Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Defectorship, Backes? There's a word directorship, but there is no word, defectorship.  Even blogger told you that as you were typing it by underlining it in red. Did you miss that?

I didn't say that Oswald had no connection to the US government. Haven't I been a supporter of John Armstrong, who has been saying for years that the CIA had a Two Oswalds program, where they took two boys, one American and the other Russian-speaking, who looked alike and merged their identities?

I don't mind saying that the Oswald of fame was a CIA "asset" but he was not a CIA or FBI agent. It wasn't like Agent Hosty, Agent Bookhout, and Agent Oswald. 

If Oswald was an agent, then he'd have been paid, right? Espionage agents get salaries, don't they? It's not a charity, is it? It's a profession, right? And when he returned home, they'd have paid his travel expenses, wouldn't they? Don't soldiers returning from war zones have their travel expenses paid? Don't diplomats returning from foreign countries? Well, in Oswald's case, the US State Department lent him the money to return home, but he had to pay it back- and he did pay it back. 

So, he had some unusual connection to them, but Oswald was not an intelligence agent.  If he was an intelligence agent, think of all the money they'd have owed him for 3 years of intelligence work in the Soviet Union. But, he never got anything.

And it's not my "whole concept" that Oswald was involved in the completely separate plot to kill Castro. That's Judyth's concept. Remember? Are you not aware of what has been going on? I've been saying for 3 years that Oswald NEVER went to Mexico City. I've cited John Armstrong, Jim Douglass, Mark Lane and others who say that Oswald NEVER went to Mexico City. I've repeatedly posted images of the fake laughable images of Oswald supposedly in Mexico City. 

What have I told you, Backes, about not misrepresenting my positions? You not only misrepresent them, you turn them upside down and inside out.

And no, Backes, the Oswald of fame was NOT at Atsugi. You can deny the Two Oswalds thesis as much as you want, but it will do you as much good as denying Oswald in the doorway. It was the other Oswald who was at Atsugi- not the Oswald of fame. 

In other words: John Armstrong is right; Joseph Backes is wrong.

http://www.harveyandlee.net 

My point is that Oswald was never really an agent, in the sense of being employed by the FBI or CIA. He never held a recognized position or office with either of them. He was never a respected member of their organizations. He was just a guy who was used, manipulated, and exploited by them- who was taken advantage of by them, from beginning to end. The manipulation and abuse of Oswald didn't begin when they decided to frame him for killing Kennedy. They were manipulating and abusing him all along. He was a puppet, and they were pulling his strings.  That's my point.

And do you really think that Oswald told FBI Agent John Quigley anything that he didn't already know or needed to hear? That's your defectorship talking, Backes.