top of page
Search
Lukaschik Gleb

I Am a Patsy! I Am a Patsy! by George de Mohrenschildt


Escaped from communists a man with noble origin George De Mohrenschildt was the closest contact of Lee Harvey Oswald after so-called Kennedy’s assassin returned in the United States in 1962. A book by such person supposed to have a lot of publishers wishing to release it, but that wasn’t. Nobody of them find material as interesting and believed that people tired from anything connected with assassination of John Kennedy. A manuscript titled as “I Am a Patsy! I Am a Patsy!” was finished in summer 1976 and it’s book implementation came many years later in 2014 under name “Oswald as I Knew Him”, which I read and review, but I save an original title, because an author wanted it.

 

Editor Michael A. Rinella made grandiose with improvement of written. I saw an original text of manuscript. It’s in containing of orthographic and grammar mistakes and incoherent building of sentences. Rinella writes that goal of editor to correct such things, but also it is make text look great and he confesses in doing shuffling, taking out repeating thoughts and removal of parts he considered as untruly and incoherent.

I wasn’t in favor to reading “beautiful house” in beginning whereas it was “house” even though de Mohrenschildt will use that word count later. Original writer’s point there was correct while editor’s addition makes senseless to that sentence. Rinella violated one of many rules and here is that he shouldn’t touch author’s expression.

He isn’t right in correction of person’s vision. If there is a mistake in facts, which actually were, Rinella was supposed to do it in footnotes, which, however, are interesting as addition of what de Mohrenschildt intentionally didn’t mention or conceal, because his composition has unfulfilled places. Also Rinella puts in there how looked original text time by time. But sometimes the editor writes outside references not having relation to noted part, needless own opinions (one his nonsense was on that de Mohrenschildt doesn’t explain his failed venture in Haiti whereas the author expresses own position about that later.) and quotes with links on side books, which sometimes of conspirology what absolutely mustn’t be, because his goal is presentation of author’s view. I don’t like forewords, because there usually a person speaks own opinion on written, which always doesn’t tie to what you read. Moreover, Rinella demonstrates own “I want to be a writer” by quoting Friedrich Nietzsche, which place in de Mohrenschildt’s recollection same as relating of that philosopher to JFK assassination. I didn’t read everything in these dozen of pages, because I didn’t buy the book for this.

Rinella cut a conversation, which wasn’t mentioned in footnotes, where Oswald expresses negative on that a Negro professor is called a “nigger” and then he uses this word in telling a racist anecdote. Following to these episodes, de Mohrenschildt writes on talking in which Oswald says FBI is constantly bothering him and his wife and that dislike he expressed in writing a letter in which promised to blow up their office. The author writes FBI concealed this letter. A simple false. It would be presented in evidences in Warren Investigation at least if the letter existed. Rinella didn’t understand that a reader decides what are right and wrong. This is approach of dictatorship in where censors regulate in what to keep and how it should look.

I was surprised to his usage of term “The Great Patriotic War” once what strange for American. It’s very likely that he rewrote from some source. The Great Patriotic War term appeared in Commie Muscovy and it’s still in using in Russian-speaking world was originated for cover years of collaboration of Commie Muscovy with Nazi Germany. Period of The Great Patriotic War begins with invasion in commieland in June 22, 1941 and it ends in May 9, 1945.

Rinella was supposed also to care to on name content, because I wanted to return to some pages, but I didn’t see in list J. Edgar Hoover who was mentioned more than once and Mao Zedong.

The editor’s clueless interference deprives of that pride in having this book on shelf. I would take edition has initial raw text of manuscript with all mistakes instead of that. Only wonderful in Oswald as I Knew Him in letters saved original writing and excerpts of George de Mohrenschildt’s testimony to Warren Commission, which I saw before and it’s one of the long in that investigation and a needless due to it was telling of biography where a lot of facts don’t have relations to case.

 

I have a little in questions on credibility in what author tells, but usually when George de Mohrenschildt wanted to be not objective – that he did in not telling full in episodes relating to him. He praises his friendship with Lee Harvey Oswald and admits his negative sides. Also he writes Oswald was an adventurous person in explanation of his job changing while actually it was dislikeable routine for Lee Harvey and he usually put legs on table or/and read something and that behavior ended on that he was getting fired. However de Mohrenschildt’s portrait on Oswald can consider for truthful though I doubt in two quotes, which, as memoir writer claims, Lee Harvey said, because too wise for that young, naive and unexperienced person believed in pretty words of Karl Marx. Nevertheless, de Mohrenschildt describes Oswald to which I came, he gives new facts and only corroborates about his wife (a generic person from a place she came from.) and writes a justified good word on Ruth Paine. George de Mohrenschildt was unique person by his biography and different kind relations with significant people as he was close to Kennedy family. Crossing paths with persons have tie to Kennedy mystery make the book a stolen top secret document, which was intending to be destroyed. His visiting of Jackie’s mother after testimony to Warren Commission was flabbergasting for me, because de Mohrenschildt described behavior of presented people. He had brief meeting with Edgar J. Hoover. And if this true, then that’s a whole disclosure of personality of FBI director and that makes me to understand about him. De Mohrenschildt describes impressions in testimony to Warren Commission what is unique detail. Another interesting thing is that he writes on Oswald’s expressed grudge on Senator Connally for dishonorable discharge when they were meeting whereas he said to commission that Lee Harvey didn’t speak negative on Connally and de Mohrenschildt claimed that he know on his military status after assassination.

In reasoning on whether Oswald wanted to kill Senator of Texas. His wife Marina in said in testimony that when they were in the Soviets, Lee Harvey praised John Connolly and wanted to vote for him. He could change positive opinion due to dishonorable discharge, but I can’t believe because it isn’t a strong motive for this person. Oswald could be highly emotional and he was a big Marxist, but he wasn’t so crazy to do for that. He could go on this for ideological purpose as it was with General Walker. And if his view on Kennedy is solved for me, therefore I want to say he wouldn’t risk to attack a moving target which surrounded of ideologically sympathetic to him people

George de Mohrenschildt mentions an actual fact that people who don’t believe in “lone assassin conclusion” are thinking that Lyndon Johnson organized it. If take this theory, that is not possible due to Johnson hadn’t in control of own henchmen and any power structure for implementation of it.

The author confesses in regret that he didn’t protect Oswald in giving testimony and writing letter to Janet Norton Lee Anchincloss. He doesn’t know who true murderers of Kennedy are. He believes in some things with almost all of them I don’t agree. He made friendship with Willem Oltmans who is another fairytaler and among his statements was that the writer told him that he spoke with Oswald a plan of assassination of Kennedy (a journalist was supposed to hear more details if follow this logic.). It likely ended a good relationship if de Mohrenschildt wouldn’t kill himself. Somewhere he contradicts to himself, but I love this book, because I see George de Mohrenschildt.

 

A story of demise of De Mohrenschildt is clearly fits for theory that suicide was an organized murder. He was in depression and tried to kill himself four times – it could be a good factor if hypnotize on setup, but not after thirteen years and multiple given interviews by this man.

bottom of page