Lee Harvey Oswald’s Cold War: Why the Kennedy Assassination Should Be Reinvestigated Volume Two

By Greg R. Parker

In Volume 2, the author continues his biography of accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, taking it from the start of 1954 through to his March, 1959 application to attend the Albert Schweitzer College in Switzerland.

During this period, the author contends that Oswald was recruited into a long buried and forgotten Cold War Civil Air Patrol program which produced both domestic and international covert operations.

Also revealed for the first time is the exact nature of the CIA employment of Ruth Paine’s sister, Sylvia Hoke. It is guaranteed to surprise, and the relevance will be immediately obvious to those already well-versed in the history of the times.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Tellwell Talent
• Release date: Aug 27, 2015
• ISBN: 9780992446024

Greg R. Parker

Greg Parker was born in Newcastle, NSW Australia in 1958. Since his late teens, he has traveled around "the wide brown land" working in various blue and white collar jobs including an 11 year stint as a federal public servant. Married with twin boys, he currently runs his own business in the Central West of NSW.Parker's interest in the Kennedy assassination began in 1999 while living in Darwin and he was given a copy of Anthony Summer's "Conspiracy" to read. Parker was intrigued by the book and has been doing his own research since 2000. That same year, he was runner-up in the Darwin Poetry Cup, and had a lot of fun as a performance poet in between band sets at local venues.His work on the Kennedy case has been widely cited in articles and books by such writers as Joan Mellon, George Michael Evica, Larry Hancock and Jim Di Eugunio.

Book preview

Lee Harvey Oswald’s Cold War:

Why the Kennedy Assassination Should Be Reinvestigated

Volume Two

New Orleans, Fort Worth, California, Japan, Indonesia & Santa Ana

by

Greg R. Parker

Copyright © 2015 Greg R. Parker

All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, scanning, or otherwise without permission in writing from the copyright owners, except brief passages for bona fide educational or review purposes.

First Edition © Greg R. Parker, 2015

Sydney, Australia

Brought to you with the assistance of

MoshPit Publishing

an imprint of Mosher’s Business Support Pty Ltd

PO Box 147

Hazelbrook NSW 2779

http://www.moshpitpublishing.com.au

The right of Greg Parker to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright Amendment (Moral Rights) Act 2000.

License Notes

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to the place of purchase and buy your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

For Alex, Ben, and Thom

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to acknowledge that the task of writing these volumes would not have been contemplated without knowing the help of many could be counted upon. It has been a truly global effort.

Specifically, I wish to thank…

In Australasia

Steven Duffy, Vanessa Loney, Toni Parker, Mick Purdy, James Richards, Anthony Thorne, Frankie Vegas and Hasan Yusuf

In Europe

Lee Farley, Bernie Laverick, Sean Murphy and John Watters

In North America

Herbert Blenner, Eric Catuccio, Robert Charles-Dunne, Jim Di Eugenio, Lee Forman, Richard Gilbride, Mark Groubert, Larry Hancock, Lisa Harbatkin, Nathaniel Heidenheimer, Robert Howard, Bill Kelly, Erin Lacey, Duke Lane, Ed LeDoux, Terry Martin, Carlos Mucha, William O’Neil, Jim Olmstead, Bill Simpich, Andrea Skolnik, Stig, and Stu Wexler

Each has contributed to this effort in their own way. I am especially grateful to Lee Farley for his friendship, support, research assistance and book cover designs, Robert Charles-Dunne for his friendship, support and vast knowledge in many areas of interest inside and outside of this case, Jim Olmstead whom I regard as my original mentor and who encouraged and added to my work enormously, and to Stig, who did the hard digging to obtain the evidence needed in pinning down some of the main claims within these volumes, and who also gave freely of his own personal research.

It would be remiss not to also acknowledge the wonderfully talented members at the reopenkennedycase forum. It has been a privilege. The good-will is endless, the humor often raw and thought-provoking.

PART 1 – SYMBIOSIS & SYNTHESIS: 1954–1956

All of us live under the same sky, but we don’t all have the same horizon.

Conrad Adenauer

That’s the new disease.

Natalie Wood in Rebel without a Cause, 1955

On December 6, 1953, Operation Candor was officially launched when Eisenhower addressed the UN General Assembly giving his Atoms for Peace speech. The stated purpose of the speech was to advise the public about the dangers of nuclear proliferation and the difficulties involved in accounting for all the nuclear material held by either side. Such candor was meant to share the troubling information with the world through the UN in order to gain approval for whatever defensive steps may be deemed necessary. It was also an opportunity to counter Soviet propaganda that it was the West blocking the path to détente. This was to be achieved by proposing that both Superpowers contribute fissile material from their stockpiles to a depository for use by, and under the control of, an International Atomic Energy Agency.

It was not diplomacy. It was not keeping faith with voters. It was not heartfelt. It was Game Theory. And Game Theory is war strategy by another name. The speech deepened nuclear secrecy and suspicion, in turn leading to greater threats to public health not only in terms of mass psycho-political hysteria but also via isolated pockets of physical damage through human radiation experiments.

The Soviets were winning the propaganda war. The Soviets were winning the space race. This was not time to double-down. By 1956, Eisenhower wanted genuine rapprochement and opened the gates to the sharing of culture and science. It was an opportunity to find similarities and mutual benefits for some; for others, it was an opportunity to keep the Cold War rolling.

Back in the Big Easy

Marguerite and Lee turned up on Lillian Murret’s doorstep at 757 French Street in New Orleans without prior notice. The mother told Lillian she had sought legal advice, and that advice was that she "had better get out of New York as fast as she could with this boy."[i]

Young Lee was familiar with the address. He had been looked after by Aunt Lillian and her husband Uncle Dutz on occasion in the past.

The HSCA concluded that Uncle Dutz had "served as a surrogate father of sorts" throughout much of Oswald’s life in New Orleans.[ii] This conclusion is completely at odds however with Dutz’s Warren Commission testimony. When asked by Counsel Jenner what kind of boy Lee was, Murret replied, "Well, I’ll tell you; I didn’t take that much interest in him. I couldn’t tell you anything about that, because I didn’t pay attention to all that. I do think he was a loud kid, you know what I mean; he was always raising his voice when he wanted something from his mother, I know that, but I think a lot of times he was just the opposite. He liked to read, and he stuck by himself pretty much in the apartment the way I understand it." The only father figure Oswald ever knew was Edwin Ekdahl. Despite this, both Marguerite and Lee left Ekdahl out of the family history given to Lee’s Probation Officer and Youth House staff. Accurate and complete family history of course, is integral to accurate and complete child welfare assessments, and this missing piece of information helped color the assessments made of young Lee. If we consider those omissions and the unflattering assessments of Marguerite and Lee’s (very likely contrived) truancy, what we arrive at is the profile used by the Communists during the Korean War to identify potential military defectors. To refresh memories, here again is the profile we looked at in Volume One:

· unstable childhood, or

· raised in female dominated house-hold

· high IQ but low prospects, or

· physical differences

· aversion to authority

· thirst for knowledge

· past criminal/delinquent record

If looking for a suitable candidate to fool the Communists in any false defector program, you would look for someone who ticked most or all of those boxes, in reality perhaps, but preferably with at least some markers on paper only.

The HSCA conclusion regarding the closeness of the relationship between Dutz and Lee has to be seen in light of some of its other findings. This includes that two gunmen fired at JFK, that one of the gunmen was Oswald, that individual members of anti-Castro Cuban groups, or individual members of national syndicates of organized crime were possibly involved, and that Dutz Murret was close to individual members of organized crime in New Orleans.[iii] It should come as no surprise then that the Chief Counsel for the HSCA, Prof. G. Robert Blakey, would author a book in 1981 on the assassination maintaining Oswald was a sniper in a mob revenge hit. Later still, in a 1993 interview with Frontline commemorating the 30th anniversary of the assassination, Blakey, when asked "Was Oswald recruited as a spy? responded with the kneejerk reaction which has been the line from official and unofficial government apologists and mouthpieces for a long, long time. With a no doubt straight face, Blakey claimed that the KGB had investigated Oswald in the Soviet Union and found him to be of no value as a recruit. On the other hand, Uncle Sam would not have recruited him for any false defector program because he was too unstable and not the kind of candidate that our people would recruit." Whilst it is true that a Harvard graduate was far more likely than a high school drop-out to be tapped on the shoulder for this type of patriotic duty in the 1950s, it would have been difficult to find a Harvard grad who could tick any of the boxes on this particular profile. As for the KGB – unless you were aiming for some type of longshot triple play, the negative assessment by the Soviet spooks would be exactly as wanted.

Beauregard Junior High

The stay at the Murret’s was meant to be temporary until Marguerite could find other accommodation. That did not happen until sometime in the spring and in the interim Lee enrolled at Beauregard on January 13, 1954.[iv] We’ll have a more in-depth look at Lee’s time at Beauregard a bit later.

A Friendship Tested

Somewhere in the spring of ’54 Myrtle Evans got a call from Marguerite asking if she had any vacancies in the apartment block Myrtle owned on Saint Mary Street. Mother and son had obviously outstayed their welcome at the Murret French Street residence. As it happened, not only did Marguerite’s long-time friend have a vacancy, she would let it to Marguerite at less than market value. But the largesse didn’t end there. Myrtle Evans and Lillian Murret proceeded to furnish the apartment for the new tenant.[v]

Marguerite by then also had a job in sales with Burt Shoes at 1117 Canal Street. She had her final day there on October 9, 1954 and had a short break before commencing in the same work at Chandler’s Shoe Store at 837 Canal Street on November 15 and continuing until January 7, 1955.[vi]

Around February, 1955, Marguerite was apparently struggling financially despite the discounted rent and evidently having sold her car. She informed Myrtle she had found a cheaper place on the other side of town so Myrtle promptly re-let the apartment and Marguerite even sold some of her furniture to the soon-to-be