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

The following is by OIC Chairman James Norwood. It's part of an ongoing discussion we are having in the OIC about the Sylvia Odio incident. All agree that phony Oswald sightings were used to frame him, but which ones really involved him? And when I say "him" I mean the Oswald of fame, the one who got arrested and charged with two murders and was then killed two days later by Jack Ruby.

The Framing of Oswald:  The Sponsors of the Legend vs. the Authors of the Official Story

by James Norwood, OIC Chairman 

Over the weekend, the members of OIC discussed the complex Sylvia Odio case. 

One of the personal revelations to me was the distinction that must be drawn between:

(a) those who were framing Oswald prior to the assassination in creating the Oswald "legend," and

(b) those members of officialdom who selectively drew upon the phony evidence to craft the final version of the story in the Warren Report

These are two interdependent groups of people:

Group A:  The Sponsors

It would appear that the sponsors who planted false evidence to make Oswald the scapegoat included James Jesus Angleton, Richard Helms, David Atlee Phillips, George Joannides, Howard Hunt, and others in the CIA and natural security network.

Group B:  The Authors of the Official Story

It would appear that J. Edgar Hoover was the key player who, within weeks of the assassination, had formulated the template for the "official" story about Oswald.  Hoover selectively drew upon the fictitious stories developed from Group A for the information that he provided to the Warren Commission.  Katzenbach, LBJ, and the members of the Warren Commission essentially followed the blueprint of Hoover.  There is no substantial evidence to suggest that Group B had foreknowledge or were participants in the JFK assassination.  In many ways, Group B was being duped by Group A, just like the American people.

************

The Sylvia Odio story may only come into focus only by recognizing that a different set of people was responsible for "staging" this event in the first place than those who later distilled the information in the official version.  For the American public, the result was complete confusion in understanding the facts of this story.  Due to this courageous woman and the information we now know about Group A, we are able to piece together most of the Odio story.

Ralph Cinque astutely observed that the official story of Oswald "changed course suddenly in going with 'the crazed lone-nut who was disgruntled with America-in general' story."  That is precisely what occurred in the crucial transitional period of November 22 until the formation of the Warren Commission.

The original sponsors (Group A) had to be outraged with the changed story.  For many months, they had worked hard to plant a trail of evidence to link Oswald to Cuba through fabricated the Mexico City adventure, which would result in the World War III scenario with a full-scale invasion of Cuba.  

********

The response that the original sponsors had never anticipated turned out to be the major wild card in this story:  the initial reactions of the American people.  The sponsors were expecting such outrage from the public that a military invasion of Cuba would be inevitable.  Group A had simply assumed that the JFK assassination would be another Pearl Harbor.

But, instead, the American people reacted with an unprecedented outpouring of grief at the death of JFK.  The members of Group A were expecting another "date which will live in infamy" speech; instead, they were treated to a weekend of collective mourning in a national ritual made palpable by the medium of television.  In the aftermath of the eulogies and the baroque funeral ceremony spanning November 23-25, the original sponsors (Group A) discovered that they were screwed! 

The story of Oswald had to be reshaped at this time into the "lone nut" scenario.  And instead of recovering for American interests an island off the coast of Florida, the sponsors (Group A) had to settle for a disastrous and protracted war in Southeast Asia.