The Kennedy Assassination And The Persistence Of Conspiracy Theories -- Part IV

/

These Kennedy assassination posts have generated large numbers of comments. Most of the commenters, and certainly the prolific ones, have studied up on the issue and have formed firm opinions of their view of the facts. But then there is a large gulf of disagreement between those who have accepted the “Oswald acted alone” theory and those who have rejected it.

The smallest camp is those who admit they don’t know the answer. That’s my camp. Many people understandably do not feel comfortable with ambiguity in situations like this.

Back in Part II of this series, I expressed the view that biggest problem for those who support the official narrative of “Oswald acted alone” is that there are multiple factual anomalies that are at least potentially inconsistent with that theory. And I said that those supporting the official narrative would be wise to put their emphasis on addressing the anomalies, rather than reiterating well-known facts that are merely consistent with their preferred narrative.

So today I am going to expand on several of the most important anomalies. Here are the four that I listed in Part II:

  • Oswald’s biography.

  • George de Mohrenschildt

  • The trajectory of the fatal bullet

  • Jack Ruby

I am genuinely interested in the thoughts of any of the commenters on these anomalies.

Oswald’s biography.

The short version of the official Oswald bio goes something like this: Oswald enlisted in the Marine Corps, and served about three years, from October 1956 to September 1959. Shortly after his discharge, Oswald defected to the Soviet Union in October 1959. He then lived in Minsk for about two and a half years, returning in June 1962. He then may or may not have been de-briefed by the CIA, but other from that the CIA, FBI and other federal agencies largely left Oswald alone to live peaceably in Dallas in 1962 and 1963 until the assassination.

There are several problems with this narrative. First, Oswald was not just any Marine. He was stationed at a base called Atsugi Naval Air Base in Japan, which was the base for launching the U2 spy planes that flew over Russia. This was one of the most highly classified programs of the U.S. military at the time. Surely, when he defected, the Russians got from him every bit of classified information they were able to get. Even if his access to classified information was limited, he would surely have known things like the capabilities of the planes, and the schedules and destinations of flights.

Second, Oswald somehow picked up the Russian language. During his time in the Marines, he requested and passed a Russian-language proficiency test. The U.S. military has denied that they gave him any formal training.

Third, how is it that upon his return from the Soviet Union, Oswald was not arrested and prosecuted? In the Edward Jay Epstein “Short Course” on Oswald that I linked in Part I of this series, Epstein writes, “Only eight weeks before the assassination [Oswald] had excited FBI and CIA interest in his activities by renewing his contacts with Cuban and Soviet intelligence officers in Mexico City.” So up until then they had little interest in him, and didn’t care that he had given away the secrets of the Atsugi Air Base? Compare the treatment of Oswald to that of, for example, Edward Snowden. After Snowden leaked details of the NSA’s data surveillance programs, the U.S. has sought to extradite him for prosecution, and he has been granted asylum and citizenship in Russia. What made Oswald different?

George de Mohrenschildt

The great thing about de Mohrenschildt is that, once you have seen his name, you won’t forget it.

This is again from Edward Jay Epstein’s “Short Course,” laying out the official narrative:

In Dallas, where [Oswald] settled [on his return from the Soviet Union], he purchased a rifle with telescopic sights and a revolver from a mail-order house under a false name. . . . He then had his wife photograph him, dressed entirely in black, with his revolver strapped on a holster on his hip, his sniper’s rifle in his right hand, and two newspapers — The Worker and The Militant — in his left hand. He made three copies of the photograph — one of which he inscribed, dated “5–IV-63” and sent to a Dallas acquaintance, George De Mohrenschildt.

“A Dallas acquaintance, George de Mohrenschildt” — you are left with the impression that this guy is just some random Dallas neighbor of the Oswalds.

de Mohrenschildt was clearly a CIA operative to some degree and at some times. To what degree and at what times is very much shrouded in mystery. Commenter Eric Wright provides a couple of links for more information about de Mohrenschildt, this one and this one. A 2021 book titled “Our Man In Haiti: George de Mohrenschildt and the CIA in the Nightmare Republic” identifies de Mohrenschildt as the key CIA operative in Haiti in the later 1960s. That is also not confirmed — but then the CIA doesn’t confirm things. The Wikipedia biography of de Mohrenschildt contains this tidbit, sourced to Epstein himself, indicating that de Mohrenschildt had claimed that it was the CIA that put him up to getting acquainted with Oswald in 1962:

On March 29 [1977], de Mohrenschildt gave an interview to author Edward Jay Epstein, during which he claimed that in 1962, Dallas CIA operative J. Walton Moore and one of Moore's associates had handed him the address of Oswald in nearby Fort Worth and then suggested that de Mohrenschildt might like to meet him. . . . "I would never have contacted Oswald in a million years if Moore had not sanctioned it", de Mohrenschildt said.

So Oswald and de Mohrenschildt had not just bumped into each other randomly in Texas; rather, the CIA had put de Mohrenschildt up to seeking out Oswald.

The 1977 Epstein interview of de Mohrenschildt coincided with the investigation then taking place by the House Select Committee on Assassinations, that was investigating the killings of Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. Here’s what happened next:

On the same day as the Epstein interview, de Mohrenschildt received a business card from Gaeton Fonzi, an investigator for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, telling him that he would like to see him. The HSCA considered him a "crucial witness". That afternoon, de Mohrenschildt was found dead from a shotgun wound to the head in a house at which he was staying in Manalapan, Florida. The coroner's verdict was suicide.

If de Mohrenschildt was a CIA operative, that shines an entirely different light on the information that Oswald sent him a copy of the photograph of himself with his new rifle. Obviously there could be many explanations, ranging from the respectable (they were doing their best to keep tabs on a potentially dangerous guy) to the frightening (they were advising Oswald on potential killings). But it would seem that the least likely explanation is that Lee was just letting his random acquaintance know about his fun new purchase.

Both of these anomalies discussed today point to directions that an investigator might want to go to get to the bottom of this. As to Oswald’s bio, internal FBI and/or CIA records should indicate what interest those agencies had in Oswald, the extent to which they were keeping tabs on him, and their reasons for not arresting him. As to de Mohrenschildt, again internal records, this time of the CIA, should provide details of the agency’s relationship with this guy, and what he was up to with Oswald. Unfortunately, none of this information is likely to be included in records designated as “relating to the Kennedy assassination.” When all the “Kennedy assassination” records are released, we’re likely to know no more about these subjects than we know today.