CE 833

[Jerry Freeman]

Comments welcome-----
 


Information that was withheld from the Warren Commission, the press, and the American people.
You can bet your butt that the Soviets had it 
Of course...the lone gunman guys will claim it's a fake.

[John Mytton]

Comments welcome-----
 


Information that was withheld from the Warren Commission, the press, and the American people.
You can bet your butt that the Soviets had it 
Of course...the lone gunman guys will claim it's a fake.

 



------------------------------------------------------------------------

A poster at alt.assassination.jfk (12-12-06) going by the name dfdean1 asked the National Archives about McCone-Rowley and received this response:

We appreciate your interest in the JFK Assassination Records Collection. Your request was forwarded to our office because we have custody of the JFK Assassination Records Collection. We have received several requests for information about the McCone/Rowley Memo in the past.

Our staff conducted an extensive search of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection. In addition to searches on the JFK Database, we carried out physical searches of the files. The file series searched included Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file; the CIA Miscellaneous File; the United States Secret Service's official case file on the assassination; the Russ Holmes Work File; and the Assassination Records Review Board's files related to the CIA. We were unable to locate a copy of, or any reference to, this document in the Collection.

If we may be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact our office directly at specialaccess_foia@nara.gov. .

Sincerely,

Heather MacRae
Archivist
Special Access & FOIA Staff

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Researcher Anthony Marsh on McCone-Rowley

posted 12-7-06 at alt.assassination.jfk

When I looked at it I knew instantly that it was a fake. How? It is not written in the proper format using the proper CIA style. One tip off is the marking "CO-2-34,030." That is actually from a Secret Service report. How would I know? Because I had obtained and used on my Web site some of the pages from that SS report, so the notation jumped out as a fabrication. What someone did was take a page from the SS report, maybe even downloaded it from my Web page, removed the original text and wrote their own. Also the wording is not how the CIA would word a document of that type at that time. They would not refer to Hoover by name or agencies by common names. Instead you would see code words like ODACID. You need to look at hundreds of thousands of genuine CIA documents as I have to develop a mental database of what genuine CIA documents look like. I have no doubt that the hoaxer really thought that something like that was said. I don't think the intent was like the other hoaxes to discredit all JFK assassination research. I think someone just assumed that he knew enough to create a realistic fake to incriminate the CIA.

JohnM

[Walt Cakebread]

Correct. She gave Hosty the letter AFTER the assassination. And she told Oswald about the meetings. That angered him and he went to FBI headquarters to confront Hosty.

She and Michael testified that she showed him the letter and asked what they should do about it. He said it was nothing, that Oswald was bragging about his behavior, that he (and she) didn't think he actually went to Mexico City and visited the embassies. He had made it all up.

So she not only withheld this from Hosty, she told Oswald about the meetings. That's a pretty bad informant if you ask me. Besides, wasn't she a CIA agent?


From Michael Paine's testimony re the letter:

Mr. PAINE - Ruth was quite bothered by that letter, and apparently had--apparently I hadn't really taken it in. I said, "The heck with it. Yes; it a fantastic lie, isn't that amazing that he will fabricate such stories here."
Mr. LIEBELER - What did she say?
Mr. PAINE - No; she said--she approached me and said, "I never realized how much he could lie" or that he was a liar or something like that, and "I want you to read this letter." So I put aside the thing I was reading in which I was more interested and read most of the letter, not the latter part about having used another name. And then I thought it was too personal, "Dear Lisa," so I thought he was telling her, being rather braggadocio telling about his exploits which were rather imaginary and I put it out of my mind....

he (and she) didn't think he actually went to Mexico City and visited the embassies. He had made it all up.

Yes indeed...That Lee Oswald had extra ordinary mental abilities....He could get The secretary at the Cuban embassy in Mexico City to believe he was there raising hell about a visa , when he never was there....ROTFLMAO....

[Walt Cakebread]

Correct. She gave Hosty the letter AFTER the assassination. And she told Oswald about the meetings. That angered him and he went to FBI headquarters to confront Hosty.

She and Michael testified that she showed him the letter and asked what they should do about it. He said it was nothing, that Oswald was bragging about his behavior, that he (and she) didn't think he actually went to Mexico City and visited the embassies. He had made it all up.

So she not only withheld this from Hosty, she told Oswald about the meetings. That's a pretty bad informant if you ask me. Besides, wasn't she a CIA agent?

From Michael Paine's testimony re the letter:

Mr. PAINE - Ruth was quite bothered by that letter, and apparently had--apparently I hadn't really taken it in. I said, "The heck with it. Yes; it a fantastic lie, isn't that amazing that he will fabricate such stories here."
Mr. LIEBELER - What did she say?
Mr. PAINE - No; she said--she approached me and said, "I never realized how much he could lie" or that he was a liar or something like that, and "I want you to read this letter." So I put aside the thing I was reading in which I was more interested and read most of the letter, not the latter part about having used another name. And then I thought it was too personal, "Dear Lisa," so I thought he was telling her, being rather braggadocio telling about his exploits which were rather imaginary and I put it out of my mind....

She gave Hosty the letter AFTER the assassination.

That's not correct....Check again ..... See page 311 of the WR, and notice the date.....

[Charles Collins]

She gave Hosty the letter AFTER the assassination.

That's not correct....Check again ..... See page 311 of the WR, and notice the date.....

If you are referring to the date of the typewritten letter (CE 15), November 9, 1963, that’s the date that it was written (typed). The date that the handwritten draft was given to Hosty was 11/23/63 (as Hosty wrote in his book “Assignment Oswald” page 57. Since the assassination happened on 11/22/63, she gave Hosty the handwritten draft after the assassination. There are 12-days between the two dates in which she might have turned the draft of the letter over to the FBI. But she didn’t until the day after the assassination.

[Walt Cakebread]

Comments welcome-----
 


Information that was withheld from the Warren Commission, the press, and the American people.
You can bet your butt that the Soviets had it 
Of course...the lone gunman guys will claim it's a fake.

Wow!....This is worth repeating.... Thanks, Jerry

[Walt Cakebread]

Ruth told the FBI about Oswald’s letter to the Soviet Embassy. Therefore she was an informant about that, at least.

Yes, , You're right, the FACT that Ruth Paine retrieved Lee's rough draft of the Russian Embassy letter from the waste basket and typed it up to give to FBI agent Hosty is confirmation that she was an informant.

One of the Loony LNer's thinks she was simply a good citizen.....  But that's a very shallow and unreasonable view.   Ruth Paine intruded into the Oswald's life in early 1963 and had far more than a passing interest in them......