Wow! It only took CIA 4 decades to originate a new backyard photo.  Detectives Rose, Stouval and Walthers went to the Paine residence that day and searched the house and garage.  They were there for two and a half hours. Carting off all of the Oswald's possessions including metal filing cabinets, the blanket, leaflets, etc, and took the evidence down to the homicide office.  The next day  detectives  Stouval,  Moore,  Rose and Adamchick were sent out a second time and lo and behold, with a second search of the garage, these photos were found. Question?  Why weren't they found the day of the assassination when a clean sweep of the garage was made? Looks like a plant to me.  Wait until Sirhan is deprogrammed and his memory of CIA programming is recalled.  Fun times ahead.  www.jfkcia.com     

I suspect the photo is real, and I think it fits-in with the "sheep-dipping" theory and Judyth Bakers' story.

I just watched "The Garrison Tapes" DVD again, and it has a short section on this photo.  It does appear to be manipulated, that is to say it's the same head of LHO, cut 'n pasted onto a 2nd photo.

By itself, it doesn't incriminate LHO wrt the Walker shooting, the JFK assassination or the Tippit murder.

I've seen no evidence to convince me that Oswald had much of a class consciousness or that he really accepted the proletariat/class struggle from the communist perspective.  Nor do I think he ever grasped the important distinctions between Trotskyite, Stalinist and/or Leninist factions within the various communist/socialist/anarchist circles of the day.

To side with the Cuban Revolution was a fairly simple exercise for any progressive/leftist/socialist in the early 1960's, and I'd guess that LHO was sincere about support for socialist Cuba, but when you start becoming involved in the political details that are characteristic of specific parties on the left, you have to pick one side or the other and you can't serve two or three masters at the same time. LHO never went that far with it.

author said:

Jim Fetzer make a pertinent point about the two communist/socialist newspapers LHO was holding up. "The Militant" and "The (Daily) Worker".  One is essentially Trotskyite (the US Socialist Workers Party) and the other was a conservative pro-Stalinist publication published by the CPUSA (since superceded by the "People's World".

Unless you were severely bipolar or psychotic, there would be little sense in trying to subscribe to two opposing viewpoints of socialist parties.

I don't think Fetzer's "point" amounts to much. Trotsky had been dead for 23 years when the "backyard photos" were taken. Could the antagonism/philosophical divide between the Worker and Militant have lessened by 1963? Oswald also subscribed to other communist publications. I think you summarized the depth of Oswald's Marxism pretty well a post or two back:

I've seen no evidence to convince me that Oswald had much of a class consciousness or that he really accepted the proletariat/class struggle from the communist perspective. Nor do I think he ever grasped the important distinctions between Trotskyite, Stalinist and/or Leninist factions within the various communist/socialist/anarchist circles of the day.

Oswald didn't seem to be particularly impressed by the "virtues" of either communism or capitalism.
----------------------------

"I first read the communist manifesto and 1st volume of capital in 1954 when I was 15. I have study 18th century philosophers works by Lenin after 1959 and atteneded numerous marxist reading circles and groups at the factory where I worked, some of which were compulsory and other which were not. Also in Russia, through newspapers, radio, and T.V., I learned much of Marx Engles and Lenin's works. Such articles are given very good coverage daily in the U.S.S.R. 
   

After my stay in the Soviet Union, upon my return to the USA, I continued to receive my subscription from "Komkrin Inc," Soviet ideological and informative literature, "Agitator" newspaper, Soviet "Belowsi," "Krockill," satirical political magazine, and the CPUSA newspaper "Worker." Also I receive the well known Soviet Journal "Ogonxok." I also have received literature from the Soviet Embassy, Washington D.C."
Warren Commission Exhibit 93 Vol. 16 Page 337-346

"No man, having known, having lived, under the Russian Communist and American capitalist system, could possibly make a choice between them. There is no choice, one offers oppression the other poverty. Both offer imperialistic injustice, tinted with two brands of slavery. 
   

But no rational man can take the attitude of "a curse on both your houses." There are two world systems, one twisted beyond recognition by its misuse, the other decedant and dying in its final evolution. 
   

A truly democratic system would combine the better qualities of the two upon an American foundation, opposed to both world systems as they are now." Warren Commission Exhibit 97 Pg 422-430
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-7.html#interest

 

MinM said:

I tend to be agnostic about this issue. After all, Oswald seemed to be a witting participant in the '[url=http://rasputin.gnn.tv/blogs/7306/Cut_outs_moles_patsies_and_provocateurs]sheep-dipping[/url]' process, handing out those [url=http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1219]Fair Play for Cuba[/url] flyers. So I could see a case made for the photos being real. OTOH, it is disinformation season. Every year, as the anniversary of the assassination nears, these types of stories inevitably get play in the M$M.

What this "study" doesn't address, for obvious reasons, is why "Oswald" has a square jaw in this photo whereas all other photos of him show a severely pointed jaw.

I would also like to clarify the issue of the "cut line" in the middle of the jaw in one of the photos. As someone with decades of experience in photographic related employment, I can assure you that no one would take out a knife--even in the days before PhotoShop--in order to alter a photograph. Photographic alterations are done with light, where there is light and where there is not light. This is done by blocking out parts of one negative using either black tape or black ink and doing the same to another negative, so that a single piece of photographic paper can be exposed twice without producing a double image. This is fairly exacting work, and any accidental overlap will produce a dark line, just as seen in one of the backyard photos. All this supposed shadow analysis is just one big red herring and points to either massive stupidity on the part of the "analyst" or intentional deception.