Harvey Lee Oswald

Steve,

this is just my opinion and nothing more, but I am convinced that

the Stringfellow memo
the Decker file
& the Robert's testimony re being asked about "Harvey Lee Oswald"

all stem from Oswald flashing his old library card upside down to Lt Erich Kaminski and Kaminski recording it as "Harvey Lee Oswald" as a result.

Oswald being introduced to Quigley as Harvey Lee Oswald was just plain inadvertence. It would possibly have some significance if the records showed that was the name of the person they held, but they don't. They show "Lee Harvey Oswald". 

Is a simple and innocent answer is more likely than a complex and convoluted explanation involving multiple impersonators and/or multiple files in false names? Simple vs complex explanations aren't aways a good way to look at various aspects of this case, but in this instance, for me anyway, it works best with all of the known facts.

I have no problem if you disagree. I want to make that clear because honest disagreement is not a bad thing. I don't get "honest" disagreement from some and react accordingly. Your honesty is beyond question.

greg parker wrote:Steve,

this is just my opinion and nothing more, but I am convinced that

the Stringfellow memo
the Decker file
& the Robert's testimony re being asked about "Harvey Lee Oswald"

all stem from Oswald flashing his old library card upside down to Lt Erich Kaminski and Kaminski recording it as "Harvey Lee Oswald" as a result.

Oswald being introduced to Quigley as Harvey Lee Oswald was just plain inadvertence. It would possibly have some significance if the records showed that was the name of the person they held, but they don't. They show "Lee Harvey Oswald". 

Is a simple and innocent answer is more likely than a complex and convoluted explanation involving multiple impersonators and/or multiple files in false names? Simple vs complex explanations aren't aways a good way to look at various aspects of this case, but in this instance, for me anyway, it works best with all of the known facts.

I have no problem if you disagree. I want to make that clear because honest disagreement is not a bad thing. I don't get "honest" disagreement from some and react accordingly. Your honesty is beyond question.

Greg,

Thank you for your kind words. I'm sorry I never got back to you on this. I've been doing a little research.

Peter Dale Scott has found references in ONI files to Harvey Lee Oswald that go back to June of 1960.
(I can supply these if want).

I've found references in the documents supplied by the USSR that go back to January of 1960.

On page 430 of CE 985, there is a Certificate dated January 1, 1960 that “Comrade”, Lee Harvey Oswald was employed as an assembler at the Minsk Radio Plant.
[url=https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&relPageId=447&search="Harvey_Lee Oswald"]https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&relPageId=447&search=%22Harvey_Lee%20Oswald%22[/url]
[url=https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&relPageId=447&search="Harvey_Lee Oswald"]
[/url]
[url=https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&relPageId=447&search="Harvey_Lee Oswald"]
[/url]
On page 433 of that CE Exhibit, it says that “Citizen” Harvey Lee Oswald was hired as a regulator at the Minsk Radio Plant on January 13, 1960.



So, “Comrade” Lee Harvey Oswald went from being employed as an assembler in the Minsk Plant on January 1, 1960 to being “Citizen” Harvey Lee Oswald hired as a “regulator in the experimental shop of the plant” on January 13^th The character reference provided on page 433 says that his work as a regulator was unsatisfactory.




Included in CE 985 is a Letter from the Department of State to the Commission, dated May 18, 1964, with attached documents. It says that 985 is a translated copy of a note submitted by Dobrynin on May 5, 1964.



[url=https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=7986&relPageId=111&search=Dobrynin_December 11, 1963]https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=7986&relPageId=111&search=Dobrynin_December%2011,%201963[/url]
p. 111.



In this letter, it says that Harvey Lee Oswald's request for USSR Citizenship was denied. It doesn't say when he applied for that citizenship, but the character reference memo from the Minsk Radio factory in CE 985, p. 433 [url=https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&relPageId=447&search="Harvey_Lee Oswald"]https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&relPageId=447&search=%22Harvey_Lee%20Oswald%22[/url] is dated December 11, 1961 and refers to “Citizen” Harvey Lee Oswald.


On October 31, 1959, when Oswald marched into the U.S. Embassy, he told Snyder that he was renouncing his U.S. citizenship and that he had applied for Soviet citizenship. On July 8, 1961, when he went back to the Embassy, he told them that he had not, in fact, applied for Soviet citizenship; and indeed there are applications for, and identity cards good for one year issued to Lee Harvey Oswald which allowed him to travel and work in the Soviet Union as a "stateless person without citizenship."


But there is no application for citizenship, and no letter or correspondence from the Soviets to Oswald denying that application.


There is a statement denying Harvey Lee Oswald's application and spelling out the reasons for it, but if that's the case, who was the Citizen Harvey Lee Oswald who was hired at the Minsk plant on January 13th?



Just as an aside, Lee Harvey Oswald's first Identity card was issued on January 4, 1960 and he signed a receipt for it on January 5th; but the Certificate showing him working as an assembler at the factory is stamped January 1st. How could he be working without an identity card?

There is an application for the job as a regulator dated January 11th, but there is no application for the job as an assembler. He didn't apply for that job, he was assigned to it.



Steve Thomas

Steve,

no worries. Solid reputations are hard won.

On this though, I think we will have to agree to disagree.

Without checking any further than Tracy Parnell's time line (hopefully he got it right!), Oswald was informed on Jan 1 that he was going to Minsk
http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/chrono.htm

I think I linked to documents in my first paper for Alan Dale showing that he commenced work initially in the experimental shop on Jan 13. His work was unsatisfactory, so after 2 weeks, he was placed in the main workshop.

The date of Jan 1, 1960 on one of the docs you point to looks like a mistranscription.  If you go to the next page, you'll find the original document. The date under the addressee or addresser (whichever it is) is July 15 1961. The second date in the transcription is not in the right place and is clearly the date the document was actually signed. Moreover, regardless of what the date is that is supposed to be there, nowhere does it say that this was the start date at the factory. 

The translated document on page 233 lists "Lee Harvey Oswald", "Harvey Lee Oswald" and "HL Oswald".
To my mind, it is referring to the same person each time with the error being the result again of transcription (and possibly Russian naming conventions).

According to Tracy's timeline, citizenship was declined on January 4, 1961. 

However, I don't believe he applied for it, or if he did, he deliberately sabotaged his chances of getting by being a slacker.  For that reason, if there truly is no documentation supporting an actual application, it does not surprises me. His various statements, claiming to have applied and then later denying it, need to be put in context. He was supposed to be "defecting" so it all had to look and sound legit. But later, when it was time to go home, he could honestly claim he never made any application.

The document you cite as a reference for citizenship from the factory is dated Dec 11, 1961 - well after he had already begun his quest to go home. Also, nowhere does it say what the purpose of the document is, nor does it appear to be addressed to any appropriate citizenship authority. 

Your point is taken that at various times he is listed as "citizen" when technically, he wasn't, but that's not much to hang all of this on if the rest is all relatively innocent (or at least not pointing in the direction you think, of a second Oswald).