 7:01:19?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:07:47 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
If you start with erroneous data, you will generally reach erroneous conclusions.
Tell us what the erroneous data that you used to justify your wacky
belief that the "A.B.C.D." of the Autopsy Report describe the location
of the large wound.
But you won't... you're a coward, and will, as always, run...
As you do...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
Ben tries to change the subject rather than correct a false statement he knows is false.
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:22:32 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsienzant@aol.com> wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 7:01:19?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Anybody can say anything, especially if they are not familiar with the evidence.Such as your claim that the throat wound was dissected?
Can you cite for your claim?
Go ahead, we’ll wait.
Ben tries to change the subject rather than correct a false statement he knows is false.You've **NEVER** answered this question. Quite the coward, aren't
you?
I have the rest of my life, and I'll never get the answer... becauseGo ahead, we'll wait.
cowards like Huckster think if they ignore it, it will go away...
Or let's see if any other conspiracy theorist...
I reject your silly notion that a troll is a Critic.
So you think ...
Yes, I do.
And unlike you, I can reason - and answer honestly.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:35:20?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:22:32 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsienzant@aol.com> wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 7:01:19?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:You've **NEVER** answered this question. Quite the coward, aren't
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Anybody can say anything, especially if they are not familiar with the evidence.Such as your claim that the throat wound was dissected?
Can you cite for your claim?
Go ahead, well wait.
Ben tries to change the subject rather than correct a false statement he knows is false.
you?
I have the rest of my life, and I'll never get the answer... becauseGo ahead, we'll wait.
cowards like Huckster think if they ignore it, it will go away...
Or let's see if any other conspiracy theorist...
I reject your silly notion that a troll is a Critic.
So you think ...
Yes, I do.
And unlike you, I can reason - and answer honestly.
Except you changed the subject and didn't answer to the point raised.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert Schweitzer college? Oh,
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald" sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November 22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter") supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63). But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is, indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one- man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin] Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind something not
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 21:12:49 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.Huckster knows the answer to the questions I raise, but the correct
answer would indict him as a fool.
So he runs.
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 08:53:57 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:35:20?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:22:32 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 7:01:19?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:You've **NEVER** answered this question. Quite the coward, aren't
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Anybody can say anything, especially if they are not familiar with the evidence.Such as your claim that the throat wound was dissected?
Can you cite for your claim?
Go ahead, we’ll wait.
Ben tries to change the subject rather than correct a false statement he knows is false.
you?
I have the rest of my life, and I'll never get the answer... becauseGo ahead, we'll wait.
cowards like Huckster think if they ignore it, it will go away...
Or let's see if any other conspiracy theorist...
I reject your silly notion that a troll is a Critic.
So you think ...
Yes, I do.
And unlike you, I can reason - and answer honestly.
Except you changed the subject and didn't answer to the point raised.You can run, Huckster... but I'm merely going to keep pointing out
your PROVEN cowardice.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:35:20?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:22:32 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsienzant@aol.com> wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 7:01:19?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:You've **NEVER** answered this question. Quite the coward, aren't
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:00:11 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Anybody can say anything, especially if they are not familiar with the evidence.Such as your claim that the throat wound was dissected?
Can you cite for your claim?
Go ahead, well wait.
Ben tries to change the subject rather than correct a false statement he knows is false.
you?
I have the rest of my life, and I'll never get the answer... becauseGo ahead, we'll wait.
cowards like Huckster think if they ignore it, it will go away...
Or let's see if any other conspiracy theorist...
I reject your silly notion that a troll is a Critic.
So you think ...
Yes, I do.
And unlike you, I can reason - and answer honestly.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:35:20?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 21:12:49 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.Huckster knows the answer to the questions I raise, but the correct
answer would indict him as a fool.
So he runs.
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:14:30 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.
Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?
You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.
Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?
Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert Schweitzer college? Oh,
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald" sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is, indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind something not
Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be appreciated.”
This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and
I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert Schweitzer college?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald" sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks. Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President. The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind something
and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be appreciated.”
This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim
I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert Schweitzer college?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks. Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President. The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind something
Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be appreciated.”
and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim
If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination? What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be appreciated.
claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making a
Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination? What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making a
Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was? https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making a
Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was? https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJWhy would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making
Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was? https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJWhy would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question. But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
is always a possibility. But it would be nice to know why Hoover was concerned about this. It shouldn't be a problem for a man to have a copy of his own birth certificate, even if he goes to Russia. It would be nice to know.Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was? https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJWhy would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.You answered a question. That wasn't so hard, was it? But, how could Oswald have used his birth certificate to establish himself as Oswald if he had already been in the Soviet Union for 8 months before the date of Hoover's memo? Yes, miscommunication
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance? I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question. But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
is always a possibility. But it would be nice to know why Hoover was concerned about this. It shouldn't be a problem for a man to have a copy of his own birth certificate, even if he goes to Russia. It would be nice to know.Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.You answered a question. That wasn't so hard, was it? But, how could Oswald have used his birth certificate to establish himself as Oswald if he had already been in the Soviet Union for 8 months before the date of Hoover's memo? Yes, miscommunication
I already answered all that.to complain in person about not knowing where her son was.
You are confusing two separate items. Oswald takes his birth certificate to establish his identity when he attempts to defect, not eight months later.
Months later, Hoover memo questioning whether someone is masquerading as Oswald is spurred by Marguerite Oswald’s complaints to the State Department that she hasn’t been in contact with her son since his defection. She even travelled to Washington
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question. But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
USSR from the US. A memo from him to Hoover first mentions the possibility. That seems to be where Hoover got the idea. As you noted, Marguerite told the government that Oswald took his birth certificate but had disappeared after defecting, He didn'tHilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was? https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJWhy would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good. He was in charge of the FBI's Funds Transmitted program that, as far as I can tell, monitored transfers of money to the
The memo from Good is here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=117797#relPageId=248John Newman has a few more details in his book "Oswald and the CIA." His concluson: "In the end the impostor issue, along with concerns over the birth certificate, was dropped due to the lack of substantive information."
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in mind
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet making
It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good. He was in charge of the FBI's Funds Transmitted program that, as far as I can tell, monitored transfers of money to theHilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was? https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJWhy would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:22:02 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance? I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question. But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
the USSR from the US. A memo from him to Hoover first mentions the possibility. That seems to be where Hoover got the idea. As you noted, Marguerite told the government that Oswald took his birth certificate but had disappeared after defecting, He didn'tHilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good. He was in charge of the FBI's Funds Transmitted program that, as far as I can tell, monitored transfers of money to
The memo from Good is here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=117797#relPageId=248John Newman has a few more details in his book "Oswald and the CIA." His concluson: "In the end the impostor issue, along with concerns over the birth certificate, was dropped due to the lack of substantive information."
Oswald's birth certificate was, it appears, found among his possessions: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339664/m1/1/
It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's
birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:22:02 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance? I am interested in your thoughts about this issue. Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question. But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
the USSR from the US. A memo from him to Hoover first mentions the possibility. That seems to be where Hoover got the idea. As you noted, Marguerite told the government that Oswald took his birth certificate but had disappeared after defecting, He didn'tHilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good. He was in charge of the FBI's Funds Transmitted program that, as far as I can tell, monitored transfers of money to
Complicating this further, Oswald told the FBI when he was interviewed after returning from the USSR that he had *not* taken his birth certificate with him when he defected. He said he left it in a trunk at his mother's home.The memo from Good is here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=117797#relPageId=248John Newman has a few more details in his book "Oswald and the CIA." His concluson: "In the end the impostor issue, along with concerns over the birth certificate, was dropped due to the lack of substantive information."
Oswald's birth certificate was, it appears, found among his possessions: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339664/m1/1/
Complicating this further...
Even worse...
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:48:47 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:22:02 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
the USSR from the US. A memo from him to Hoover first mentions the possibility. That seems to be where Hoover got the idea. As you noted, Marguerite told the government that Oswald took his birth certificate but had disappeared after defecting, He didn'tHilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good. He was in charge of the FBI's Funds Transmitted program that, as far as I can tell, monitored transfers of money to
her father and adopted when her mother re-married.Complicating this further, Oswald told the FBI when he was interviewed after returning from the USSR that he had *not* taken his birth certificate with him when he defected. He said he left it in a trunk at his mother's home.The memo from Good is here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=117797#relPageId=248John Newman has a few more details in his book "Oswald and the CIA." His concluson: "In the end the impostor issue, along with concerns over the birth certificate, was dropped due to the lack of substantive information."
Oswald's birth certificate was, it appears, found among his possessions: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339664/m1/1/
Here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=117797#relPageId=146&search=certificate
As a sidebar to this, when Marina and Oswald wanted to marry the Soviet officials said they needed to see a birth certificate from Marina. But apparently not Oswald? When Marina finally find hers she was shocked to learn that she had been abandoned by
Sound and fury......Even worse, Marina's adopted father *denied* adopting her. So she found out that her birth father abandoned her and that her adopted father denied adopting her.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 08:58:06 -0700 (PDT), Steven Galbraith <stevemg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Even worse...
Completely unrelated nonsense that fails to prove the WCR's theory...
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 10:22:04 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
miscommunication is always a possibility. But it would be nice to know why Hoover was concerned about this. It shouldn't be a problem for a man to have a copy of his own birth certificate, even if he goes to Russia. It would be nice to know.Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.You answered a question. That wasn't so hard, was it? But, how could Oswald have used his birth certificate to establish himself as Oswald if he had already been in the Soviet Union for 8 months before the date of Hoover's memo? Yes,
Washington to complain in person about not knowing where her son was.I already answered all that.
You are confusing two separate items. Oswald takes his birth certificate to establish his identity when he attempts to defect, not eight months later.
Months later, Hoover memo questioning whether someone is masquerading as Oswald is spurred by Marguerite Oswald’s complaints to the State Department that she hasn’t been in contact with her son since his defection. She even travelled to
Where is Oswald trying to establish his identity when he defects? How did Marguerite not knowing where her son was make Hoover suspicious that he was being impersonated, or spur him into questioning it? I think the Hoover comment is difficult toexplain unless there are reports of somebody using Oswald's identity in the US. Then the comment makes sense. Of course it's not the Bolton Ford sighting, but Hoover might have known a few things we don't. I don't see how Marguerite's words or actions
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 1:57:47 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:in mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 10:22:04 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have
be appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will
internet making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the
miscommunication is always a possibility. But it would be nice to know why Hoover was concerned about this. It shouldn't be a problem for a man to have a copy of his own birth certificate, even if he goes to Russia. It would be nice to know.Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.You answered a question. That wasn't so hard, was it? But, how could Oswald have used his birth certificate to establish himself as Oswald if he had already been in the Soviet Union for 8 months before the date of Hoover's memo? Yes,
Washington to complain in person about not knowing where her son was.I already answered all that.
You are confusing two separate items. Oswald takes his birth certificate to establish his identity when he attempts to defect, not eight months later.
Months later, Hoover memo questioning whether someone is masquerading as Oswald is spurred by Marguerite Oswald’s complaints to the State Department that she hasn’t been in contact with her son since his defection. She even travelled to
explain unless there are reports of somebody using Oswald's identity in the US. Then the comment makes sense. Of course it's not the Bolton Ford sighting, but Hoover might have known a few things we don't. I don't see how Marguerite's words or actionsWhere is Oswald trying to establish his identity when he defects? How did Marguerite not knowing where her son was make Hoover suspicious that he was being impersonated, or spur him into questioning it? I think the Hoover comment is difficult to
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/157-10014-10138.pdf
See page 14 of 172.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 5:03:54 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:in mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 1:57:47 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 10:22:04 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have
be appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will
internet making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the
miscommunication is always a possibility. But it would be nice to know why Hoover was concerned about this. It shouldn't be a problem for a man to have a copy of his own birth certificate, even if he goes to Russia. It would be nice to know.Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.You answered a question. That wasn't so hard, was it? But, how could Oswald have used his birth certificate to establish himself as Oswald if he had already been in the Soviet Union for 8 months before the date of Hoover's memo? Yes,
Washington to complain in person about not knowing where her son was.I already answered all that.
You are confusing two separate items. Oswald takes his birth certificate to establish his identity when he attempts to defect, not eight months later.
Months later, Hoover memo questioning whether someone is masquerading as Oswald is spurred by Marguerite Oswald’s complaints to the State Department that she hasn’t been in contact with her son since his defection. She even travelled to
explain unless there are reports of somebody using Oswald's identity in the US. Then the comment makes sense. Of course it's not the Bolton Ford sighting, but Hoover might have known a few things we don't. I don't see how Marguerite's words or actionsWhere is Oswald trying to establish his identity when he defects? How did Marguerite not knowing where her son was make Hoover suspicious that he was being impersonated, or spur him into questioning it? I think the Hoover comment is difficult to
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/157-10014-10138.pdf
See page 14 of 172.Well, that's nice, but it doesn't seem to add anything to the documents which have already been linked to in this thread, the same documents this document relies upon.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:59:23 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:have in mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 5:03:54 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 1:57:47 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 10:22:04 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein -------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could
will be appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject
internet making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the
miscommunication is always a possibility. But it would be nice to know why Hoover was concerned about this. It shouldn't be a problem for a man to have a copy of his own birth certificate, even if he goes to Russia. It would be nice to know.Hilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.You answered a question. That wasn't so hard, was it? But, how could Oswald have used his birth certificate to establish himself as Oswald if he had already been in the Soviet Union for 8 months before the date of Hoover's memo? Yes,
Washington to complain in person about not knowing where her son was.I already answered all that.
You are confusing two separate items. Oswald takes his birth certificate to establish his identity when he attempts to defect, not eight months later.
Months later, Hoover memo questioning whether someone is masquerading as Oswald is spurred by Marguerite Oswald’s complaints to the State Department that she hasn’t been in contact with her son since his defection. She even travelled to
explain unless there are reports of somebody using Oswald's identity in the US. Then the comment makes sense. Of course it's not the Bolton Ford sighting, but Hoover might have known a few things we don't. I don't see how Marguerite's words or actionsWhere is Oswald trying to establish his identity when he defects? How did Marguerite not knowing where her son was make Hoover suspicious that he was being impersonated, or spur him into questioning it? I think the Hoover comment is difficult to
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/157-10014-10138.pdf
You know what they say about leading a horse to water, right, and Parker’s famous quip playing off that?See page 14 of 172.Well, that's nice, but it doesn't seem to add anything to the documents which have already been linked to in this thread, the same documents this document relies upon.
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:48:47 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:mind something not stated in the memo. What is stated doesn't necessarily imply impersonation. In fact, the Official Story is that there was no impersonation. Do you think that Hoover is worried that the Russians might be sending a spy to the Albert
On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:22:02 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 5:53:50 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:52:58 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 9:45:16 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 9:51:16 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:16:19 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 1:03:18 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 2:01:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:12:51 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, September 11, 2023 at 5:27:34 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Sunday, September 10, 2023 at 9:03:52 PM UTC-4, gggg gggg wrote:
On Wednesday, February 10, 2010 at 1:38:14 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
Subject: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 11:30:09 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Richard
To: David Von Pein
-------------------------
Dave, have you published your thoughts about the "second Oswald"
sightings (e.g. Sylvia Odio, Mexico, firing range in Dallas, auto
dealership in Dallas etc) prior to the JFK assassination?
What significance do you think they have? Do they suggest some govt
involvement in some sort of plot or plan -- not necessarily the JFK
assassination but perhaps some other significance?
I am interested in your thoughts about this issue.
Thanks.
Richard
========================================================
Subject: Re: Second Oswald
Date: 2/10/2010 4:30:30 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein
To: Richard
-------------------------
Hi Richard,
As you undoubtedly know, many times after a high-profile murder occurs
there are people who crawl out of the woodwork with stories of various
"sightings" of the killer, most of whom only saw someone who resembled
the murderer. And this could easily be the case with many of the
Oswald sightings, since LHO had fairly "average" looks and physical
features.
The Oswald sightings before the assassination do not indicate a
Government plot of some kind, nor do any of them even make any
cohesive SENSE at all, in my opinion. Take the "car lot" sighting of
Oswald, for example.
The conspiracy kooks want us to believe that somebody was
impersonating LHO at some car dealership a few weeks before November
22, and that this "other Oswald" tipped his hand and told Mr. Bogard
that he would be coming into some money in about three weeks.
Now, I ask: Why would any conspirators who were in the process of
trying to frame Oswald have any desire to ADVERTISE THEIR PLOT three
weeks in advance (even in a subtle manner, like this car dealership
example)? It's just silly.
And I think the same type of reasoning applies to the Dial Ryder
incident at the Irving Sports Shop, where Oswald (or an "imposter")
supposedly wanted a scope mounted on a gun that conspiracy theorists
say wasn't Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano at all (which, indeed, it
almost certainly wasn't, since the scope had already been mounted on
the rifle Oswald purchased from Klein's by mail order in March '63).
But for what logical reason would some plotters want to do this and
possibly blow a portion of the murder plan if they were to be exposed
after the assassination?
Apparently the planting of all the physical evidence at the murder
scene on November 22nd to implicate poor sap Lee Oswald (which is,
indeed, what many conspiracy theorists think occurred) wasn't nearly
enough for these gung-ho patsy framers. They wanted to run the risk of
exposure by having imposter Oswalds pop up all over the place in the
weeks and months prior to the assassination of the President.
The Garland Slack/rifle range incident and the Sylvia Odio incident
are not quite as easy to dismiss, however. I think it's quite possible
that Oswald was at Odio's door on 9/25/63 (although there's other
evidence to indicate he wasn't there, such as the tight timeline for
his being able to catch the various busses to Mexico and a phone call
he made to Horace Twiford that same night (probably from New Orleans
or Houston), which suggests he might not have been able to physically
be present at Odio's home at the time in question.
But Odio and her sister are two good reasons to consider the
possibility of Oswald actually having been at Odio's door that
September night. Their stories corroborate each other nicely. And the
fact that Sylvia Odio remembered the American being introduced to her
as a man named "Oswald" is another thing that leads toward him being
there.
But even if Oswald was at Odio's, it wouldn't be totally out of
character for LHO to be seen in the company of anti-Castro Cubans. He
pulled the same trick in New Orleans just one month earlier, in August
'63, when he went into Carlos Bringuier's clothing store, with
Bringuier being under the distinct impression that LHO was ANTI-Castro
(when, in fact, he certainly wasn't).
It was probably part of a game Oswald was playing that summer to
garner more attention (and sympathy from some quarters) for his one-
man FPCC chapter in New Orleans.
As for Mexico City, it couldn't be more obvious that the real Lee
Harvey Oswald travelled to Mexico City in late September of 1963. The
proof of that trip is several layers deep, starting with Oswald's very
own handwriting on the Mexico City hotel's register [as seen in Warren
Commission Exhibit No. 2480, line 18], plus Marina Oswald's testimony
regarding the Mexico excursion, plus the visa application with
Oswald's own PICTURE and SIGNATURE on it [CE2564], plus another SIGNED
document in Oswald's own handwriting (a letter he wrote to complain
about his treatment while in Mexico), plus the various witnesses who
saw and spoke to Lee Oswald while on the busses he took to and from
Mexico City.
CE2480: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm
CE2564: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0422b.htm
So, since we know beyond ALL doubt that the real Lee Harvey Oswald
went to Mexico City in late 1963, the question must then be asked: Why
would somebody ALSO be impersonating Oswald in Mexico AT THE SAME
TIME? Vince Bugliosi has a few (humorous) thoughts on that silly
theory:
"It's always assumed, of course, that the imposter would
impersonate Oswald [in Mexico City] without his knowledge, that he
would be someone Oswald did not know. But [HSCA investigator Edwin]
Lopez raises the possibility--are you seated?--that maybe the
impersonator was "one of his [Oswald's] companions" in Mexico City. To
think that our tax money went into the preparation of the Lopez
Report. ....
"Shouldn't an impersonator at least resemble the man he's
standing in for? .... The conspiracy theorists are so unhinged that
they believe Oswald's framers would use an impersonator who looks as
much like Oswald as Danny DeVito does." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi
Vincent's last comment above was referring to this picture of the so-
called "Oswald imposter": http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/Mexico-City.jpg?t=1265835168
-----------------
ADDENDUM:
Jean Davison does a terrific job of dissecting and analyzing this
strange bird known as Lee Harvey Oswald in her 1983 book "OSWALD'S
GAME":
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
And Vincent Bugliosi also has an excellent biography of Oswald in his
2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY": http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
Thanks for writing.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
========================================================Hoover knew about 2nd Oswald in New O.:
But that has nothing to do with Hoover. And Hoover was talking about a different time and place.https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xQ2JokIbA_gThat guy's memory is shooting from the hip. The Bolton Ford sighting was 1961.
Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false.
It’s just a random guy on the internet making a claim and butchering the details.
Nothing to see here.The Hoover memo is not perfectly clear as to what it means regarding Oswald impersonation, but it certainly implies that it is about Marguerite's concerns about news from the Albert Schweitzer college. However, Hoover could have in
appreciated.”Yes, almost perfect. Hoover’s memo does imply impersonation and has nothing to do with the college, however.
Hoover wrote in June of 1960 (after Oswald was in Russia), that “since there is a possibility that an impostor is using Oswald's birth certificate, any current information the department of state may have concerning subject will be
making a claim and butchering the details. Nothing to see here.”This was after numerous letters to the State Department starting in March of 1960 inquiring as to her son’s whereabouts in Russia, which you can read starting here:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0309b.htm
Hoover’s memo has nothing to do with New Orleans and wasn't written in 1958 or 1959, contrary to the claims of the YouTube person. He butchered it entirely.
It was written in June of 1960. It's not about the Bolton Ford supposed incident you mention that occurred on the same day JFK was being inaugurated in Washington (1/20/1961) either.
Like I said, “Hoover was talking about a different time and place. Ben knows this, but curiously, he remains silent and would rather argue with me than correct a statement he knows is false. It’s just a random guy on the internet
the USSR from the US. A memo from him to Hoover first mentions the possibility. That seems to be where Hoover got the idea. As you noted, Marguerite told the government that Oswald took his birth certificate but had disappeared after defecting, He didn'tHilarious!Cowardly Hank refuses to present his conclusion, but wants us to read the writings of Marguerite Oswald, just for fun.If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the evidence upon which I based my conclusion, I can't force you.I'm waiting for gggg… to show up and apologize for wasting everyone’s time on an obviously false claim, but I'm not holding my breath, either.What are you saying is Hoover's reason for suspecting an Oswald impersonator? Don't tell me to read Marguerite Oswald's letters. Oswald has his birth certificate, so somebody is impersonating Oswald? What exactly are you alleging?
Umm, I'm not a mind-reader, nor a seance conductor, but you're clearly asking for my speculation here, so i’ll provide two off the top of my head:What part of the below post confused you as to what my conclusion was?Why would Hoover think that anybody was using Oswald's birth certificate?
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/1yZ8hOJsB_Q/m/g9Yv3jc2CAAJ
1. Because ‘somebody’ (I.e., Oswald) used Oswald’s birth certificate to establish themselves as Oswald. Hoover didn't know Oswald from a hill of beans, so he thought that was worth checking into?
2. Because something got lost in translation between Hoover and the people reporting to him. Hoover is reporting what he was told, or what he thought he was told, neither of which may be the precise truth?
I'm sure I'm overlooking some possibilities that don't involve a conspiracy to kill JFK and frame Oswald.It seems the idea/suggestion that an impostor may try using Oswald's birth certificate first came from FBI Special Agent Harry Good. He was in charge of the FBI's Funds Transmitted program that, as far as I can tell, monitored transfers of money to
Complicating this further, Oswald told the FBI when he was interviewed after returning from the USSR...The memo from Good is here: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=117797#relPageId=248John Newman has a few more details in his book "Oswald and the CIA." His concluson: "In the end the impostor issue, along with concerns over the birth certificate, was dropped due to the lack of substantive information."
Oswald's birth certificate was, it appears, found among his possessions: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339664/m1/1/
You know what they say about leading a horse to water...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 116:34:02 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,334,184 |
