(Testimony of Michael R. Paine)
Mr. Paine.
He did not indicate or reveal to me how he thought it would come about and I on several occasions felt by his, perceived from his attitude or felt impelled by his attitude to say that the values that I held dear were diminished in a situation of violence, to which he remained silent and I took it as disagreement. But I don't remember if he had said that.
Senator COOPER. He remained silent when you spoke about that?
Mr. Paine.
When I said I was opposed to violence or said, why, when I said that he remained silent and I took it
Senator COOPER. You took it that he disagreed in any way by your statement?
Mr. Paine.
Well, just by the way he would sort of withdraw.
Senator COOPER. He did not agree with your position?
Mr. Paine.
He did not agree; no.
Senator COOPER. That violence was unacceptable as a means of change?
Mr. Paine.
That is right, and I don't think he perceived also, was a war of the kind of values that I am--tolerance, for instance seems to me disappears when strained situations--
Senator COOPER. Did you discuss at least the kind of economic changes that had occurred in Russia by means of violence?
Mr. Paine.
No; I was trying to find out whether he thought it was going to come by revolution or not and he never did say, I never got an answer as to how he thought this change was going to come. He did not reveal constructive, or from my point of view, constructive effort to make.
Senator COOPER. Did he ever discuss the revolution in Russia where by means of violence the change had come about?
Mr. Paine.
He did not. That would have been the kind of argument I would have accepted, a normal kind that you would have accepted it as evidence here is the normal way to produce it, but he never said that.
Senator COOPER. Did he ever say any way in which he was expecting Russia or any other country to indicate that he felt the use of violence had produced good?
Mr. Paine.
No. As I say he did not--I would have accepted that argument as a debating argument but he didn't bring it up.
Senator COOPER. That is all.
Mr. Dulles.
Did he say or did you get the impression that he felt that violence was the only way to improve things, let's say, in the United States?
Mr. Paine.
I felt he was so disgusted with the whole system that he didn't see a way that was worthwhile fussing around trying to modify the situation.
Mr. Dulles.
Other than violence or he didn't go that far?
Mr. Paine.
He didn't mention advocating violence or didn't say anything in regard to violence but he did seem to me he didn't see dismissed as trivial, no difference between the parties so why join one party or another. They were all the same.
Churches--there is no avenue out that way. Education--there is nothing there. So that he never revealed to me any constructive way that wasn't violent.
Mr. Dulles.
Did he think that communism was different from capitalism in this respect?
(Short recess.)
The Chairman.
All right, gentlemen, the Commission will be in order.
Mr. Dulles.
What I was getting at with my question was as to whether he thought that probably violence was necessary with respect to both systems to achieve the millennium that he sought or did he think it was just necessary with regard to the American system.
Mr. Paine.
He didn't reveal to me to my satisfaction what criticism he found of the Soviet Union. He had indicated he didn't like it. But I wasn't aware that he was proposing to change that system also in some way. Neither did he ever speak, he never spoke to me, in a way that I could see a paradise, see his paradise. He spoke only, he was opposed to exploitation of man by man. That was his motivating power.
(At this point Senator Cooper left the hearing room.)
Mr. Liebeler.
Did Oswald indicate to you in any way that he had been
|
