Mr. THORNLEY. Yes; humorously, satirically. One day we were unloading, moving a radarscope off the truck and it slipped, and he said, "Be careful with Big Brother's equipment." It was things like this. He did a lot of that. I remember one day he--I was walking along with my hands in my pocket, which is something you don't do in the service if you are--certainly if you are in an infantry outfit you don't dare. Things were a little lax in our outfit, so we could get away with it once in a while, so I happened to be walking along with my hands in my pockets and suddenly I heard a voice: "Hey, Smith, Winston," and rattle off a serial number, "get your hands out of your pockets," which was a direct quote from the book "1984." These are the only examples of Oswald's, that particular aspect of Oswald's character that I recall. Mr. JENNER. I am stimulated to ask you this question by something you just said. Did he have a good memory? Mr. THORNLEY. I think he must have had a good memory; yes. If he wanted to remember something, he could. I think he also had good ability to blot out unpleasant thoughts in his mind. Mr. JENNER. What about his powers of assimilation of what he read, and his powers of critique? Mr. THORNLEY. I certainly think he understood much more than many people in the press have seemed to feel. I don't think he was a man who was grasping onto his particular beliefs because he didn't understand them. I don't think he was just trying to know something over his head, by any means. I think he understood what he was talking about. Sometimes I think there were gaps in his knowledge. I think there were many things he didn't know, and this came from a haphazard education. Mr. JENNER. You became acquainted with the fact that he had had a somewhat haphazard education? Mr. THORNLEY. It was obvious. I didn't become acquainted with it specifically until recently in the news. But---- Mr. JENNER. You had that impression at the time? Mr. THORNLEY. I had that impression; yes, sir. Mr. JENNER. How did that impression arise? Because of the lack of analysis or real critique on his part of that which he was reading? Inability to assimilate the thrust of a work? Mr. THORNLEY. No; I wouldn't say that. I would say he could analyze what he read very well, but it was a very subjective impression, and the idea I got was that there were a lot of things he didn't know, and just a lot of facts that he wasn't familiar with. I guess sometimes, probably in discussions, I would run into something. I would mention something and he would say, "What is that?" I know we did have a couple of very hot arguments and I am sure we were throwing facts at one another, and he was certainly able to belt them out when he wanted to, facts that suited his purpose in arguing. Mr. JENNER. What was your impression of his--the extent of his formal education and the extent of any private education of his; that is, reading--self-education.