Oswald: Late October

23 Oct, '63: Walker holds US Day Rally
24 Oct, '63: Stevenson assaulted at UN Day Rally
25 Oct, 63: Dallas ACLU meeting held

Officially accepted is that Lee Harvey Oswald attended the US Day Rally alone, and that he attended the ACLU meeting with Mike Paine.

Does the testimony and statements of key players support this?

Not entirely.

From the testimony of Mike Paine. My comments in brackets:

Mr. Liebeler.
On June 11, 1964, Marina Oswald testified before the Commission at which time the following colloquy occurred, as indicated on page 7368 of the Commission's transcript:

Mr. McKenzie.
Mrs. Oswald, you say, or you said a few minutes ago, that Mr. Paine knew or knows more about your husband's attitude about the United States than you do. Why did you say that?

Mrs. Oswald.
Because my husband's favorite topic of discussion was politics and whoever he was with. he talked to them politics and Mr. Paine was with him a fair amount and I am not sure they talked about politics. Apparently it should have been "I am quite sure they talked about politics." But, at any rate, the transcript does read, "I am not sure they talked about politics. "They went to meetings of some kind together. I don't know what kind of meetings.

Mr. McKenzie.
Do you know where the meetings were?

Mrs. Oswald.
In Dallas. After they came back from some meeting, my husband said to me something about Walker being at this meeting.

[So according to Marina, they attended more than one meeting together - one being the "Walker" meeting.]

Mr Liebeler.
Do you remember going at any meeting with Lee Oswald at which Mr. Walker was present?

Mr. Paine.
No---the only meeting I went to was the ACLU meeting, that I recall.

Mr. Liebeler.
Do you recall going to any meeting yourself in October 1963, with or without Oswald, at which General Walker was present?

Mr. Paine.
General Walker was present at the Oswald mentioned the U.N.- U.S. Day meeting held by the rightists, which occurred a day or two or two nights before the ACLU meeting. He had been to that by himself. I had gone that same evening to a John Birch meeting. We were not together, but they were two things that occurred simultaneously, and that's where Lee, by his report at the ACLU meeting said he was and Walker was there. Maybe that's what Marina had in mind.

[We are expected to believe that on the same day, just by sheer coincidence, Mike goes to a Bircher meeting and Lee goes to a "Walker" meeting. And just to complicate things, the "Walker" meeting was most likely the Stevenson demonstration - not the US Day rally. Mike, during another stint before the committee, says in response to a question about what night he attended the Bircher meeting: "That was the night Stevenson spoke in Dallas." He went on to say: "No. You see they were taking place at the same time. It [the Bircher meeting] was rather sparsely attended, most of them were down spitting on Stevenson." There is also this exchange as to the date of the Bircher meeting: Mr. Paine. "I had been seeking to go to a Birch meeting for some time, and then I was invited on this night so I went. It was an introductory meeting." Mr. Dulles. "On the 9th of November?" Mr. Paine. "It was November something, I don't know what, a Wednesday or Thursday night." Mr. Liebeler. "For the record I think the record should indicate that Mr. Stevenson was in Dallas on or about October 24, 1963. Who invited you to this meeting?". If Paine is right, then Oswald was also at the UN rally where Larrie Schmidt and Gen Walker had organised a none-too-friendly "welcoming" committee. We know he surely was at the US Day rally because he advised Arnald Johnson of the CPUSA he had attended. But what of Paine? How likley is it that the Birch Society had meetings on either the US day rally, OR the UN Day rally? My best guess is not very. Paine was giving himself an alibi to cover for his attendance at both of those meetings with Lee - just as Marina's testimony hints at.]

Mr. Liebeler.
But you, yourself, don't have any recollection of your ever being at a meeting when he was there?

Mr. Paine.
No; I have never seen General Walker that I can recall.

Mr. Liebeler.
You have never seen Walker?

Mr. Paine.
Unless he was--in a year previous to that I had been to the Indignation Committee meeting--no-- that is the answer to your previous question.

[This was at the time he left Ruth - around Sept, '62... which again puts him in close proximity with Larrie Schmidt, who was trying to infiltrate that group at that time]

Mr. Liebeler.
Do--to the best of your recollection, you don't ever remember seeing General Walker present?

Mr. Paine.
That's right.

Mr. Liebeler.
Or having been at a meeting at which you subsequently learned that he was present, although you didn't see him?

Mr. Paine.
That's right--I can't remember about the previous year, but I don't think that has relevancy.

[Yeah, sure]

Mr. Liebeler.
Well, since the time you met Oswald--you were at no meetings at which General Walker was present, to your knowledge?

Mr. Paine.
That's true.

[Now aren't we glad we got that sorted out! Too bad it's a crock...]


Mr. Liebeler.
Marina Oswald goes on to testify and I will recapitulate part of it, "After they came back from some meeting, my husband said to me something about Walker being at this meeting and he said, Paine knows that I shot him."

Do you have any reason to believe that--the first question, of course, is and I have already asked you that and you testified you did not know Oswald shot Walker prior to the assassination of President Kennedy; is that correct?

Mr. Paine.
That's right.

Mr. Liebeler.
Now, do you have any reason to believe that Oswald might have thought that you knew that he, Oswald, had shot at General Walker?

Mr. Paine.
I can't see how he would have thought I knew that. I just don't see--he might have said something that revealed that and I didn't catch his meaning, so it never sunk in to me at all, that is, to assume that he wasn't lying and that is the only way I can explain it.

Mr. Liebeler.
So that you think that this testimony that Marina has given is either the result of a misapprehension, or a lie on Oswald's part or on Marina's part?

[Doh! Of course! Could never be the Paine's under any "misapprehension" now could it? But here Marina - admittedly does seem confused: Mr. Rankin. "Did you say there were a number of political meetings that your husband went to---- " Mrs. Oswald. "Excuse me; this was October 24." Mr. Rankin. "With Mr. Paine?" Mrs. Oswald. "A week after his birthday--this was Friday. I think it was a week after my husband's birthday about October 24 or something like that or the 25th."

The Friday - a week after Lee's birthday - was the 25th - the date of the ACLU meeting. However, it was the "Walker" meeting which was being queried]

Mr. Paine.
Yes.

Mr. Liebeler.
And you don't have any doubt about that whatsoever?

Mr. Paine.
I am perfectly certain that I didn't know he shot at Walker.

Mr. Liebeler.
Marina herself goes on to say: "I don't know whether this was the truth or not, I don't know whether it was true or not, but this is what they told me." And I presume she means that's what Lee had told her.

Mr. Paine.
Now, wait--this is--it would be well to check for that "they"---this is testimony in June, you said, and that "they" could possibly be Martin and Thorne. I don't know much about Martin and Thorne either, but I had the impression that they were telling her stories.

[Really? And where did Mike get this "impression" from?]

Mr. Liebeler.
Well, of course, this is what the translator said Marina had said. Marina is going to be here tomorrow and I will ask her about this then and see if she can clarify the record, but the point we want to bring out now at this time is that your testimony is quite clear that you did not know before the assassination that Oswald had shot at General Walker?

[Phew! Thank the lord! Liebeler is going to get Marina to "clarify the record". Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate this "clarification".]

Mr. Paine.
Yes.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SIDEBAR
I also like this from Mike: "I had tried once before to go to a meeting which didn't occur. There happens to be a member of our choir, a paid soloist who is a John Birch advocate so I have been applying--so I have been telling her, that I wanted to go. I suppose, I don't remember for certain but I suppose she was the one who told me where and when."

Now, the choir was with the Unitarian church. It was the supposedly the reason he joined the Unitarian church in the first place. The Unitarians were / are predominately liberals; still, the church has always had a powerful convervative faction. And the entire church was anti- Communist. The Unitarians were also under investigation in Texas during this period, but I don't know if it was in regard to left or right wing activities, or for illegal activities. This bit of testimony does seem to suggest that his church was "of the right". Not many people (apart from Mike and Lee) would join churches or organisations where others are not like-minded souls.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So how does the ACLU meeting stack up?

FBI report, Dec 4, 1963, on Barry Cohen.

Cohen appeared voluntarily at the Dallas FBI office. He was a member of the ACLU, at that time, attending the University of Texas working on his Master's Degree in Russian Studies. Cohen advised the FBI he had been very active in the ACLU and had discussed Oswald's attempt to join the ACLU with Dallas President of the ACLU, Greg Olds.

The 2nd para reads:

"Approximately one month prior to the President's assassination, Oswald attended a meeting of the ACLU, but Cohen was not at this meeting. Cohen started an investigation to determine why Oswald attended this meeting and found that a Mrs Paine with whom Oswald's wife had been residing, invited Oswald as her guest to this meeting."

www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0108a.htm

FBI report dated 19 Dec, 1963, on Greg Olds.

Olds stated he had never heard of LHO until after the assassination. At that time, because of newspaper articles linking LHO to the ACLU, he "finally" determined from the NY office that an application for memmbership had in fact been received, he believed on or about Nov 4, 1963. Olds further stated he had no idea where the application had come from unless Oswald had picked one up at a meeting of the ACLU Oswald had attended on on 25oct63. Olds told the FBI he believed Oswald had been brought to the meeting by Michael Paine, adding that he had intended to talk to Paine about Oswald, but had not had the opportunity. Olds had been to the Oct 25, 1963 meeting, but did not recall seeing Oswald there, and "certainly does not recall him [Oswald] entering into any discussions. He has heard, but once again, he cannot recall the source, that Oswald did have something to say at this meeting. He, however, does not know what Oswald was supposed to have said."

The second last para has Olds claiming he had not conducted any investigation regarding Oswald, but had been following his background in the media to learn all that he could.

The last paragraph concludes with Olds suggesting that the only person apart from Paine who may have talked to Oswald that night was a Rev Byrd Helligas.
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0372b.htm

FBI report, Dec 19, 1963, on the Rev Byrd Helligas

Helligas advised that he did attend the ACLU meeting on Nov 25, 1963. After the assassination, he recognised Oswald as being at that neeting. He further advised that he was in charge of the projector and coffee during that meeting, and that Oswald had come up and said something to him about the projector. He did not recall the exact comment, but it was in regard to how the projector worked. "He did not have any other discussion with Oswald and Oswlad did not make any further comment and said nothing regarding politics..."

From the second last para:

"He stated he could not furnish the names of anyone who attended the meeting who might have had discussions with Oswald. He has heard generally from sources whom he does not recall that Oswald did have some comments to make during the meeting. The comments made by Oswald are not known to Mr Helligas and Mr Helligas stated he certainly did not hear him say anything."

---same link as above to read the full report---

From the testimony of Raymond Franklin Krystinik.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did Oswald comment on the John Birch Society as well as General Walker?

Mr. KRYSTINIK. I know there was mention about him in the group. The group commented on the John Birch Society, and I don't remember exactly whether Oswald commented on them, too. I would like to be of help to you, but I don't remember.

Mr. LIEBELER. Just give us the best recollection you have.

Mr. KRYSTINIK. That is it so far.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did Oswald impress you when he stepped up and addressed the group? Did he impress you as being articulate, intelligent, or was he not that way?

Mr. KRYSTINIK. At that particular time he just made the one statement. After the meeting, I talked to him for about 15 minutes primarily about economics.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was anyone there besides you and Oswald?

Mr. KRYSTINIK. Yes, sir; there was a Mr. Byrd Helligas.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did he take part in the conversation with you and Oswald?

Mr. KRYSTINIK. Yes; a little bit, to the best of my memory. Oswald was the fellow that impressed me, and I was paying attention to what he was saying, and I am afraid that Mr. Helligas didn't make an impression on me. I don't remember what he said, except he did enter into the conversation at different times. I am afraid most of my attention was directed to Oswald. The hair was up on the back of my neck. I was irritated by the man a little. Not real bad, but he bothered me some.

----

Mr. KRYSTINIK. Well, after the meeting was over we went back to the back where they had coffee. I believe they had doughnuts, I am not sure, but they had a table of refreshments, at least, and I am sure there was coffee. I wasn't interested in the coffee. Michael, my wife, and Oswald, and I, walked to the back of the room together. I approached Oswald and commented to him that Michael had told me about his political background a little bit, and I understood that he had been to Russia. I asked him what he felt communism had to offer that was better than he could find in the United States. He kind of shrugged his shoulders and didn't make any particular comment then. I forget exactly the trend of talk at that particular moment, but as we talked for just a couple of minutes, or at any rate as we talked, I told him I had met his wife at the Paine's over in Irving and that he had a beautiful little girl, he should be real proud of them. And he commented, "They are nice." And that was to let it go at that. I forget, or I do forget now about exactly what the next few comments were. We did start talking about communism versus capitalism.

From the testimony of Mike Paine.

Mr. LIEBELER. When he made this remark about the person at the ACLU meeting being a Communist how was the remark made, did he seem to indicate to you some desire to reach out and to know this person, to meet this person, to associate with him or was he just making a general remark or were you thinking in the perjurative sense, how did he speak, what impression did he give you?

Mr. PAINE. I had the impression that he hoped he would be a Communist and he would like to meet him again, yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you notice the person. this third person?

Mr. PAINE. No; I didn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Was he an elderly person?

Mr. PAINE. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you know a Reverend Helligas?

Mr. PAINE. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. This was not him?

Mr. PAINE. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you observe Oswald speak with Reverend Helligas that evening at the meeting?

Mr. PAINE. No; I didn't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever learned the identity of this third person?

Mr. PAINE. No; I haven't.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you ever seen him again?

Mr. PAINE. I think that is the last ACLU meeting I have been to. They convene very infrequently.

Mr. LIEBELER. By that do you mean you have not seen this person again?

Mr. PAINE. Therefore, I have not seen him again. I expect he is a registered member of the ACLU. I had the impression he was an ACLU member. He is rather softspoken, a quiet man.

Mr. LIEBELER. Would you recognize him again if you saw him?

Mr. PAINE. I probably would.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you discussed him with anybody else in the ACLU?

Mr. PAINE. I joined Frank to the ACLU now.

Mr. LIEBELER. You discussed him with Frank?

Mr. PAINE. Yes; that is Frank Krystinik.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you attempted to identify this third person?

Mr. PAINE. No; I never, I have not.

From the testimony of Greg Olds.

Mr. OLDS. Yes; it was at this time that we first heard the idea that Oswald might be a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, and this surprised us, because we felt we would have had a record of it in our files, but there is often a lapse of time when a member moves from one area to another and it takes some time to transfer him to the local affiliate. To make sure of this I called the national office in New York City, and it was night, of course there was no one there, but I finally got a number of one of the staff members and talked to him at his home in New Jersey and told him about it, and he said, he would check on the matter. Have somebody in New York, who lived near the office to go in and see about it, and he did and they found no such record at that time. However, it was later discovered that on November 4, he had sent a check for $2 to the office, which was, I believe, discovered 3 weeks later.

In summary:

Cohen was not at the meeting, but spoke to Olds and conducted an investigation on why Oswald had attended a Dallas ACLU meeting. His finding? Oswald had gone at the invitation of Ruth Paine - no mention at all of Michael.

Olds (interviewed a couple of weeks after Cohen) was at the meeting. He did not see Oswald, nor hear him make any of the comments allegedly made. Olds made no mention of Cohen, Cohen's investigation, or his findings. Instead, he states he believes Oswald attended the meeting with MP and repeats rumours from unremembered sources on Oswald's alleged comments at the meeting. He names Rev Byrd Helligas as someone who may have talked to Oswald at the meeting.

Helligas, interviewed the same day as Olds, agreed he did talk to Oswald - but only briefly about the workings of the projector. Denies any other converstaions with him.

Paine pal, Frankie the K told the WC that Helligas WAS involved in political discussions with Oswald.

Meanwhile, MIke told the WC the man involved in the Oswald/Frankie the K summit was NOT Helligas, but an old guy whose name he could not recall.

And what of Helligas? He was assistant minister of the Unitarian Church in Dallas, had served as a medic in WWII in Romel's campaign. His career as a minister followed one in sales of medical and drug supplies.

Interesting congregation at the Dallas Unitarian Church... Michael Paine, Byrd Helligas - both ACLU members, and a female member of the JBS.

From the Washington Post Dec 1, 1963 edition: "The associate pastor of First Unitarian Church, Dallas, Rev. Byrd Helligas, described Lee Oswald as 'erudite.' 'He had a good vocabulary. No dangling participles or split infinitives. In the dictionary definition of the word 'intellectual' he was an intellectual.' Helligas added that he sensed 'no frustration through erudition. He was calm.'"

The only evidence of Oswald's alleged comments are Michael Paine - who may not have even been there - and Frankie the K. No one else seems to have heard them, and indeed, the unremembered sources on this mentioned by Olds and Helligas probably were either Paine, Frankie the K, or people THEY had told.

And Oswald's application to join the ACLU? The facts about that are that Olds' call to the NY office triggered a search of the records which showed no signs of any application. The ACLU issued a press release on that basis. It was AFTER the denial of any connection to Oswald hit the press that the application was miraculously found. And it was found by a person who - according to another researcher, was an FBI informant. How "lucky" was that? This of course, forced the ACLU into issuing a second press release, leaving them covered in egg.

Conclusions: Noone except Mike Paine and his close friend, Frank Krystinik place Mike at that meeting.

Greg Olds did not recall him being there, nor did Helligas.

Indeed, an internal investigation placed Oswald at the meeting with Mrs Paine - who was indeed a member. It was on this night that I believe Mike Paine attended his "rightist" meeting. The Birchers would not have had a meeting on the same night as the US Day rally, nor on the night they were all down spitting on Stevenson. The logical night for a meeting was the night after that - the 25th.

Just thought I'd give this thread a bump.

greg parker wrote:Indeed, an internal investigation placed Oswald at the meeting with Mrs Paine - who was indeed a member. It was on this night that I believe Mike Paine attended his "rightist" meeting. The Birchers would not have had a meeting on the same night as the US Day rally, nor on the night they were all down spitting on Stevenson. The logical night for a meeting was the night after that - the 25th.

"I took him to an ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) meeting, and it was startling to him that ACLU's interest in human rights is without ulterior motive. He couldn't join that organization, he said, because it isn't a political action group. (He did nastily enough, join it about two weeks before the assassination)."

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_460.pdf