Discussion:
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
(too old to reply)
Raymond
2011-12-25 19:03:20 UTC
Permalink
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death

Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
"I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."

Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth

In Her Words

What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.

I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.

Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.

But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."

Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.

"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.

"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know," she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."

http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Marina_Oswald_Porter_Discussion.
bigdog
2011-12-26 01:39:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
Post by Raymond
In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
She was telling the truth there.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
Others have changed her mind. She was better off when she was thinking
for herself and accepting the obvious.
Post by Raymond
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
He set himself up. She knew it then. She has since become quite
confused, listening to the nonsense.
Post by Raymond
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
Who can blame her?
Post by Raymond
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know,"
Truer words were never spoken. She was much better off accepting the
obvious.
Post by Raymond
she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
Coincidences? Just a coincidence her husband's rifle fired the shots that
killed JFK. Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle. Just a
coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime. Just a
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag. Just a coincidence he fled the scene
minutes after the shooting. Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him. Just a coincidence he tried to kill another
cop about a half hour later. Just a coincidence my achin' ass.
j***@gmail.com
2011-12-26 17:05:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
She was telling the truth there.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
Others have changed her mind. She was better off when she was thinking
for herself and accepting the obvious.
False. She was sequestered by the SS until she gave the WC what they
wanted to hear. When she was thinking for herself she read the 26 vols of
the WC H+E and began to realize she had not been used.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
He set himself up. She knew it then. She has since become quite
confused, listening to the nonsense.
She read the 26 vols of H+E. Are you saying that is 'nonsense'?
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
Who can blame her?
Post by Raymond
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know,"
Truer words were never spoken. She was much better off accepting the
obvious.
False. While sequstered by the SS she was told what to believe. What she
was told was 'obvious' turned out to be what the WC wanted to hear.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
Coincidences? Just a coincidence her husband's rifle fired the shots that
killed JFK.
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas. He may not even have known
where it was.

Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.

That's debatable. But it was his rifle at one time.

Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.

Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.

Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.

Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.

st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun. It did not go off.

Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.

Your opinion. You are entitled. I think you are wrong.

Pamela Brown
www.in-broad-daylight.com
bigdog
2011-12-26 19:05:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
She was telling the truth there.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
Others have changed her mind. She was better off when she was thinking
for herself and accepting the obvious.
False.  She was sequestered by the SS until she gave the WC what they
wanted to hear.  When she was thinking for herself she read the 26 vols of
the WC H+E and began to realize she had not been used.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
He set himself up. She knew it then. She has since become quite
confused, listening to the nonsense.
She read the 26 vols of H+E.  Are you saying that is 'nonsense'?
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
Who can blame her?
Post by Raymond
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know,"
Truer words were never spoken. She was much better off accepting the
obvious.
False.  While sequstered by the SS she was told what to believe.  What she
was told was 'obvious' turned out to be what the WC wanted to hear.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
Coincidences? Just a coincidence her husband's rifle fired the shots that
killed JFK.
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
It was his rifle all the time after he received it from Klein's .
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
His prints are where we would expect them to be if he was the shooter.
Was there another TSBD employee whose prints appeared there?
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
Nothing debatable about any of that. CTs are forced to dispute it
because it is the only way they can exhonorate their martyr, LHO.
Post by j***@gmail.com
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
He knew he would be supected because he did it.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
How can intelligent people be so desperate as to deny things that are
so obvious?
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
And you give him credit for that?
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
Pamela Brown
2011-12-28 03:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
She was telling the truth there.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
Others have changed her mind. She was better off when she was thinking
for herself and accepting the obvious.
False.  She was sequestered by the SS until she gave the WC what they
wanted to hear.  When she was thinking for herself she read the 26 vols of
the WC H+E and began to realize she had not been used.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
He set himself up. She knew it then. She has since become quite
confused, listening to the nonsense.
She read the 26 vols of H+E.  Are you saying that is 'nonsense'?
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
Who can blame her?
Post by Raymond
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know,"
Truer words were never spoken. She was much better off accepting the
obvious.
False.  While sequstered by the SS she was told what to believe.  What she
was told was 'obvious' turned out to be what the WC wanted to hear.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
Coincidences? Just a coincidence her husband's rifle fired the shots that
killed JFK.
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
It was his rifle all the time after he received it from Klein's .
He had nothing to do with it after he left NOLA. Marina said she knew
it was in the Paynes' garage. Was it hers then too?
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
His prints are where we would expect them to be if he was the shooter.
Was there another TSBD employee whose prints appeared there?
Your opinion.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
Nothing debatable about any of that. CTs are forced to dispute it
because it is the only way they can exhonorate their martyr, LHO.
He wasn't a 'martyr'. If anything, he was a traitor. He may also have
been a patsy. We don't know. He wasn't allowed to live to stand trial.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
He knew he would be supected because he did it.
Or a patsy.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
How can intelligent people be so desperate as to deny things that are
so obvious?
Only 'obvious' if you believe the WCR.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
And you give him credit for that?
It is a fact.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively. It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
John McAdams
2011-12-28 03:06:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively. It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
This from the woman who would not ask Judyth any tough questions!

And the woman who hounded and hectored those who did.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Raymond
2011-12-28 04:11:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by bigdog
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively.  It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
This from the woman who would not ask Judyth any tough questions!
And the woman who hounded and hectored those who did.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Pamela With Her Flute
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/JFK.html
* Photos of researchers
pjfk
2012-01-12 02:52:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by bigdog
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively.  It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
This from the woman who would not ask Judyth any tough questions!
And the woman who hounded and hectored those who did.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
PamelaWith Her Flutehttp://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/JFK.html
 * Photos of researchers
Donner and I had a very nice visit with Ken Rahn, ironically, the day
before Katrina hit NOLA, when he took that photo. We managed to agree-
to-disagree on just about everything. I can only hope to do the same
with others who believe LHO was guilty.

Pamela
pjfk
2012-01-12 02:52:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by bigdog
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively.  It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
This from the woman who would not ask Judyth any tough questions!
And the woman who hounded and hectored those who did.
McAdams seems to be having a difficult time living in the present. I
am asking Judyth the tough questions and she has run from them.

Pamela Brown
findingjudyth.blogspot.com
bigdog
2011-12-28 15:10:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
It was his rifle all the time after he received it from Klein's .
He had nothing to do with it after he left NOLA.
How could you possibly know that?
Post by Pamela Brown
Marina said she knew
it was in the Paynes' garage.  Was it hers then too?
I'm not an expert on Texas law, but I'm guessing it would be community
property.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
His prints are where we would expect them to be if he was the shooter.
Was there another TSBD employee whose prints appeared there?
Your opinion.
Are you saying it is just my opinion Oswald's fingerprints were in the
sniper's nest or my opinion that no other employee's were?
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
Nothing debatable about any of that. CTs are forced to dispute it
because it is the only way they can exhonorate their martyr, LHO.
He wasn't a 'martyr'. If anything, he was a traitor.  He may also have
been a patsy. We don't know.  He wasn't allowed to live to stand trial.
So I guess we don't know what John Wilkes Booth role was in the
Lincoln assassination.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
He knew he would be supected because he did it.
Or a patsy.
He knew he wasn't a patsy.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
I suppose you think it is debateable he was arrested with the Tippit
murder weapon about a half hour after that crime.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
How can intelligent people be so desperate as to deny things that are
so obvious?
Only 'obvious' if you believe the WCR.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
And you give him credit for that?
It is a fact.
So it was only attempted murder and a lucky break it wasn't Oswald's
third murder of the day. Amazing how casually you dismiss the
significance of Oswald's post assassination actions.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively.  It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
There are no tough questions. The answers are obvious for anyone who
knows the evidence and can apply an ounce of common sense. There is no
common sense arguments for Oswald's innocence.
pjfk
2012-01-12 02:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
It was his rifle all the time after he received it from Klein's .
He had nothing to do with it after he left NOLA.
How could you possibly know that?
Nobody ever saw him with the MC in Dallas.
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Marina said she knew
it was in the Paynes' garage.  Was it hers then too?
I'm not an expert on Texas law, but I'm guessing it would be community
property.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
His prints are where we would expect them to be if he was the shooter.
Was there another TSBD employee whose prints appeared there?
Your opinion.
Are you saying it is just my opinionOswald'sfingerprints were in the
sniper's nest or my opinion that no other employee's were?
He worked there.
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
Nothing debatable about any of that. CTs are forced to dispute it
because it is the only way they can exhonorate their martyr, LHO.
He wasn't a 'martyr'. If anything, he was atraitor.  He may also have
been a patsy. We don't know.  He wasn't allowed to live to stand trial.
So I guess we don't know what John Wilkes Booth role was in the
Lincoln assassination.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
He knew he would be supected because he did it.
Or a patsy.
He knew he wasn't a patsy.
How would you know that?
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
I suppose you think it is debateable he was arrested with the Tippit
murder weapon about a half hour after that crime.
No. He was arrested with a gun that didn't work.
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
How can intelligent people be so desperate as to deny things that are
so obvious?
Only 'obvious' if you believe the WCR.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
And you give him credit for that?
It is a fact.
So it was only attempted murder and a lucky break it wasn'tOswald's
third murder of the day. Amazing how  casually you dismiss the
significance ofOswald'spost assassination actions.
I am not 'dismissing' them. I am correctly orienting them.
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively.  It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
There are no tough questions.
I disagree. Let's start with why the WC had to leave out everything that
didn't point to LHO acting alone?
Post by bigdog
The answers are obvious for anyone who
knows the evidence and can apply an ounce of common sense.
Opinion stated as fact. Thanks to the obfuscation of the WCR, nothing
is 'obvious' to those who are able to reason with objectivity.
Post by bigdog
There is no
common sense arguments forOswald'sinnocence.
Yes there is. He was a patsy.
bigdog
2012-01-12 16:04:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
It was his rifle all the time after he received it from Klein's .
He had nothing to do with it after he left NOLA.
How could you possibly know that?
Nobody ever saw him with the MC in Dallas.
That doesn't establish that he never handled the weapon in Dallas. If he
kept it wrapped in the blanket, nobody would have seen him with it. If he
had taken it out of the blanket and gone to a gun range, why would anybody
remember seeing him. I've been to gun ranges numerous times and seen
dozens of people on the firing line but I doubt I could identify a single
one of them. Why would I remember a nameless face? The fact that nobody is
on record as having seen Oswald with the rifle does not establish that he
had nothing to do with it after he left New Orleans. Oswald's palm print
and shirt fibers on the rifle is pretty good indication he had quite a bit
to do with the MC in Dallas.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Marina said she knew
it was in the Paynes' garage.  Was it hers then too?
I'm not an expert on Texas law, but I'm guessing it would be community
property.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
His prints are where we would expect them to be if he was the shooter.
Was there another TSBD employee whose prints appeared there?
Your opinion.
Are you saying it is just my opinionOswald'sfingerprints were in the
sniper's nest or my opinion that no other employee's were?
He worked there.
Lot's of people worked there. His were the only prints on the boxes. In
addition, the prints were on the tops of the boxes in a position
consistent with having been left there by the shooter. They were not
consistent with someone having moved the boxes during their normal work
duties. This is just another fine example of a CT dismissing a significant
piece of evidence simply because they do not want to accept the obvious
conclusion that Oswald was the shooter.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
Nothing debatable about any of that. CTs are forced to dispute it
because it is the only way they can exhonorate their martyr, LHO.
He wasn't a 'martyr'. If anything, he was atraitor.  He may also have
been a patsy. We don't know.  He wasn't allowed to live to stand trial.
So I guess we don't know what John Wilkes Booth role was in the
Lincoln assassination.
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
He knew he would be supected because he did it.
Or a patsy.
He knew he wasn't a patsy.
How would you know that?
Because there is overwhelming proof that Oswald was the assassin and
barring amnesia, he would have known he was the assassin too.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
I suppose you think it is debateable he was arrested with the Tippit
murder weapon about a half hour after that crime.
No.  He was arrested with a gun that didn't work.
The gun worked fine. The FBI had no problem firing test bullets with it
during the ballistic matching process. The reason it misfired in the
theater was because Officer MacDonald was struggling with Oswald for the
gun and the webbing between his thumb and forefinger slipped between the
hammer and the firing pin as Oswald pulled the trigger. He felt the hammer
strike that part of his hand which prevented it from striking the firing
pin. This bit of luck may have saved his life. Oswald's gun worked fine
just a half hour earlier. We know this because four shells that were
positively matched to his gun to the exclusion of all other weapons in the
world were found near the scene of the Tippit murder. Somehow, I don't
think his gun would have broken during his short flight from that murder
scene.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
How can intelligent people be so desperate as to deny things that are
so obvious?
Only 'obvious' if you believe the WCR.
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
And you give him credit for that?
It is a fact.
So it was only attempted murder and a lucky break it wasn'tOswald's
third murder of the day. Amazing how  casually you dismiss the
significance ofOswald'spost assassination actions.
I am not 'dismissing' them.  I am correctly orienting them.
So the correct orientation is that after having already murdered two other
people in a little over an hour, Oswald tried to murder a third and failed
due to a fortunate break.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by bigdog
Post by j***@gmail.com
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
I know I am right and you are very, very wrong. I suppose you could be
more wrong, but it is hard to imagine how.
It's easy to believe the WCR if you don't read it objectively.  It's
not easy to ask the tough questions.
There are no tough questions.
I disagree.  Let's start with why the WC had to leave out everything that
didn't point to LHO acting alone?
What did they leave out? They put everything they had, with the exception
of the autopsy materials and some classified information into the 26
volumes. That was the raw data they had to work with. Those 26 volumes
contained a great deal of conflicting testimony and quite a bit of
irrelevant stuff, such as the reference to Jack Ruby's mother's dentures.
Should that have been included in their report. All the physical evidence
pointed at Oswald and no one else. The WC's job was to resolve the
conflicts with the eyewitness testimony in order to reach a rational
conclusion. It would have been illogical to conclude that everybody was
right because everybody couldn't be right. In many cases, the WC did
include these erroneous statements in the final report and gave their
reasons for having rejected them. Give us one example of a physical piece
of evidence the WC left out that pointed to someone other than Oswald as
the assassin.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
The answers are obvious for anyone who
knows the evidence and can apply an ounce of common sense.
Opinion stated as fact.  Thanks to the obfuscation of the WCR, nothing
is 'obvious' to those who are able to reason with objectivity.
Sorry. No objective analysis of the evidence can lead to any other
conclusion other than that Oswald was the assassin. If there was another
possibility, someone would have found one by now. No one has ever pieced
together a cohesive alternative theory that explains all the available
evidence. Every alternative ever offered has been easily debunked. It is
only those who for reasons known only to them who have a need to believe
that an insignificant little nobody like Oswald could not have taken out
someone as significant as JFK. Whether we want to believe that or not,
things do work that way. Of the three other Presidential assassins, only
Booth was a man of prominence and only his act was the result of a
conspiracy. The other two were commited by little nobodies like Oswald who
became a somebody by killing a President. Fortunately, none of them lived
very long afterward to bask in their noteriety.
Post by pjfk
Post by bigdog
There is no
common sense arguments forOswald'sinnocence.
Yes there is.  He was a patsy.-
That defies common sense.

John McAdams
2011-12-26 22:44:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.

The SS was worried that she would leave the country.

BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Pamela Brown
2011-12-27 16:35:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.

Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.

Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
Raymond
2011-12-27 20:43:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
SOURCE ?
Post by Pamela Brown
Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Pamela Brown
2011-12-28 02:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
  SOURCE ?
She has stated this more than once. I first heard it, I think, in an
Oprah show that she did some time ago.
Post by Pamela Brown
Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
John McAdams
2011-12-28 02:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by Pamela Brown
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
  SOURCE ?
She has stated this more than once. I first heard it, I think, in an
Oprah show that she did some time ago.
No. She told Oprah:

". . . which is the report. And then comes the 26 volumes of the
testimony, of the evidence, which does not support their conclusion --
only by omission. Another thing . . . "

But the idea that the 26 volumes "don't support their conclusion" is
just a standard buff talking point.

http://www.jfkresearch.com/marina/marina.htm

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
pjfk
2012-01-12 02:59:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by John McAdams
Post by Pamela Brown
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
  SOURCE ?
She has stated this more than once.  I first heard it, I think, in an
Oprah show that she did some time ago.
Here is another link where she claims LHO was innocent:

lee is absolutely innocent
Post by John McAdams
". . . which is the report. And then comes the 26 volumes of the
testimony, of the evidence, which does not support their conclusion --
only by omission. Another thing . . . "
But the idea that the 26 volumes "don't support their conclusion" is
just a standard buff talking point.
Only to an LNT. To those able to reason through the 26 vols objectively,
it becomes evident that this is a fact.
Bud
2011-12-27 22:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
This trumped her belief that her husband tried political
assassination before?
Post by Pamela Brown
Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
Pamela Brown
2011-12-28 03:03:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
  This trumped her belief that her husband tried political
assassination before?
Good question. I don't know if anyone asked her that. Or if she was
exaggerating things she had said in that regard in the past.

She may have made up the Nixon episode(where she said she had to lock Lee
in the bathroom), but her thinking LHO took the missed shot at Gen. Walker
is supported by the statements of George deMohrenshildt, who supposedly
asked LHO why he had missed.

Of course, all this begs the question that if she knew Lee was a threat to
politicians she failed to go to the authorities and was at least an
accessory to any crime he committed.
Post by Pamela Brown
Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
Bud
2011-12-28 15:16:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
  This trumped her belief that her husband tried political
assassination before?
Good question.  I don't know if anyone asked her that.
It seems that the people who are questioning her conspiracy
oriented, so they aren`t asking her the relevant, important questions,
they are asking the ones that don`t really matter, like her opinion. I
think I can fit another comma in there if I try.
 Or if she was
exaggerating things she had said in that regard in the past.
How can she exaggerate such an episode?
She may have made up the Nixon episode(where she said she had to lock Lee
in the bathroom),
Just another case of a CTers finding some minor point so they can
throw the whole thing out. At the time Marina`s English was bad, the
idea may have been conveyed inaccurately. The main point was that
Marina had a history run-ins with her husband about attempts on
political figures before. You guys just don`t want to accept the fact
that Oswald had a real desire to strike a blow for his beliefs (I
think this had to do with ego, something to prove to himself that he
was a cut above ordinary men).
but her thinking LHO took the missed shot at Gen. Walker
is supported by the statements of George deMohrenshildt, who supposedly
asked LHO why he had missed.
And the physical evidence of the note. And the fact that Oswald
ordered a rifle he had no real use for, not being a hunter (of
animals, anyway).

So, how many people take shots at political figures? Not many, yet
Oswald has a history of being just such a person. With all the other
evidence there is no doubt he is the one that did it in Kennedy`s case
also.
Of course, all this begs the question that if she knew Lee was a threat to
politicians she failed to go to the authorities and was at least an
accessory to any crime he committed.
Thats why I would have deported her. There was no reason to let her
and her children derive benefits from this country after LHO struck a
blow against it.
Post by Pamela Brown
Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
pjfk
2012-01-12 02:55:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Betty talks with MarinaOswaldPorter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
MarinaOswaldPorter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience MarinaOswaldPorter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee HarveyOswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters whenOswaldwas gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
  This trumped her belief that her husband tried political
assassination before?
Good question.  I don't know if anyone asked her that.
  It seems that the people who are questioning her conspiracy
oriented, so they aren`t asking her the relevant, important questions,
they are asking the ones that don`t really matter, like her opinion. I
think I can fit another comma in there if I try.
 Or if she was
exaggerating things she had said in that regard in the past.
  How can she exaggerate such an episode?
Very easily, considering that she was threatened with deportation or
worse if she did not give the govt what they wanted.
She may have made up the Nixon episode(where she said she had to lock Lee
in the bathroom),
  Just another case of a CTers finding some minor point so they can
throw the whole thing out.
I am not trying to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am just
saying that there is no corroboration for Nixon even being there, so it is
likely she did make this up.
At the time Marina`s English was bad, the
idea may have been conveyed inaccurately.
That is another misconception. Marina was making legal arrangements in
English shortly after LHO's assassination. She pretended not to know the
language, maybe because Lee didn't want her to speak English.
The main point was that
Marina had a history run-ins with her husband about attempts on
political figures before.
Perhaps. But how do we know she didn't encourage him?
You guys just don`t want to accept the fact
thatOswaldhad a real desire to strike a blow for his beliefs (I
think this had to do with ego, something to prove to himself that he
was a cut above ordinary men).
How can you say that when it is my thinking, described in another thread,
that he gave USSR information that resulted in Powers U-2 being shot down?
but her thinking LHO took the missed shot at Gen. Walker
is supported by the statements of George deMohrenshildt, who supposedly
asked LHO why he had missed.
  And the physical evidence of the note.
We don't know when that was written.
And the fact thatOswald
ordered a rifle he had no real use for, not being a hunter (of
animals, anyway).
When he could have bought one in town. And besides, he didn't order
any bullets for it.
  So, how many people take shots at political figures?
What if Marina exaggerated that too?

Not many, yetOswaldhas a history of being just such a person. With all
the other
evidence there is no doubt he is the one that did it in Kennedy`s case
also.
LHO had no connection to the MC in Dallas.
Now, even Marina asks whose rifle it was:

Of course, all this begs the question that if she knew Lee was a threat to
politicians she failed to go to the authorities and was at least an
accessory to any crime he committed.
  Thats why I would have deported her.
And I would agree with you.
There was no reason to let her
and her children derive benefits from this country after LHO struck a
blow against it.
There is no reason to enable someone who, worse case scenario, could
have presented the disaster of the assassination.

Here is the first interview Marina did after the assassination where she
claims LHO killed Kennedy and thanks the people of the US for their
kindness to her and her children:




Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
timstter
2011-12-28 02:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
Pamela Brown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
Marina later listened to idiots like Michael Eddowes and changed her
mind.

BTW, she still thinks Oswald shot at General Walker, according to
Reclaiming History.

Seasonal Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
pjfk
2012-01-12 03:00:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by timstter
Post by Pamela Brown
Post by John McAdams
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Betty talks with MarinaOswaldPorter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
MarinaOswaldPorter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience MarinaOswaldPorter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee HarveyOswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters whenOswaldwas gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
She was threatened with deportation by the FBI.
The SS was worried that she would leave the country.
BTW, it's normal to pressure witnesses whom investigators believe are
withholding information.
You have just done a good job of making my point for me.
Marina later read the 26 vols of the WC H+E and changed her mind.
PamelaBrown
marinaenigma.blogspot.com
Marina later listened to idiots like Michael Eddowes and changed her
mind.
I wouldn't want to minimize the 26 vols. They are dynamite to anyone who
wants to understand what the WC was doing.
Post by timstter
BTW, she still thinksOswaldshot at General Walker, according to
Reclaiming History.
For now, maybe...
Post by timstter
Seasonal Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Bud
2011-12-27 03:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
She was telling the truth there.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
Others have changed her mind. She was better off when she was thinking
for herself and accepting the obvious.
False.  She was sequestered by the SS until she gave the WC what they
wanted to hear.  When she was thinking for herself she read the 26 vols of
the WC H+E and began to realize she had not been used.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
He set himself up. She knew it then. She has since become quite
confused, listening to the nonsense.
She read the 26 vols of H+E.  Are you saying that is 'nonsense'?
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
Who can blame her?
Post by Raymond
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know,"
Truer words were never spoken. She was much better off accepting the
obvious.
False.  While sequstered by the SS she was told what to believe.  What she
was told was 'obvious' turned out to be what the WC wanted to hear.
Post by bigdog
Post by Raymond
she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
Coincidences? Just a coincidence her husband's rifle fired the shots that
killed JFK.
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
Don`t confuse your ability to deny with the ability to debate.
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
Keep those blinders firmly in place, Pamela.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Pamela Brownwww.in-broad-daylight.com
pjfk
2012-01-12 03:02:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by bigdog
Betty talks with MarinaOswaldPorter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
MarinaOswaldPorter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience MarinaOswaldPorter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee HarveyOswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters whenOswaldwas gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy.
She was quite right.
She was sequestered by the SS and threatened with deportation.
Post by bigdog
In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission thatOswaldhad
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
She was telling the truth there.
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
Others have changed her mind. She was better off when she was thinking
for herself and accepting the obvious.
False.  She was sequestered by the SS until she gave the WC what they
wanted to hear.  When she was thinking for herself she read the 26 vols of
the WC H+E and began to realize she had not been used.
Post by bigdog
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
He set himself up. She knew it then. She has since become quite
confused, listening to the nonsense.
She read the 26 vols of H+E.  Are you saying that is 'nonsense'?
Post by bigdog
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters withOswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
Who can blame her?
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know,"
Truer words were never spoken. She was much better off accepting the
obvious.
False.  While sequstered by the SS she was told what to believe.  What she
was told was 'obvious' turned out to be what the WC wanted to hear.
Post by bigdog
she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
Coincidences? Just a coincidence her husband's rifle fired the shots that
killed JFK.
Nobody saw LHO with the M/C in Dallas.  He may not even have known
where it was.
Just a coincidence his palm print was on that rifle.
That's debatable.  But it was his rifle at one time.
Just a> coincidence his fingerprints were all over the scene of the crime.
Just a coincidence that he worked there.
Just a
Post by bigdog
coincidence his shirt fibers were on the murder weapon.. Just a
coincidence his palm print was on the rifle bag. Just a coincidence fibers
from his blanket were in that bag.
Debatable.
 Just a coincidence he fled the scene
Post by bigdog
minutes after the shooting.
He knew he had been set up because he had lived in the USSR.
Just a coincidence he went to his rooming
Post by bigdog
house to retrieve his pistol. Just a coincidence he gunned down a Dallas
cop who tried to question him.
Debatable.
  Don`t confuse your ability to deny with the ability to debate.
Post by j***@gmail.com
st a coincidence he tried to kill another
Post by bigdog
cop about a half hour later.
He did pull his gun.  It did not go off.
Just J a coincidence my achin' ass.
Your opinion.  You are entitled.  I think you are wrong.
  Keep those blinders firmly in place,Pamela.
CTs don't wear blinders, Bud; don't you know? :-)
Post by j***@gmail.com
PamelaBrownwww.in-broad-daylight.com
Walt
2011-12-27 22:34:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.


I'm not sure that Marina ever believed that Lee had shot the
President......As you've pointed out she was raised in a different world,
and believed that if she didn't agree with the authorities she would
suffer serious repercussions.

Only after her girls were raised and gone from her home did she feel safe
in speaking from her heart......And she now says that Lee was framed. It
doesn't take a genius to see that she's right.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with Oswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know," she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Marina_Oswald_Porter_Discussion.
pjfk
2012-01-12 03:03:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with MarinaOswaldPorter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
MarinaOswaldPorter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience MarinaOswaldPorter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee HarveyOswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered the
assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the Dallas
Police Headquarters whenOswaldwas gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission thatOswaldhad
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned after
the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone and that
there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the star
witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission thatOswaldhad
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
Marina said a lot more than that LHO had abused her. And she did do
the right thing in talking about that.

http://youtu.be/T1lxNEKjhwg
Post by Raymond
I'm not sure that Marina ever believed that Lee had shot the
President......As you've pointed out she was raised in a different world,
and believed that if she didn't agree with the authorities she would
suffer serious repercussions.
She said what she was told. She would have been deported or worse. I
have no doubt they held her not going to the authorities about the Walker
incident over her head too.
Post by Raymond
Only after her girls were raised and gone from her home did she feel safe
in speaking from her heart......And she now says that Lee was framed. It
doesn't take a genius to see that she's right.
But only those who are able to keep an open mind get it.
Post by Raymond
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said, "I
do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot the
President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was a
patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he realized
he had been set-up."
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters withOswald,
a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in college," she
told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know," she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Marina_Oswald_Porter_Discussion.
t***@cox.net
2011-12-28 15:13:43 UTC
Permalink
mARINA'S HUSBAND KENNETH TOLD ME THAT mARINA HAS QUITE Library on the
subject.
Post by Raymond
Betty talks with Marina Oswald Porter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
Marina Oswald Porter Still Questions JFK's Death
"I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience Marina Oswald Porter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered
the assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the
Dallas Police Headquarters when Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned
after the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone
and that there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the
star witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission that Oswald had
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said,
"I do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot
the President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was
a patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he
realized he had been set-up."
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with
Oswald, a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in
college," she told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know," she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Marina_Oswald_Porter_Discussion.
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
pjfk
2012-01-12 03:04:14 UTC
Permalink
mARINA'S HUSBAND KENNETH TOLD ME THAT mARINA HAS QUITE  Library on the
subject.
Good for her. That takes guts.
Betty talks with MarinaOswaldPorter who still questions her
husband's role in JFK's death
MarinaOswaldPorter Still Questions JFK's Death
 "I try to weigh this and weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know
there are too many coincidences, just too many coincidences."
Updated on May 20, 2011, 1:17 am ET
By Myrna Blyth
In Her Words
What would it be like to be a 22-year-old wife and mother, living in a
strange country where you could not speak the language, and being told
that your husband had just committed the crime of the century? That is
exactly the experience MarinaOswaldPorter lived. She was the young
Russian-born wife of Lee HarveyOswald, the man accused of assassinating
President Kennedy.
I have known Marina for 20 years. Oddly enough, we have something in
common. My husband, a correspondent for the London Daily Mail, covered
the assassination. He was standing behind Lee in the basement of the
Dallas Police Headquarters whenOswaldwas gunned down by Jack Ruby.
Raised under Stalin, Marina at first thought she would be imprisoned
after the assassination. At the time she believed that Lee acted alone
and that there was no conspiracy. In the following months, Marina was the
star witness against her husband during the Warren Commission hearings
investigating the assassination. She told the Commission thatOswaldhad
abused her. "I could not tell them Lee was wonderful," she said.
But in the ensuing years Marina has changed her mind about Lee's role.
When I talked with her on the 45th anniversary of his murder, she said,
"I do not think Lee was the lone gunman. I do not know if he even shot
the President." Was there a conspiracy? "I don't know. But he said he was
a patsy at the time. It was an odd word for him to use. I think he
realized he had been set-up."
Marina, who is now 67, lives a quiet life in a suburb of Dallas. She
married Kenneth Porter, a carpenter, in 1966. They divorced, reconciled
and have lived together for many years. She had two daughters with
Oswald, a son with Porter. "I have a grandchild who is already in
college," she told me.
"I can't live in the past," she says but she is reminded of it every time
an anniversary of the assassination comes around. She does not read the
books or watch the television shows that continue to debate Lee's role.
"All the books and programs are just trying to convince a new generation
of their theories. The more I learn the less I know," she says. "And that
isn't exactly pertaining to Lee." But she adds, "I try to weigh this and
weigh that. It is an enigma, but I know there are too many coincidences,
just too many coincidences."
http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Marina_Oswald_Porter_Discussion.
--
--------------------http://NewsReader.Com/--------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service                        $9.95/Month 30GB
Raymond
2012-01-12 15:59:40 UTC
Permalink
Greg,Somewhere I recall...(anyway, I haven't read Meagher, read around a
100 JFK Assassination books, but can't read them all, nor would I want
too, though there is some very unique interesting info. in some
otherwise mediocre books) that Marguerite in Ft. Worth had destroyed a
BY Photo of Oswald holding a rfile over his head? So, you are saying
that this was actually a photo of Lee in Minsk that Marina destroyed,
which was the impetus for the entire set of fraudulent BY photos and
that RP and MP are connected?
Interesting...I'll have to think about that..also, interesting is DeM &
Roscoe White are connected to the photos, but the former at a possible
facilitator macro level, and the latter at the micro level... I believe
of the conspiracy...Laz
Well think abouit this Laz...... Lee was a foreigner in the USSR....
Do you really think the Russians would have allowed him to have a
rifle??   Even Russian citizens weren't allowed to possess rifles.
"Even Russian citizens weren't allowed to possess rifles"
Walt is right --- no rifles ...
" You can't buy a rifle in Russia, you can only buy shotguns. I had a
shotgun in Russia and hunted some while there."
--- LHO

However , "A gun is a gun is a gun."..
The bottom line is that a gun is a gun is a gun. All are inert
objects, the only danger comes from the person behind the trigger.

How to learn from your mistakes
By Scott Berkun, July 17 2005
You can only learn from a mistake after you admit you’ve made it. As
soon as you start blaming other people (or the universe itself) you
distance yourself from any possible lesson. But if you courageously
stand up and honestly say “This is my mistake and I am responsible”
the possibilities for learning will move towards you. Admission of a
mistake, even if only privately to yourself, makes learning possible
by moving the focus away from blame assignment and towards
understanding. Wise people admit their mistakes easily. They know
progress accelerates when they do.

This advice runs counter to the cultural assumptions we have about
mistakes and failure, namely that they are shameful things. We’re
taught in school, in our families, or at work to feel guilty about
failure and to do whatever we can to avoid mistakes. This sense of
shame combined with the inevitability of setbacks when attempting
difficult things explains why many people give up on their goals:
they’re not prepared for the mistakes and failures they’ll face on
their way to what they want. What’s missing in many people’s beliefs
about success is the fact that the more challenging the goal, the more
frequent and difficult setbacks will be. The larger your ambitions,
the more dependent you will be on your ability to overcome and learn
from your mistakes.

But for many reasons admitting mistakes is difficult. An implied value
in many cultures is that our work represents us: if you fail a test,
then you are a failure. If you make a mistake then you are a mistake
(You may never have felt this way, but many people do. It explains the
behavior of some of your high school or college friends). Like eggs,
steak and other tasty things we are given letter grades (A, B, C, D
and F) organizing us for someone else’s consumption: universities and
employers evaluate young candidates on their grades, numbers based on
scores from tests unforgiving to mistakes.

For anyone than never discovers a deeper self-identity, based not on
lack of mistakes but on courage, compassionate intelligence,
commitment and creativity, life is a scary place made safe only by
never getting into trouble, never breaking rules and never taking the
risks that their hearts tell them they need to take.

Learning from mistakes requires three things:

1.Putting yourself in situations where you can make interesting
mistakes
2.Having the self-confidence to admit to them
3.Being courageous about making changes
This essay will cover all three. First we have to classify the
different kinds of mistakes.

The four kinds of mistakes
One way to categorize mistakes is into these categories:

Stupid: Absurdly dumb things that just happen. Stubbing your toe,
dropping your pizza on your neighbor’s fat cat or poking yourself in
the eye with a banana.
Simple: Mistakes that are avoidable but your sequence of decisions
made inevitable. Having the power go out in the middle of your party
because you forgot to pay the rent, or running out of beer at said
party because you didn’t anticipate the number of guests.
Involved: Mistakes that are understood but require effort to prevent.
Regularly arriving late to work/friends, eating fast food for lunch
every day, or going bankrupt at your start-up company because of your
complete ignorance of basic accounting.
Complex: Mistakes that have complicated causes and no obvious way to
avoid next time. Examples include making tough decisions that have bad
results, relationships that fail, or other unpleasant or unsatisfying
outcomes to important things.
(I’m sure you can come up with other categories: that’s fantastic,
please share them here. But these are the ones you’re stuck with for
the rest of this essay).

I’m leaving all philosophical questions about mistakes up to you. One
person’s pleasure is another person’s mistake: decide for yourself.
Maybe you enjoy stabbing your neighbor’s cat with a banana, who knows.
We all do things we know are bad in the long term, but are oh so good
in the short term. So regardless of where you stand, I’m working with
you. However mistakes are defined in your personal philosophy this
essay should help you learn from them.

Learning from mistakes that fall into the first two categories (Stupid
& Simple) is easy, but shallow. Once you recognize the problem and
know the better way, you should be able to avoid similar mistakes. Or
in some cases you’ll realize that no matter what you do once in a
while you’ll do stupid things (e.g. even Einstein stubbed his toes).

But these kinds of mistakes are not interesting. The lessons aren’t
deep and it’s unlikely they lead you to learn much about yourself or
anything else. For example compare these two mistakes

1.My use of dual part harmony for the 2nd trumpets in my orchestral
composition for the homeless children’s shelter benefit concert
overpowered the intended narrative of the violins.
2.I got an Oreo stuck in my underwear.
The kind of mistakes you make define you. The more interesting the
mistakes, the more interesting the life. If your biggest mistakes are
missing reruns of tv-shows or buying the wrong lottery ticket you’re
not challenging yourself enough to earn more interesting mistakes.

And since there isn’t much to learn from simple and stupid mistakes,
most people try to minimize their frequency and how much time we spend
recovering from them. Their time is better spent learning from bigger
mistakes. But if we habitually or compulsively make stupid mistakes,
then what we really have is an involved mistake.

Involved mistakes
The third pile of mistakes, Involved mistakes, requires significant
changes to avoid. These are mistakes we tend to make through either
habit or nature. But since change is so much harder than we admit, we
often suffer through the same mistakes again and again instead of
making the tough changes needed to avoid them.

Difficultly with change involves an earlier point made in this essay.
Some feel that to agree to change means there is something wrong with
them. “If I’m perfect, why would I need to change?” Since they need to
protect their idea of perfection, they refuse change (Or possibly,
even refuse to admit they did anything wrong).

But this is a trap: refusing to acknowledge mistakes, or tendencies to
make similar kinds of mistakes, is a refusal to acknowledge reality.
If you can’t see the gaps, flaws, or weaknesses in your behavior
you’re forever trapped in the same behavior and limitations you’ve
always had, possibly since you were a child (When someone tells you
you’re being a baby, they might be right).

Another challenge to change is that it may require renewing
commitments you’ve broken before, from the trivial “Yes, I’ll try to
remember to take the trash out” to the more serious “I’ll try to stop
sleeping with all of your friends”. This happens in any environment:
the workplace, friendships, romantic relationships or even commitments
you’ve made to yourself. Renewing commitments can be tough since it
requires not only admitting to the recent mistake, but acknowledging
similar mistakes you’ve made before. The feelings of failure and guilt
become so large that we don’t have the courage to try again.

This is why success in learning from mistakes often requires
involvement from other people, either for advice, training or simply
to keep you honest. A supportive friend’s, mentor’s or professional’s
perspective on your behavior will be more objective than your own and
help you identify when yhttp://www.scottberkun.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=578&action=editou’re
hedging, breaking or denying the commitments you’ve made.

In moments of weakness the only way to prevent a mistake is to enlist
someone else. “Fred, I want to play my Gamecube today but I promised
Sally I wouldn’t. Can we hang out so you can make sure I don’t do it
today?” Admitting you need help and asking for it often requires more
courage than trying to do it on your own.

The biggest lesson to learn in involved mistakes is that you have to
examine your own ability to change. Some kinds of change will be
easier for you than others and until you make mistakes and try to
correct them you won’t know which they are.

How to handle complex mistakes
The most interesting kinds of mistake are the last group: Complex
mistakes. The more complicated the mistake you’ve made, the more
patient you need to be. There’s nothing worse than flailing around
trying to fix something you don’t understand: you’ll always make
things worse.

I remember as a kid when our beloved Atari 2600 game system started
showing static on the screen during games. The solution my brother and
I came up with? Smack the machine as hard as we could (A clear sign I
had the intellect for management). Amazingly this worked for awhile,
but after weeks of regular beatings the delicate electronics
eventually gave out. We were lazy, ignorant and impatient, and
couldn’t see that our solution would work against us.

Professional investigators, like journalists, police detectives and
doctors, try to get as many perspectives on situations as possible
before taking action (Policemen use eyewitnesses, Doctors use exams
and tests, scientific studies use large sample sizes). They know that
human perception, including their own, is highly fallible and biased
by many factors. The only way to obtain an objective understanding is
to compare several different perspectives. When trying to understand
your own mistakes in complex situations you should work in the same
way.

Start by finding someone else to talk to about what happened. Even if
no one was within 50 yards when you crashed your best friend’s BMW
into your neighbor’s living room, talking to someone else gives you
the benefit of their experience applied to your situation. They may
know of someone that’s made a similar mistake or know a way to deal
with the problem that you don’t.

But most importantly, by describing what happened you are forced to
break down the chronology and clearly define (your recollection of)
the sequence of events. They may ask you questions that surface
important details you didn’t notice before. There may have been more
going on (did the brakes fail? Did you swerve to avoid your neighbor’s
daughter? etc.) than you, consumed by your emotions about your
failure, realized.

If multiple people were involved (say, your co-workers), you want to
hear each person’s account of what happened. Each person will
emphasize different aspects of the situation based on their skills,
biases, and circumstances, getting you closer to a complete view of
what took place.

If the situation was/is contentious you may need people to report
their stories independently – police investigators never have
eyewitness collaborate. They want each point of view to be delivered
unbiased by other eyewitnesses (possibly erroneous) recollections.
Later on they’ll bring each account together and see what fits and
what doesn’t.

An illustrative example comes from the book Inviting disasters
Inviting Disaster: Lessons from the edge of technology. It tells the
story of a floating dormitory for oil workers in the North Sea that
rolled over during the night killing over 100 people. The engineering
experts quickly constructed different theories and complex
explanations that focused on operational errors and management
decisions.

All of these theories were wrong. It was eventually discovered through
careful analysis that weeks earlier a crack in a support structure had
been painted over, instead of being reported and repaired. This
stupid, simple and small mistake caused the superstructure to fail,
sinking the dormitory. Without careful analysis the wrong conclusion
would have been reached (e.g. smacking the Atari) and the wrong lesson
would have been learned.

Until you work backwards for moments, hours or days before the actual
mistake event, you probably won’t see all of the contributing factors
and can’t learn all of the possible lessons. The more complex the
mistake, the further back you’ll need to go and the more careful and
open-minded you need to be in your own investigation. You may even
need to bring in an objective outsider to help sort things out. You’d
never have a suspect in a crime lead the investigation, right? Then
how can you completely trust yourself to investigate your own
mistakes?

Here some questions to ask to help your investigation:

What was the probable sequence of events?
Were their multiple small mistakes that led to a larger one?
Were there any erroneous assumptions made?
Did we have the right goals? Were we trying to solve the right
problem?
Was it possible to have recognized bad assumptions earlier?
Was there information we know now that would have been useful then?
What would we do differently if in this exact situation again?
How can we avoid getting into situations like this? (What was the kind
of situation we wanted to be in?)
Was this simply unavoidable given all of the circumstances? A failure
isn’t a mistake if you were attempting the impossible.
Has enough time passed for us to know if this is a mistake or not?
As you put together the sequence of events, you’ll recognize that
mistakes initially categorized as complex eventually break down into
smaller mistakes. The painted over crack was avoidable but happened
anyway (Stupid). Was there a system in place for avoiding these
mistakes? (Simple). Were there unaddressed patterns of behavior that
made that system fail? (Involved). Once you’ve broken a complex
mistake down you can follow the previous advice on making changes.

Humor and Courage
No amount of analysis can replace your confidence in yourself. When
you’ve made a mistake, especially a visible one that impacts other
people, it’s natural to question your ability to perform next time.
But you must get past your doubts. The best you can do is study the
past, practice for the situations you expect, and get back in the
game. Your studying of the past should help broaden your perspective.
You want to be aware of how many other smart, capable well meaning
people have made similar mistakes to the one you made, and went on to
even bigger mistakes, I mean successes, in the future.

One way to know you’ve reached a healthy place is your sense of humor.
It might take a few days, but eventually you’ll see some comedy in
what happened. When friends tell stories of their mistakes it makes
you laugh, right? Well when you can laugh at your own mistakes you
know you’ve accepted it and no longer judge yourself on the basis of
one single event. Reaching this kind of perspective is very important
in avoiding future mistakes. Humor loosens up your psychology and
prevents you from obsessing about the past. It’s easy to make new
mistakes by spending too much energy protecting against the previous
ones. Remember the saying “a man fears the tiger that bit him last,
instead of the tiger that will bite him next”.

So the most important lesson in all of mistake making is to trust that
while mistakes are inevitable, if you can learn from the current one,
you’ll also be able to learn from future ones. No matter when happens
tomorrow you’ll be able to get value from it, and apply it to the day
after that. Progress won’t be a straight line but if you keep learning
you will have more successes than failures, and the mistakes you make
along the way will help you get to where you want to go.

The learning from mistakes checklist
Accepting responsibility makes learning possible.
Don’t equate making mistakes with being a mistake.
You can’t change mistakes, but you can choose how to respond to them.
Growth starts when you can see room for improvement.
Work to understand why it happened and what the factors were.
What information could have avoided the mistake?
What small mistakes, in sequence, contributed to the bigger mistake?
Are there alternatives you should have considered but did not?
What kinds of changes are required to avoid making this mistake again?
What kinds of change are difficult for you?
How do you think your behavior should/would change in you were in a
similar situation again?
Work to understand the mistake until you can make fun of it (or not
want to kill others that make fun).
Don’t over-compensate: the next situation won’t be the same as the
last.
References
Inviting Disaster: Lessons from the edge of technology by James
Chiles. A series of magazine style essays about major technological
disasters in the last 100 years. Includes the Challenge shuttle,
Apollo 13, & Three mile island.

The Logic of Failure by Dietrich Dorner. An analysis of decision
making mistakes in complex environments. More academic than Inviting
disaster, but also more prescriptive.
Loading...