Mr. Stuckey.

Are not.

Mr. Jenner.

And in that sense it is in some measure a distortion of the actual tape.

Mr. Stuckey.

A slight distortion. I think it is an unfair thing.

Mr. Jenner.

Well, we have the actual tape so the hesitations will appear, and what I was using this primarily for is to afford you an opportunity, if you wish to use it, to refresh your recollection of this program.
What were some of the things that you now recall that struck you about this dissertation?

Mr. Stuckey.

Well, of course, the principal thing that came out on that program, aside from the Russian residence, the most striking thing was his admission that he was a Marxist. We asked him if he was a Communist--we were always doing this---he was very clever about avoiding the question. He would usually say, "As I said before, I belong to no other organization other than the Fair Play for Cuba Committee."
So we asked him this question, of course, and he gave us that answer, and I asked, "Are you a Marxist?"; and he said, "Yes."
Otherwise, it was--the program was largely speeches by Bringuier and Butler. and Oswald did not have a chance to ramble much or to talk much as he had earlier, and most of his answers are rather short.

Mr. Jenner.

Did you get into a discussion of democracy and communism and Marxism and then the distinctions?

Mr. Stuckey.

Yes, yes.

Mr. Jenner.

The distinctions between them?

Mr. Stuckey.

A brief discussion. We asked him, I say "we," I mean Mr. Butler asked him the difference between being a Marxist and being a Communist, and this was a typical oblique Oswald answer. He says, "It is the same difference between Ghana and Guinea, and even in Great Britain they have socialized medicine," and that is about the extent of the answer.

Mr. Jenner.

What impression did you have as to this man's deep or fundamental appreciation of Marxism, democracy, communism, fascism, socialism, as the case might be?

Mr. Stuckey.

It was my impression he had done a great deal of reading.

Mr. Jenner.

Did you have an impression that his knowledge that he was, if I may use this expression, that he had a superficial knowledge as distinguished from a close study with a critical leader or teacher pointing out to him the fundamental distinctions between these systems?

Mr. Stuckey.

It would be difficult to say. It was apparent he was acquainted with a wide body of facts and he knew appropriate words and such from historical points concerning the development of Marxism.

Mr. Jenner.

You see I am seeking your impression at the time and not one that you have formed since.

Mr. Stuckey.

Yes; right. Well, I had not run across many Marxists in my time, and I guess this was about the first professional Marxist I had run across, and he impressed me as knowing something about the subject. But again it was difficult to appraise the full measure of his learning because of his oblique way of answering questions and dodging questions whenever he did not want to speak about a particular point. I would hesitate to say whether it was superficial or not. I just don't know that much about it.

Mr. Jenner.

Give me your impression of his demeanor.

Mr. Stuckey.

Confident.

Mr. Jenner.

Confident, self-assured?

Mr. Stuckey.

Self-assured, logical.

Mr. Jenner.

Able to handle questions?

Mr. Stuckey.

Very well qualified to handle questions, articulate. There was a little bit of a woodenness in his voice at times, and a little stiff. This was another impression of mine about Oswald, his academic manner. If he could use a six-syllable word--

Mr. Jenner.

You mean demeanor?

Mr. Stuckey.

Demeanor; yes. If he could use a six-syllable word instead of a two-syllable word, he would do so. Now that characteristic in itself would not tend to make it that his learning was superficial.