George de Mohrenschildt

Sun 16 May 2021, 1:49 pm

From the Lone Star Speaks book.

A BACKGROUND OF SHADOWS
“If George’s death was engineered, it is because you focused such attention on my husband that the real conspirators decided to eliminate him.”
—Mrs. George de Mohrenschildt

[size=40]S[/size]gt. Vinson knew nothing about the background of the young man who resembled Lee Harvey Oswald. As someone unfortunate enough to realize there was more to the assassination than the Warren Commission reported, he deliberately did not seek further knowledge about either Oswald.

The same cannot be said for a great number of researchers. Despite the FBI’s assurances that Oswald was guilty of killing President Kennedy and that the case was closed, certain individuals continued to research Oswald’s background. Some of the information they uncovered caused consternation for certain members of the FBI, for the Dallas Police Department, for some
members of the intelligence community, and for the Secret Service. It may have caused life-threatening problems for people like George De Mohrenschildt.

Some of the discrepancies about Oswald’s background did not fit into the official propaganda being fed to the American public. There is official evidence that a “Lee Harvey Oswald” defected to Russia in 1959. There is also evidence that a “Lee Harvey Oswald” resided in Minsk, Russia, and that he married a Russian girl and fathered a daughter. The FBI, the CIA, and hundreds of historical researchers discovered a great deal of information about the man accused of killing President Kennedy, but not all of it was made available to the public.

Family records indicate that an “Oswald” was connected by family to Carlos Marcello, head of the New Orleans crime family. Oswald’s paternal uncle, Dutz Murret, was a runner for Carlos Marcello and his crime family.

Newspaper articles show that in 1963, an “Oswald” pretended to be a Cuban sympathizer, which connected him to Castro expatriates. This is the Oswald photographed in New Orleans handing out “Fair Play for Cuba” pamphlets. This was the same “Oswald” who debated Carlos Bringuier and Edward Scannell Butler on a radio program titled Conversation Carte Blanche on August 21, 1963 in New Orleans.

There is evidence that an “Oswald” may have been connected to the Secret Service when he worked at the Reily Coffee Company in New Orleans during this time. This evidence comes from Adrian Alba. Alba’s garage was located next door to the Reily Coffee Company. He had a contract with the Secret Service to garage three of its cars. Alba saw Oswald walk to his garage almost every day.

Alba recalled that on one particular day, a man driving a Secret Service car identified himself as an FBI agent. Alba remembers this because it would have been quite unusual for an FBI agent to drive a Secret Service car because the FBI had its own garage where it housed its cars. Alba saw the man who identified himself as FBI pull over to the curb. He then noticed Lee Harvey Oswald walk over to the Secret Service car and receive an envelope from the driver. Oswald bent over and, Alba assumed, hid the envelope under his shirt, because when he turned around, Oswald had nothing in his hand.

To Be Continued

Sun 16 May 2021, 1:54 pm

Alba’s observation suggests that Oswald walked daily to Alba’s garage to do more than just drink Cokes and read magazines. The garage was the perfect place for him to meet Secret Service contacts. Undoubtedly, he never intended for Alba to notice this brief meeting between himself and a Secret Service agent who had pretended to be an FBI agent.

Documents show that an Oswald also had connections to the FBI. It is known that Oswald asked to speak to FBI Special Agent John Quigley in New Orleans after his arrest on August 10, 1963. Texas Attorney General Waggoner Carr believed that Lee Harvey Oswald was a FBI informant. He stated this to the Warren Commission. Carr was told that Oswald had been recruited as an FBI informant in September of 1962 and been given informant number S-179. Carr and the Secret Service informed the Warren Commission about this detail. Journalist Alonzo Hudkins refused to name his source for this information, but he felt confident enough to raise the questionin an article in the Houston Post. Little did Hudkins know that in 2005 a memorandum from James J. Rowley, the chief of the Secret Service, to John McCone, Director of the CIA, would surface. Dated March 3, 1964, and stamped CONFIDENTIAL, it stated: “Oswald subject was trained by this agency, under cover of the office of Naval Intelligence…During preliminary training during 1957, subject was active in aerial reconnaissance…Subject received additional indoctrination at our own Camp Peary Site from September 8-October 17, 1958…While in the Soviet Union, he was on special assignment in the area of Minsk…It would not be advantageous at this time to divulge the specifics of that assignment…At the time of the Dallas action, the Oswald subject was only seldom in our employ [italics added by the authors]”

This memo has caused quite a controversy in the research community.Some researchers still maintain that it is a hoax. Others are unsurprised that the original cannot be found. After all, neither the Secret Service nor the CIA would ever admit, even today, that any government agency used Lee Harvey Oswald as an agent or informant.There is evidence that at least one Oswald was obviously connected to government intelligence. CIA contract employee Gerry Patrick Hemming reported that the owner of Reily Coffee worked for the CIA for years.

Oswald obtained employment at Reily on May 9, 1963. This does not mean that every Reily Coffee Company employee was connected to the CIA, but it is likely that some CIA informants probably found employment there.

An “Oswald” applied for a job at Mason Marble and Granite at the end of July. One of the references he listed was a “Charles Harrison,” whom he claimed worked at Tulane University. “Charles Harrison” might be the same “Charles Harrelson” who would soon accompany Oswald to the home of Elmer and Marietta Gerhart in Houston.

In Marina Oswald’s testimony to the Warren Commission, she claimed that her husband had only one friend in Dallas from August 1962 until April 1963. That friend was George de Mohrenschildt. He was a 52-year-old Russian geologist and petroleum engineer. This man belonged to many distinguished circles—from Dallas’ White Russian community to Texas oil
magnates. He was associated with the Bush family and even knew the family of Jacqueline Kennedy.

De Mohrenschildt arrived in the United States in 1938 and, by 1941, the FBI had information about him in their open “Internal Security” files. He was under surveillance as a suspected spy from 1941 until the day he died.Gary Taylor, de Mohrenschildt’s son-in-law, admitted in his testimony to the Warren Commission that he believed his father-in-law was a spy. Taylor felt that his father-in-law was the controller for Oswald and that he had told Oswald where to live and where to work.

This could explain how Oswald became an employee of the Jagger-Chiles-Stovall firm. It specialized in commercial photography, as well as topsecret work for the Department of Defense. Dennis Hyman Ofstein, a fellow employee at this firm, stated in his Warren Commission testimony dated March 30, 1964 that he thought Oswald went to Russia as an agent for the United States government.Ofstein and Oswald had more in common than their positions at Jagger-Chiles-Stovall.

Ofstein admitted to attending the Military Language School in Monterey, California. A comment made by Warren Commissioner Lee Rankin during a Warren Commission executive session on January 27, 1964, indicates that the Commissioners knew Oswald also had attended the Monterey Language School. “…We are trying to run that down to find out what he studied at the Monterey School of the Army in the way of languages,” Rankin stated to fellow Commissioners.

There is some question as to what language or languages Oswald studied at the language school; Ofstein specialized in Russian. It could be mere coincidence that these two men later met in Dallas at Jagger-Chiles-Stovall.An important questions is: Did Oswald have access to the highly classified material this company was working on for the Department of Defense?
Regardless of the answer to that question, it seems almost unbelievable that he was able to obtain a job at a top-secret firm after defecting to Russia.

Some researchers have suggested that George de Mohrenschildt helped Oswald obtain his job at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall. He may have also been the man who introduced Ruth and Michael Paine to the Oswalds, before the Oswalds moved to New Orleans in the summer of 1963. The Oswalds and the de Mohrenschildts saw each other often. If de Mohrenschildt was one of Oswald’s handlers, as de Mohrenschildt’s son-in-law claimed he was, then de Mohrenschildt must have turned this responsibility over to someone else in New Orleans. Instead of following the Oswalds to Louisiana, he and his wife
moved to Haiti—six months before the assassination.

George de Mohrenschildt was conveniently out of the country when the man he had taken under his wing was accused of killing two men, one of whom was the President of the United States. According to Joan Mellen, in her book Our Man in Haiti, when de Mohrenschildt heard about the assassination of Kennedy, the assassin’s name was said to be “Lee.”

“Could it be Lee Oswald?” he immediately asked.There is no reason why de Mohrenschildt should connect the common name “Lee” to Lee Harvey Oswald unless he knew much more about him than he ever admitted to the Warren Commission. After the assassination, de Mohrenschildt’s comments about Oswald varied from time to time. Some of his comments
about Oswald were derogatory. In fact, he wrote an unpublished manuscript titled “I Am a Patsy, I Am a Patsy.” In it, he described Oswald as a man focused on assassinations. At other times, he indicated that Oswald was not capable of killing President Kennedy.

To Be Continued

Sun 16 May 2021, 1:58 pm

What de Mohrenschildt really knew about Oswald and about the Kennedy assassination may have weighed heavily on him. By 1977, he seemed ready to share information with investigators. Oddly enough, on the day of his sudden death, he was interviewed by journalist Edward Jay Epstein. He admitted to Epstein that he had been ordered by the CIA to monitor Oswald. Before Epstein was able to continue the interview, which was interrupted by lunch, de Mohrenschildt was dead.

According to the coroner, he killed himself with a single shot to his head. His wife argued that, despite some mental problems, her husband had not been suicidal. “…If George’s death was engineered, it is because you focused such
attention on my husband that the real conspirators decided to eliminate him just in case George actually knew something, just like so many others involved in the assassination,” she told the Dutch journalist Willems Oltmans after her husband’s death.

Numerous characters like de Mohrenschildt attempted to leave the shadows that surrounded the Kennedy assassination by sharing their secrets.One of the characters in the assassination drama who can never step out of the shadows is Kennedy’s accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald. The world may never know if he was truly guilty, as the Warren Report claimed.
If the President was actually shot by someone from the Depository, then Oswald, like every other employee in the building, had a narrow window of opportunity to kill him. Because of his job description, he had access to all seven floors, which was not true for all employees. However, of all the groups named as possible suspects in the assassination—the CIA, J. Edgar
Hoover, anti-Castro Cubans, the military complex, the Mafia, Texas oilmen, Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon Johnson, and possibly a Greek billionaire— Oswald had less motive than any of them.

At first, the world assumed he was desperate for attention and wanted his time in the spotlight. However, Oswald never admitted he had anything to do with the killing of a Dallas police officer or the President of the United States. If what he wanted was attention, then all he had to do was confess to both these murders.

Despite what was described as an “open and shut case” by Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, the Dallas Chief of Police Jesse Curry admitted after Oswald’s death that there was no evidence that actually placed Lee Harvey Oswald on the sixth floor of the Depository during the killing of the President.

On the other hand, was Lee Harvey Oswald the ordinary boy-next-door who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Some believe that the young man who made the mistake of defecting to the Soviet Union because he was disenchanted with his homeland was nothing more than the “patsy” he claimed to be. However, his actions before, during, and after the assassination leave questions that are difficult to answer.

For example, Oswald supposedly wrote a letter to the Soviet Embassy while staying in Irving. Ruth Paine claimed that Oswald even used her typewriter, which offended her. In the letter, the writer referred to a recent visit to Mexico City and made the comment that he had wanted to extend his Mexican visa, but in order to do so, he would have had “to use his real
name.” If this letter, which was never dusted for fingerprints, had been written by Oswald, then it certainly raises numerous questions.

Why would an ordinary American citizen ever use an alias? If Oswald was as disgusted with the Soviet Union, as he claimed to be when he returned to the United States in 1962, why was he reaching out to the Soviet Embassy on November 9, 1963? Perhaps the most important question is: Did Oswald actually write this letter, or did someone else create it to link him to a trip to Mexico City and to subversive activities? It seems obvious that Lee Harvey Oswald, whether an assassin or a patsy, was not just an ordinary American citizen. Ordinary American citizens do not need “handlers” like the Paines and de Mohrenschildt. Ordinary American citizens do not use aliases instead of their “real names.” Intelligence agents and spies often do.

Although it was widely reported that Oswald was the only employee to leave the Depository after the assassination, this is not true. He was, however, the only one who went home, retrieved his pistol, and went to a movie theatre near his boarding house. Though he bought popcorn, he did not sit down and enjoy the movie. Instead, as other patrons reported, he moved from seat to seat, always sitting next to someone. This would make one think he planned on meeting someone in the theatre.

To Be Continued

Sun 16 May 2021, 2:00 pm

For a twenty-four-year-old arrested for killing a police officer, a crime of the utmost seriousness anywhere in the United States, Oswald appeared calmer than one would expect. Capt. Will Fritz of the Dallas Police Department commented after Oswald’s death that Oswald seemed to be familiar with interrogation methods and strategies. Perhaps this is why he did
not seem frightened when interviewed by reporters. Perhaps he also had convinced himself that there was not enough evidence to convict him.

Some people suspect that Oswald played some role in the assassination of the President, even if it was an inadvertent one. There is circumstantial evidence that he became involved in a dangerous game with the CIA, FBI,and the Mafia from which he was unable to completely extricate himself.

Perhaps he was deliberately standing where his supervisor, Roy Truly, and Dallas Police Officer Marion Baker saw him in the Depository. After all, if a person wanted to make it clear he was nowhere near any upper floors during an assassination attempt, he might very well deliberately stand in the open drinking a Coke so others would notice him.

If Oswald realized ahead of time that authorities could quickly determine a man’s ability to fire three shots, hide a rifle among boxes of books, run down four flights of stairs without anyone seeing or hearing him, purchase a Coke, open it, and begin drinking it, he might have pushed his way through the front doors and into the crowd of people standing on the steps of the Depository. Then his photo would have been among those observing the motorcade. At least he would have had witnesses to prove his whereabouts.

Realistically, no assassin would bring his weapon wrapped in a paper sack and let the person driving him to work see it. Oswald must have known that others might see the package as he walked from the parking lot to the Depository and into the building that morning. As a former Marine, he knew that even a dismantled rifle is longer than curtain rods.Once Oswald was in jail, he must have felt relatively safe. As he was being walked to the basement of the Dallas Police Department to be
transferred to the Sheriff’s Department, Detective Jim Leavelle commented to him, “If someone tries to shoot you, I hope he’s as good a shot as you are.”

“No one’s gonna try to shoot me,” Oswald replied calmly. He may have realized there was insufficient evidence to convict him in a court of law, as Chief Curry later indicated, or perhaps he knew he was innocent of both shootings, and eventually a lawyer would be able to prove it. This may explain why he coolly faced a basement packed with reporters,photographers, and law enforcement—plus an armed night-club owner.

None of the individuals pushing and shoving each other to capture a prizewinning comment or photograph had been searched for weapons. Oswald could have been gunned down by any of those waiting in the basement. The surprised expression on the accused assassin’s face indicated he had certainly not anticipated his own assassination. Like most other Americans, he assumed he would be allowed to defend himself in a court of law. Sadly, the lack of security in the Dallas Police Department sealed his fate. Years later, George de Mohrenschildt, a man who had “befriended” Oswald, may have had his fate sealed by the fact that he began to talk to a reporter.

Sun 16 May 2021, 3:53 pm

Got halfway through the second post. What an absolute crock of shit. Thanks Vinny. Had no real idea of what the book was like until now.

Tue 18 May 2021, 7:14 pm

greg_parker wrote:Got halfway through the second post. What an absolute crock of shit. Thanks Vinny. Had no real idea of what the book was like until now.

Welcome Greg. Yes it is a crazy book. Too much misinformation and use of unreliable witnesses.

George de Mohrenschildt

George de Mohrenschildt

Re: George de Mohrenschildt

Re: George de Mohrenschildt

Re: George de Mohrenschildt

Re: George de Mohrenschildt

Re: George de Mohrenschildt

Re: George de Mohrenschildt