Wild Woman of Wales

The Last Words of Lee Harvey Oswald

2008-07-20T05:32:00.000-07:00

1963: Dallas

The Government Decides That Truth Doesn't Exist

At noon, on a street in Dallas, the president of the United States is assassinated. He is hardly dead when the official version is broadcast. In that version, which will be the definitive one, Lee Harvey Oswald alone has killed John Kennedy.
The weapon does not coincide with the bullet, nor the bullet with the holes. The accused does not coincide with the accusation: Oswald is an exceptionally bad shot of mediocre physique, but according to the official version, his acts were those of a champion marksman and Olympic sprinter. He has fired an old rifle with impossible speed and his magic bullet, turning and twisting acrobatically to penetrate Kennedy and John Connally, the governor of Texas, remains miraculously intact.
Oswald strenuously denies it. But no one knows, no one will ever know what he has to say. Two days later he collapses before the television cameras, the whole world witness to the spectacle, his mouth shut by Jack Ruby, a two-bit gangster and minor trafficker in women and drugs. Ruby says he has avenged Kennedy out of patriotism and pity for the poor widow.
--Eduardo Galeano, Memory of Fire: III Century of the Wind. Part Three of
a Trilogy, translated by Cedric Belfrage, Pantheon Books, 1988, p. 183

the following is taken from The People's Almanac #2,
by David Wallechinsky and Irving Wallace, Bantam Books, 1978, pp. 47-52.

THE LAST WORDS OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD

Compiled by Mae Brussell
Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone in shooting Pres. John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963, or did he conspire with others? Was he serving as an agent of Cuba's Fidel Castro, himself the target of American assassins? Or in squeezing the trigger of his carbine was he undertaking some super "dirty trick" for a CIA anxious to rid itself of a president whose faith in the "company" had evaporated in the wake of the Bay of Pigs fiasco? Or was he representing a group of Cuban exiles, the Teamsters Union, the Mafia? Indeed, was it Lee Harvey Oswald at all who killed JFK? Or was there a double impersonating Oswald? These questions continue to nag many people more than a decade and a half after that dreadful day in Dallas, in spite of the 26 volumes of hearings and exhibits served up by the Warren Commission, the congressional investigations, the release of heretofore classified FBI documents.
Almost everyone, it seems, has been heard from on the Kennedy assassination and on Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt or innocence, except one person -- Lee Harvey Oswald himself. From the time of Oswald's arrest to his own assassination at the hands of Jack Ruby, no formal transcript or record was kept of statements made by the alleged killer. It was said that no tape recordings were made of Oswald's remarks, and many notes taken of his statements were destroyed.
Determined to learn Oswald's last words, his only testimony, "The People's Almanac" assigned one of the leading authorities on the Kennedy assassination, Mae Brussell, to compile every known statement or remark made by Oswald between his arrest and death. The quotes, edited for space and clarity, are based on the recollections of a variety of witnesses present at different times and are not verbatim transcripts. "After 14 years of research on the JFK assassination," Mae Brussell concludes, "I am of the opinion that Lee Harvey Oswald was telling the truth about his role in the assassination during these interrogations."

12:30 P.M., CST, NOV. 22, 1963
Pres. John F. Kennedy Assassinated
12:33 P.M.
Lee Harvey Oswald left work, entered a bus, and said, "Transfer, please."
12:40 - 12:45 P.M.
Oswald got off the bus, entered a cab, and said, "May I have this cab?" A woman approached, wanting a cab, and Oswald said, "I will let you have this one. . . . 500 North Beckley Street [instructions to William Whaley, driver of another cab]. . . . This will be fine." Oswald departed cab and walked a few blocks.
1:15 P.M. Officer J. D. Tippit Murdered
1:45 P.M. Arrest at the Texas Theater
"This is it" or "Well, it's all over now." Oswald arrested. (Patrolman M. N. McDonald heard these remarks. Other officers who were at the scene did not hear them.) "I don't know why you are treating me like this. The only thing I have done is carry a pistol into a movie. . . . I don't see why you handcuffed me. . . . Why should I hide my face? I haven't done anything to be ashamed of. . . . I want a lawyer. . . . I am not resisting arrest. . . . I didn't kill anybody. . . . I haven't shot anybody. . . . I protest this police brutality. . . . I fought back there, but I know I wasn't supposed to be carrying a gun. . . . What is this all about?"
2:00 - 2:15 P.M. Drive to Police Dept.
"What is this all about? . . . I know my rights. . . . A police officer has been killed? . . . I hear they burn for murder. Well, they say it just takes a second to die. . . . All I did was carry a gun. . . . No, Hidell is not my real name. . . . I have been in the Marine Corps, have a dishonorable discharge, and went to Russia. . . . I had some trouble with police in New Orleans for passing out pro-Castro literature. . . . Why are you treating me this way? . . . I am not being handled right. . . . I demand my rights."
2:15 P.M. Taken into Police Dept.
2:15 - 2:20 P.M.
"Talked to" by officers Guy F. Rose and Richard S. Stovall. No notes.
2:25 - 4:04 P.M. Interrogation of Oswald, Office of Capt Will Fritz
"My name is Lee Harvey Oswald. . . . I work at the Texas School Book Depository Building. . . . I lived in Minsk and in Moscow. . . . I worked in a factory. . . . I liked everything over there except the weather. . . . I have a wife and some children. . . . My residence is 1026 North Beckley, Dallas, Tex." Oswald recognized FBI agent James Hosty and said, "You have been at my home two or three times talking to my wife. I don't appreciate your coming out there when I was not there. . . . I was never in Mexico City. I have been in Tijuana. . . . Please take the handcuffs from behind me, behind my back. . . . I observed a rifle in the Texas School Book Depository where I work, on Nov. 20, 1963. . . . Mr. Roy Truly, the supervisor, displayed the rifle to individuals in his office on the first floor. . . . I never owned a rifle myself. . . . I resided in the Soviet Union for three years, where I have many friends and relatives of my wife. . . . I was secretary of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans a few months ago. . . . While in the Marines, I received an award for marksmanship as a member of the U.S. Marine Corps. . . . While living on Beckley Street, I used the name 0. H. Lee. . . . I was present in the Texas School Book Depository Building, I have been employed there since Oct. 15, 1963. . . . As a laborer, I have access to the entire building. . . . My usual place of work is on the first floor. However, I frequently use the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh floors to get books. I was on all floors this morning. . . . Because of all the confusion, I figured there would be no work performed that afternoon so I decided to go home. . . . I changed my clothing and went to a movie. . . . I carried a pistol with me to the movie because I felt like it, for no other reason. . . . I fought the Dallas Police who arrested me in the movie theater where I received a cut and a bump. . . . I didn't shoot Pres. John F. Kennedy or Officer J. D. Tippit. . . . An officer struck me, causing the marks on my left eye, after I had struck him. . . . I just had them in there," when asked why he had bullets in his pocket.
3:54 P.M.
NBC newsman Bill Ryan announced on national television that "Lee Oswald seems to be the prime suspect in the assassination of John F. Kennedy."
4:45 P.M. At a Lineup for Helen Markham, Witness to Tippit Murder
"It isn't right to put me in line with these teenagers. . . . You know what you are doing, and you are trying to railroad me. . . . I want my lawyer. . . . You are doing me an injustice by putting me out there dressed different than these other men. . . . I am out there, the only one with a bruise on his head. . . . I don t believe the lineup is fair, and I desire to put on a jacket similar to those worn by some of the other individuals in the lineup. . . . All of you have a shirt on, and I have a T-shirt on. I want a shirt or something. . . . This T-shirt is unfair."
4:45 - 6:30 P.M. Second Interrogation of Oswald, Captain Fritz's Office
"When I left the Texas School Book Depository, I went to my room, where I changed my trousers, got a pistol, and went to a picture show. . . . You know how boys do when they have a gun, they carry it. . . . Yes, I had written the Russian Embassy. (On Nov. 9, 1963, Oswald had written to the Russian Embassy that FBI agent James Hosty was making some kind of deals with Marina, and he didn't trust "the notorious FBI.") . . . Mr. Hosty, you have been accosting my wife. You mistreated her on two different occasions when you talked with her. . . . I know you. Well, he threatened her. He practically told her she would have to go back to Russia. You know, I can't use a phone. . . . I want that attorney in New York, Mr. Abt. I don't know him personally but I know about a case that he handled some years ago, where he represented the people who had violated the Smith Act, [which made it illegal to teach or advocate the violent overthrow of the U.S. government] . . . I don't know him personally, but that is the attorney I want. . . . If I can't get him, then I may get the American Civil Liberties Union to send me an attorney."
"I went to school in New York and in Fort Worth, Tex. . . . After getting into the Marines, I finished my high school education. . . . I support the Castro revolution. . . . My landlady didn't understand my name correctly, so it was her idea to call me 0. H. Lee. . . . I want to talk with Mr. Abt, a New York attorney. . . . The only package I brought to work was my lunch. . . . I never had a card to the Communist party. . . . I am a Marxist, but not a Leninist-Marxist. . . . I bought a pistol in Fort Worth several months ago. . . . I refuse to tell you where the pistol was purchased. . . . I never ordered any guns. . . . I am not malcontent. Nothing irritated me about the President." When Capt. Will Fritz asked Oswald, "Do you believe in a deity?" Oswald replied, "I don't care to discuss that." "How can I afford a rifle on the Book Depository salary of $1.25 an hour? . . . John Kennedy had a nice family. . . ." (Sheriff Roger Craig saw Oswald enter a white station wagon 15 minutes after the assassination. Oswald confirmed this in Captain Fritz's office. A man impersonating Oswald in Dallas just prior to the assassination could have been on the bus and in the taxicab.) "That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Ruth Paine. Don't try to tie her into this. She had nothing to do with it. I told you people I did. . . . Everybody will know who I am now."
"Can I get an attorney?. . . I have not been given the opportunity to have counsel. . . . As I said, the Fair Play for Cuba Committee has definitely been investigated, that is very true. . . . The results of that investigation were zero. The Fair Play for Cuba Committee is not now on the attorney general's subversive list."
6:30 P.M. Lineup for Witnesses Cecil J. McWatters, Sam Guinyard, and Ted Callaway
"I didn't shoot anyone," Oswald yelled in the halls to reporters. . . . "I want to get in touch with a lawyer, Mr. Abt, in New York City. . . . I never killed anybody."
7:10 P.M. Arraignment: State of Texas v. Lee Harvey Oswald for Murder with Malice of Officer J. D. Tippit of the Dallas Police Dept.
"I insist upon my constitutional rights. . . . The way you are treating me, I might as well be in Russia. . . . I was not granted my request to put on a jacket similar to those worn by other individuals in some previous lineups."
7:50 P.M. Lineup for Witness J. D. Davis
"I have been dressed differently than the other three. . . . Don't you know the difference? I still have on the same clothes I was arrested in. The other two were prisoners, already in jail." Seth Kantor, reporter, heard Oswald yell, "I am only a patsy."
7:55 P.M. Third Interrogation, Captain Fritz's Office
"I think I have talked long enough. I don't have anything else to say. . . . What started out to be a short interrogation turned out to be rather lengthy. . . . I don't care to talk anymore. . . . I am waiting for someone to come forward to give me legal assistance. . . . It wasn't actually true as to how I got home. I took a bus, but due to a traffic jam, I left the bus and got a taxicab, by which means I actually arrived at my residence."
8:55 P.M. Fingerprints, Identification Paraffin Tests -- All in Fritz's Office
"I will not sign the fingerprint card until I talk to my attorney. [Oswald's name is on the card anyway.] . . . What are you trying to prove with this paraffin test, that I fired a gun? . . . You are wasting your time. I don't know anything about what you are accusing me."
11:00 - 11:20 P.M. "Talked To" by Police Officer John Adamcik and FBI Agent M. Clements
"I was in Russia two years and liked it in Russia. . . . I am 5 ft. 9 in., weigh 140 lb., have brown hair, blue-gray eyes, and have no tattoos or permanent scars."
(Oswald had mastoidectomy scars and left upper-arm scars, both noted in Marine records. "Warren Report," pp. 614-618, lists information from Oswald obtained during this interview about members of his family, past employment, past residences.)
11:20 - 11:25 P.M. Lineup for Press Conference; Jack Ruby Present
When newsmen asked Oswald about his black eye, he answered, "A cop hit me." When asked about the earlier arraignment, Oswald said "Well, I was questioned by Judge Johnston. However, I protested at that time that I was not allowed legal representation during that very short and sweet hearing. I really don't know what the situation is about. Nobody has told me anything except that I am accused of murdering a policeman. I know nothing more than that, and I do request someone to come forward to give me legal assistance." When asked, "Did you kill the President?" Oswald replied, "No. I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question. . . . I did not do it. I did not do it. . . . I did not shoot anyone."
12:23 A.M., NOV. 23, 1963 Placed in Jail Cell
12:35 A.M. Released by Jailer
Oswald complained, "This is the third set of fingerprints, photographs being taken."
1:10 A.M. Back in Jail Cell
1:35 A.M. Arraignment: State of Texas v. Lee Harvey Oswald for the Murder with Malice of John F. Kennedy
"Well, sir, I guess this is the trial. . . . I want to contact my lawyer, Mr. Abt, in New York City. I would like to have this gentleman. He is with the American Civil Liberties Union." (John J. Abt now in private practice in New York, was the general counsel for the Senate Sub-Committee on Civil Liberties from 1935-1937, and later served as legal adviser for the Progressive party from 1948-1951. Mr. Abt has never been a member of the ACLU.)
10:30 A.M.-1:10 P.M. Interrogation, Capt. Will Fritz's Office
"I said I wanted to contact Attorney Abt, New York. He defended the Smith Act cases in 1949, 1950, but I don't know his address, except that it is in New York. . . . I never owned a rifle. . . . Michael Paine owned a car, Ruth Paine owned two cars. . . . Robert Oswald, my brother, lives in Fort Worth. He and the Paines were closest friends in town. . . . The FBI has thoroughly interrogated me at various other times. . . . They have used their hard and soft approach to me, and they use the buddy system. . . . I am familiar with all types of questioning and have no intention of making any statements. . . . In the past three weeks the FBI has talked to my wife. They were abusive and impolite. They frightened my wife, and I consider their activities obnoxious."
(When arrested, Oswald had FBI Agent James Hosty's home phone and office phone numbers and car license number in his possession.)
"I was arrested in New Orleans for disturbing the peace and paid a $10 fine for demonstrating for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. I had a fight with some anti-Castro refugees and they were released while I was fined. . . . I refuse to take a polygraph. It has always been my practice not to agree to take a polygraph . . . The FBI has overstepped their bounds in using various tactics in interviewing me. . . . I didn't shoot John Kennedy. . . . I didn't even know Gov. John Connally had been shot. . . . I don't own a rifle. . . . I didn't tell Buell Wesley Frazier anything about bringing back some curtain rods. . . . My wife lives with Mrs. Ruth Paine. She [Mrs. Paine] was learning Russian. They needed help with the young baby, so it made a nice arrangement for both of them. . . . I don't know Mrs. Paine very well, but Mr. Paine and his wife were separated a great deal of the time."
(Michael Paine worked at Bell Aerospace as a scientific engineer. His boss, Walter Dornberger, was a Nazi war criminal. The first call, the "tipoff," on Oswald, came from Bell Aerospace.)
"The garage at the Paines' house has some seabags that have a lot of my personal belongings. I left them after coming back from New Orleans in September. . . . The name Alek Hidell was picked up while working in New Orleans in the Fair Play for Cuba organization. . . . I speak Russian, correspond with people in Russia, and receive newspapers from Russia. . . . I don't own a rifle at all. . . . I did have a small rifle some years in the past. You can't buy a rifle in Russia, you can only buy shotguns. I had a shotgun in Russia and hunted some while there. I didn't bring the rifle from New Orleans. . . . I am not a member of the Communist party. . . . I belong to the Civil Liberties Union. . . . I did carry a package to the Texas School Book Depository. I carried my lunch, a sandwich and fruit, which I made at Paine's house. . . . I had nothing personal against John Kennedy."
1:10 - 1:30 P.M. Lee Harvey Oswald Visited by Mother, Marguerite Oswald, and Wife, Marina Oswald
(To his Mother.) "No, there is nothing you can do. Everything is fine. I know my rights, and I will have an attorney. I already requested to get in touch with Attorney Abt, I think is his name. Don't worry about a thing."
(To his Wife.) "Oh, no, they have not been beating me. They are treating me fine. . . . You're not to worry about that. Did you bring June and Rachel? . . . Of course we can speak about absolutely anything at all. . . . It's a mistake. I'm not guilty. There are people who will help me. There is a lawyer in New York on whom I am counting for help. . . . Don't cry. There is nothing to cry about. Try not to think about it. . . . Everything is going to be all right. If they ask you anything, you have a right not to answer. You have a right to refuse. Do you understand? . . . You are not to worry. You have friends. They'll help you. If it comes to that, you can ask the Red Cross for help. You mustn't worry about me. Kiss Junie and Rachel for me. I love you. . . . Be sure to buy shoes for June."
2:15 P.M. Lineup for Witnesses William W. Scoggins and William Whaley
"I refuse to answer questions. I have my T-shirt on, the other men are dressed differently. . . . Everybody's got a shirt and everything, and I've got a T-shirt on. . . . This is unfair."
3:30 - 3:40 P.M. Robert Oswald, Brother, in Ten-Minute Visit
"I cannot or would not say anything, because the line is apparently tapped. [They were talking through telephones.] . . . I got these bruises in the theater. They haven't bothered me since. They are treating me all right. . . . What do you think of the baby? Well, it was a girl, and I wanted a boy, but you know how that goes. . . . I don't know what is going on. I just don't know what they are talking about. . . . Don't believe all the so-called evidence." When Robert Oswald looked into Lee's eyes for some clue, Lee said to him, "Brother, you won't find anything there. . . . My friends will take care of Marina and the two children." When Robert Oswald stated that he didn't believe the Paines were friends of Lee's, he answered back, "Yes, they are. . . . Junie needs a new pair of shoes."
(Robert Oswald told the Warren Commission, "To me his answers were mechanical, and I was not talking to the Lee I knew.")
3:40 P.M. Lee Harvey Oswald Calls Mrs. Ruth Paine
"This is Lee. Would you please call John Abt in New York for me after 6:00 P.M. The number for his office is ___________, and his residence is _______________ . . . . Thank you for your concern."
5:30 - 5:35 P.M. Visit with H. Louis Nichols, President of the Dallas Bar Association
"Well, I really don't know what this is all about, that I have been kept incarcerated and kept incommunicado. . . . Do you know a lawyer in New York named John Abt? I believe in New York City. I would like to have him represent me. That is the man I would like. Do you know any lawyers who are members of the American Civil Liberties Union? I am a member of that organization, and I would like to have somebody who is a member of that organization represent me." Mr. Nichols offered to help find a lawyer, but Oswald said, "No, not now. You might come back next week, and if I don't get some of these other people to assist me, I might ask you to get somebody to represent me."
6:00 - 6:30 P.M. Interrogation, Captain Fritz's Office
"In time I will be able to show you that this is not my picture, but I don't want to answer any more questions. . . . I will not discuss this photograph [which was used on the cover of Feb. 21, 1964 Life magazine] without advice of an attorney. . . . There was another rifle in the building. I have seen it. Warren Caster had two rifles, a 30.06 Mauser and a .22 for his son. . . . That picture is not mine, but the face is mine. The picture has been made by superimposing my face. The other part of the picture is not me at all, and I have never seen this picture before. I understand photography real well, and that, in time, I will be able to show you that is not my picture and that it has been made by someone else. . . . It was entirely possible that the Police Dept. has superimposed this part of the photograph over the body of someone else. . . . The Dallas Police were the culprits. . . . The small picture was reduced from the larger one, made by some persons unknown to me. . . . Since I have been photographed at City Hall, with people taking my picture while being transferred from the office to the jail door, someone has been able to get a picture of my face, and with that, they have made this picture. . . . I never kept a rifle at Mrs. Paine's garage at Irving, Tex. . . . We had no visitors at our apartment on North Beckley. . . . I have no receipts for purchase of any gun, and I have never ordered any guns. I do not own a rifle, never possessed a rifle. . . . I will not say who wrote A. J. Hidell on my Selective Service card. [It was later confirmed that Marina Oswald wrote in the name Hidell.] . . . I will not tell you the purpose of carrying the card or the use I made of it. . . . The address book in my possession has the names of Russian immigrants in Dallas, Tex., whom I have visited."
9:30 P.M. Lee Harvey Oswald Calls His Wife, Marina, at Mrs. Paine's Home
"Marina, please. Would you try to locate her?" (Marina had moved.)
10:00 P.M. Office of Captain Fritz
"Life is better for the colored people in Russia than it is in the U.S."
9:30 - 11:15 A.M., SUNDAY MORNING, NOV. 24,1963 Interrogation in Capt. Will Fritz's Office
"After the assassination, a policeman or some man came rushing into the School Book Depository Building and said, `Where is your telephone?' He showed me some kind of credential and identified himself, so he might not have been a police officer. . . . `Right there,' I answered, pointing to the phone. . . . `Yes, I can eat lunch with you,' I told my co-worker, `but I can't go right now. You go and take the elevator, but send the elevator back up.' [The elevator in the building was broken.] . . . After all this commotion started, I just went downstairs and started to see what it was all about. A police officer and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told officers that I am one of the employees in the building. . . . If you ask me about the shooting of Tippit, I don't know what you are talking about. . . . The only thing I am here for is because I popped a policeman in the nose in the theater on Jefferson Avenue, which I readily admit I did, because I was protecting myself. . . . I learned about the job vacancy at the Texas School Book Depository from people in Mrs. Paine's neighborhood. . . . I visited my wife Thursday night, Nov. 21, whereas I normally visited her over the weekend, because Mrs. Paine was giving a party for the children on the weekend. They were having a houseful of neighborhood children. I didn't want to be around at such a time. . . . Therefore, my weekly visit was on Thursday night instead of on the weekend. . . . It didn't cost much to go to Mexico. It cost me some $26, a small, ridiculous amount to eat, and another ridiculous small amount to stay all night. . . . I went to the Mexican Embassy to try to get this permission to go to Russia by way of Cuba. . . . I went to the Mexican Consulate in Mexico City. I went to the Russian Embassy to go to Russia by way of Cuba. They told me to come back in `thirty days.' . . . I don't recall the shape, it may have been a small sack, or a large sack; you don't always find one that just fits your sandwiches. . . . The sack was in the car, beside me, on my lap, as it always is. . . . I didn't get it crushed. It was not on the back seat. Mr. Frazier must have been mistaken or else thinking about the other time when he picked me up. . . . The Fair Play for Cuba Committee was a loosely organized thing and we had no officers. Probably you can call me the secretary of it because I did collect money. [Oswald was the only member in New Orleans.] . . . In New York City they have a well-organized, or a better, organization. . . . No, not at all: I didn't intend to organize here in Dallas; I was too busy trying to get a job. . . . If anyone else was entitled to get mail in P.O. Box 6525 at the Terminal Annex in New Orleans, the answer is no. . . . The rental application said Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the American Civil Liberties Union. Maybe I put them on there. . . . It is possible that on rare occasions I may have handed one of the keys to my wife to get my mail, but certainly nobody else. . . . I never ordered a rifle under the name of Hidell, Oswald, or any other name. . . . I never permitted anyone else to order a rifle to be received in this box. . . . I never ordered any rifle by mail order or bought any money order for the purpose of paying for such a rifle. . . . I didn't own any rifle. I have not practiced or shot with a rifle. . . . I subscribe to two publications from Russia, one being a hometown paper published in Minsk, where I met and married my wife. . . . We moved around so much that it was more practical to simply rent post office boxes and have mail forwarded from one box to the next rather than going through the process of furnishing changes of address to the publishers. . . . Marina Oswald and A. J. Hidell were listed under the caption of persons entitled to receive mail through my box in New Orleans. . . . I don't recall anything about the A. J. Hidell being on the post office card. . . . I presume you have reference to a map I had in my room with some X's on it. I have no automobile. I have no means of conveyance. I have to walk from where I am going most of the time. I had my applications with the Texas Employment Commission. They furnished me names and addresses of places that had openings like I might fill, and neighborhood people had furnished me information on jobs I might get. . . . I was seeking a job, and I would put these markings on this map so I could plan my itinerary around with less walking. Each one of these X's represented a place where I went and interviewed for a job. . . . You can check each one of them out if you want to. . . . The X on the intersection of Elm and Houston is the location of the Texas School Book Depository. I did go there and interview for a job. In fact, I got the job there. That is all the map amounts to. [Ruth Paine later stated she had marked Lee's map.] . . . What religion am I? I have no faith, I suppose you mean, in the Bible. I have read the Bible. It is fair reading, but not very interesting. As a matter of fact, I am a student of philosophy and I don't consider the Bible as even a reasonable or intelligent philosophy. I don't think of it. . . . I told you I haven't shot a rifle since the Marines, possibly a small bore, maybe a .22, but not anything larger since I have left the Marine Corps. . . . I never received a package sent to me through the mailbox in Dallas, Box No. 2915, under the name of Alek Hidell, absolutely not. . . . Maybe my wife, but I couldn't say for sure whether my wife ever got this mail, but it is possible she could have." Oswald was told that an attorney offered to assist him, and he answered, "I don't particularly want him, but I will take him if I can't do any better, and will contact him at a later date. . . . I have been a student of Marxism since the age of 14. . . . American people will soon forget the President was shot, but I didn't shoot him. . . . Since the President was killed, someone else would take his place, perhaps Vice-President Johnson. His views about Cuba would probably be largely the same as those of President Kennedy. . . . I never lived on Neely Street. These people are mistaken about visiting there, because I never lived there. . . . It might not be proper to answer further questions, because what I say might be construed in a different light than what I actually meant it to be. . . . When the head of any government dies, or is killed, there is always a second in command who would take over. . . . I did not kill President Kennedy or Officer Tippit. If you want me to cop out to hitting or pleading guilty to hitting a cop in the mouth when I was arrested, yeah, I plead guilty to that. But I do deny shooting both the President and Tippit."
11:10 A.M. Preparation for Oswald's Transfer to County Jail
"I would like to have a shirt from clothing that was brought to the office to wear over the T-shirt I am wearing. . . . I prefer wearing a black Ivy League-type shirt, which might be a little warmer. I don't want a hat. . . . I will just take one of those sweaters, the black one."
11:15 A.M. Inspector Thomas J. Kelley, U.S. Secret Service, Has Final Conversation with Lee Harvey Oswald
Kelley approached Oswald, out of the hearing of others, except perhaps Captain Fritz's men, and said that as a Secret Service agent, he was anxious to talk with him as soon as he secured counsel, because Oswald was charged with the assassination of the President but had denied it. Oswald said, "I will be glad to discuss this proposition with my attorney, and that after I talk with one, we could either discuss it with him or discuss it with my attorney, if the attorney thinks it is a wise thing to do, but at the present time I have nothing more to say to you."
11:21 A.M. Lee Harvey Oswald Was Fatally Wounded by Jack Ruby

Marina Oswald - her story

2008-07-20T05:12:00.001-07:00

Marina Oswald Porter's Letter
to the ARRB -- April 1996

Mr. John Tunheim, Chairman
JFK Assassination Records Review Board
600 E Street, NW, Second Floor
Washington, DC 20530

Dear Mr. Tunheim:

I am writing to you regarding the release of still classified documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy, and to my former husband, Lee Harvey Oswald. Specifically, I am writing to ask about documents I have learned of from a recent book and from a story in the Washington Post by the authors of the same book (as well as other documents they have described to me). The book reviews Dallas police, FBI, and CIA files released since 1992, and places them in the context of previously known information. I would like to know what the Review Board is doing to obtain the following:

1. The Dallas field office and headquarters FBI reports on the arrests of Donnell D. Whitter and Lawrence R. Miller in Dallas on November 18, 1963 with a carload of stolen U.S. army weapons. I believe that Lee Oswald was the FBI informant who made these arrests possible. I would also like to know what your board has done to obtain the reports of t he U.S. Marshal and the U.S. Army on the same arrests, and the burglary these men were suspected of.

2. the records of the FBI interrogations of John Franklin Elrod, John Forrester Gedney and Harold Doyle (the latter men were previously known as two of the "three tramps") in the Dallas jail November 22-24, 1963. All of these men have stated that they were interrogated during that time by the FBI.

3. The official explanation of why the arrest records for Mr. Elrod, Mr. Gedney, and Mr. Doyle, as well as for Daniel Wayne Douglas and Gus Abrams were placed "under federal seal" in the Dallas Police Records Division for 26 years as described by Dallas City Archives supervisor Laura McGhee to the FBI in 1992.

4. The FULL records of the interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald, including his interrogation in the presence of John Franklin Elrod as described by Elrod in an FBI report dated August 11, 1964.

5. The reports of army intelligence agent Ed J. Coyle on his investigation of Captain George Nonte, John Thomas Masen, Donnell D. Whitter, Lawrence R. Miller, and/or Jack Ruby. I am also requesting that you obtain agent Coyle's reports as army liaison for presidential protection on November 22, 1963 (as described by Coyle's commanding officer Col. Robert Jones in sworn testimony to the House Select Committee on Assassinations). If the army does not immediately produce these documents, they should be required to produce agent Coyle to explain what happened to his reports.

6. Secret Service reports and tapes of that agency's investigation of Father Walter Machann and Silvia Odio in 1963-64.

7. Reports of the FBI investigation of Cuban exiles in Dallas, to include known but still classified documents on Fermin de Goicochea Sanchez, Father Walter Machann and the Dallas Catholic Cuban Relocation Committee. These would include informant files for Father Machann and/or reports of interviews of Father Machann by Dallas FBI agent W.Heitman.

8. The full particulars and original of the teletype received by Mr. William Walter in the New Orleans FBI office on the morn-ing of November 17, 1963, warning of a possible assassination attempt on President Kennedy in Dallas. I now believe that my former husband met with the Dallas FBI on November 16, 1963, and provided informant information on which this teletype was based.

9. A full report of Lee Harvey Oswald's visit to the Dallas FBI office on November 16, 1963.

10. A full account of FBI agent James P. Hosty's claim (in his recent book, ASSIGNMENT: OSWALD) that Lee Harvey Oswald knew of a planned "paramilitary invasion of Cuba" by "a group of right wing Cuban exiles in outlying areas of New Orleans.' We now know that such an invasion was indeed planned by a Cuban group operating on CIA payroll in Miami, New Orleans, and Dallas--the same group infiltrated by Lee Oswald. We know this information ONLY from documents released since 1992, as described in the book I have mentioned. On what basis did agent Hosty believe Lee "had learned" of these plans, unless Lee himself told him this? I am therefore specifically requesting the release of the informant report that Lee Oswald provided to agent Hosty and/or other FBI personnel on this intelligence information.

The time for the Review Board to obtain and release the most important documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy is running out. At the time of the assassination of this great president whom I loved, I was misled by the "evidence" presented to me by government authorities and I assisted in the conviction of Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin. From the new information now available, I am now convinced that he was an FBI informant and believe that he did not kill President Kennedy. it is time for Americans to know their full history. On this day when I and all Americans are grieving for the victims of Oklahoma City, I am also thinking of my children and grandchildren, and of all American children, when I insist that your board give the highest priority to the release of the documents I have listed. this is the duty you were charged with by law. Anything else is unacceptable--not just to me, but to all patriotic Americans.<

Please be advised that this is an open letter, and I intend to make it available to anyone who wishes to see it. The time for secrecy in government is over. I ask that you respond to me in writing within two weeks, and will take no further action until then.

Thank you for your attention to my requests.

Sincerely,

/s/ Marina Porter

[Update: Marina Oswald Porter was contacted by Walt Brown; she received only a "general response" and not from Tunheim; the FBI gave a blanket denial to all the Oswald-as-FBI informant allegations.]

Lee Harvey Oswald - Innocent

2008-07-19T16:35:00.000-07:00

Oswald Innocent? A Lawyer’s Brief

National Guardian
the progressive newsweekly

A Guardian Special
Dallas, Nov. 22, 1963
A grave doubt plagues U.S.

This is a special eight-page, tabloid-size pamphlet published by the NATIONAL GUARDIAN newsweekly as a public service. It is based largely on a five-page brief on the Oswald case, published in the Dec. 19, 1963, issue of the GUARDIAN, written by attorney Mark Lane.
Few issues of the GUARDIAN in recent years—and the GUARDIAN has been involved in many stirring crusades in its 15 years—have created as much comment as the Dec. 19 issue with the Lane brief. An extra press run distributed to newsstands and offered to readers both old and new was quickly sold out. The demand was so heavy that this pamphlet was produced to meet it.
The doubts and confusion in the aftermath of the assassination of President Kennedy have brought to mind the situation that was created by the Sacco-Vanzetti case and the case of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg—and the continuing case of Morton Sobell. Nor will the doubts be set at rest until genuine efforts are made to get to the bottom of the events that took place the tragic weekend of Nov. 22, 1963.
New readers will be interested in the reaction to the publication of the Lane brief.
The press reaction was interesting. Except for the Times, no New York newspaper printed a line on the Lane brief. The United Press International got proof sheets in advance and announced it “wouldn’t touch it.” The Associated Press was offered the proofs, but said it was not interested; after the Times story appeared, AP became interested.
Abroad the reaction was quite different. In Rome the Lane brief was scheduled to be printed in full in Paese Sera, the largest in the evening field, and in Liberation in Paris. Oggi, an Italian magazine with a circulation of one million, sought permission to reprint. The Japanese press and news agencies also were on top of the story. Several Mexican papers picked it up, too.

Was this rifle the Kennedy assassination weapon?
The Dallas police had a story that raises many doubts

THIS EXPERIENCE with the Lane brief leads to the conclusion that there is widespread doubt and incredulity in the public mind both at home and abroad over the handling of the assassination of President Kennedy by the police and investigating agencies. Unlike most of the U.S. press, the GUARDIAN shares this feeling and will continue to gather and to present every pertinent piece of information it can. It deplores the fact that not one leading newspaper in the country is alarmed enough by the implication of the double assassination to apply its full resources to a crusading effort to get to the bottom of the case—even if it means a muck-raking job on the FBI, the CIA, the Secret Service and any agency of government—local, state or federal—that needs looking into.
Among the honorable exceptions in the field of journalism, in addition to the Times (which has been following the developments in the Oswald case in its news columns) are the New Republic, which in its issue of Dec. 21 carried a most disturbing article on the assassination called “Seeds of Doubt,” by Jack Minnis and Staughton Lynd; and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which had given its Washington correspondent, Richard Dudman, a free hand in his coverage of the assassination aftermath.
At this writing, the atmosphere in Washington remains troubled and tense. A reporter who has been particularly zealous in tracking down leads in the Oswald case and asking questions has been called “unpatriotic” for his efforts. In Dallas, Mrs. Marina Oswald, widow of the slain suspect, at this writing was being held incommunicado by the Secret Service and the FBI. All attempts by newspapermen to obtain interviews with her have been thwarted, despite the fact that she is perhaps the only person who can shed light on the nagging questions that will not be downed in the case. A “business representative” was chosen, on the advice of the Secret Service, to act as her spokesman.
The Warren Commission has a formidable task, but one which, if pursued with integrity, could help elevate justice in the United States to a more honorable estate. It goes without saying that the extreme Right in America will attempt by every means to make the job harder for its favorite target, Chief Justice Warren. But there are many elements within the Establishment itself which have a big stake in relegating the assassinations even now to dead history. In this category are the federal agencies previously named and the politics-as-usual crowd both in the Congress and the White House which do not want to disturb the profit-and-plunder pattern of our way of life with any revelations that might disclose the underlying ugliness of the pattern.

THE GUARDIAN’S publication of the Lane brief in the Oswald case—a brief which has been submitted to the Warren Commission—is just the kind of public service for which this newsweekly was founded. On page 8 of this pamphlet persons not familiar with the history of the GUARDIAN can learn more about this publication and can avail themselves of the opportunity to subscribe to it.
The GUARDIAN is published weekly 52 times a year in a 12-page issue. It covers national and foreign news with its own staff—trained journalists of complete integrity. It seeks not to be just another newsweekly, but to serve as an antidote to the regular commercial press by presenting news and interpretations which can be found in few other journals in the U.S.
A full year’s subscription is $7 (special student rate is $3.50 a year). A trial 10-week sub is $1. There are coupons on page 8.

—THE EDITORS

Lane’s defense brief for Oswald

***********************
(Box between title and byline)

In an analysis of the civil liberties aspects of the assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald, the American Civil Liberties Union said the “public interest” would be served if the commission named by President Johnson were to make “a thorough examination of the treatment accorded Oswald, including his right to counsel, the nature of the interrogation, his physical security while under arrest, and the effect of pretrial publicity on Oswald’s right to a fair trial.”
In the public interest the GUARDIAN has devoted one-half of the issue of Dec. 19 to a lawyer’s brief in the Oswald case which has been sent by the author to Justice Earl Warren as head of the fact-finding commission inquiring into the circumstances of the assassination of President Kennedy. The author is Mark Lane, a well known New York defense attorney, who has represented almost all the civil rights demonstrators arrested in New York. He has also served as defense counsel in a number of murder cases involving young persons.
In 1959, he helped organize the Reform Democrats in New York, an insurgent movement within the Democratic Party, was the first candidate of the movement to be nominated to the New York State Legislature and was elected in 1960.
In his letter to Justice Warren accompanying the brief, Lane urged that defense counsel be named for Oswald so that all aspects of the case might be vigorously pursued, particularly since Oswald was denied a trial during his lifetime. It is an ironic note, as the ACLU statement said, that “if Oswald had lived to stand trial and were convicted, the courts would very likely have reversed the conviction because of the prejudicial pretrial publicity.”
The GUARDIAN’S publication of Lane’s brief presumes only one thing: a man’s innocence, under U.S. law, unless or until proved guilty. It is the right of any accused, whether his name is Oswald, Ruby, or Byron de la Beckwith, the man charged with the murder of Medgar Evers in Mississippi. A presumption of innocence is the rock upon which American jurisprudence rests. Surely it ought to apply in the “crime of the century” as in the meanest back-alley felony.
We ask all our readers to study this document, show it to as many persons as you can (extra copies are available on request) and send us your comment. Any information or analysis based on fact that can assist the Warren Commission is in the public interest—an interest which demands that everything possible be done to establish the facts in this case.

—THE GUARDIAN

********************
By Mark Lane

IN ALL LIKELIHOOD there does not exist a single American community where reside 12 men or women, good and true, who presume that Lee Harvey Oswald did not assassinate President Kennedy. No more savage comment can be made in reference to the breakdown of the Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence. At the very foundation of our judicial operation lies a cornerstone which shelters the innocent and guilty alike against group hysteria, manufactured evidence, overzealous law enforcement officials, in short, against those factors which militate for an automated, prejudged, neatly packaged verdict of guilty. It is the sacred right of every citizen accused of committing a crime to the presumption of innocence.
This presumption, it has been written, is a cloak donned by the accused when the initial charge is made, and worn by him continuously. It is worn throughout the entire case presented against him, and not taken from the defendant until after he has had an opportunity to cross-examine hostile witnesses, present his own witnesses and to testify himself.
Oswald did not testify. Indeed, there will be no case, no trial, and Oswald, murdered while in police custody, still has no lawyer. Under such circumstances the development of a possible defense is difficult, almost impossible. Under such circumstances, the development of such a defense is obligatory.
There will be an investigation. No investigation, however soundly motivated, can serve as an adequate substitute for trial. Law enforcement officials investigate every criminal case before it is presented to a jury. The investigation in almost all such cases results in the firm conviction by the investigator that the accused is guilty. A jury often finds the defendant innocent, notwithstanding.
That which intervenes between the zealous investigator and the jury is due process of law, developed at great cost in human life and liberty over the years. It is the right to have irrelevant testimony barred. It is the right to have facts, not hopes or thoughts or wishes or prejudicial opinions, presented. It is the right to test by cross-examination the veracity of every witness and the value of his testimony. It is, perhaps above all, the right to counsel of one’s own choice, so that all the other rights may be protected. In this defense, Oswald has forfeited all rights along with his life.
The reader, inundated at the outset with 48 solid television, radio and newspaper hours devoted to proving the guilt of the accused and much additional “evidence” since then, cannot now examine this case without bringing to it certain preconceived ideas. We ask, instead, only for a temporary suspension of certainty.

An examination of the evidence against Oswald—for a trial that can’t be held

The case against Oswald

LONG BEFORE OSWALD was shot to death in the basement of the Dallas courthouse, the Dallas officials had concluded that Oswald was “without any doubt the killer.” On Saturday, the press was informed that “absolute confirmation as to Oswald’s guilt” had just arrived but that the “startling evidence” could not then be released to the press.
Immediately after Oswald was slain, the Dallas district attorney, Henry Wade, announced that the “Oswald case was closed.” Despite the deep belief that prevailed throughout the U.S. as to Oswald’s guilt, doubts raised throughout Europe escalated with Oswald’s murder into almost absolute rejection of the prosecution case.
The Justice Department then announced that the case was not closed. Wade called a press conference to “reopen” the case. In a radio and television statement, publicized throughout the world, Wade presented “the evidence, piece by piece, for you.”
Wade is not new to the ways of law enforcement and prosecution. He has held the post of district attorney in Dallas 13 years. He has a staff of 80, and an annual budget of almost $500,000. For more than four years he was an FBI agent before becoming district attorney.
He boasts of obtaining the death sentence in 23 of the 24 capital cases he has prosecuted. It can be assumed that the Oswald case was by far the most important matter that he ever handled, and that his appearance on Sunday to present the evidence was the high point of his career. This was an appearance for which he had abundantly prepared himself.

Lee Harvey oswald and the dallas police
He was questioned, without counsel, for 48 hours

In that light, we now examine the “airtight case,” the “absolute confirmation of Oswald’s guilt.” Wade presented 15 assertions, some mere conclusions, some with a source not revealed, some documented.

Here are the 15 assertions:

1—A number of witnesses saw Oswald at the window of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.
2—Oswald’s palm print appeared on the rifle.
3—Oswald’s palm print appeared on a cardboard box found at the window.
4—Paraffin tests on both hands showed that Oswald had fired a gun recently.
5—The rifle, an Italian carbine, had been purchased by Oswald, through the mail, under an assumed name.
6—Oswald had in his possession an identification card with the name Hidell.
7—Oswald was seen in the building by a police officer just after the President had been shot.
8—Oswald’s wife said that his rifle was missing Friday morning.
9—Oswald had a package under his arm Friday.
10—Oswald, while taking a bus from the scene, laughed loudly as he told a woman passenger that the President had been shot.
11—A taxi driver, Darryl Click, took Oswald home, where he changed his clothes.
12—Oswald shot and killed a police officer.
13—A witness saw Oswald enter the Texas theater.
14—Oswald drew a pistol and attempted to kill the arresting officer.
15—A map was found in Oswald’s possession showing the scene of the assassination and the bullet’s proposed trajectory.

Perused lightly, the list seems impressive. But in capital cases evidence is not perused lightly. It is subject to probing cross-examination, study and analysis. The most effective tool available to any defendant, cross-examination, is not available in this case. We rely instead upon press reports of statements made, not by witnesses for the defense, not by the defendant, but by the district attorney, police officers or FBI agents. With this oppressive restriction in mind, we move on to an analysis of the evidence.

Point One

A number of witnesses saw Oswald at the window of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.
SINCE IT IS ALLEGED that Oswald fired through that window, that assertion is important. Wade was unequivocal, stating, “First, there was a number of witnesses that saw the person with the gun on the sixth floor of the bookstore building, in the window—detailing the window—where he was looking out.” Subsequently, it developed that the “number of witnesses” was in reality one witness, who was quoted as follows: “I can’t identify him, but if I see a man who looks like him, I’ll point him out.” (Newsweek—Dec. 9) Such “identification” is at best speculative and would not be permitted in that form at trial.

Point Two

Oswald’s palm print appeared on the rifle.
A PALM PRINT, unlike a fingerprint, is not always uniquely identifiable. Nevertheless, palm prints possibly belonging to the suspect and present on a murder weapon must be considered important evidence. If the rifle did belong to Oswald, the presence of palm prints there might be normal and need not lead to the inevitable conclusion that Oswald fired the fatal shots. However, speculation in this area is not now required to rebut Wade’s second point. The FBI now states that “no palm prints were found on the rifle.”
This conclusion, first carried in the Fort Worth press, was later leaked to reporters by the FBI in off-the-record briefing sessions. The FBI at that time took the position that “we don’t have to worry about prints in this case.” The FBI indicated anger with Wade for stating that a palm print was present when in fact it was not.

Point Three

Oswald’s palm print appeared on a cardboard box found at the window.
WADE STATED, “On this box that the defendant was sitting on, his palm print was found and was identified as his.” Inasmuch as a palm print is not always uniquely identifiable, depending on the number of characteristics that are readable, the palm print very likely was not definitely “identified as his.”
It had been alleged earlier that the defendant ate greasy, fried chicken at the window. The presence of a palm print indicates that he wore no gloves and took no precautions to prevent a trail of fingerprints and palm prints. Nevertheless, no prints of the defendant were found on the floors, walls, window ledge, window frame or window. Only a movable cardboard carton, subsequently present at the police station while the defendant was also there, is now alleged to have his print.
An over-zealous investigatory staff might arrange to secure such a print after the fact. Certainly, the handling of this case by the Dallas authorities was marked by over-zealous desire to convict the defendant. A district attorney who states falsely that a palm print is present on the murder weapon might make a similar statement in reference to a cardboard carton.

Point Four

Paraffin tests on both hands showed that Oswald had fired a gun recently.
PARAFFIN IS APPLIED to that portion of the human body which might come in close contact with the gas (released by a weapon’s firing) containing solid particles of burned nitrates in suspension. To determine whether a pistol (i.e., a gun) has been fired, tests are made of both hands. To determine whether a rifle has been fired, tests are made of both hands and the area on both sides of the face near the cheekbone, the cheek remaining in immediate contact with a rifle when the trigger is pulled.

Dallas district attorney henry wade
He presents the 'evidence'—to the press

In the service, as any veteran, including Wade, well knows, a rifle is always referred to as a rifle. It is never, under fear of company punishment, called a gun (pistol). At Wade’s press conference, this dialogue took place:

Reporter: What about the paraffin tests?
Wade: Yes, I’ve got paraffin tests that showed he had recently fired a gun—it was on both hands.
Reporter: On both hands?
Wade: Both hands.
Reporter: Recently fired a rifle?
Reporter: A gun.
Wade: A gun.

Wade’s answers, while truthful, were a study in understatement. The district attorney neglected to state the additional facts that tests had been conducted on Oswald’s face and that the tests revealed that there were no traces of gunpowder on Oswald’s face (Washington Star, Nov. 24). One fact emerges here with clarity. The paraffin test did not prove Oswald had fired a rifle recently. The test tended to prove Oswald had not fired a rifle recently. This fact alone raises that reasonable doubt that a jury might utilize in finding the defendant not guilty.

Point Five

The rifle, an Italian carbine, had been purchased by Oswald through the mail and under an assumed name.
WADE SAID, “It (the rifle), as I think you know, has been identified as having been purchased last March by Oswald, from a mail-order house, through an assumed name named Hidell, mailed to a post office box here in Dallas.” Wade said this was the weapon that killed the President.
Wade had made a very different statement in reference to the murder weapon just a short while before.
Just after the arrest of Oswald, Dallas law enforcement officials announced that they had found the murder weapon. Wade and his associates studied the rifle. It was shown to the television audience repeatedly as some enforcement official carried it high in the air, with his bare hands on the rifle. After hours of examination Wade said without hesitation that “the murder weapon was a German Mauser.”
The next day it was reported that FBI files showed that Oswald purchased an Italian carbine through the mail. It was sent to a post-office box maintained by Oswald in his own name and also A. Hidell. (Clearly no serious effort to escape detection as the purchaser of the rifle was made by Oswald, if he did purchase it.)
Armed with the knowledge that Oswald could be connected with an Italian carbine (it then not being known that the Italian rifle in question might not be able to fire three times in five seconds), Wade made a new announcement. The murder weapon was not a German Mauser, it was an Italian carbine. This prosecution reversal established a high point in vulnerability for the trial—the trial that was never to take place.

Point Six

Oswald had in his possession an identification card with the name Hidell.
WADE SAID, “On his (Oswald’s) person was a pocketbook. In his pocketbook was an identification card with the same name (Hidell) as the post-office box on it.”
Almost immediately after Oswald was arrested the police asserted that he was guilty of assassination, was a Communist, was the head of the New Orleans Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and had used an alias, “Lee,” the name under which he had rented his $8-a-week room. The following day, after the FBI had revealed that Oswald had purchased a rifle under the assumed name Hidell, the Dallas DA announced for the first time that Oswald had carried an identification card under the assumed name Hidell on his person when he was arrested the previous day.
One wonders why the police and the DA, in announcing Oswald’s political background, failed to mention another alias readily available to them. Clearly, the suspect was immediately searched when arrested. Clearly, an identification card made out to another person fitting Oswald’s description exactly was proof of another assumed name. Why did the Dallas authorities publicly “discover” the ID card for Hidell after the FBI said that Oswald purchased a rifle under the name Hidell?

Point Seven

Oswald was seen in the building by a police officer just after the President had been shot.
WADE SAID, “A police officer, immediately after the assassination, ran in the building and saw this man in a corner and tried to arrest him; but the manager of the building said he was an employe and it was all right. Every other employe was located but this defendant of the company. A description and name of him went out to police to look for him.” (At this point it might be in order to state that all of the Wade quotations are reproduced unedited, and in their entirety. The text of the Wade remarks appeared in the New York Times, Nov. 26.)
Unexplained by Wade is why the officer was going to arrest Oswald, who was sipping a soft drink in the lunchroom along with others. If the officer had reason to single out Oswald for arrest for the assassination at that time, it seems unlikely that the mere statement that Oswald was an employe might result in immunity from arrest.
Wade does explain, however, how the almost immediate description of Oswald was radioed to the police and to the citizens of Dallas. The explanation: “Every other employe was located but this defendant of the company.” The New York Times (Nov. 23) reported: “About 90 persons were employed in the Texas School Book Depository and most of them were out watching the President’s motorcade when the shots were fired.” Police Chief Curry, who was riding in a car just 40 feet ahead of the limousine carrying the President, said he could tell from the sound of the three shots that they had come from the book company’s building. Moments after the shots were fired, Curry said, he radioed instructions that the building be surrounded and searched (New York Times, Nov. 24). The deployment of 500 officers from his 1,100-man force made fast action possible in the manhunt, he said.
The scene painted for us by Wade and Curry finds officers immediately rushing to the building to seal it off and search it. This is the building from which the fatal shots allegedly were fired.
In these circumstances, is it likely that Oswald was permitted to leave the premises after the police had arrived? Is it likely that Oswald, after killing the President, and deciding to leave the premises, decided first to stop off for a soda, and had then—only after the building was surrounded, sealed off, and the search begun—made an effort to leave? Is it likely that each of the almost 90 employes, most of whom were outside of the building, engulfed in the panic and confusion attendant upon the assassination, could easily and quickly return to his place of employment through the police line, while still on his lunch hour, so that “every other employe was located but this defendant…” and the description of the one missing employe radioed at once?

a sample headline—this one in the n.y. herald tribune nov. 24
The question mark hardly erases the sensationalism of treatment

Point Eight

Oswald’s wife said that the rifle was missing Friday morning.
WADE SAID, “The wife had said he had the gun the night before, and it was missing that morning after he left.” All indications are from statements made to other law officials and from FBI private briefings that Mrs. Oswald had never been quoted as saying anything remotely similar to Wade’s assertion.
Mrs. Oswald was alleged to have said, at the very most, that she saw something in a blanket that could have been a rifle. However, it soon became plain that the Secret Service “leak” was itself absolutely inaccurate. Later we discovered that Mrs. Oswald stated that she never knew that her husband owned a rifle nor did she know he owned a pistol (New York Times, Dec. 8).
Perhaps Wade and the Secret Service felt confident that, just as Oswald never got the opportunity to tell his side of the story, Mrs. Oswald might also have difficulty in being heard. Immediately after the assassination Marina Oswald, Oswald’s wife, was incarcerated by the Secret Service. “The widow and relatives of Lee Harvey Oswald are being sequestered here (Dallas) by the Secret Service. A spokesman for the Secret Service said the family was being kept in a secret place for its own protection…A Secret Service spokesman said he did not know when they would be released.” (New York Times, Nov. 27.)
Inasmuch as there will be no trial, Marina Oswald clearly is not being held as a material witness. Since the federal government has no jurisdiction in any event, there seems to be no legal basis for her incarceration. Lee Oswald’s mother, jeopardized by the existing hysteria as much as his widow, after being released from Secret Service “protective custody,” requested that a guard be stationed at the door of her home. The Secret Service rejected that request, stating that she was not in danger. One wonders then why Marina Oswald, widely and inaccurately quoted by the Secret Service and FBI, has remained in custody and practically incommunicado as well. The same issue of the New York Times that correctly stated Marina Oswald’s view of the rifle said, “Mrs. Oswald has been moved from the motel where she was taken with Mrs. Marguerite Oswald, her brother-in-law and his wife, after her husband was killed. She is now excluded from Oswald’s relatives as well as from the public.” Several days after the “protective custody” began a reporter sought an interview with Marina Oswald. She indicated a desire to meet the reporter. The FBI then intervened and prevented the interview.
It would seem that the Secret Service move was dictated by a desire to prevent any truthful leaks from Mrs. Oswald’s family or friends or through the press in reference to her views. At about the same time more Secret Service and FBI “leaks” regarding Marina Oswald’s recollection of her late husband’s “attempt to shoot Gen. Walker with the same assassination rifle” flooded the front pages of every daily in America. Marina Oswald’s assertion that she never even knew that her husband owned a rifle, buried in the 14^th paragraph of a story appearing on page 63 of the New York Times, is a total repudiation of that fabrication.
It may be said that when Marina Oswald is released from “protective custody” she will be able to discuss the truth of the statements attributed to her by the FBI, the Secret Service and Wade. The Secret Service has “suggested to her [Marina Oswald] that it might be safer and easier for her to return to the Soviet Union than to try to live in the United States (Times, Dec. 8).” Perhaps the Secret Service intended to indicate that it would be safer and easier for the Secret Service, the FBI and Wade and the case against Oswald if Mrs. Oswald quietly left the country.
Meanwhile, back to Wade’s “clinched case.” Even if Mrs. Oswald did state that her husband owned a rifle and that it was missing Friday morning, such “evidence” would not be admissible under the laws of Texas. The Dallas law enforcement officials, nevertheless, released that “evidence” to the public and, therefore, to all potential jurors in Dallas, while Oswald was alive and facing the possibility of trial. Such conduct did violence both to the spirit and letter of law and ethics and to the rights of the defendant.
In view of Marina Oswald’s lack of knowledge regarding the rifle, and in view of the statement made by Mrs. Paine, at whose home the rifle was alleged to have been stored, one questions whether Oswald ever actually possessed the rifle. “Mrs. Paine, a Quaker, said she had no idea what was in the blanket. She said that because of her personal beliefs she would not allow a weapon of any sort into her home.” (New York World Telegram and Sun, Nov. 25).

a swift verdict of guilty—n.y. times headline nov. 25
The Times later 'regretted' its failure to qualify the word assassin

Point Nine

Oswald had a package under his arm Friday.
THE PROSECUTOR said, “This day he went home one day earlier on Thursday night, and came back to—with this fellow—and when he came back he had a package under his arm that he said was window curtains, I believe, or window shades.”
If Oswald were alive, we would proceed to ask him whether he carried a package to work Friday morning, and if so, what was in the package and what happened to the contents. If Mrs. Oswald were not locked up in a secret location we might ask her about the package. Wade has not indicated what evidence regarding the package led him to the conclusion that he offered (that it contained the murder weapon).

Point Ten

Oswald, while taking a bus from the scene, laughed loudly as he told a woman passenger that the President had been shot.
WADE SAID, “The next we hear of him is on a bus where he got on at Lamar Street, told the bus driver the President had been shot, the President. [He] told the lady—all this was verified by her statements—told the lady on the bus that the President had been shot. He said, ‘How did he know?’ He said a man back there told him. The defendant said, ‘Yes, he’s been shot’ and laughed very loud.”
Wade, in telling his story, made no attempt to explain how Oswald escaped from the building sealed off by scores of Dallas police. We leave that mystery to enter a new one. Why did Oswald, fleeing the scene of a murder, joke publicly about the murder? Why did he “laugh very loud”? Such behavior is hardly consistent with 48 hours of consistent denial of guilt when in custody of the Dallas authorities. The laughter on the bus story seemed so unlikely that the FBI, in off-the-record briefing sessions for the press, conceded that it was untrue. In considering that the bus laughter story is false, we consider also the statement by Wade in the telling of that story, “…all this was verified by statements.”

Point Eleven

A taxi driver Darryl Click, took Oswald home, where he changed his clothes.
WADE SAID, “He then—the bus, he asked the bus driver to stop, got off at a stop, caught a taxicab driver, Darryl Click—I don’t have his exact place—and went to his home in Oak Cliff, changed his clothes hurriedly, and left.”
On Nov. 27, it was conceded that “Darryl Click” did not drive a taxicab in which Oswald was a passenger. When “Darryl Click” disappeared from the case, “William Whaley” appeared as the man who drove Oswald, not home, but at least in that general direction.
Oswald, it is alleged, fired the shots that killed Kennedy from the sixth floor of the building. Oswald, it is alleged, then walked down four flights of stairs, purchased a soft drink and was sipping it while a police officer approached him on the second floor.
Oswald, it is alleged, left the building, slipping though the police cordon and proceeded through the panicked street crowds until he found a bus. Oswald, it is alleged, the boarded the bus, paid his fare, got a transfer (that he never used) and spoke to the driver about the assassination.
The driver referred a woman to Oswald, it is alleged, and Oswald spoke with her about the shooting. Oswald, it is alleged, eventually left the bus after riding about six blocks and was walking “from Commerce Street” when the taxicab driver, now named “William Whaley” saw him. Oswald, it is alleged, hailed the taxi, and entered it. “William Whaley’s” log shows that Oswald entered the taxi, after having completed this entire trip, at exactly 12:30 p.m. The shots that killed Kennedy were fired at 12:31 p.m.

Point Twelve

Oswald shot and killed a police officer.
WADE SAID, “He walked up to the car. Officer Tippit stepped out of the car and started around it. He shot him three times and killed him.”
This allegation isn’t directly related to the murder of the President but it raised interesting points.
The Dallas authorities first said Tippit was shot in a movie theater. Later, it was reported that he was shot on one street and, still later, on another street. The first charge against Oswald was not for the murder of the President but for the murder of Tippit. That charge was made while the investigation of the Kennedy shooting was still going on., Wade announced that the Tippit case was absolutely set and that all the evidence proved Oswald shot the officer.
In view of the certainty of the prosecutor as to a case that had been entirely locked up two days before, the following dialogue (at the press conference) is rather curious.

Reporter: Was this (where Oswald shot Tippit) in front of the boarding house?
Wade: No, it’s not in front of the boarding house.
Reporter: Where was it?
Wade: I don't have it exact.

Point Thirteen

A witness saw Oswald enter the Texas Theater.
WADE SAID, “Someone saw him go in the Texas Theater.”
There has been little conflict about that assertion. The first statement by Dallas authorities indicated that the theater cashier was so suspicious when she saw Oswald change from seat to seat nervously that the telephoned the police.
It soon became obvious that a cashier at a post outside of the theater might have difficulty watching the customers once they entered. So the authorities then indicated that an usher saw Oswald changing seats. The last version has a person outside the theater noticing Oswald’s suspicious action, following him into the theater, sealing off the doors with the assistance of the usher, and then notifying the police through a telephone call made by the cashier.
Some questions peripheral to the arrest in the theater persist. What did Oswald do before entering the theater to attract attention? In what manner were his action “suspicious”? We have been told by the newly emerging firearm-psychologist experts that although Oswald was not particularly talented with a rifle, his “psychotic condition” may have given him “nerveless coordination” so that he might fire accurately.
Evidently that “nerveless coordination” was not present outside the theater, although it could have appeared to Oswald that he had committed the perfect crime, had escaped the police at the Texas Book Depository and was now far removed from the scene. Frantic actions by Oswald, so obvious as to attract the attention of a passerby, in these circumstances, also seem inconsistent with Oswald’s reported demeanor moments after the President had been shot. At this time a policeman charged up the stairs of the book depository, pointed a gun at him and sought to arrest him for shooting the President.
Oswald’s employer described Oswald’s condition at that time as “cool as a cucumber—although he seemed a little bothered by the gun.” (Washington Post, Dec. 1).

Point Fourteen

Oswald drew a pistol and attempted to kill the arresting officer. The firing pin stuck and marked the bullet but it did not explode.
WADE SAID, “He [Oswald] struck at the officer, put the gun against his head and snapped it, but did not—the bullet did not—go off. We have the snapped bullet there. Officers apprehended him at that time…It misfired being on the—the shell didn’t explode. We have where it hit it, but it didn’t explode.”
Wade was attempting to indicate that when Oswald was arrested in the theater he tried to shoot the arresting officer and did in fact pull the trigger of the pistol There can be no question that the trigger was pulled since Wade assured us, in his fashion, that the firing pin struck the bullet and marked the bullet. He further assured us his office has the “snapped bullet” in its possession. The arresting officer, however, policeman MacDonald, told the story differently: “I got my hand on the butt of his gun,” said MacDonald. “I could feel Oswald’s hand on the trigger. I jerked my hand and was able to slow down the trigger movement. He didn’t have enough force to fire it.” (Washington Post, Dec. 1.)
Confronted with a resume of that report, Wade quickly adjusted to it:

Reporter: There was one officer who said that he pulled the trigger, but he managed to put his thumb in the part before the firing pin. It didn’t strike the—the bullet didn't explode. Is that…?

Wade: I don’t know whether it’s that or not. I know he didn’t snap the gun is all I know about it. (New York Times, Nov. 26.)

We leave this incident bearing in mind one remarkable fact. Physical evidence, introduced by Wade—a bullet marked by a firing pin in an attempt to kill a police officer—now was repudiated by the officer who was an eyewitness and by Wade himself.

the dallas cops certainly made the news
This appeared in the N.Y. News, Nov. 24

Point Fifteen

A map was found in Oswald’s possession showing the scene of the assassination and the bullet’s trajectory.
THE DAY AFTER Wade’s historic press conference, and three days after the Oswald arrest, a new discovery was made.
“Today Mr. Wade announced that authorities had also found a marked map, showing the course of the President’s motorcade, in Oswald’s rented room. ‘It was a map tracing the location of the parade route,’ the district attorney said, ‘and this place [the Texas School Book Depository, a warehouse from which the fatal shots were fired] was marked with a straight line.’ Mr. Wade said Oswald had marked the map at two other places, ‘apparently places which he considered a possibility for an assassination.’” (New York Times, Nov. 25.)
A document written by the defendant showing his intention to commit a crime is important evidence. It seems incredible, were such a map in the hands of the Dallas authorities on the previous day when Wade presented the evidence, “piece by piece,” that he would have neglected to mention it.
Oswald was arrested three days prior to the map announcement. On the day of his arrest police removed all of his belongings from his room, telling the landlady that Oswald “would not return.” One wonders where the map came from three days later. The same newspapers that hailed the discovery of the map Nov. 25, without a single question as to its legitimacy, origin. or previous whereabouts, totally ignored or buried the last comment regarding this important document. “Dallas officials yesterday denied that such a map exists.” (Washington Post, Nov. 27.)

Flaws in the ‘airtight’ case

The people vs. Oswald

WHEN A CRIMINAL CASE is brought in federal court against an individual, it is entitled, “The People of the United States against” the named defendant. No federal charge was lodged against Oswald; however, in the most significant sense the case became the entire country and its institutions against one man. Very likely no prospective defendant in the history of civilization has been tried and condemned as through the utilization of the media as was Oswald.
The American Civil Liberties Union commented on Dec. 6:
“It is our opinion that Lee Harvey Oswald, had he lived, would have been deprived of all opportunity to receive a fair trail by the conduct of the police and prosecuting officials in Dallas, under pressure from the public and the news media.
“From the moment of his arrest until his murder two days later, Oswald was tried and convicted many times over in the newspapers, on the radio, and over television by the public statements of the Dallas law enforcement officials. Time and again high-ranking police and prosecution officials state[d] their complete satisfaction that Oswald was the assassin. As their investigation uncovered one piece of evidence after another, the results were broadcast to the public.
“…Oswald’s trial would…have been nothing but a hollow formality.”
In a section headed “Police Responsibility for Oswald’s Killing” the ACLU stated that the concessions to the media “resulted in Oswald being deprived not only of his day in court, but of his life as well.”
On Dec. 4 the chancellor-elect of the Philadelphia Bar Association stated that Lee Oswald had been “lynched” and that this was an “indictment” of the legal profession for its failure to protect Oswald (New York Times, Dec. 5). These two comments, made after the death of Oswald and buried by the news media under the avalanche of news attacks against Oswald (including the FBI leaks of other crimes alleged to have been committed by him), constitute to date almost the only indication of sanity in the country.
After Oswald’s death, the FBI acted to prevent certain information from reaching the public. “Most private citizens who had cooperated with newsmen reporting the crime have refused to give further help after being interviewed by agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” (New York Times, Dec. 6). The FBI acted, not to protect the rights of a defendant, but, after he was murdered, to protect the inconsistent evidence from further scrutiny. Mrs. Oswald, still in Secret Service custody, hidden in an unknown location, was quoted on the front pages of papers throughout the country Dec. 6 and 7 as implicating Oswald in another crime. Such a quotation could have come only from a Secret Service or FBI leak. No one else had access to her. And so the insanity accelerates until the few remaining vestiges of doubt as to Oswald’s guilt are obliterated from the American scene.
However, let it not be said that the lawyers are not aroused by an attorney’s giving statements to the public in relation to a pending case. “A Dallas Bar Association grievance committee met three hours last night on charges that Tom Howard, attorney for Jack Ruby, had violated legal ethics by discussing Ruby’s case with the press…No charges had been placed against District Attorney Henry Wade.” (New York Post, Dec. 6).
When an entire society moves in for the kill, logic is a weapon of doubtful value. Were logic to prevail, a number of questions might be raised for rational deliberation. For example, one might inquire why the FBI, having questioned Oswald just a week before the assassination and having discovered that he worked in a building directly on the President’s line of march, and knowing that Oswald had purchased a rifle, did not watch him on the day of assassination. Certainly, a small portion of the millions of dollars bestowed upon the FBI each year and utilized for following persons of unorthodox political views and tapping their telephones might have been available under these circumstances, as part of what the FBI and Secret Service referred to as the “greatest security provisions ever taken to protect an American President.”

oswald's family at the police station
Mother, Marguerite, with wife, Marina, and baby

The question of motive

WHETHER THE DALLAS POLICE through complicity or complacency permitted the murder of the defendant by a police department friend after two warnings through the FBI that such an attempt would be made should be a matter for press discussion. Whether or not the FBI showed Mrs. Oswald, the defendant’s mother, a picture of Ruby before Ruby murdered Oswald would ordinarily demand media debate.
There are two matters not even commented upon by the press to date—Oswald’s motive and Oswald’s plan for escape. Oswald seemed to respect President Kennedy. If Oswald were a leftist, pro-Soviet and pro-Cuban, did he not know that during the last year, with the assistance of President Kennedy, a better relationship was in the process of developing between the U.S. and the Soviet Union? Even the relations between the U.S. and Cuba, while still extremely unfriendly, have progressed past the stage of military intervention. Fidel Castro himself stated, just before the President’s death, “He (Kennedy) has the possibility of becoming the greatest President of the United States…He has come to understand many things over the last few months—I’m convinced that anyone else would be worse.” (New York Times, Dec. 11).
The press made much of the fact that Oswald had been seen with a copy of the Worker, a Communist publication, and that he had received at least two letters from the Communist Party. A New York newspaper referred to him editorially as a “Communist murderer.” Did Oswald not know that the U.S. Communist party supported Kennedy when he ran for the presidency in 1960 and that within the last six months Gus Hall urged the Communist Party, which he leads, to endorse and support Kennedy again?
Why should Oswald wish to assassinate the President; and after firing at the President, how did he plan to escape? Did he wish to flee from the building? If so, why did he remain in the lunchroom sipping a soda? Was he in a hurry? If so, why did he take a ride on a bus? It was a very warm day in Dallas. Mrs. Kennedy, sweltering in the open moving car, later said that she was looking forward to the cool relief of riding through the underpass just ahead. Why then, did Oswald, seeking to escape the police, go home to pick up his jacket? If he was planning to leave the city, why did he then go to a movie just as the city-wide search was gaining intensity?
These are genuine areas for speculation by the press now that the defendant is dead. These are, nevertheless almost the only areas left unexamined by the media.
Perhaps some day, when America is ready for the sunlight of reason to penetrate the rational mind, now frozen to a false and unfair conclusion, this article and others far more comprehensive may be read.

Conviction by press vs. presumption of innocence

An affirmative case

UNDER OUR SYSTEM of justice a defendant need not prove he is innocent. It is the obligation of the prosecutor to attempt to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Should the prosecutor fail to sustain that burden, the defendant must be declared not guilty.
In the case of Oswald, hysteria and intolerance have so swept our country that the protections guaranteed by our Constitution and by our traditions have failed to operate. Since irrationality is the implacable foe of justice and due process, we are compelled to depart from ordinary legal procedure. At this point we shall submit an affirmative case. We shall attempt to present facts that tend to prove that Oswald did not shoot President Kennedy.
A denial by a defendant that he committed a crime when supported by testimony as to his good character is sufficient in and of itself to cause a reasonable doubt which, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, may result in acquittal.
Oswald denied he shot anyone. He stated that the charges against him were “ridiculous.” He persisted in his denial despite the fact that he was questioned for 48 hours without the benefit of counsel.
Denial of counsel, when coupled with extensive questioning, is improper and contrary to long-established principles of law. This principle was developed out of revulsion against the ancient trial by ordeal or trial by fire which forced a person accused to a crime to cooperate in the prosecution of his own case. Great constitutional protections, including the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, were developed. It was found that not only would guilty persons confess when sufficient pressure was placed against them, but innocent persons also were likely to succumb.
Great pressure was placed against Oswald. He stood all alone condemned as the slayer of a popular leader. “Oswald was pummeled by the arresting officers until his face was puffed and battered. ‘Kill the President will you?’ one officer shouted in a choked voice.” (Washington Post, Dec. 1.)
In addition “Oswald received a black eye and a cut on his forehead.” (New York Times, Nov. 24.)
When a reporter asked Oswald in a televised interview how he received the bruises and cuts on his face, he answered calmly, “A policeman hit me.”
For 48 hours, Oswald was denied the elementary right to counsel of his choice. The Dallas police falsely told the attorneys for the ACLU that Oswald “did not want counsel.” Despite physical abuse and absolute isolation, Oswald continued to state that he was innocent. Each previous assassin of an American president immediately and boastfully declared that the act was his.

Character witnesses

The press has been glutted with attacks upon Oswald since his death, with each informant issuing self-serving declarations as to his own ability to detect incipient mental problems or character weaknesses, when Oswald was much younger.
A former probation officer in New York City permitted an interview which violated principles of a privileged and protected relationship between himself and a young boy. A justice of the Family Court released records to the FBI, and the information was carried in the press.
Nevertheless, those who knew Oswald a little better had some rather kind things to say about him. At a trial, their testimony could have been decisive. The associate pastor of First Unitarian Church, Dallas, Rev. Byrd Helligas, described Lee Oswald as “erudite.” “He had a good vocabulary. No dangling participles or split infinitives. In the dictionary definition of the word ‘intellectual’ he was an intellectual.” Helligas added that he sensed “no frustration through erudition. He was calm.” (Washington Post, Dec. 1).
Samuel Ballen, described in the press as a “Republican petroleum economist in Dallas,” said he found Lee Oswald to be “an independent, thinking, inquiring young man…He was a rather frail person physically. At least to me, he was the kind of person I could like. I kind of took a liking to him, I wanted to help him a little bit…He had a kind of Ghandi, far-off look about him.” (Washington Post, Dec. 1.)
Roy Truly, the director of the depository where Oswald was employed, said of Oswald, “He seemed just a normal, quiet young fellow.”
Mrs. Paine, with whom his wife and children lived and where he stayed on weekends, said, “Marina (Lee Oswald’s wife) felt very favorably toward the President and his family. Most of what she learned of American news was provided by Lee, who translated from newspapers and news magazines. Marina said he never transferred any negative feelings toward President Kennedy.” (Washington Post, Nov. 28.)
Mrs. Paine also stated that, “As far as I know Oswald had never been critical of Kennedy. He had been critical of General [Edwin] Walker, but I never heard him say anything against the President. In fact, it was my impression that he respected him” (New York World Telegram and Sun, Nov. 25.)
In 1959, Oswald was interviewed by Priscilla Johnson, an American correspondent while in Moscow. She reported, “I found him rather likeable. He was quiet and didn’t have a vehement manner. He was so very young. He was someone you would try to help.”
Mrs. Luella Merrett, principal of West Ridglea elementary school which Oswald attended, said, “If he had problems, we did not recognize them…He was interested in things.”
Were the case to be tried, persons ordinarily selected as character witnesses would include his employer, a minister, his landlady, a respected businessman, a correspondent who knew him abroad, the Quaker family with whom his wife resided and his school teachers. Judging by the initial response, one could conclude that character testimony for Lee Oswald would be compelling.

Time, place and Oswald

IN ADDITION to consistent denial of guilt by the defendant and statements of character witnesses that seem to indicate a person different from the disturbed, hostile character usually associated with the particular crime, a defendant may offer testimony indicating that he was somewhere other than at the scene of the crime when it was committed. We, of course, can’t get such information from this defendant.
However, a valid defense could result in showing that even if the defendant were at the scene he could not have committed the crime. Such a defense is available. If Oswald was on the sixth floor of the book depository armed with the alleged murder weapon, a 6.5mm Italian carbine, he could not have fired three shots that struck President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
The official homicide report filed by the Dallas Police Department attested to by two police officers, states under the section “Place of Occurrence”: “Elm Street (approximately 150 feet west of Houston).” The report also states under the section “Pronounced dead by Physician,” the name “Dr. Kemp Clark, 1 p.m., Parkland Hospital.”
A motion picture taken of the President just before, during and after the shooting, and demonstrated on television showed that the President was looking directly ahead when the first shot, which entered his throat, was fired. A series of still pictures taken from the motion picture and published in Life magazine on Nov. 29 show exactly the same situation. The Life pictures also reveal that the car carrying the President was well past the turn from Houston St. and a considerable distance past the depository building. The Life estimate in an accompanying caption states that the car with the President was 75 yards past the sixth-floor window when the first shot was fired.
The New York Times (Nov. 27) reported: “Dr. Kemp Clark, who pronounced Mr. Kennedy dead, said one [bullet] struck him at about the necktie knot. ‘It ranged downward in his chest and did not exit’, the surgeon said. The second he called a ‘tangential wound’, caused by a bullet that struck the ‘right back of his head’.”
The New York Herald Tribune (Nov. 27) said: “On the basis of accumulated data, investigators have concluded that the first shot, fired as the Presidential car was approaching, struck the President in the neck just above the knot of his necktie, then ranged downward into his body.”
Surgeons who attended the President at the Parkland Memorial Hospital described the throat wound as “an entrance wound.” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Dec. 1), “They said it was in the center of the front, just below the Adam’s apple, at about the necktie knot.” (Ibid.) Dr. Malcolm Perry began to cut an air passage in the President’s throat in a effort to restore an air passage and start his breathing. The incision was made through the bullet wound, since it was in the normal place for the operation. “Dr. Perry described the bullet hole as an entrance wound.” (Ibid.) Dr. Robert N. McClelland, one of three surgeons who participated in the operation, said “It certainly did look like an entrance wound.” (Ibid.) Dr. McClelland said he saw bullet wounds every day, “sometimes several a day. This did appear to be an entrance wound.” (Ibid.)
On Nov. 27, the Secret Service re-enacted the assassination of the President. “The purpose was ‘to test whether it could be done the way we believe it was done’ an official source said.” (New York Times, Nov. 28.) The consensus was “that the shooting began after the President’s car had made the turn from Houston Street into Elm Street.” (New York Times, Nov. 28.)
If the throat wound resulted from a shot fired from the book depository the President would have had to turn around with his throat facing almost directly to the rear. Dr. McClelland stated that the doctors postulated that “he [the President] would have had to be looking almost completely to the rear.” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Dec. 1.) The Washington correspondent for the Post-Dispatch stated that, “The motion pictures, however, showed the President looking forward.” (Dec. 1.) “Mrs. John Connally, the wife of the Texas Governor, has said that she had just told Mr. Kennedy, ‘You can’t say Dallas isn’t friendly to you today.’ Presumably he was about to reply when he was hit.” (Ibid.) Mrs. Connally was seated in front of the President.
Relying, therefore, upon the Homicide Report filed with the Dallas Police by two officers who were eye-witnesses, the motion pictures taken of the shooting, still shots taken from the motion pictures, the statement of Gov. Connally, the consensus of those who re-enacted the scene under supervision of the Secret Service, and the report of the attending physicians, we may conclude that the shot was fired while the back of the President was to the sixth-floor window and many yards removed from the window and that the bullet entered the front of the President’s throat.
If Oswald was at the sixth-floor window, as alleged, when the President was shot it would have been physically impossible for him to have fired the first shot that struck the President. In the words or Richard Dudman, the correspondent for the Post-Dispatch (Dec. 1), “The question that suggests itself is: How could the President have been shot in the front from the back?”

The gun and the experts

THE QUESTION now arises as to whether any one man, even a skilled expert, could have fired the three shots within a period of five seconds. An Olympic rifle champion, Hubert Hammerer, said he doubted it could be done with the weapon allegedly used. The Dallas sheriff, Bill Decker, said he believed three shots “could be fired in less than 20 seconds.” (Washington Post, Nov. 27.) The FBI and the witnesses agree the elapsed period was five seconds, possibly five and one-half seconds.
Life magazine (Dec. 6) hired a skilled marksman, the director of the National Rifle Association, to fire a similar rifle. The best he could do was “three hits in 6.2 seconds.” The New York Times, Nov. 23 reported: “As marines go, Lee Harvey Oswald was not highly regarded as a rifleman.”
Debate will continue whether the rifle in question was capable, in the hands of an expert, of the performance the prosecution insists it gave. All agree, however, that such a remarkable display of shooting would be beyond the ability of any person less qualified. To maintain the ability to fire a rifle accurately, one must practice continually. Oswald’s wife and the Paine family, all of who lived in the house where the rifle was allegedly stored, did not even know Oswald owned a rifle. This would seem to indicate an extremely limited usage of the rifle at the very most. Oswald did not have the requisite skill to fire three accurate shots within 5½ seconds at a moving target.

a presumption of guilt in the public press
The way the N.Y. Post expressed it Nov. 24

Other uncertainties

IF OSWALD WAS WHERE the FBI and the Dallas District Attorney said he was when the shots were fired and if the President was assassinated by one person as charged—Lee Harvey Oswald is demonstrably not guilty. Oswald was in the wrong place and did not have sufficient time to shoot President Kennedy as charged.
The facts as presented to date by the FBI and the Dallas district attorney (soon to be rewritten no doubt) have overcome the presumption of guilt manufactured when the case was initiated.
Dudman wrote in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Dec. 1): “Another unexplained circumstance is a small hole in the windshield of the presidential limousine. This correspondent and one other man saw the hole, which resembled a bullet hole, as the automobile stood at the hospital emergency entrance while the President was being treated inside the building.
“The Secret Service kept possession of the automobile and flew it back to Washington. A spokesman for the agency rejected a request to inspect the vehicle here [Washington]. He declined to discuss any hole there might be in the windshield.”
Undoubtedly the Secret Service has placed the auto in protective custody, “in a secret place for its own protection.”
Dudman continued to present startling information. “Uncertainty surrounds the number of shots fired.” (Ibid.) Although most witnesses heard three shots fired within a period of five seconds it seems that five bullets have been discovered.
“The first bullet is said by the doctors to have entered the throat, coursed downward and remained in the President’s body. The second was extracted from Gov. Connally’s thigh. It had lodged there after entering the right side of his back, passing through his body and through his wrist. A third, which may be the one that struck the back of Mr. Kennedy’s head, was recovered from the stretcher on which he was carried into the hospital. A fourth was found in fragments in the car. Still another bullet was found by Dallas police officers after the shooting. It was in the grass opposite the point where the President was hit. They did not know whether it had anything to do with the shooting of the President and the Governor.” (Ibid.)
One point does emerge with absolute clarity. The theory held by the Dallas police and supported repeatedly by the FBI that “there is an airtight case against Oswald as the sole killer” is based upon an investigation so poor as to be incredible or an investigation devoted to a particular conclusion at the outset.

The investigation

The FBI, having completed its investigation, has submitted what amounts to its findings and conclusions as well. The verdict, deftly and covertly divulged to the press, and then blared forth throughout the world, is impressively simple: “Oswald is the assassin. He acted alone.” This remarkable law enforcement and investigatory agency, unable to solve a single one of the more than 40 Birmingham bombings, is now able to function as investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury. No other American agency has presumed to occupy so many position of trust at one time.
The essential problem is that no investigating agency can fairly evaluate the fruits of its own work. Were the FBI certain of its conclusions it seems likely it would not be so reluctant to permit witnesses to talk with the press. It might not feel the need continually to leak information favorable to its verdict to the press. Most disquieting of all, however, is that the FBI, once wedded to a conclusion conceived before investigation, might be motivated to discover evidence which supports that conclusion. Within a few hours after Oswald was arrested the Dallas police, with the FBI at its side, announced the very same verdict now reinforced by the latest FBI discoveries. Under such circumstances, we fear that evidence tending to prove Oswald innocent might be discarded and evidence proving him guilty might be developed out of proportion or even created.
The Justice Department has already privately expressed “disappointment” with the FBI report, fearing that it “has left too many questions unanswered.”

The stakes are big

The FBI investment in a Warren Commission finding identical with its own cannot be emphasized too boldly. Should the Warren Commission reach and publish a conclusion substantially different from the one submitted so publicly by the FBI, public confidence in the FBI would be so shaken as, in all likelihood, to render the FBI as it is now constituted almost absolutely useless. One can assume that the FBI wishes to avoid that result.
It may be argued on many different levels of governmental life that a finding by the commission that an American lynched in a Dallas courthouse might be innocent would result in the further destruction of the American image abroad.
It will be extremely difficult for any commission, in these circumstances, to bear the responsibility imposed upon it. For the sake of our country let us hope that Justice Earl Warren, a fair and great American, may successfully guide his commission through the sea of hatred and malice surrounding this case in its search for the truth.

An era of understanding

There are those who have said much good may come from this assassination, that a new era of understanding and unity may result. I doubt this. From hate comes hate. From murder—as we have already seen—murder. And from hysteria—rejection of the great Anglo-Saxon tradition of justice. But if it is possible to leave behind us the America of violence and malice, our national renaissance must begin with a respect for law and disdain for the hysteria that has thus far made fair consideration of this case impossible.
Our national conscience must reject the massive media conviction of Oswald—presumed to be innocent—and begin to examine and to analyze the evidence. We must recognize that the same reckless disregard for human life and decency that resulted in the death of our President resulted also in the death of Oswald while in police custody. And, before that, it resulted in the destruction of every right belonging to an American accused of a crime. The press, the radio and the television stations share that guilt.
The law enforcement officials, however, beginning with District Attorney Wade, who falsely stated evidence to the entire world repeatedly and who gave leadership to the development of a carnival atmosphere, must bear history’s harshest judgment.
You are the jury. You are the only jury that Lee Harvey Oswald will ever have.
A terrible crime has been committed. A young, vital and energetic leader of perhaps the world’s most powerful nation has been killed by the cowardly act of a hidden assassin. The murderer or murderers were motivated by diseased minds or by such depths of malice as to approach that state. We will perhaps never know their motives. We must, however, know and approve of our own conduct and our own motives.
We begin with a return to an old American tradition—the presumption of innocence. We begin with you.
Let those who would deny a fair consideration of the evidence to Oswald because of a rage inspired, they say, by their devotion to the late President, ponder this thought: If Oswald is innocent—and that is a possibility that cannot now be denied—then the assassin of President Kennedy remains at large.

Back to Mark Lane
Back to pre-WCR Reactions by the Left
Back to pre-WCR Reactions
Back to WC Period

MICHELANGELO

2008-07-19T14:53:00.000-07:00

Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni
Chalk portrait of Michelangelo by Daniele da Volterra
Birth name	Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni
Born	March 6, 1475(1475-03-06) near Arezzo, in Caprese, Tuscany
Died	February 18, 1564 (aged 88) Rome
Nationality	Italian
Field	sculpture, painting, architecture and poetry
Training	Apprentice to Domenico Ghirlandaio^[1]
Movement	High Renaissance

Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni^[1] (March 6, 1475 – February 18, 1564), commonly known as Michelangelo, was an Italian Renaissance painter, sculptor, architect, poet and engineer. Despite making few forays beyond the arts, his versatility in the disciplines he took up was of such a high order that he is often considered a contender for the title of the archetypal Renaissance man, along with his rival and fellow Italian Leonardo da Vinci.

Michelangelo's output in every field during his long life was prodigious; when the sheer volume of correspondence, sketches and reminiscences that survive is also taken into account, he is the best-documented artist of the 16th century. Two of his best-known works, the Pietà and the David, were sculpted before he turned thirty. Despite his low opinion of painting, Michelangelo also created two of the most influential works in fresco in the history of Western art: the scenes from Genesis on the ceiling and The Last Judgment on the altar wall of the Sistine Chapel in Rome. Later in life he designed the dome of St. Peter's Basilica in the same city and revolutionised classical architecture with his use of the giant order of pilasters.

In a demonstration of Michelangelo's unique standing, he was the first Western artist whose biography was published while he was alive.^[2] Two biographies were published of him during his lifetime; One of them, by Giorgio Vasari, proposed that he was the pinnacle of all artistic achievement since the beginning of the Renaissance, a viewpoint that continued to have currency in art history for centuries. In his lifetime he was also often called Il Divino ("the divine one").^[3] One of the qualities most admired by his contemporaries was his terribilità, a sense of awe-inspiring grandeur, and it was the attempts of subsequent artists to imitate Michelangelo's impassioned and highly personal style that resulted in the next major movement in Western art after the High Renaissance, Mannerism.

Biography

Early life

Michelangelo was born on March 6, 1475^[a] in Caprese near Arezzo, Tuscany.^[4] His family had for several generations been small-scale bankers in Florence but his father, Lodovico di Leonardo di Buonarroti di Simoni, failed to maintain its status, holding to occasional government jobs.^[2] At the time of Michelangelo's birth he was Judicial administrator of small-town Caprese and local administrator of Chiusi. Michelangelo's mother was Francesca di Neri del Miniato di Siena.^[5] The Buonarroti claimed to descend from Countess Mathilde of Canossa; this claim was probably false, but Michelangelo himself believed it.^[6] However, several months after Michelangelo's birth the family returned to Florence where Michelangelo was raised. At later times, during the prolonged illness and after the death of his mother, Michelangelo lived with a stonecutter and his wife and family in the town of Settignano where his father owned a marble quarry and a small farm.^[5] Michelangelo once said to the biographer of artists Giorgio Vasari, "If there is some good in me, it is because I was born in the subtle atmosphere of your country of Arezzo. Along with the milk of my nurse I received the knack of handling chisel and hammer, with which I make my figures."^[4]

Michelangelo's father sent him to study grammar with the humanist Francesco da Urbino in Florence as a young boy.^[7]^[4]^[b] The young artist, however, showed no interest in school, preferring instead to copy paintings from churches and seek the company of painters.^[7] Michelangelo was apprenticed in painting with Domenico Ghirlandaio^[1] and in sculpture with Bertoldo di Giovanni. Michelangelo's father managed to persuade Ghirlandaio to pay the fourteen year old artist, which was highly unusual at the time.^[8] When in 1489 Florence's ruler Lorenzo de' Medici asked Ghirlandaio for his two best pupils, Ghirlandaio sent Michelangelo and Francesco Granacci.^[9] From 1490 to 1492, Michelangelo attended Lorenzo's school and was influenced by many prominent people who modified and expanded his ideas on art, following the dominant Platonic view of that age, and even his feelings about sexuality. It was during this period that Michelangelo met literary personalities like Pico della Mirandola, Angelo Poliziano and Marsilio Ficino.^[10] Michelangelo finished Madonna of the Steps (1490–1492) and Battle of the Centaurs (1491–1492). The latter was based on a theme suggested by Poliziano and was commissioned by Lorenzo de Medici.^[11]

Early adulthood

Lorenzo's death on April 8, 1492, brought a complete reversal of Michelangelo's circumstances.^[12] Michelangelo left the security of the Medici court and returned to his father's house. In the following months he produced a Wooden crucifix (1493), as a gift to the prior of the church of Santa Maria del Santo Spirito who had permitted him some studies of anatomy on the corpses of the church's hospital.^[13] Between 1493 and 1494 he bought the marble for a larger than life statue of Hercules, which was sent to France and disappeared sometime in the 1700s.^[11]^[c] He re-entered the court on January 20, 1494, when, after a great deal of snow had fallen, the young Piero de Medici commissioned a snow statue from him.

The same year, however, the Medici were expelled from Florence after the rise of Savonarola, while Michelangelo had left the city before the end of the political upheaval, moving to Venice and then to Bologna.^[12] Here he was commissioned to finish the carving of the last small figures of the tomb and shrine of St. Dominic, in the church with the same name. He returned to Florence at the end of 1494, as Charles VIII had suffered defeats and Florence was no longer in danger of being sacked by the French. He did not receive any commissions from the new city government under Savonarola, and so linked up with the Medicis.^[14] During the half year he spent in Florence he worked on two statuettes; a child St. John the Baptist and a sleeping Cupid. Supposedly, his commissioner, Lorenzo de Pierfrancesco 'de Medici, for whom Michelangelo had sculpted St. John the Baptist, asked that Michelangelo "fix it so that it looked as if it had been buried" so he could "send it to Rome…pass [it off as] an ancient work and…sell it much better." Both Lorenzo and Michelangelo were unwittingly cheated out of the real value of the piece by a middleman. Cardinal Raffaele Riario, to whom Lorenzo had sold it, found out that it was a fraud, but was so impressed by the quality of the sculpture that he invited the artist to Rome. ^[15]^[d] This apparent success in selling his sculpture abroad as well as the conservative Florentine situation may have encouraged Michelangelo to accept the prelate's invitation.^[14]

Rome

Michelangelo's Pietà, a depiction of the body of Jesus on the lap of his mother Mary after the Crucifixion, was carved in 1499, when the sculptor was 24 years old.

On June 25, 1496^[16] at the age of twenty-one, Michelangelo arrived in Rome. On July 4 Michelangelo started to carve an over-life-size statue of the Roman wine god, Bacchus, commissioned by Cardinal Raffaele Riario; the work was rejected by the cardinal, and subsequently entered the collection of the banker Jacopo Galli, for his garden.

Subsequently, in November of 1497, the French ambassador in the Holy See commissioned one of his most famous works, the Pietà. The contemporary opinion about this work — "a revelation of all the potentialities and force of the art of sculpture" — was summarized by Vasari: "It is certainly a miracle that a formless block of stone could ever have been reduced to a perfection that nature is scarcely able to create in the flesh."

The contract was agreed in the August of the following year. Though he devoted himself mainly to sculpture, during his first stay in Rome Michelangelo never stopped his daily practice of drawing. In Rome, Michelangelo lived near the church of Santa Maria di Loreto: here, according to the legends, he fell in love (probably a Platonic love) with Vittoria Colonna, marquise of Pescara and poet. His house was demolished in 1874, and the remaining architectural elements saved by the new proprietors were destroyed in 1930. Today a modern reconstruction of Michelangelo's house can be seen on the Gianicolo hill.

Works

The Statue of David, completed by Michelangelo in 1504, is one of the most renowned works of the Renaissance.

Statue of David

Main article: David (Michelangelo)

Michelangelo returned to Florence in 1499–1501. Things were changing in the republic after the fall of anti-Renaissance Priest and leader of Florence, Girolamo Savonarola (executed in 1498) and the rise of the gonfaloniere Pier Soderini. He was asked by the consuls of the Guild of Wool to complete an unfinished project begun 40 years earlier by Agostino di Duccio: a colossal statue portraying David as a symbol of Florentine freedom, to be placed in the Piazza della Signoria, in front of the Palazzo Vecchio. Michelangelo responded by completing his most famous work, the Statue of David in 1504. This masterwork, created out of a marble block from the quarries at Carrara that had already been worked on by an earlier hand, definitively established his prominence as a sculptor of extraordinary technical skill and strength of symbolic imagination.

Also during this period, Michelangelo painted the Holy Family and St John, also known as the Doni Tondo or the Holy Family of the Tribune: it was commissioned for the marriage of Angelo Doni and Maddalena Strozzi and in the 17th Century hung in the room known as the Tribune in the Uffizi. He also may have painted the Madonna and Child with John the Baptist, known as the Manchester Madonna and now in the National Gallery, London.

Sistine Chapel ceiling

Main article: Sistine Chapel ceiling

Michelangelo painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel which took approximately four years to complete (1508–1512).

In 1505 Michelangelo was invited back to Rome by the newly elected Pope Julius II. He was commissioned to build the Pope's tomb. Under the patronage of the Pope, Michelangelo had to constantly stop work on the tomb in order to accomplish numerous other tasks. Because of these interruptions, Michelangelo worked on the tomb for 40 years. The tomb, of which the central feature is Michelangelo's statue of Moses, was never finished to Michelangelo's satisfaction. It is located in the Church of S. Pietro in Vincoli in Rome.

The major interruption on the tomb was the commission to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, which took approximately four years to complete (1508–1512). According to Michelangelo's own account, reproduced in contemporary biographies, Bramante and Raphael convinced the Pope to commission Michelangelo in a medium not familiar to the artist, in order that he might be diverted from his preference for sculpture into fresco painting, and thus suffer from unfavorable comparisons with his rival Raphael. However, this story is discounted by modern historians on the grounds of contemporary evidence, and may be merely a reflection of the artist's own perspective.

Michelangelo was originally commissioned to paint the 12 Apostles, but lobbied for a different and more complex scheme, representing Creation, the Downfall of Man and the Promise of Salvation through the prophets and Genealogy of Christ. The work is part of a larger scheme of decoration within the chapel which represents much of the doctrine of the Catholic Church

The composition eventually contained over 300 figures and had at its centre nine episodes from the Book of Genesis, divided into three groups: God's Creation of the Earth; God's Creation of Humankind and their fall from God's grace; and lastly, the state of Humanity as represented by Noah and his family. On the pendentives supporting the ceiling are painted twelve men and women who prophesied the coming of the Jesus. They are seven prophets of Israel and five Sibyls, prophetic women of the Classical world.

Among the most famous paintings on the ceiling are the Creation of Adam, Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, the Great Flood, the Prophet Isaiah and the Cumaean Sibyl. Around the windows are painted the ancestors of Christ.

Under Medici Popes in Florence

Michelangelo's Moses (center) with Rachel and Leah on his sides.

In 1513 Pope Julius II died and his successor Pope Leo X, a Medici, commissioned Michelangelo to reconstruct the façade of the basilica of San Lorenzo in Florence and to adorn it with sculptures. Michelangelo agreed reluctantly. The three years he spent in creating drawings and models for the facade, as well as attempting to open a new marble quarry at Pietrasanta specifically for the project, were among the most frustrating in his career, as work was abruptly cancelled by his financially-strapped patrons before any real progress had been made. The basilica lacks a facade to this day.

Apparently not the least embarrassed by this turnabout, the Medici later came back to Michelangelo with another grand proposal, this time for a family funerary chapel in the basilica of San Lorenzo. Fortunately for posterity, this project, occupying the artist for much of the 1520s and 1530s, was more fully realized. Though still incomplete, it is the best example we have of the integration of the artist's sculptural and architectural vision, since Michelangelo created both the major sculptures as well as the interior plan. Ironically the most prominent tombs are those of two rather obscure Medici who died young, a son and grandson of Lorenzo. Il Magnifico himself is buried in an unfinished and comparatively unimpressive tomb on one of the side walls of the chapel, not given a free-standing monument, as originally intended.

Michelangelo's The Last Judgment. Saint Bartholomew is shown holding the knife of his martyrdom and his flayed skin. The face of the skin is recognizable as Michelangelo.

In 1527, the Florentine citizens, encouraged by the sack of Rome, threw out the Medici and restored the republic. A siege of the city ensued, and Michelangelo went to the aid of his beloved Florence by working on the city's fortifications from 1528 to 1529. The city fell in 1530 and the Medici were restored to power. Completely out of sympathy with the repressive reign of the ducal Medici, Michelangelo left Florence for good in the mid-1530s, leaving assistants to complete the Medici chapel. Years later his body was brought back from Rome for interment at the Basilica di Santa Croce, fulfilling the maestro's last request to be buried in his beloved Tuscany.

Last works in Rome

Michelangelo designed the dome of St. Peter's Basilica, although it was unfinished when he died.

The fresco of The Last Judgment on the altar wall of the Sistine Chapel was commissioned by Pope Clement VII, who died shortly after assigning the commission. Paul III was instrumental in seeing that Michelangelo began and completed the project. Michelangelo labored on the project from 1534 to October 1541. The work is massive and spans the entire wall behind the altar of the Sistine Chapel. The Last Judgment is a depiction of the second coming of Christ and the apocalypse; where the souls of humanity rise and are assigned to their various fates, as judged by Christ, surrounded by the Saints.

Once completed, the depictions of nakedness in the papal chapel was considered obscene and sacrilegious, and Cardinal Carafa and Monsignor Sernini (Mantua's ambassador) campaigned to have the fresco removed or censored, but the Pope resisted. After Michelangelo's death, it was decided to obscure the genitals ("Pictura in Cappella Ap.ca coopriantur"). So Daniele da Volterra, an apprentice of Michelangelo, was commissioned to cover with perizomas (briefs) the genitals, leaving unaltered the complex of bodies. When the work was restored in 1993, the conservators chose not to remove all the perizomas of Daniele, leaving some of them as a historical document, and because some of Michelangelo’s work was previously scraped away by the touch-up artist's application of “decency” to the masterpiece. A faithful uncensored copy of the original, by Marcello Venusti, can be seen at the Capodimonte Museum of Naples.

Censorship always followed Michelangelo, once described as "inventor delle porcherie" ("inventor of obscenities", in the original Italian language referring to "pork things"). The infamous "fig-leaf campaign" of the Counter-Reformation, aiming to cover all representations of human genitals in paintings and sculptures, started with Michelangelo's works. To give two examples, the marble statue of Cristo della Minerva (church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, Rome) was covered by added drapery, as it remains today, and the statue of the naked child Jesus in Madonna of Bruges (The Church of Our Lady in Bruges, Belgium) remained covered for several decades. Also, the plaster copy of the David in the Cast Courts (Victoria and Albert Museum) in London, has a fig leaf in a box at the back of the statue. It was there to be placed over the statue's genitals so that they would not upset visiting female royalty.

In 1546, Michelangelo was appointed architect of St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican, and designed its dome. As St. Peter's was progressing there was concern that Michelangelo would pass away before the dome was finished. However, once building commenced on the lower part of the dome, the supporting ring, the completion of the design was inevitable.

Last sketch found

On December 7, 2007, Michelangelo's red chalk sketch for the dome of St Peter's Basilica, his last before his 1564 death, was discovered in the Vatican archives. It is extremely rare, since he destroyed his designs later in life. The sketch is a partial plan for one of the radial columns of the cupola drum of Saint Peter's.^[17]

Architectural work

Michelangelo's own tomb, at Basilica di Santa Croce di Firenze, Florence

Michelangelo worked on many projects that had been started by other men, most notably in his work at St Peter's Basilica, Rome. The Campidoglio, designed by Michelangelo during the same period, rationalized the structures and spaces of Rome's Capitoline Hill. Its shape, more a rhomboid than a square, was intended to counteract the effects of perspective. The major Florentine architectural projects by Michelangelo are the unexecuted façade for the Basilica of San Lorenzo, Florence and the Medici Chapel (Capella Medicea) and Laurentian Library there, and the fortifications of Florence. The major Roman projects are St. Peter's, Palazzo Farnese, San Giovanni de' Fiorentini and the Sforza Chapel (Capella Sforzesca), Porta Pia and Santa Maria degli Angeli.

Laurentian Library

Around 1530 Michelangelo designed the Laurentian Library in Florence, attached to the church of San Lorenzo. He produced new styles such as pilasters tapering thinner at the bottom, and a staircase with contrasting rectangular and curving forms.

Medici Chapel

Main article: Medici Chapel

Michelangelo designed the Medici Chapel. The Medici Chapel has monuments in it dedicated to certain members of the Medici family. Michelangelo never finished it, so his pupils later completed it. Lorenzo the Magnificent was buried at the entrance wall of the Medici Chapel. Sculptures of the "Madonna and Child" and the Medici patron saints Cosmas and Damian were set over his burial. The "madonna and child" was Michelangelo's own work.

Personality

Michelangelo, who was often arrogant with others and constantly dissatisfied with himself, saw art as originating from inner inspiration and from culture. In contradiction to the ideas of his rival, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo saw nature as an enemy that had to be overcome. The figures that he created are forceful and dynamic; each in its own space apart from the outside world. For Michelangelo, the job of the sculptor was to free the forms that were already inside the stone. He believed that every stone had a sculpture within it, and that the work of sculpting was simply a matter of chipping away all that was not a part of the statue.

Several anecdotes reveal that Michelangelo's skill, especially in sculpture, was greatly admired in his own time. Another Lorenzo de Medici wanted to use Michelangelo to make some money. He had Michelangelo sculpt a cupid that looked worn and old. Lorenzo paid Michelangelo 30 ducats, but sold the cupid for 200 ducats. Cardinal Raffaele Riario became suspicous and sent someone to investigate. The man had Michelangelo do a sketch for him of a cupid, and then told Michelangelo that while he received 30 ducats for his cupid, Lorenzo had passed the cupid off for an antique and sold it for 200 ducats. Michelangelo then confessed that he had done the cupid, but had no idea that he had been cheated. After the truth was revealed, the Cardinal later took this as proof of his skill and commissioned his Bacchus. Another better-known anecdote claims that when finishing the Moses (San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome), Michelangelo violently hit the knee of the statue with a hammer, shouting, "Why don't you speak to me?"

In his personal life, Michelangelo was abstemious. He told his apprentice, Ascanio Condivi: "However rich I may have been, I have always lived like a poor man." ^[18] Condivi said he was indifferent to food and drink, eating "more out of necessity than of pleasure"^[18] and that he "often slept in his clothes and ... boots."^[18] These habits may have made him unpopular; his biographer Paolo Giovio says "His nature was so rough and uncouth that his domestic habits were incredibly squalid, and deprived posterity of any pupils who might have followed him."^[19] He may not have minded, since he was by nature a solitary and melancholy person; he had a reputation for being bizzarro e fantastico because he "withdrew himself from the company of men." ^[20]

Sexuality

Drawing for The Libyan Sybil, Metropolitan Museum of Art.

The Libyan Sybil, Sistine Chapel.

Fundamental to Michelangelo's art is his love of male beauty, which attracted him both aesthetically and emotionally. In part, this was an expression of the Renaissance idealization of masculinity. But in Michelangelo's art there is clearly a sensual response to this aesthetic.^[21] Such feelings caused him great anguish, and he expressed the struggle between Platonic ideals and carnal desire in his sculpture, drawing and his poetry, too, for among his other accomplishments Michelangelo was also a great Italian lyric poet of the 16th century.

The sculptor's expressions of love have been characterized as both Neoplatonic and openly homoerotic; recent scholarship seeks an interpretation which respects both readings, yet is wary of drawing absolute conclusions. One example of the conundrum is the story of the sixteen year old Cecchino dei Bracci, whose death, only a year after their meeting in 1543, inspired the writing of forty eight funeral epigrams, which by some accounts allude to a relationship that was not only romantic but physical as well:

La carne terra, e qui l'ossa mia, prive
de' lor begli occhi, e del leggiadro aspetto
fan fede a quel ch'i' fu grazia nel letto,
che abbracciava, e' n che l'anima vive.^[22]
or
The flesh now earth, and here my bones,
Bereft of handsome eyes, and jaunty air,
Still loyal are to him I joyed in bed,
Whom I embraced, in whom my soul now lives.

According to others, they represent an emotionless and elegant re-imagining of Platonic dialogue, whereby erotic poetry was seen as an expression of refined sensibilities (Indeed, it must be remembered that professions of love in 16th century Italy were given a far wider application than now).^[23] Some youths were street wise and took advantage of the sculptor. Febbo di Poggio, in 1532, peddled his charms—in answer to Michelangelo's love poem he asks for money. Earlier, Gherardo Perini, in 1522, had stolen from him shamelessly. Michelangelo defended his privacy above all. When an employee of his friend Niccolò Quaratesi offered his son as apprentice suggesting that he would be good even in bed, Michelangelo refused indignantly, suggesting Quaratesi fire the man.

The greatest written expression of his love was given to Tommaso dei Cavalieri (c. 1509–1587), who was 23 years old when Michelangelo met him in 1532, at the age of 57. Cavalieri was open to the older man's affection: I swear to return your love. Never have I loved a man more than I love you, never have I wished for a friendship more than I wish for yours. Cavalieri remained devoted to Michelangelo till his death.

Michelangelo dedicated to him over three hundred sonnets and madrigals, constituting the largest sequence of poems composed by him. Some modern commentators assert that the relationship was merely a Platonic affection, even suggesting that Michelangelo was seeking a surrogate son.^[24] However, their homoerotic nature was recognized in his own time, so that a decorous veil was drawn across them by his grand nephew, Michelangelo the Younger, who published an edition of the poetry in 1623 with the gender of pronouns changed. John Addington Symonds, the early British homosexual activist, undid this change by translating the original sonnets into English and writing a two-volume biography, published in 1893.

Ignudo, Sistine Chapel.

The sonnets are the first large sequence of poems in any modern tongue addressed by one man to another, predating Shakespeare's sonnets to his young friend by a good fifty years.

I feel as lit by fire a cold countenance

That burns me from afar and keeps itself ice-chill;

A strength I feel two shapely arms to fill

Which without motion moves every balance.

— (Michael Sullivan, translation)

Late in life he nurtured a great love for the poet and noble widow Vittoria Colonna, whom he met in Rome in 1536 or 1538 and who was in her late forties at the time. They wrote sonnets for each other and were in regular contact until she died, though many scholars note the intellectualized or spiritual quality of this passion.

It is impossible to know for certain whether Michelangelo had physical relationships (Condivi ascribed to him a "monk-like chastity"),^[25] but through his poetry and visual art we may at least glimpse the arc of his imagination.^[26]

Robert F Kennedy Memorial

2008-07-19T04:18:00.000-07:00

Robert F Kennedy Memorial

LIFE & VISION

THE ORGANIZATION

LEGACY IN ACTION

Robert F. Kennedy boldly faced tough problems and challenged the comfortable and complacent. To keep his vision alive, his family and friends founded a living memorial in 1968.

Today the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial is dedicated to advancing the human rights movement through providing innovative support to courageous human rights defenders around the world. Through long-term partnerships and cutting edge methods, we assist advocates who have won the RFK Human Rights Award to boldly confront injustice in support of human freedom. We support investigative journalists and authors who bring light to injustice and encourage the human rights movement through the RFK Book and Journalism Awards. Our Speak Truth to Power program educates the public on the value of the human rights and the courage of its defenders.

Join the Mailing List!

Current News:

Release: RFK Center and JPC Help Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission Obtain Additional U.S. State Dept. Records on Abuses

New York Times Article: Rights Groups Assail US for Withholding Aid to Haiti

Release: Rights Groups Launch Groundbreaking Report on Right to Water in Haiti

Report: Wòch nan Soley: The Denial of the Right to Water in Haiti

Invite: RFK Center, ZanmiLasante/Partners in Health, and the NYU Human Rights Clinic Right to Water Release Event in NYC

Release: New York State Assembly Passes Historic Bill to Rename Triborough Bridge After Robert F. Kennedy

Release: Dominican Republic: Time to Move Forward to End Statelessness English Español

Remarks: Kathleen Kennedy Townsend's Opening Remarks at "To Seek a Newer World" Symposium

Release: RFK Center Congratulates Immokalee Workers on Burger King Agreement

Release: As Rising Food Prices Ignite Social Unrest in Haiti, Members of Congress, Religious Leaders, Development Advocates Urge Immediate Debt Cancellation

Release: 2008 RFK Memorial Journalism Awards Announced

Dominican-Haitian Network Release: Group denounces the violation of the right to vote and the right to a nationality (in English and en Español)

Release: Going Down Jericho Road Wins 2008 RFK Book Award

Release: RFK Center Urges Appellate Court to Ensure Justice after Previously Convicted Suspect Acquited in Murder of Sister Dorothy (English) (No Português)

Video:Kerry Kennedy on Squawk on the Street on CNBC promoting RFK Memorial and Online Auction

Media Links: 2008 RFK Memorial/CharityBuzz.com Online Auction

Remarks: Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, John F. Kennedy Library Forum: Robert Kennedy and the 1968 Campaign

Release: Lucas Benitez to Testify at Senate Hearing on Slavery and Abuses in US Tomato Fields

Release: RFK joins CIW and Members of Congress to kick-off National Petition to End Slavery in Florida's Fields

Joint Letter:Colombia: NGOs Press Uribe to Address Wave of Violence Against Rights Defenders, Unionists

Release:Inter-American Commission Hearing Explores the Right to Education for Afro-Descendant and Indigenous Communities

Release:RFK Center co-hosts Conference on Right to Identity in the Americas (Mar. 7, DC)

Invite: Roundtable with RFK Laureates Darci Frigo and Martin Macwan on Land Rights in Brazil and India

RFK Center Helps Delphine Djiriabe, RFK Human Rights Defender, Evacuates From Chad Amidst Violence

Time Picayune Article: Group pushes to inject Gulf revival into debates

Alternet Article: "Networks Ignore Gulf Coast in Presidential Debates" by RFK Center Staff

Wes Studi

2008-07-14T17:20:00.000-07:00

Wesley "Wes" Studi (born December 17, 1947) is a U.S. actor of Native American descent.

Born in Tahlequah, Studi was schooled at Chilocco Indian Boarding School in Northern Oklahoma. Until he attended grade school, he spoke only Cherokee. In 1967, he was drafted into the Army and served 18 months in Vietnam. After his discharge, Studi studied at Tulsa Junior College.

Studi won a Western Heritage Award (shared with cast and crew) in 1994 for Geronimo: An American Legend^[1]

He is best known for his roles as both brave and vicious Indians, such as the Pawnee warrior in Dances with Wolves and Magua in The Last of the Mohicans (1992). In 2002, Studi brought to life the legendary Tony Hillerman character Lt. Joe Leaphorn, for a series of PBS movies produced by Robert Redford.

In 2005, he portrayed a character inspired by the Powhatan warrior Opechancanough in The New World, a 2005 Academy Award-nominated film directed by Terrence Malick, and starring Colin Farrell. The historical adventure is set during the founding of the Jamestown, Virginia settlement and includes other characters inspired by historical figures, notably Captain John Smith (Farrell) and Pocahontas. Much of the film was shot at locations in James City County and Charles City County, not far from where the first permanent English colony in the New World was established at Jamestown beginning on May 14, 1607.

In addition to acting, Studi is a stone carver, an author of two children's books, and plays bass in a local band.

Filmography

Year	Title	Role	Other notes
1989	Powwow Highway	Buff
1990	Dances with Wolves	Toughest Pawnee
1991	The Doors	Indian in Desert
1992	The Last of the Mohicans	Magua
1993	Geronimo: An American Legend	Geronimo
1994	Street Fighter	Victor Sagat
1995	Lone Justice 2	One Horse
1995	Heat	Detective Casals
1996	The Killing Jar (Film)	Cameron
1998	Deep Rising	Hanover
	The Horse Whisperer	parks guard
	Soundman	Terry Leonard
1999	Mystery Men	The Sphinx
2001	Ice Planet	Commander Trager
	Christmas in the Clouds	Bingo Caller
	Road to Redemption	Frank Lightfoot
2002	Undisputed	Mingo Pace
2003	Edge of America	Cuch
2003	The Ugly One	Father Mike
2004	Echoes from Juniper Canyon	Grandpa (voice)
2005	Animal	Creeper (voice)
	Miracle at Sage Creek	Chief Thomas
	The New World	Opechancanough
2006	Three Priests	Ben
2007	Seraphim Falls	Native Water Guardian
2007	Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee	Wovoka
2008	Comanche Moon	Buffalo Hump
2008	The Only Good Indian	Sam

Geronimo

2008-07-14T17:16:00.000-07:00

Geronimo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Geronimo

Born	Goyathlay, Goyaałé: "one who yawns" June 16, 1829 Gila River, Mexico
Died	February 17, 1909 (aged 79) Fort Sill, Oklahoma
Occupation	Medicine man
Known for	A famous Apache Warrior

Geronimo (Chiricahua: Goyaałé, "one who yawns"; often spelled Goyathlay or Goyahkla^[1] in English) (June 16, 1829–February 17, 1909) was a prominent Native American leader of the Chiricahua Apache who defended his people against the encroachment of the United States on their tribal lands for over 25 years.

Biography

Geronimo, U.S. prisoner

Goyaałé (Geronimo) was born to the Bedonkohe band of the Apache, near Turkey Creek, a tributary of the Gila River in the modern-day state of Arizona, then part of Mexico, but which his family considered Bedonkohe land.

Geronimo's father, Tablishim, and mother, Juana, educated him according to Apache traditions. He married a woman from the Chiricauhua band of Apache; they had three children. On March 5, 1851, a company of 400 soldiers from Sonora led by Colonel Jose Maria Carrasco attacked Geronimo's camp outside Janos while the men were in town trading. Among those dead were Geronimo's wife, Alope, his children, and mother. His chief, Mangas Coloradas, sent him to Cochise's band for help in revenge against the Mexicans. It was the Mexicans who named him Geronimo. This appellation stemmed from a battle in which he repeatedly attacked Mexican soldiers with a knife, ignoring a deadly hail of bullets, in reference to the Mexicans' plea to Saint Jerome. The name stuck.^[1]

The first Apache raids on Sonora appear to have taken place during the late 17th century. To counter the early Apache raids on Spanish settlements, presidios were established at Janos (1685) in Chihuahua and at Fronteras (1690) in northern Opata country. In 1835, Mexico had placed a bounty on Apache scalps. Two years later Mangas Coloradas or Dasoda-hae (Red Sleeves) became principal chief and war leader and began a series of retaliatory raids against the Mexicans. Apache raids on Mexican villages were so numerous and brutal that no area was safe.^[2]

While Geronimo said he was never a chief, he was a military leader. As a Chiricahua Apache, this meant he was also a spiritual leader. He consistently urged raids and war upon many Mexican and later U.S. groups.

He married Chee-hash-kish and had two children, Chappo and Dohn-say. Then he took another wife, Nana-tha-thtith, with whom he had one child. He later had a wife named Zi-yeh at the same time as another wife, She-gha, one named Shtsha-she and later a wife named Ih-tedda. Some of his wives were captured, such as the young Ih-tedda. Wives came and went, overlapping each other, being captured and added to the family, lost, or even given up, as Geronimo did with Ih-tedda when he and his band surrendered. At that time he kept his wife She-gha but abandoned the younger wife, Ih-tedda. Geronimo’s last wife was Azul.

Ta-ayz-slath, wife of Geronimo, & child

Though outnumbered, Geronimo fought against both Mexican and United States troops and became famous for his daring exploits and numerous escapes from capture from 1858 to 1886. One such escape, as legend has it, took place in the Robledo Mountains of southwest New Mexico. The legend states Geronimo and his followers entered a Cave, and the U.S. Soldiers waited outside the cave entrance for him, but he never came out. Later it was heard that Geronimo was spotted in a nearby area. The second entrance to the cave has yet to be found and the cave is still called Geronimo's Cave. At the end of his military career, he led a small band of 38 men, women, and children. They evaded 5,000 U.S. troops (one fourth of the army at the time) and many units of the Mexican army for a year. His band was one of the last major forces of independent Indian warriors who refused to acknowledge the United States Government in the American West. This came to an end on September 4, 1886, when Geronimo surrendered to United States Army General Nelson A. Miles at Skeleton Canyon, Arizona.

Geronimo and other warriors were sent as prisoners to Fort Pickens, Florida, and his family was sent to Fort Marion. They were reunited in May 1887, when they were transferred to Mount Vernon Barracks in Alabama for five years. In 1894, they were moved to Fort Sill, Oklahoma. In his old age, Geronimo became a celebrity. He appeared at fairs, including the 1904 World's Fair in St. Louis, and sold souvenirs and photographs of himself. However, he was not allowed to return to the land of his birth. He rode in President Theodore Roosevelt's 1905 inaugural parade. He died of pneumonia at Fort Sill,Oklahoma in 1909 and was buried at the Apache Indian Prisoner of War Cemetery there.

In 1905, Geronimo agreed to tell his story to S.M. Barrett, Superintendent of Education in Lawton, Oklahoma. Barrett had to appeal to President Roosevelt to gain permission to publish the book. Geronimo came to each interview knowing exactly what he wanted to say. He refused to answer questions or alter his narrative. Barrett did not seem to take many liberties with Geronimo's story as translated by Asa Daklugie. Frederick Turner re-edited this autobiography by removing some of Barrett's footnotes and writing an introduction for the non-Apache readers. Turner notes the book is in the style of an Apache reciting part of his oral history.^[3]

Religion

Geronimo (right) and his warriors in 1886

Geronimo was raised with the traditional religious views of the Bedonkohe. When questioned about his views on life after death, he wrote in his 1905 autobiography, "As to the future state, the teachings of our tribe were not specific, that is, we had no definite idea of our relations and surroundings in after life. We believed that there is a life after this one, but no one ever told me as to what part of man lived after death...We held that the discharge of one's duty would make his future life more pleasant, but whether that future life was worse than this life or better, we did not know, and no one was able to tell us. We hoped that in the future life family and tribal relations would be resumed. In a way we believed this, but we did not know it." ^[4]

Later in life, Geronimo embraced Christianity, and stated, "Since my life as a prisoner has begun I have heard the teachings of the white man's religion, and in many respects believe it to be better than the religion of my fathers...Believing that in a wise way it is good to go to church, and that associating with Christians would improve my character, I have adopted the Christian religion. I believe that the church has helped me much during the short time I have been a member. I am not ashamed to be a Christian, and I am glad to know that the President of the United States is a Christian, for without the help of the Almighty I do not think he could rightly judge in ruling so many people. I have advised all of my people who are not Christians, to study that religion, because it seems to me the best religion in enabling one to live right." ^[5]He joined the Dutch Reformed Church in 1903 but four years later was expelled for gambling.^[6] To the end of his life, he seemed to harbor ambivalent religious feelings, telling the Christian missionaries at a summer camp meeting in 1908 that he wanted to start over, while at the same time telling his tribesmen that he held to the old Apache religion.^[7]

Theft of remains

Portrait of Geronimo by Edward S. Curtis, 1905.

In 1918, certain remains of Geronimo were stolen in a grave robbery. Three members of the Yale secret society of Skull and Bones served as Army volunteers at Fort Sill during World War I; one of those three members was Prescott Bush, father of the forty-first President of the United States George H. W. Bush and grandfather of George W. Bush. They reportedly stole Geronimo's skull, some bones, and other items, including Geronimo's prized silver bridle, from the Apache Indian Prisoner of War Cemetery. The stolen items were alleged to have been taken to the society's tomb-like headquarters on the Yale University campus, and are supposedly used in rituals practiced by the group, one of which is said to be kissing the skull of Geronimo as an initiation. The story was known for many years but widely considered unlikely or apocryphal, and while the society itself remained silent, former members have said that they believed the bones were fake or non-human, possibly in an attempt at misdirection.^{[original research?]}

Geronimo's grave at Fort Sill, Oklahoma in 2005.

In a contemporary letter discovered by the Yale historian Marc Wortman and published in the Yale Alumni Magazine in 2006, society member Winter Mead wrote to F. Trubee Davison:

The skull of the worthy Geronimo the Terrible, exhumed from its tomb at Fort Sill by your club... is now safe inside the tomb ("tomb" is the building at Yale University's Skull and Bones) and bone together with his well worn femurs, bit and saddle horn.^[8]

This prompted the Indian chief's great-grandson, Harlyn Geronimo of Mescalero, New Mexico, to write to President Bush requesting his help in returning the remains:

According to our traditions the remains of this sort, especially in this state when the grave was desecrated ... need to be reburied with the proper rituals ... to return the dignity and let his spirits rest in peace.^[9]

Geronimo - Wikiquote

2008-07-14T16:56:00.000-07:00

Geronimo - Wikiquote

Geronimo's Story of His Life (1907) as told to S.M. Barrett in 1905 and 1906; republished as Geronimo : His own story, newly revised and edited (1996)

In the beginning the world was covered with darkness. There was no sun, no day. The perpetual night had no moon or stars.
There were, however, all manner of beasts and birds. Among the beasts were many hideous, nameless monsters, as well as dragons, lions, tigers, wolves, foxes, beavers, rabbits, squirrels, rats, mice, and all manner of creeping things such as lizards and serpents. Mankind could not prosper under such conditions, for the beasts and serpents destroyed all human offspring.
All creatures had the power of speech and were gifted with reason.

I cannot think we are useless or Usen would not have created us. He created all tribes of men and certainly had a righteous purpose in creating each.

I was no chief and never had been, but because I had been more deeply wronged than others, this honor was conferred upon me, and I resolved to prove worthy of the trust.

I am thankful that the President Of the United States has given me permission to tell my story. I hope that he and those in authority under him will read my story and judge whether my people have been rightly treated.

William Jacques 5.11.85 - 9.11.85 RIP

2008-05-24T00:36:00.001-07:00

William was born 12 weeks prematurely, and died when he was 5 days old. This year would have seen him celebrate his 21st birthday. No parent should ever have to bury their own child.

I had suffered with a massive Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) during my first pregnancy, and, because of this, I was put on the anticoagulant drug Heparin, which induced early labour. When William was born at 28 weeks he too had received doses of the anticoagulant while in the womb, and as a result his blood was much thinner than it should have been.

William died at 2.00 am on 9 November, 1986, of a pneumothorax (collapsed lung) brought on by Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) - this basically meant his lungs were not fully functional. Post-mortem showed that, because his blood was so thin, William had suffered a massive brain haemorrhage while being born. If he had lived, he would probably have been blind and brain damaged to a considerable extent.

Nevertheless, one is left to forever wonder what might have been.

A whole lifetime of cuddles and kisses never given, words never spoken, ideas never expressed and achievements never realised....

I'll lend you for a little time a child of mine."He said.
"For you to love while he lives,
And mourn for when he is dead.
It may be six or seven years, or twenty two or three.
But will you, till I call him back,
Take care of him for Me?
He'll bring his charms to gladden you,
And shall his stay be brief,
You'll have his lovely memories as solace for your grief.

I cannot promise he will stay,
since all from earth return,
But there are lessons taught down there,
I want this child to learn.
I've looked the wide world over,
In search for teachers true,
And from the throngs that crowd life's lane,
I have selected you.
Now you will give him all your love,
Nor think the labor vain,
Nor hate me when I come to call, to take him back again?

I fancied that I heard them say:
"Dear Lord, Thy will be done."
For all the joy thy child shall bring,
The risk of grief we'll run.
We'll shelter him with tenderness,
we'll love him while we may,
And for happiness we've known,
Forever grateful stay;
And should the angels come for him,
Much sooner than we'd planned,
We'll brave the bitter grief that comes,
And try to understand.

Facebook Sketches

2007-10-01T04:12:00.001-07:00

To view them properly, you need to go to Facebook, because then you can watch them being drawn too ...

Poland - my Fatherland

2007-10-01T03:33:00.000-07:00

Of all the countries involved in the war, Poland lost the highest percentage of its citizens: over six million perished, half of them Polish Jews. Poland made the fourth-largest troop contribution to the Allied war effort, after the Soviets, the British and the Americans. At the war's conclusion, Poland's borders were shifted westwards, pushing the eastern border to the Curzon line. Meanwhile, the western border was moved to the Oder-Neisse line. The new Poland emerged 20% smaller by 77,500 square kilometres (29,900 sq mi). The shift forced the migration of millions of people, most of whom were Poles, Germans, Ukrainians, and Jews. Poland was where the main Nazi death camps were. During the Holocaust 3,000,000 out of 3,300,000 Jews were killed.

Poland's provinces ("voivodeships") are largely based on the country's historic regions, whereas those of the past two decades (till 1998) had been centered on and named for individual cities.

The new units range in areas from under 10,000 km² (Opole Voivodeship) to over 35,000 km² (Masovian Voivodeship). Voivodeships are governed by voivod governments, and their legislatures are called voivodeship sejmiks.

Poland is subdivided into sixteen voivodeships (województwa, singular województwo). In turn, the voivodeships are divided into powiaty (singular powiat), second-level units of administration, equivalent to a county, district or prefecture in other countries (NUTS-4 or rather LAU-1) and then gminy ("communes",

singular gmina).

My father, whose name was Mieczyslaw Kizler (but who called himself Michael when he came over here in the aftermath of WW2), hailed from a town called Izabelin, which is now a village in Lublin Voivodeship, Parczew County, Sosnowica Commune.

My father was taken from his mother and father by the Germans when he was 14 years old, and sent to Germany as a POW. It was common practice for the Nazis, in occupied countries such as Poland, to take the youngest sons from Polish households and use them as forced labour, in industry and in rural farms, back in Germany. He had a three brothers, one of whom, Edward, was in the Polish resistance (after which he was captured by the Nazis and sent to either Chelmno or Dachau concentration camp). His younger brother, Marion, was eventually killed by the Germans, as was his older brother, Tad, while fighting in the resistance army. He also had a half-brother, Jan, and a sister, Yadwiga, both of whom survived the war and settled in or around Warsaw.

After being taken away from his family at age 14, my father was never to see his mother, Natalia, or his father, Ignacy, again. When he finally returned to Poland in 1970, with the help and intervention of the International Red Cross, he found that his mother had died just 2 weeks earlier. His father had died years before.

My father himself, after working on a succession of German farms, was taken into a POW camp in Germany, where the Germans offered him the dubious honour of German citizenship. This was due to the fact that his surname sounded much like the German 'Kitzler', and also because he was, aesthetically, a member of Hitler's 'perfect' Aryan race, which Hitler was so determined to promote throughout Europe in his rambling doctrines. That is to say he was blond-haired and blue-eyed. He refused.

He could not, when he arrived, speak a word of German, but this did not stop my father learning colloquial German from simply listening to the German radio broadcasts in the POW camp. It was enough to secure his escape, which he achieved by sneaking on to a POW train dressed as a German army officer. He had to converse with an SS officer who subsequently boarded the train, and his German was evidently good enough to convince the officer that he was a bona fide German. He crossed over the 'Siegfried Line' to safety in the hands of the Allies.

The original Siegfried line (Siegfriedstellung) was a line of defensive forts and tank defenses built by Germany as a section of the Hindenburg Line 1916-1917 in northern France during World War I. The World War II Siegfried Line was built during the 1930s, opposite the French Maginot Line, which served a corresponding purpose. The Germans themselves called this the Westwall, but the Allies renamed it after the First World War line. It was a defence system stretching more than 630km (392 miles) with more than 18,000 bunkers, tunnels and tank traps. It went from Kleve on the border with the Netherlands, along the western border of the old German Empire as far as the town of Weil am Rhein on the border to Switzerland. More with propaganda in mind than for any strategic reason, Adolf Hitler planned the line from 1936 and had it built between 1938 and 1940. This was after the Nazis had broken the Treaty of Versailles and the Locarno Treaties by remilitarizing the Rhineland in 1936.

Once in the hands of the Americans, my father was conscripted into the 2nd Polish Corps where he fought at the battle of Monte Casino, helping to wrest the abbey ruins from German hands, and paving the way for the Allied march on Rome.The Battle of Monte Cassino (also known as the Battle for Rome and the Battle for Cassino) was a costly series of four battles during World War II, fought by the Allies with the intention of breaking through the Winter Line and seizing Rome.

In the beginning of 1944, the western half of the Gustav Line was being anchored by Germans holding the Rapido, Liri and Garigliano valleys and certain surrounding peaks and ridges, but not the historic abbey of Monte Cassino, founded in 524 AD by St. Benedict, although they manned defensive positions set into the steep slopes below the abbey walls. On February 15 the monastery, high on a peak overlooking the town of Cassino, was destroyed by American B-17, B-25, and B-26 bombers. The bombing was based on the fear that the abbey was being used as a lookout post for the Axis defenders (this position evolved over time to admit that Axis military was not garrisoned there). Two days after the bombing, German paratroopers poured into the ruins to defend it. From January 17 to May 18, the Gustav defenses were assaulted four times by Allied troops. These operations resulted in casualties of over 54,000 Allied and 20,000 German soldiers.

My father was in the fourth, or final, battle, code-named Operation Diadem.The plan for Operation Diadem was that U.S. II Corps on the left would attack up the coast along the line of Route 7 towards Rome. The French Corps to their right would attack from the bridgehead across the Garigliano originally created by X Corps in the first battle in January into the Aurunci Mountains which formed a barrier between the coastal plain and the Liri Valley. British XIII Corps in the centre right of the front would attack along the Liri valley. On the right, the 2nd Polish Corps (3rd and 5th Division) commanded by Lt. Gen. Władysław Anders, which had relieved 78th Division in the mountains behind Cassino on April 24, would attempt the task which had defeated 4th Indian Division in February, isolate the monastery and push round behind it into the Liri valley to link with XIII Corps' thrust and pinch out the Cassino position. It was hoped that being a much larger force than their 4th Indian Division predecessors they would be able to saturate the German defences which would as a result be unable to give supporting fire to each other's positions. Improved weather, ground conditions and supply would also be important factors. Once again, the pinching maneuver by the Polish and British Corps were key to the overall success. Canadian I Corps would be held in reserve ready to exploit the expected breakthrough. Once the German Tenth Army had been defeated, U.S. VI Corps would break out of the Anzio beachhead to cut off the retreating Germans in the Alban Hills.

The large troop movements required for this took two months to execute. They had to be carried out in small units to maintain secrecy and surprise. U.S. 36th Division was sent on amphibious assault training, and road signposts and dummy radio signal traffic were created to give the impression that a sea-borne landing was being planned for north of Rome. This was planned to keep German reserves held back from the Gustav line. Movements of troops in forward areas were confined to the hours of darkness and armoured units moving from the Adriatic front left behind dummy tanks and vehicles so the vacated areas appeared unchanged to enemy aerial reconnaissance. The deception was successful. As late as the second day of the final Cassino battle, Kesselring estimated the Allies had six divisions facing his four on the Cassino front. In fact there were thirteen.

On May 15 British 78 Division came into the XIII Corps line from reserve passing through the bridgehead divisions to execute the turning move to isolate Cassino from the Liri valley. On May 17 the Polish Division renewed their assault in the mountains. By the early hours of May 18, 78 Division and the Polish Corps had linked up in the Liri valley 2 miles (3 km) west of Cassino town.In the early morning of May 18 a reconnaissance group of Polish 12th Podolian Uhlans Regiment found the monastery abandoned and raised an improvised regimental pennant over its ruins. The last German paratroops (said to be approximately 200 in number), with supply lines threatened by the advance up the Liri valley, had withdrawn the night before to take up new defensive positions on the Adolf Hitler Line. The only remnants of the defenders were a group of emaciated German wounded who had been too sick to move.

The 8th Army units advanced up the Liri valley and the 5th Army up the coast to the Adolf Hitler defensive line (renamed the Dora Line at Hitler's insistence to minimise the significance if it was penetrated). An immediate follow-up assault failed and 8th Army then decided to take some time to re-organise. Getting 20,000 vehicles and 2,000 tanks through the broken Gustav Line was a major job taking several days. The next assault on the Dora Line commenced on May 23 with the Polish Corps attacking Piedimonte (defended by the redoutable 1st Parachute Division) on the right and 1st Canadian Infantry Division (fresh from 8th Army reserve) in the centre. On May 24, the Canadians had breached the line, and 5th Canadian (Armoured) Division poured through the gap. On May 25 the Poles took Piedimonte, and the Hitler / Dora line collapsed. The way was clear for the advance northwards on Rome and beyond.Immediately after the cessation of fighting at Monte Cassino, the Polish government in Exile (in London) created the Monte Cassino campaign cross to commemorate the Polish part in the capture of the strategic point. It was also during this time that Polish song-writer Feliks Konarski, who had taken part in the fighting there, wrote his anthem Czerwone maki na Monte Cassino (The Red Poppies on Monte Cassino). Later, an imposing Polish cemetery was laid out; this is prominently visible to anybody surveying the area from the restored monastery.

The Commonwealth War Graves cemetery on the western outskirts of Cassino is the final resting place of the British, New Zealand, Canadian, Indian, Gurkha and South African casualties. The French and Italians are on Route 6 in the Liri Valley; the Americans are at Anzio. The German cemetery is approximately 2 miles (3 km) north of Cassino in the Rapido Valley.

In 2006, a memorial was unveiled in Rome honouring the Allied forces that fought and died to liberate the city.

After this victory, which led indirectly to a ceasefire and victory for the Allied Army, my father was demobbed to England (Lincoln) at age 19. A few years later, while residing in a Polish hostel in the home counties, he met and married my mother. And the rest is history.

Wild Woman of Wales

The Last Words of Lee Harvey Oswald

Marina Oswald - her story

Marina Oswald Porter's Letterto the ARRB -- April 1996

Lee Harvey Oswald - Innocent

A Guardian SpecialDallas, Nov. 22, 1963 A grave doubt plagues U.S.

Lane’s defense brief for Oswald

MICHELANGELO

Biography

Early life

Early adulthood

Rome

Works

Statue of David

Sistine Chapel ceiling

Under Medici Popes in Florence

Last works in Rome

Last sketch found

Architectural work

Laurentian Library

Medici Chapel

Personality

Sexuality

See also

Robert F Kennedy Memorial

Wes Studi

Geronimo

Geronimo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Biography

Religion

Theft of remains

Geronimo - Wikiquote

William Jacques 5.11.85 - 9.11.85 RIP

Facebook Sketches

Poland - my Fatherland

Marina Oswald Porter's Letter
to the ARRB -- April 1996

A Guardian Special
Dallas, Nov. 22, 1963
A grave doubt plagues U.S.