Ian Huntley The Algebra of Justice

THE AMERICAN COUP D'ETAT OF 1963 - Lee Harvey Oswald

The geometry of a conspiracy

The American writer Josiah Thompson has remarked on the implausibility of an American leftie murdering the left-wing President John F Kennedy in Dallas of all places, at the very heart of the right-wing American South. The reason the scenario is implausible is because it is absurd, and the reason it is absurd is because it is hypocritical. Pretences are always the opposite of the truth, and to discover the truth behind one, it is necessary to reverse all the values of the pretence. The designer of this one logically would be a right-winger, having originated from the South himself, and he would be operating in a pretentious situation, such as a right-winger in JFK's Democrat government, where he would also be in a position to organize everything.

The 1960s was a unique decade in American history as it featured no less than three high-profile political assassinations, all of them committed with guns (the gun lobby being very strong in the South), and all the victims were left-wingers. Two of the victims were the Kennedy brothers, namely President John F Kennedy himself and Robert F Kennedy, who was in the process of running for the presidency in 1968 when he was murdered. Both died in public rallies, and both appealed to the public. The third victim was Martin Luther King, whose civil rights campaign for black people was getting elbow-room under JFK's government, and whose politics would have been very much disliked by a right-winger from the South.

All three of these attacks have features suggestive of a conspiracy, and all of them have produced convicts whose guilt is contested, and all have the same victim type. Each accords with the above profile of the designer, and they indicate someone in government being behind these events.

Conspirators contrive not to leave evidence of the truth behind them, they only leave evidence for their pretences, and to suss them out, it is necessary to resolve the pretence logically. One often can't establish guilt in these cases except by deductive logic.

In addition to the design of the pretence, it is necessary to look for motive and opportunity. In this case these point to Lyndon B Johnson, who, as Vice President, stepped into the presidency after the murder of JFK, and who was in power when RFK and Martin Luther King were murdered. He came from Texas and carried the votes of the South for the Democrats.

Only someone in government and in a position of power could have organized all this carnage, and the only person whose ambition serves as motive for it is Lyndon B Johnson, who also went on to cause great harm to western society through the hippy movement when he attacked North Vietnam in 1965, turning what looked like a defensive war commitment into an offensive one. The damage to western democracy caused by this would correspond with the destructive effects that would have arisen from the after-effects of these assassinations had he organized them.

In the matter of motive, it is well known that LBJ hated the Kennedy brothers personally and politically, and as a right-winger, he must also have despised Martin Luther King. And being the man who drafted teenagers into the Army to fuel his war in Vietnam, he was evidently capable of and willing to sacrifice pawns like Lee Harvey Oswald and Police Officer Tippit for his designs.

In 1963, the murder of a president was not a federal offence and so it didn't come under the jurisdiction of the FBI. Whoever designed the events in Dallas would have known that the Dallas police would have the responsibility of the investigation.

Innocent in custody

Throughout the two days that Lee Harvey Oswald was in police custody, he behaved as an innocent man, being bewildered, polite with the press at public gatherings, but apparently narked underneath. He appealed to the press for a lawyer and knew only what the police had told him. No record was kept of his questioning by the police, and he called out to the press that he was a patsy, this being a Mafia word for someone who is set up to take the punishment for a crime that he did not commit. Either he was lying, or else he was a witness and victim in a conspiracy and was telling the truth. If he had been involved in the assassination of JFK, why would he defend himself by saying that he was a patsy?

Oswald's behaviour while in custody indicates that he was always speaking the truth when dealing with the press. The police had only one eyewitness, who claimed that he had been sitting opposite the Texas School Book Depository where one of the assassins was stationed and had seen a man later identified by the police as Lee Harvey Oswald withdraw a rifle from a window on the sixth floor. The police had immediately broadcast a description, which was of an "unknown" white male, of slender build, age about 30, and 165 pounds.

While Oswald was being transferred by the police to the county jail, he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby amidst a mass of TV cameras and press. The timing of this looks significant because after this critical point, no one would have been able to get at Oswald, and he would have been able to defend himself in the pending trial.

Afterwards Jack Ruby claimed "ruefully" to the press that if he had taken an illegal turn in his car as he had intended, he wouldn't be in the situation he was in now after the shooting. We are required to believe from this that Oswald's murder happened by chance, and that the imminence of a trial defence was not the reason he was killed. In this, Ruby was using a traffic illegality that he had not committed to rue another illegality (homicide) which he had committed, and this looks like another pretence. And why should Ruby rue having murdered Oswald if that was what he had wanted to do, and if he had done it in front of the press?

The same thing happens with his motive, when he claimed that he had done it to protect Mrs Kennedy from the ordeal of having to testify in court. This is the reverse of the motive to prevent Oswald from testifying in court, which must be the real motive, and this looks like another pretence. And as Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald, he called out (to the press), "You shot the President!" His words refer to the office rather than to the popular figurehead of JFK, which impersonalizes his attitude to Kennedy himself, so that his motive again looks pretentious.

Ruby claimed that he had shot Oswald on an impulse having been attracted by the crowd that had gathered for his transfer to jail, but this doesn't accord with the facts, because on this occasion he had a gun, while the night before, he was seen and photographed at a similar public showing of Oswald, when he did not have a gun, or did not use it if he did have one.

Ruby's pretentious behaviour might be due to his personality in such a situation, but the fact remains that in killing Oswald in a public rally, he had copied what had happened to JFK, and he had silenced a witness that an innocent government and the American public would have wished to interrogate.

For a time after his arrest, Lee Harvey Oswald only knew that he was being charged with the murder of Police Officer Tippit, whose killer had led the police to the cinema where Oswald was arrested. This cinema is considered to have been used as a secret rendez-vous point for CIA operatives at the time, which would suggest that he had gone there according to prior instructions and that he was working for the CIA, which had always been his mother's understanding. This would also explain his use of the term "patsy" to the press. Private investigators subsequently found the fingerprints of a known Texas assassin named Malcolm Everett Wallace in the Texas School Book Depository building crime scene, and Wallace had a history of association with LBJ, owing his liberty and his life to LBJ's legal friends.

If Oswald had knowingly been involved in the assassination of JFK, why would he be carrying with him on the day of the assassination the identity papers of the alias Alek Hidell, the name with which the rifle that was left at the Book Depository building had been bought by mail order earlier that year? This logically would not have been his own design, unless he intended to take the credit for the assassination, which of course he did not. The revolver that is alleged to have killed Police Officer Tippit was also ordered through the same alias, which makes this situation doubly absurd.

Neither of these weapons was suitable for these murders, because JFK was killed with high-velocity bullets, and the rifle that was left behind for evidence was a low-velocity weapon from the Second World War. A gun expert tested this rifle and found that it couldn't fire and reload bullets at the rate at which the shots were fired during the assassination. In the case of the Officer Tippit murder, the police who radioed the murder at the scene described the suspect as having an automatic pistol, with ejector marks on the shells, while Oswald's pistol was a revolver. The weapons used as evidence appear to have been bought purely for this purpose to implicate Oswald after the events.

Appearances and disappearances

Witnesses saw two men involved in this second attack. The official version is that Police Officer Tippit was murdered after getting out of his car and approaching a man on the street as the news about the assassination of JFK was spreading. It is claimed that he was acting on the description that was being broadcast by the police of their suspect in the JFK murder. After a brief conversation, the man shot Tippit five times and fled. The killer had evidently meant to kill the officer, but if Tippit was following up the description of the suspect on the radio, there would be no reason why the man should worry unduly or be sure to murder him. This does not look like a spontaneous police officer shooting. This killing led the authorities to the arrest of Oswald in the cinema, and like Oswald and JFK (and Ruby) Tippit could have been set up for this.

A curious thing about Officer Tippit is that his colleagues reported that he bore a remarkable resemblance to President Kennedy (for which he was ribbed), so that the two murders are connected by the theme of the victims' resemblance and that Tippit was killed while "following up on a description". And why should Oswald have killed a policeman who resembled the President that he is supposed to have just killed, except for the sake of appearances?

Witnesses of Oswald's behaviour inside the Texas School Book Depository building saw an employee who was behaving normally. Oswald left the Book Depository building by the front door to the street and he caught a bus. He had been standing casually by a soft drinks machine in the second floor lunch room when the police entered the building, and he was vouched for by a fellow employee. Another witness saw a strange man running out of the building by the back door after the shooting, which is logically the guilty way out. The sniper would only need to flee the building in this manner if he were a stranger there.

Oswald left the Book Depository shortly after the police had arrived and he caught a bus, but this got stuck in traffic, and he got off and caught a taxi. This suggests that he was in a hurry. When he got back to his rooming house he stayed there for only three minutes, during which time his landlady Mrs Earlene Roberts saw a police car pull up outside the house and toot its horn twice before driving off. Oswald then left and walked to the cinema where he was seized by the police. This suggests that his hurry had only concerned the timing of his arrival home.

This sequence of events has Oswald leaving the police at the scene of the assassination, then Oswald being summoned by the police at a pre-arranged rendez-vous at his rooming house, then Oswald being picked up by the police at another pre-arranged rendez-vous, nicely fitted up with the incriminating evidence and the assassinations of JFK and Police Officer Tippit.

This sequence has a "pretence" flight and a real one, the real one being of a stranger leaving the Depository building by the back door, and the pretence exit by Oswald which is flagged by the police and which ends with his arrest.

Oswald's progress from the assassination scene to his arrest was also flagged by too many wallets, for he had a wallet on him when he was arrested, which had his real identity as well as the Alek J Hidell identity in it, and there was another left at the scene of the Officer Tippit murder, which may have been the same wallet switched from the arrest to the Tippit scene, and there was also a wallet left at the house of Mrs Ruth Paine, whose garage became the source of incriminating evidence relating to the rifle ordered through the Hidell name.

In October when Oswald was engaged by Roy Truly to work at the School Book Depository, no conspirator below government could have known that the President's motorcade would pass before this building, because the route was not approved by Texas Governor John B Connally until after this time, and Connally couldn't have been involved in a conspiracy himself because he was in the President's car during the motorcade and was seriously injured in the attack. At the time of the assassination the entire sixth floor of the building, where a sniper was seen to withdraw at a window and where the incriminating rifle was left, was deserted in readiness for the assassination. This could not have been arranged by a solitary sniper.

Lee Harvey Oswald fits the victim profile in this series of murders entirely, for he was a leftist utopeanist who had expressed his views on local TV and radio during 1963, so that he had a similar political orientation to the three high-profile murder victims of the 60s, as well as having surfaced in the mass media as they had done. His left-wing politics would have been the reason that he had been selected for the patsy in this murder.

Imposters and officials

Oswald's mother had always understood that her son was working for the government in some way, and if this were so, it would mean that all three victims in the JFK case would have been working for the government when they were murdered. This again would indicate a conspirator in government, especially since Oswald's role would have been clandestine.

The question remains whether it is possible to trace a connection between Oswald and the CIA, and the only way that this can be done is through the pattern of his activities in 1963.

During this period Oswald rented a Post Office box as he was always changing his address, and only he and his wife Marina had access to it. It was only accessible to the names of Lee Harvey Oswald and Marina Oswald, and to the pseudonym A J Hidell. This means that either Oswald had ordered the incriminating rifle and revolver, which he strenuously denied, or else that his wife had. On at least one occasion Marina had added the name A J Hidell to a personal document of Oswald's without his knowledge of it.

Oswald's alleged affairs of that year include an attempted assassination of General Walker, which occurred in April. Oswald's wife Marina is the source of information that Oswald had been responsible for this incident. The General had been sitting behind a window at home, and Oswald is alleged to have fired a single shot at him with the rifle, but the bullet hit the window frame and the General escaped unhurt.

This incident corresponds with the assassination of JFK in a perfect symmetry of opposite values, the General being a right-winger while JFK was a left-winger; the General being a sitting duck for a target while JFK was a moving target at some considerable distance; and the attempted assassination on the easy target being unsuccessful while the extremely difficult target was successfully killed. This pattern of values corresponds with the overall pretence of this case and completes it. It produces the same designer profile again: a right-winger with a base in Dallas, and it shows that Marina Oswald would have been actively involved in the treachery against Lee Harvey Oswald.

Neighbours observed two men leaving the scene of this incident, driving off in separate cars.

The people closest to the Oswalds in the year 1963 were the Paines, namely Ruth and Michael, neither of whom liked Oswald, who didn't like them (nor did his elder brother Robert). They made contact with the Oswalds in March that year, soon after which time the incriminating rifle was ordered. An investigator afterwards became suspicious about the Paines because he wasn't able to get access to their tax records for 1963 or other state documents because they were covered by national security. The Paines belonged to a family of Quakers in Philadelphia and had several relatives who were employed by an organization that is thought to be connected to the CIA and naval intelligence. It was through Ruth Paine that Oswald got his job at the Texas School Book Depository building, and she arranged the job interview with Roy Truly. And it was through her that Oswald got his lodgings at the time of the assassination. Oswald's Russian wife Marina lived at the Paines' house in the spring and autumn of 1963 while Oswald lived separately.

In the summer of 1963, Oswald went to New Orleans where his wife joined him, and it was there that he established his pro-Cuba image, handing out leaflets in support of Castro which he had printed off himself, and getting into a fight over them with an anti-Castro group that he had infiltrated. He earned a night in jail for this and a $10 fine, as well as publicity and local TV and radio appearances in which he expounded his lefty political views. Without actually joining the Fair Play For Cuba Committee, he set himself up as an unofficial chapter and produced hundreds of membership cards. On one of these his wife Marina wrote the alias A J Hidell as the chapter president, thus linking this activity with the ordering of the incriminating evidence and with Oswald's arrest.

While he was in New Orleans, Oswald is supposed to have gone to Mexico City in an attempt to get visas for Cuba and Soviet Russia at the Cuban embassy there, but there is doubt that this was actually Oswald. This arrangement would imply in a conspiracy that he was organizing an escape route. While there, he is supposed to have made contact with a Steve Kennan (or Keenan), who was a Quaker from Philadelphia and who is understood to have been an undercover operator for both the Russian KGB and the CIA. Two telephone calls were made there in the name of Oswald in which Cuba and a Russian assassin were connected, and both a CIA source and J Edgar Hoover in the FBI noted that the voice in these calls was not that of Oswald, and that the caller was an impostor. This means that whether Oswald himself was in Mexico, his affairs were being organized by others without his knowledge.

All the elements of this situation harmonize exactly with his situation back home, because all the factors match. There is a Russia - assassin - CIA - Philadelphia Quakers - Cuba connection in Mexico involving an Oswald impostor, while back in New Orleans and Dallas there is an identical connection, namely Russia (Oswald's Russian wife and Oswald's and Ruth Paine's knowledge of the Russian language) - assassin (Mac Wallace, and the murderers of JFK, Police Officer Tippit and Oswald) - Cuba (whereby Oswald was acting as an impostor in the Fair Play For Cuba Committee) - Philadelphia Quakers (the Paines and their family) - and an implicit secretive CIA connection in Dallas and New Orleans. Likewise there is a link-up between the impostor-assassin factors at both ends, because in Mexico there is the telephone call of the Oswald impostor and its mention of the Russian assassin, and in the USA there is an implicit Oswald-impostor-assassin behind the official case of Oswald the impostor-assassin, whereby the conspiracy is revealed again. An interesting extra circumstance is that Michael Paine is said to be a dead-ringer for Oswald himself, resembling him in age and appearance and weight, and this corresponds with the resemblance of Officer Tippit with JFK.

All of which indicates that Oswald was working for the CIA, but not in a way that he would have wished, and with others controlling his affairs and his destiny. Each point of this conspiracy completes a symmetrical pattern of deception, and the sum of it all is geometrically perfect.

And above all this there is the same pattern again, with an impostor-leftie in JFK's government and the Democrat Party (LBJ) who is linked by a known assassin's fingerprint to the Texas School Book Depository and to the assassination of JFK. And there is the Cuba-Russia factor again, which LBJ used to justify the Warren Commission, which was set up the following year to investigate (or whitewash) the assassination of JFK, and which concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald had acted alone in the murder. This outcome has caused conspiracy theories to flourish ever since. LBJ took political advantage of this by disregarding its finding himself and taking the view that a Cuban conspiracy had been behind the assassination, so that he had a foot in both camps, with Lee Harvey Oswald fitted up both ways. LBJ had persuaded a reluctant Warren to take part in his investigation by saying that he wished to prevent a Cuba-Russia conspiracy being implicated in the murders, which implies that LBJ knew that they had not been involved and that the purpose of the Commission was to reach the conclusion that it did reach. Here again, LBJ has a foot in both camps, using concern about a Cuban conspiracy to justify the Warren Commission and its finding, while ignoring its finding and preferring the Cuban conspiracy theory afterwards.

Everything in this case indicates an American coup d'etat. Every aspect of it has a secretive character with the truth disguised by absurdity, with disappearing evidence and signs of pretences at every point of the official case, and with matching symmetrical values everywhere, all of them recurring. It is a perfect, geometric whole, a tesseract of deception and pretence. This cannot arise from natural coincidence.

Another point of the tesseract occurs at the Parkland Memorial Hospital, where the dying President was rushed to after the shooting. Both Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald died at this hospital, and Jack Ruby was seen there by a journalist soon after the arrival of the President. Ruby is alleged to have died of lung cancer after successfully appealing on technical grounds against his conviction for the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, and he was awaiting a second trial when he died, so that both he and Oswald died there just before trial. Ruby claimed that he had been injected with this cancer, and he died rapidly within a month of the diagnosis. The body of the President was taken away forcefully from Parkland for autopsy elsewhere, while the body of Officer Tippit was taken to Parkland for autopsy from another hospital. It is suspected that the body of Officer Tippit, who resembled JFK significantly, may have been used for misleading autopsy photographs of the President's injuries, so that the deaths of all four merge together under a cloud of suspicion at the same hospital.

Witnesses and distractions

There is a large list of witnesses to the assassination of JFK, whose testimony attracted harassment from government forces and who died mysteriously or were murdered soon afterwards. Among these was the manager of a motel complex in Oklahoma who claimed on the 23rd November that three men (and not Oswald) had killed the President and that a man called Ruby would kill Oswald tomorrow. Another witness saw two men in preparation and in action on the grassy knoll where witnesses heard shots fired during the assassination. Another witness saw a strange man run out of the back door of the Texas School Book Depository shortly after the shooting. These two witnesses account for the three assassins that the motel manager had referred to. Two women tried to warn people that the President was going to be killed in Dallas, and one of them was an employee of Jack Ruby's. Another witness who saw the killer of Officer Tippit running away awkwardly while trying to get his pistol into his belt saw a different haircut than Oswald's.

The wife of a former congressman, Julia Ann Mercer, reported that she had pulled up beside a truck in a traffic jam near the grassy knoll an hour before the motorcade passed through and had seen a man that she recognized afterwards as Jack Ruby in the driver seat of the truck. She also saw a man with a poorly concealed rifle take it out of the truck and climb up the grassy knoll. Her testimony agreed with that of witness Lee Bowers, who saw two men, one middle-aged and heavy-set, the other younger, behind the fence at the grassy knoll. Both said that the younger man wore a plaid shirt.

So reliable witnesses saw Jack Ruby at the grassy knoll shortly before the shooting of JFK, and at the Parkland Hospital when the bodies of Officer Tippit and JFK were taken there, as well as at the murder of Oswald. These witnesses therefore placed Jack Ruby in the vicinity of all three of the shootings, and at the scene of two of them. He was also implicated by the matter of the witness named Rose Cheramie who had claimed that President Kennedy was going to be shot before it happened and who worked for Jack Ruby.

Jack Ruby was also seen by witness George Applin at the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald in the Texas Theater, which raises the possibility that it was in the theatre that Oswald received the revolver with which he was arrested, and that it was Ruby who gave it to him after the shooting of Officer Tippit. This would explain Ruby's presence there.

Witnesses at the scene of the JFK assassination smelt gunpowder down at street level, indicating that a gun was fired in or beside the motorcade. After the first shot was fired, an agent named George Hickey was seen standing and holding up an AR-15 machine rifle in the security car immediately behind the President's car, and it was apparently from this direction and angle that the fatal shot came from. The AR-15 used a high velocity frangible bullet, hence the exploding exit wound to the head.

In the Zapruder film of the assassination, the impact of the fatal bullet pushes the President's head forward, and with the release of the exit wound to his head, his body recoils backward and to the left, and he falls on his wife in the seat beside him. This indicates a muscular reaction to the impact of the fatal bullet and that the shot came from behind him and to the left.

If this was the method used for the assassination, the shooters on the grassy knoll would have been a street distraction or cover for the fatal shot, while the shooter in the Texas Book Depository would be a second distraction to account for the shot from behind.

A similar arrangement is apparent in the murder of RFK in 1968, with a distraction shooter (the man convicted of the murder, Sirhan Sirhan), and a real shooter, standing behind the victim, whose weapon was close enough to leave gunpowder burns.

The assassination of JFK was a disaster for the American people at the time, but the most damaging long-term effects would be due to the success of any such conspiracy in history. So long as such a deception succeeds, western democracies cannot be trusted to govern themselves honourably, and innocent people cannot be safe in them. And innocent citizens should never be sacrificed to the detriment of their nation.

Copyright David Dixon 2007-2014