Well, I knew it was going to be crap before I read the first word. Why? Because it starts with positive reviews from the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and other mainstream publications.
So, why do I have this book? Well, there were circumstances that I got it which I won't go into. It is not the kind of JFK book that I would ever seek to buy.
But, I've read some of it, about a third, and the gist of it is that the entire official story is true exactly as the Warren Commission said except that when Oswald was in Mexico City, he may have connected with some pro-Castro people who egged him on. So, you see it was a conspiracy after all but a kinder, gentler conspiracy than the one we usually hear about.
But, it is ridiculous. Why assume that in early September Oswald had any expectation of having an upcoming opportunity to kill JFK? Supposedly, he only got the job at the TSBD because Ruth Paine enjoyed tea and crumpets with the neighbor ladies in Irving, and one of them said that they were hiring at the TSBD. According to the official story, Oswald did not conceive of killing Kennedy until a few days before the assassination- at most.
Oswald didn't even go to Mexico City. He said he didn't go. He said that the only place in Mexico he'd been to was Tijuana.
There are no images of Oswald in Mexico City. There are images of Oswald doubles- several of them- but not him.
Supposedly, the CIA was tracking Oswald while he was in Mexico City. Oh really? Well, if they were concerned about what he was doing there, why didn't they talk to him? Why didn't they just ask him what he was doing there?
No one has accused Oswald of committing any crimes in Mexico City. So, why wouldn't he have admitted having gone there if he did? He was being accused of killing the President of the United States and a police officer, so why lie about something that was non-criminal? If he sought to get a visa to Cuba or to Russia or both, it was not a crime. But, to lie about it would have been very dangerous (for him) because if they had solid evidence that he was there, it would obviously look very bad, that he was lying to hide something, and that he had a consciousness of guilt.
There is no authentic image of Oswald in Mexico City, and there is no authenticated recording of his voice. There is a phone call to the Russian Embassy, allegedly made by Oswald, in which the caller spoke in broken Russian. Oswald's Russian was NOT broken. His Russian was excellent; he was fluent. That call came in on October 1, but Oswald was in Dallas on October 3.
And what about Marina? What did she say? Well, that's where this lousy rotten book actually has some value. Shenon included this:
February 3, 1964 testimony of Marina Oswald to WC:
Questioner: Did he tell you anything about his trip to Mexico City?
Marina Oswald: Yes, he told me he had visited the two embassies that he had received nothing, that the people who are there are too much bureaucratic.
Questioner: Did you ask him what he did the rest of the time?
Marina Oswald: Yes, I think he said that he visited a bull fight, that he spent most of his time in museums, and that he did some sightseeing.
Questioner: Did he tell you about anyone that he met there?
Marina Oswald: no. He said that he did not like the Mexican girls.
First note that that was in Washington and it was the first time Marina said anything about Oswald going to Mexico City. So, for three months, she was not helpful at all with this and would not confirm that he went to Mexico City. And that is something that Philip Shenon confirmed in the book: that in the beginning, Marina was not helpful and cooperative about the Mexico City trip.
What should we make of that? Well, look what she said. She said that Oswald attended a bull fight, that he visited museums, and did other sightseeing. But, if he didn't even finish his business with the Russian Embassy until October 1 and he was back in Dallas with her on October 3, and he had to travel all that way by bus, how could he possibly have had time to do those fun things?
And, how plausible is it? If Oswald was there to seek a visa so that he could flee the country again, then obviously that was serious business, a life-changing decision, and he wasn't in a sightseeing state of mind. The idea that he would say to himself:
"While I'm here, I might as well take in the sights. When in Mexico City, do as the Mexicans do. So, I guess I'll go to a bull fight."
I am asking you: how plausible is it that there is any truth to that statement, that Oswald told Marina that he went to a bull fight in Mexico City?
But Shenan's revelations about Marina continued. He also said that the things she said about Oswald having tried to shoot General Walker in April- which is essentially the whole case against him for that- she didn't say at first either, that it took her several months to come around to supporting that story as well. At first, she denied it.
Are you seeing a pattern here? Marina must have decided to play ball with these people- to tell them what they wanted to hear. In the beginning, they must have threatened to charge her as an accessory in the murder. Then, they threatened to deport her back to Russia- which was probably just a bluff; they were not going to turn her over to the Russians. But, the threat worked because she did not want to go back to Russia. But, there was more. There were donations coming in for her- from Americans. Quite a bit a dough. They liked Marina, and they felt sorry for her. Why did they like her? (The fact that she was pretty didn't hurt.) But, they also liked her because, at the time, she was saying what they wanted to hear, that Oswald was a murderer, and he did all the bad things of which he was accused. Plus, she had an agent who worked for 10% who made arrangements for her to sell short accounts of her life to the media. All she had to do was write a few paragraphs, and she got money. That is in Shenan's book too. The fact is: money flowed a lot better to her after the assassination than it did before. So, good things were going to come to Marina, including money, if she cooperated; if she said the things they wanted to hear; and she knew it. She succumbed.
I would be very interested to hear what Marina has to say today, but I don't put stock in anything she said back then. She was a manipulated witness. Oh, another interesting thing covered by Shenon was the exchange between Earl Warren and Marina, how tender and sweet it was- and I don't mean anything sexual, although there were sexual advances made on Marina by others which Shenan gets into. But, Warren was very warm and sensitive and kind to her- and like he was speaking for all Americans. "America loves you, Marina. We're here for you." - not his exact words, but close. He might as well have said that.
But again, my point is that the easiest, sunniest path for Marina was to tell them what they wanted to hear, to support all their stories- not just the one about Oswald killing Kennedy, but that he went to Mexico City, that he tried to kill Walker, that he contemplated killing Nixon, and that he beat her. They needed and wanted all of it, and she delivered. It was the path of least resistance.
I'll continue wading through this Shenan book, but it's not easy. I'd really like to give this guy a piece of my mind. He took the path of least resistance too. The big media companies issued all these accolades for his crappy book, which I'm sure boosted his sales, while they refused to even acknowledge the existence of JFK and the Unspeakable by Jim Douglass. Damn bloodied bastards.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.