Greg Parker Posted August 27, 2012 Author Share Posted August 27, 2012 (edited) Cult is pejorative, tomato thrower please stop. "Cult" is accurately descriptive. You have a leader whose word is sacrosanct and whose blind followers prosetylize throughout this community. Moreover, "the Word" is based on very weak evidence and requires faith in order to "see" it without all it's leaps in logic and internal contradictions. Lastly, your faith makes you impervious to having the leaps in logic and internal contradictions sink in, even when pointed out in plain English numerous times in numerous ways. If it looks like a cult and behaves like a cult, I'm going to call it a cult. The buff or the brochure could be off,just a canceled performance. If McBride did go to the Opera with Harvey ,well that doesnt help your case. As to the matter of Stripling ,why it was handled differently ??? Gee self evident to me ?? FBI probably did get any Stripling records that were at Board.( FBI ,keep QUITE ABOUT THIS Stripling to the Board,National Security). BUT THEY HAD TO ALSO (also, a terrible word for some) go to the school to get any records there. LHO never went there officially. 1) Yes, either could be off. Thank you for that admission. Yet Armstrong was apparently quite happy to use a single brochure obtained from a Historical Society which may or may not have all the required records, to state categorically that this opera was never performed on any other dates except Oct 10 and 12, 1957, in New Orleans for the entire decade. If I had been in Armstrong's place, I would have gone to the New Orleans Opera Company for the information and I have to wonder why he didn't. In any case, I proven beyond any doubt that Oswald was not in New Orleans at the time. 2) You are appealing to your intuition again regarding Stripling. You assume "Harvey" is real and then fit a further bunch of assumptions to support your "proof". FBI "probably" got Stripling records from the board and got the board to hush it up on "grounds of National Security"? But Kudlaty was not "hushed up"? Give me a break. THOUGHT EXPERIMENTHungarian very hard to learn. Hungarians learn other languages. Grandma knew six others besides her own. Subproject 65: MKULTRA: Hungarian Refugees = Harvey THOUGHT FACT The Hungarian refugee subproject commenced after the Uprising in 1956 - a bit too late for your mythical hard left beasty boy. The rest of this latest truckload of droppings will have to wait. Edited August 27, 2012 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 (edited) 2) You are appealing to your intuition again regarding Stripling. You assume "Harvey" is real and then fit a further bunch of assumptions to support your "proof". FBI "probably" got Stripling records from the board and got the board to hush it up "grounds of National Security"? But Kudlaty was not "hushed up"? Give me a break.// END Parker +++++++++++++++++ Many a year hushed. As he said in the interview,"at that time", people obeyed the FBI and government officials. +++++++++++++++++++ If it looks like a cult and behaves like a cult, I'm going to call it a cult. // end Parker Is yours named the CULT OF NONREFUTATION ?? CASE CLOSED ??? Forged documents.......because ....??? http://www.mindserpe...Forged_docs.htm unrefuted .......................................... ############## THOUGHT EXPERIMENT Marguerite Oswald didnt want to be a mother. At 171/2 she worked as a receptionist for a United Fruit Company connected law firm. United Fruit had deep ties with ONI. Getting rid of her children was a legal problem. Thus as a woman of small means she contacted her old work place to get free legal info. to rid herself of mother obligations. From ONI to the CIA LHO went. Its really simple. = Lee +++++++++++++++++ THOUGHT EXPERIMENT Sidney Gottlieb started out as the non-observant son of Orthodox Jewish immigrants from Hungary, born in the Bronx on August 3, 1918, under the name Joseph Scheider. He received a Ph.D. in chemistry from the California Institute of Technology. A stutterer from childhood, Gottlieb got a master's degree in speech therapy. In 1951, Gottlieb joined the Central Intelligence Agency. Maybe he had a cadre of Hungarian children for mind control experimentation ? = Harvey Edited August 27, 2012 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 27, 2012 Author Share Posted August 27, 2012 2) You are appealing to your intuition again regarding Stripling. You assume "Harvey" is real and then fit a further bunch of assumptions to support your "proof". FBI "probably" got Stripling records from the board and got the board to hush it up "grounds of National Security"? But Kudlaty was not "hushed up"? Give me a break.// END Parker +++++++++++++++++ Many a year hushed. As he said in the interview,"at that time", people obeyed the FBI and government officials. Unbelievable crap. +++++++++++++++++++ If it looks like a cult and behaves like a cult, I'm going to call it a cult. // end Parker Is yours named the CULT OF NONREFUTATION ?? CASE CLOSED ??? Forged documents.......because ....??? http://www.mindserpe...Forged_docs.htm unrefuted .......................................... ? I'm sorry. I thought proving McBride has no credibility regarding his memory does tend to refute any charges of forgery. But speaking of unrefuted... that would be 7 pages worth of posts here by me. Why do you think your fellow cultists are staying away in droves, Steve? They have abandoned you because they realize the L & H fantasy is over. ############## THOUGHT EXPERIMENT Marguerite Oswald didnt want to be a mother. At 171/2 she worked as a receptionist for a United Fruit Company connected law firm. United Fruit had deep ties with ONI. Getting rid of her children was a legal problem. Thus as a woman of small means she contacted her old work place to get free legal info. to rid herself of mother obligations. From ONI to the CIA LHO went. Its really simple. = Lee +++++++++++++++++ THOUGHT EXPERIMENT Sidney Gottlieb started out as the non-observant son of Orthodox Jewish immigrants from Hungary, born in the Bronx on August 3, 1918, under the name Joseph Scheider. He received a Ph.D. in chemistry from the California Institute of Technology. A stutterer from childhood, Gottlieb got a master's degree in speech therapy. In 1951, Gottlieb joined the Central Intelligence Agency. Maybe he had a cadre of Hungarian children for mind control experimentation ? = Harvey Maybe... probably... must have... some of your favorite words and phrases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 (edited) John Armstrong - Francetta Schubert Interview John Armstrong - Francetta Schubert Interview (Tape deals with Lee Harvey Owsald) [1950's] Francetta Schubert-Fran was a student at Stripling Jr. High in Ft. Worth, TX in the 1954-55 school year. In the fall of 1954 she and her friends watched (Harvey) Oswald walk across the street to his home at 2220 Thomas Place every day for lunch (student Doug Gann remembered Oswald playing basketball on the schoolground). Fran remembered that Oswald was a year ahead of her and did not attend a full semester. While Harvey Oswald was attending Stripling, the tall, husky Lee Oswald was attending Beauregard Jr. High in New Orleans with a near-perfect attendance record. Ed Voebel took the infamous "classroom" photo of Lee Oswald in October, 1954 that appeared in Life Magazine in which he appears to have a missing front tooth. Voebel told the WC that he thought that Oswald lost a tooth in a fight with Johnny Neumeyer ############################################### John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 1 (call me Harvey) Myra DaRouse Larue-Oswald's (Harvey) 8th grade home room teacher (and girls physical education teacher). When Oswald arrived in Myra's homeroom at Beauregard Jr. High in NO, during "basketball season," he told her that he wanted to be called "Harvey." Myra described Harvey as short, slight, and without an "ounce of fight" in him. Myra recalled the day when a piano fell onto Harvey. She took him to the Monte Lepre Clinic, on Canal Street, and then to his home on Exchange Alley. At this time, according to WC documents and WC testimony of Myrtle and Julian Evans (close friends of MO), LHO and his tall, nice-looking mother were living in one of their apartments on St. Marys Street. After the end of the 8th grade Myra never again saw Harvey. When I showed Myra a photograph of Oswald (Lee) in Life Magazine (9th grade-taken in October, 1954), she looked at the photo a long time and then said, "That's not Harvey. That's not the boy I knew from my homeroom. I don't know who this boy is." ================================================ John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 2 (no part time job) ================================================= John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 4 ================================================= John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 5 ################################################## But speaking of unrefuted... that would be 7 pages worth of posts here by me. Why do you think your fellow cultists are staying away in droves, Steve? They have abandoned you because they realize the L & H fantasy is over. // end Parker == Golly I found your song. Legend In His own Mind (JANA HELLER - LYRICS ) He’s got looks like an angel And that’s a good start Everything’s in place Except he’s got no heart He’s got eyes for the mirror Or they’re over your head When you’re walking beside him You feel like you’re dead He’s a legend in his own mind He’s perfectly in tune He’s perfectly in time He’s a legend in his own mind He’s a legend in his own mind He’s read all the right books Seen all the right bands He’s got the answers written down In the palm of his hand He has the right hair colour Dressed oh so smart Everything’s in place Except he’s got no heart He’s a legend in his own mind He’s perfectly in tune He’s perfectly in time He’s a legend in his own mind He’s a legend in his own mind He’s so perfect He’s so perfect His girlfriend’s very skinny His friends have lots of coke He knows when to be sensitive And when to tell a joke He knows that he’s residing In everybody’s dreams He’s quite sure that he’s made it And what the hell that means He’s a legend in his own mind He’s perfectly in tune He’s perfectly in time He’s a legend in his own mind He’s a legend in his own mind He’s so perfect (He thinks) He’s so perfect He has a brand new band And they sound like xxxx But they wear the right clothes So they’ll get a smash hit He thinks Americans are vulgar Africans are quaint He knows besides Mother Theresa He’s the only living saint He’s a legend in his own mind He’s perfectly in tune He’s perfectly in time He’s a legend in his own mind He’s a legend in his own mind He’s a legend in his own mind Edited August 27, 2012 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 But speaking of unrefuted... that would be 7 pages worth of posts here by me. Why do you think your fellow cultists are staying away in droves, Steve? They have abandoned you because they realize the L & H fantasy is over. Not abandoned... no need for all of us - or just me for that matter - to get in Steve's way.... and CULTISTS... really? ok, whatever - a rose by any other name.... Just like the WCR supporters you've gone to discrediting a person's memory as the lynchpin to unravelling everything that follows... There are REAL PEOPLE, with REAL MEMORIES of a Lee HARVEY and a LEE Harvey that do not match... in fact, the conflict with each other. Records are incomplete... Witnesses have FBI stories to tell that sound eerily similiar to others who had "evidence" removed during the investigation only to have PHOTCOPIES replacing Originals. The photos show two different people identified as one... If we are in a position as a CULT, to accept the horrific alteration of JFK's body between Dallas and DC - and at this point I find it virtually impossible to offer up a rebuttal to the evidence of Lifton and Horne that reconciles the wound at Parkland with the wound in DC - then we should be in a position to be open to most any possibility including the recruitment of Intelligence assets and the merging of a two lives to cover for one. Then, when we add the ongiong inconsistencies of Marina, MO, and Robert when recalling Oswald's life history... the obvious tampering with evidence related to his history and the GOVERNMENT DENYING anything of the sort - I'm inclined to take another look... So Greg... we see you are convinced of your position... so no more "and what abouts" in this thread... But I for one am not done... thanks for the great discussion DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 27, 2012 Author Share Posted August 27, 2012 But speaking of unrefuted... that would be 7 pages worth of posts here by me. Why do you think your fellow cultists are staying away in droves, Steve? They have abandoned you because they realize the L & H fantasy is over. Not abandoned... no need for all of us - or just me for that matter - to get in Steve's way.... Yep. Abandoned. Where are all the others? Normally they all pile on to slap each other on the back - much like you did with Steve when he joined in - but not a peep from them here. and CULTISTS... really? ok, whatever - a rose by any other name.... CULT an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing,especially as manifested by a body of admirers: 3. the object of such devotion. 4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc. Just like the WCR supporters you've gone to discrediting a person's memory as the lynchpin to unravelling everything that follows... Once again... that is a misrepresentation of what I have done. I personally have not discredited anyone's memory. I provided evidence such as newspaper stories which prove beyond a shadow of doubt that those memories were false. The fact that you will not accept this just shows the extent of your brainwashing by fellow cult members. There are REAL PEOPLE, with REAL MEMORIES of a Lee HARVEY and a LEE Harvey that do not match... in fact, the conflict with each other. Records are incomplete... Witnesses have FBI stories to tell that sound eerily similiar to others who had "evidence" removed during the investigation only to have PHOTCOPIES replacing Originals. All of which can be explained in more than one way. The photos show two different people identified as one... That is an opinion - not a fact. If we are in a position as a CULT, to accept the horrific alteration of JFK's body between Dallas and DC - and at this point I find it virtually impossible to offer up a rebuttal to the evidence of Lifton and Horne that reconciles the wound at Parkland with the wound in DC - then we should be in a position to be open to most any possibility including the recruitment of Intelligence assets and the merging of a two lives to cover for one. Who is "we"? Don't include me in that, please. Then, when we add the ongiong inconsistencies of Marina, MO, and Robert when recalling Oswald's life history... the obvious tampering with evidence related to his history and the GOVERNMENT DENYING anything of the sort - I'm inclined to take another look... You keep assuming all this has only one possible meaning, when the reality is there are a number. So Greg... we see you are convinced of your position... so no more "and what abouts" in this thread... Wrong David. My "position" on the assassination is a work in progress. It is YOU and the rest of the cult who is convinced of their position and you hold it with all the zeal of Fundamentalist Christians and Jihadists, and your "evidence" is about on a par with theirs. But I for one am not done... thanks for the great discussion DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 27, 2012 Author Share Posted August 27, 2012 (edited) That's an impressive list of witnesses there, Steve. Here's another impressive list of witnesses in another case: In 1837, Polly Adams described seeing a man who became known as Spring Heeled Jack. She described him as having iron tipped fingers, with "Devil-like" features and pop-eyes. She accused him of ripping her blouse and scorching her belly by shooting blue flame from his mouth. The following year, her encounter was publicized by the local Lord Mayor, Sir John Cowan. This publicity bought forth a torrent of new witnesses. Among them, two sisters, one of whom (Lucy) was temporarily blinded by this blue flame spitting monster. These reports encouraged further sightings, including one by Jane Alsop who heard a knock at her door and a call for candle by someone identifying himself as a police officer and claiming to have caught Spring Heeled Jack - but as she took the candle out and moved closer to him, she could see he was dressed in white oil skin, had glowing red eyes and was spitting blue and white flames. He then attacked her with his "icy claws". The sightings continued, sometimes with a break of a year or two, for many more years to come, and even crossed the Atlantic to the US. It was as impossible then as it is now, to disprove these witnesses, or indeed, the existence of Spring Heeled Jack, so by your logic, all the accounts must be true. In fact, because Spring Heeled Jack and the witnesses can't be disproven , he is more likely to be real than Harvey because the witness who started the whole Harvey ball rolling has now been shot down, along with at least some of the others including Kudlaty and Kurion. Maybe ol' SHJ came back as Harvey? Edited August 27, 2012 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Thanks Greg... Cults? Zealots? Jihadists? Should we talk you back from the ledge? You keep assuming all this has only one possible meaning' date=' when the reality is there are a number.[/color'] Seems to us that you are the only one promoting a SINGLE MEANING for each of these instances and will not hear anything more about any of the possibilities.... So now he DIDN'T GO to Taiwan because a FBI document says so? WHEN did we begin taking FBI photocopies of documents, without original records to authenticate them, as examples of believeable evidence in this case Greg... I must have missed the memo.... Uncoroborrated FBI reports... seems we used a whole bunch of those to discredit the WCR since so many of these were simply made up out of thin air or altered to convey the exact OPPOSITE of what was said... yet you feel warranted in using them as definitive authentication that Armstrong is wrong.? And that every Oswald sighting is without warrant? (too many here to list yet how about we forget about the "sightings" and concentrate on the evidence being used. Bottom line:I have produced the FBI reports saying what they say. If anyone wants to claim the FBI lied in those reports, then let them prove it. I have given the information as to how they can. Otherwise it just looks likes some people would prefer not to find out the facts and just go on believing whatever they want to believe. As we lilke to say... you're the one useing the evidence - you be the one to authenticate it - All I see is you accepting the FBI reports at face value... as opposed to actually looking at Armstrong's evidence BEFORE you post... I went back and reread the entire thread.... YOU seem to be saying that every sighting was not Oswald while you think our position is that every one was... we had a discussion about the Jiffy Mart Oswald... you like to say it was just some young kid and the clerk was doing his 15 mins of fame routine... that is ONE POSSIBILITY... so is the possibility that it was someone looking alot like Oswald and using ID that said so. You asked Kathy about the Mastoid and then go on to state fact - that you got from the FBI reports of his timeline ....... if you have somethng that shows he was said to have the mastoidectomy while being seen in Minsk - that is not an FBI documentbut an original Russian document after his "physical"... please post it... in the mean time it's just the same... the FBI said so. Kathy, can you answer this.. which one had Otitis Media? Because the one who had a mastoidectomy at age 5 had it. The one who was at YH had it. The one who turned up in Family Court had it. The one in the Marines had it. The one who entered hospital in Minsk had it In 1946 this record would indicate that this Oswald was 7 years and 4 months old... not 5. Not everything you write is just off the top of your head Greg... but in this thread you seem not to have checked much of anything first... Do you have any other coroborration? or is it just more of the FBI telling us what THEIR OSWALD's history is. Same as the evidence for this mastoidectomy in Family Court, the Marines and Minsk? All FBI uncoroborrated documents? I looked at the links for the January story... FBI SAID January said... FBI SAID that January concluded, commented, reiterated.... but JANUARY did not read and sign this report as an accurate representation of what he said now did he? Was he called before the WC to tell his story or at least substantiate what was written that he said? Nope I'm not going to go item by item thru all your posts Greg... yet so much of what you have relied upon to refute Armstrong is either completely uncorobrrated FBI reports, the claim that it's all due to dyslexia/Aspergers, and that the Marine record is also incorrect. Like so many things that point to CIA involvement and the dead Harvey's innocence, they are simply mistakes made by fallible humans... except they NEVER EVER fall in Oswald's favor... The only mistakes ever made are if they point away from Harvey and directly to the CIA/SS/FBI... No Greg... the FBI/Gov't is the unimpeachible source of accurate evidence in this case... kinda sounds like a cultist in your belief, no? or just ask 1) Vincent Drain, 2) James Cadigan, and 3) Clint Hill cause THEY will help us understand the true nature of the Gov't's investigation... 1) the evidence has a clean Chain of Custody... 2) Mr. EISENBERG. Now, the document as we see it now exhibits extremely faint writing. Can you explain the reason for that? Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this is due to treatment of the card for latent fingerprints by chemical process which bleaches and makes inks run. Mr. EISENBERG. Was the document treated to restore the original color after it had been treated for fingerprints? Mr. CADIGAN No; from looking at this, it has been desilvered, but it has not been completely desilvered since parts of the stains of the chemical treatment remain. Mr. EISENBERG. When you first saw the document and made your examination, was the document in its original condition, that is, had it been treated yet for fingerprints? Mr. CADIGAN. I never saw the original. Mr. EISENBERG. You never saw the original? Mr. CADIGAN. No; I had a Xerox copy of the original exhibit. I did not see this original exhibit. Mr. EISENBERG. You said before you had examined this exhibit? Mr. CADIGAN. To be more exact, I examined a Xerox copy of this exhibit. 3) Mr. SPECTER. What did you observe as to President Kennedy's condition on arrival at the hospital? Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lifton Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Greg, it's interesting to hear about Texas' relative progressivism - the I Am A Patsy ms used to be somewhere on line, I read it maybe 5 years ago (and I may be recalling incorrectly but I seem to remember that Reitzes, who at one time was a very convincing Conspiracy supporter, had something to do with it's placement on the net). One thing that I do not think has been addressed in terms of photographic evidence and Oswald is that older photography is really just an analog representation of reality - and so will vary. Think of yourself in multiple photos, even today; some people look quite different in different shots, even at the same angle, in the same lighting. So although Oswald's features to seem to evolve (devolve?) from photo to photo, who knows? Though I do think there was clearly misrepresentation going on re: Oswald, having read Armstrong a while back, I think the scheme he presents is just too complicated to be real. Though in the JFK case I keep finding the need to readjust my opinions as reality moves closer and closer to the ridiculous. Things I never would have believed 40 years ago just keep turning out to be unfortunately true. The "I'm a Patsy"" manuscript is in volume 12 of the HSCA. So you can just go to History Matters website for that. DSL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 28, 2012 Author Share Posted August 28, 2012 (edited) Thanks Greg...Cults? Zealots? Jihadists? Should we talk you back from the ledge? David, I'm not the one who should consider escape from a cult. Seems to us that you are the only one promoting a SINGLE MEANING for each of these instances and will not hear anything more about any of the possibilities....So now he DIDN'T GO to Taiwan because a FBI document says so? WHEN did we begin taking FBI photocopies of documents, without original records to authenticate them, as examples of believeable evidence in this case Greg... I must have missed the memo.... "Seems to us"? Hmmm. Care to elaborate, David? Who's loading the gun for you and letting you shoot yourself in the foot with it? Did you miss where I said it was possible he did go to Taiwan, but was flown back pretty quickly for medical treatment - and that this medical treatment could possibly have been cover for an intel op or intel training? I thought you read through all this again? The only ones positing a single meaning is you guys. It is "Harvey" or "bust". I allow for a number of possibilities except those excluded by evidence e.g. "Harvey". Uncoroborrated FBI reports... seems we used a whole bunch of those to discredit the WCR since so many of these were simply made up out of thin air or altered to convey the exact OPPOSITE of what was said...yet you feel warranted in using them as definitive authentication that Armstrong is wrong.? And that every Oswald sighting is without warrant? Once again you damage your claim to have read the whole thread. Right in the very first post, I said that: 1. Sightings of Oswald when he was known to be elsewhere. As far as I can tell, no sighting of Oswald has ever been dismissed by the proponents of "Two Oswalds". Yet the sheer number and variety of them alone suggests some are the products of fertile imaginations / planted phony stories (e.g. the DPD form showing Oswald and Ruby involved in a disturbance) ; mistaken identity (e.g Ruby and Oswald at sex parties - my own research shows this was far more likely to have been Larry Crafard) or; by deliberate impersonations on a ad hoc basis (e.g Mexico City) Why do you keep falsely insisting that I use only FBI reports? I have also used newspaper reports and the HSCA among other sources. You asked Kathy about the Mastoid and then go on to state fact - that you got from the FBI reports of his timeline ....... if you have somethng that shows he was said to have the mastoidectomy while being seen in Minsk - that is not an FBI documentbut an original Russian document after his "physical"... please post it... in the mean time it's just the same... the FBI said so. In 1946 this record would indicate that this Oswald was 7 years and 4 months old... not 5. Not everything you write is just off the top of your head Greg... but in this thread you seem not to have checked much of anything first... Do you have any other coroborration? or is it just more of the FBI telling us what THEIR OSWALD's history is. Same as the evidence for this mastoidectomy in Family Court, the Marines and Minsk? All FBI uncoroborrated documents? Before you shoot yourself in the foot yet again - this time by by saying I haven't checked anything, you might consider OTHER POSSIBILITIES... such as a simple math error... just like the one you just made... Oswald turned 7 in Oct 1946. The operation was in February... so he was 6. Not 5 like I said. Not 7 like you said. Kathy, can you answer this.. which one had Otitis Media? Because the one who had a mastoidectomy at age 5 7 6 had it. (source: FBI report) The one who was at YH had it. (source: YH medical reports) The one who turned up in Family Court had it. (source: WC testimony of Marguerite) The one in the Marines had it. (source: Marines medical reports; testimony) The one who entered hospital in Minsk had it (source: Minsk medical records, which specifically state "diagnosis when admitted: Chronic Otitis Media...") ----------------------------------------------------- So I'll repeat what I said to Kathy: The only way I can see around this for Armstrong's theory to work is to say that both boys had this particular ear problem. But if you go down that road, my response is going to be, "so the CIA was smart enough to use boys who both had Otitis Media, but this same CIA was too dumb to match them on height, intelligence, language ability, or even eye color." I'll now add, but I guess you could also claim all the documents cited are faked, and Marguerite never said what the transcript says she did. I looked at the links for the January story... FBI SAID January said... FBI SAID that January concluded, commented, reiterated.... but JANUARY did not read and sign this report as an accurate representation of what he said now did he?Was he called before the WC to tell his story or at least substantiate what was written that he said? Nope I'm not going to go item by item thru all your posts Greg... yet so much of what you have relied upon to refute Armstrong is either completely uncorobrrated FBI reports, the claim that it's all due to dyslexia/Aspergers, and that the Marine record is also incorrect. Since you are intent on only ever discussing part of what I said, I think people interested enough should go back and read ALL of what I had to say about January. All three claims in your highlighted text above are completely wrong. 1. I'm losing count of how many times I've had to remind you that I do not exclusively use FBI reports. And again - anyone can go back and verify that if they want. 2. I do NOT claim he had dyslexia and Asperger's. I do not know how anyone can claim to have read this thread and make that statement. What I have said is that there is no support for any diagnosis of dyslexia - and I do not believe he had it. I do think there are multiple layers of support to conclude he had Asperger's. 3. It is YOU who needs the Marine records to be wrong, not me. I'm quite alright with his name being listed in the Unit Diaries (if that is specifically what you are referring to?). He was meant to go, but either pulled out at the last minute for medical treatment, or went and was quickly flown back for medical treatment. You, otoh, need the reports of Otitis Media to disappear, and perhaps more... Edited August 28, 2012 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Before you shoot yourself in the foot yet again - this time by by saying I haven't checked anything, you might consider OTHER POSSIBILITIES... such as a simple math error... just like the one you just made... Oswald turned 7 in Oct 1946. The operation was in February... so he was 6. Not 5 like I said. Not 7 like you said. Let's see October 18, 1939... I was thinking 1938.... and I did not miss your first post Greg... fertile minds = you way of saying they were made up... some sightings were, some weren't... to say there were no other people looking like Oswald and using his name would be incorrectly stating the evidence. mistaken identity = again, bottom line, you have PEOPLE making mistakes supported by unsigned, uncorroborated FBI accounts deliberate impersonation = events that only happen outside the US and definitely NOT in TX... Cause the CIA does not operate on american soil - right? Cause impersonating him in Mexico only makes sense if you DO NOT impersonate him anywhere else... C'mon Greg... don't tell me you are not using anything but FBI reports... most every one of these is FBI and while discussin 1953/54 you post 1954/55 links... uh, ok. Myra Darouse - Beauregard Myra "claimed" to be Oswald's home teacher because she was. Just not in any part of 1953 as she apparently thought some 40 years later. http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=34 He attended Beauregard from 1/13/54 to 6/10/55. http://www.maryferre...971&relPageId=3 My guess is that Armstrong honed in on her because the FBI report on her doesn't give any time frame and because she described him as "physically small". Both of those things suited Armstrong's theory. But the FBI was more thorough than you'd imagine for an agency allegedly trying to hide certain facts. They also interviewed: Fellow Beauregard students - Peggy Zimmerman - recalled Oswald as attending in 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=26 Mrs Bernierita Smith - recalled Oswald as attending in 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=26 Mrs Anna Langlois - recalled Oswald as attending in 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=27 Fred O'sullivan - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview him? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=27 Jack Loyakano - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview him? http://www.maryferre...bsPageId=715120 Carroll Battistella - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=28 Joan Burgard - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=29 One final thing - in Louisiana, a Census Form was completed for EVERY child attending school in that state. Did Armstrong check Census records? http://www.maryferre...07&relPageId=83 "Oswald's unit was deployed for Taiwan on September 16..." http://www.maryferre...65&relPageId=94 (DJ: Almost every one of these links is to an uncorroborated FBI report... or to a letter from Blakey quoting the DoD... DOD "says" he stayed behind and they quote Vol 19 p.609 http://www.history-m...Vol19_0311a.htm which is the Donabedian Exhibits... please point out where it shows he comes BACK after leaving either the 14th (according to the Diaries) or as you say the 16th. The other reference is Vol 8 p313 http://www.history-m..._Vol8_0161a.htm which is also Dr. Donabedian telling us that the document says "SENT TO MAINSIDE FOR SMEAR" this does not say MAINLAND, Greg... MAINSIDE DISPENSARY is in Japan.... You do not see how it is possible that HARVEY is in Taiwan while LEE is being treated for STD.? You'd rather us believe that he simply stayed behind... yet then PLEASE explain how he is both ON THE BOAT BACK from Taiwan on the 6th of October per the Ping-Tung Unit Diary? Below are the Unit Diaries... as well as a page from the man's health records U.D.: "was in Ping Tung, N Taiwan 30 September 1958" "returned to Atsugi Japan 5 October 1958" - we can see from the medical records that he is checked on the 20th 22nd and 29th... the 6th and 24th of October AND AGAIN on Nov 3rd! - didn't you say that this might be cover for a training mission...? Except A boat sales from Japan with an Oswald on it Nov 2nd.... Now the next block... shows Oswald "sick at Atsugi Hospital from 7 October 1958 to 13 October 1958".... while the Blakey documents say hospitalization from Oct 7 thru Oct 15... And the other Oswald is seen on Oct 6th with "SEVERE HEAVY DISCHARGE due to heavy lifting" which is one week after the Sept 29th visit in which he was markedly improved... and then the unit diary tells us LEE is in the hospital from the 7th to the 13th... yet there is no record of his being treated for anything in his medical record. Greg, with HARVEY returning from Taiwan...LEE had to be moved. On Nov 2 HARVEY leaves Japan On Nov 3, LEE is once again seen at the Atsugi Hospital... wonder why there are no records of his being in that hospital from the 7th to the 15th? And according to the records below...10/6/58 thru 12/22/58 he does not seem to have left Japan yet.... isn't MAG II and 1st MAW in Japan? yet the Diary has him leaving Nov 2 ?? The HSCA finds that on Nov 2 Oswald leaves Japan... that the WCR did not have access to MAGII... yet the medical pages show that Oswald had "cocci noted!" on Oct 24th with a note to return in 5 days. Instead we have a note by the same Dr on 11/3... According to Armstrong... Sept/Oct/Nov 1958 is when the switch occurs... when HARVEY returns from Taiwan and becomes LEE, we find that from Nov 2 on, our Mr Oswald no longer has any hemorroids or STD problems... and is returned to CA while LEE remains at the U-2/CIA base at Atsugi Japan. Greg, if you want to keep chalking all this up to MISTAKES in the record and MISTAKES in the testimonies and memories - you're of course entitled to whatever you'd like to think. When you are not linking to WE SAID HE SAID FBI reports you link to the HSCA conclusions or report... another paragon of quality evidence... These are the docs Greg, THESE are what Armstrong used to find the discrepencies in the military records. Not what the FBI said the witnesses said, or what Blakey says the DoD said. When combined with the civilian evidence there is a strong indication of two people merged into one history to create the little commie that became LHO. I'm sorry but I do not put faith into the documents you used to support your argument... the FBI tells us there were only 3 shots and 2 hits... the FBI will only remain a window into the conspiracy... That you would choose to use these FBI reports as the defense for your rebuttals is quite a surprise... unless you have something to corroborate them? I'm done with this now Greg... we are at an impass and I respect your postings too much to continue just disagreeing. Arguments that are based in "everything offered against the truth must be a MISTAKE" is a LNer tactic and is simply beneath you imo... fast forward a little while and this red-blooded american is now a defecting, Russian speaking communist/marxist... that's quite the transition. Peace DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 29, 2012 Author Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) Let's see October 18, 1939... I was thinking 1938.... Cool. You made an honest mistake. I never accused you of anything else - as you did me. and I did not miss your first post Greg... Well then your interpretation needs fine tuning. fertile minds = you way of saying they were made up... some sightings were, some weren't... to say there were no other people looking like Oswald and using his name would be incorrectly stating the evidence. mistaken identity = again, bottom line, you have PEOPLE making mistakes supported by unsigned, uncorroborated FBI accounts deliberate impersonation = events that only happen outside the US and definitely NOT in TX... Cause the CIA does not operate on american soil - right? Cause impersonating him in Mexico only makes sense if you DO NOT impersonate him anywhere else... I used MC as an EXAMPLE (which is what e.g. denotes). I did not say it was the ONLY time it happened, nor the only place. C'mon Greg... don't tell me you are not using anything but FBI reports... most every one of these is FBI and while discussin 1953/54 you post 1954/55 links... uh, ok. Once again, it is your comprehension at fault, not my use of documents. Armstrong decreed that before any one claimed McBride was mistaken in his memory (regarding time frames he gave the FBI - who somehow failed to change them), it was incumbent upon researchers to interview McBride for themselves. My point with all the reports below was to show that Armstrong didn't take his own advice when it came to 7 students who gave the FBI time frames which did not suit him. The same can be seen when we come to fellow employees at the dental clinic who gave time frames antithetical to the needs of Armstrong. To be clear, it's not whether the students were correct or not (though they were because the newspaper accounts of '56 riots in Ft Worth puts paid to McBride). It's that Armstrong advocated interviewing McBride to ascertain whether what he said was true, but doesn't do the same with those whose data goes against him - and that allows him and his flock to summarily dismiss those reports as "uncorroborated". It's a rigged game you guys play. Myra Darouse - Beauregard Myra "claimed" to be Oswald's home teacher because she was. Just not in any part of 1953 as she apparently thought some 40 years later. http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=34 He attended Beauregard from 1/13/54 to 6/10/55. http://www.maryferre...971&relPageId=3 My guess is that Armstrong honed in on her because the FBI report on her doesn't give any time frame and because she described him as "physically small". Both of those things suited Armstrong's theory. But the FBI was more thorough than you'd imagine for an agency allegedly trying to hide certain facts. They also interviewed: Fellow Beauregard students - Peggy Zimmerman - recalled Oswald as attending in 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=26 Mrs Bernierita Smith - recalled Oswald as attending in 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=26 Mrs Anna Langlois - recalled Oswald as attending in 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=27 Fred O'sullivan - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview him? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=27 Jack Loyakano - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview him? http://www.maryferre...bsPageId=715120 Carroll Battistella - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=28 Joan Burgard - 54/55. Did Armstrong interview her? http://www.maryferre...71&relPageId=29 One final thing - in Louisiana, a Census Form was completed for EVERY child attending school in that state. Did Armstrong check Census records? http://www.maryferre...07&relPageId=83 "Oswald's unit was deployed for Taiwan on September 16..." http://www.maryferre...65&relPageId=94 (DJ: Almost every one of these links is to an uncorroborated FBI report... or to a letter from Blakey quoting the DoD... DOD "says" he stayed behind and they quote Vol 19 p.609 http://www.history-m...Vol19_0311a.htm which is the Donabedian Exhibits... please point out where it shows he comes BACK after leaving either the 14th (according to the Diaries) or as you say the 16th. The other reference is Vol 8 p313 http://www.history-m..._Vol8_0161a.htm which is also Dr. Donabedian telling us that the document says "SENT TO MAINSIDE FOR SMEAR" this does not say MAINLAND, Greg... MAINSIDE DISPENSARY is in Japan.... No. It's not the 14th according to the diaries. The date only indicates the day the entry was made. When did he come back? If he didn't go, how does he come back? You do not see how it is possible that HARVEY is in Taiwan while LEE is being treated for STD.? You're right, I don't see how a creature of someone's vivid imagination was in Tawain - or anywhere else. You'd rather us believe that he simply stayed behind... yet then PLEASE explain how he is both ON THE BOAT BACK from Taiwan on the 6th of October per the Ping-Tung Unit Diary? Clearly, there is a problem with the records, and equally clearly, you are determined to exploit that for your own ends. My best guess is that the diary is actually filled out by some desk jockey who did not realize Oswald had not boarded to due ill-health and so also marked him as returning. Any decent conspirators would have cleaned this mess up as you insist they did in other cases... Below are the Unit Diaries... as well as a page from the man's health records U.D.: "was in Ping Tung, N Taiwan 30 September 1958" "returned to Atsugi Japan 5 October 1958" - we can see from the medical records that he is checked on the 20th 22nd and 29th... the 6th and 24th of October AND AGAIN on Nov 3rd! - didn't you say that this might be cover for a training mission...? Except A boat sales from Japan with an Oswald on it Nov 2nd.... Now the next block... shows Oswald "sick at Atsugi Hospital from 7 October 1958 to 13 October 1958".... while the Blakey documents say hospitalization from Oct 7 thru Oct 15... And the other Oswald is seen on Oct 6th with "SEVERE HEAVY DISCHARGE due to heavy lifting" which is one week after the Sept 29th visit in which he was markedly improved... and then the unit diary tells us LEE is in the hospital from the 7th to the 13th... yet there is no record of his being treated for anything in his medical record. Greg, with HARVEY returning from Taiwan...LEE had to be moved. On Nov 2 HARVEY leaves Japan On Nov 3, LEE is once again seen at the Atsugi Hospital... wonder why there are no records of his being in that hospital from the 7th to the 15th? And according to the records below...10/6/58 thru 12/22/58 he does not seem to have left Japan yet.... isn't MAG II and 1st MAW in Japan? yet the Diary has him leaving Nov 2 ?? The HSCA finds that on Nov 2 Oswald leaves Japan... that the WCR did not have access to MAGII... yet the medical pages show that Oswald had "cocci noted!" on Oct 24th with a note to return in 5 days. Instead we have a note by the same Dr on 11/3... Here is the record you're talking about. There is a major problem with what you say. It is NOT the same doctor, as can be seen with just a quick glance at both the hand writing and the initials. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=141372 Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document; that you've only taken Armstrong's word for what it shows - behavior consistent with being a devotee in a cult rather than an independent and open-minded researcher? According to Armstrong... Sept/Oct/Nov 1958 is when the switch occurs... when HARVEY returns from Taiwan and becomes LEE, we find that from Nov 2 on, our Mr Oswald no longer has any hemorroids or STD problems... Yes. By some miracle the treatment received on Nov 3 seems to have worked. That's never happened before in the history of medicine... a course of treatment that actually fixes the problem! and is returned to CA while LEE remains at the U-2/CIA base at Atsugi Japan. Greg, if you want to keep chalking all this up to MISTAKES in the record and MISTAKES in the testimonies and memories - you're of course entitled to whatever you'd like to think. When you are not linking to WE SAID HE SAID FBI reports you link to the HSCA conclusions or report... another paragon of quality evidence... These are the docs Greg, THESE are what Armstrong used to find the discrepencies in the military records. Not what the FBI said the witnesses said, or what Blakey says the DoD said. When combined with the civilian evidence there is a strong indication of two people merged into one history to create the little commie that became LHO. I'm sorry but I do not put faith into the documents you used to support your argument... the FBI tells us there were only 3 shots and 2 hits... the FBI will only remain a window into the conspiracy... That you would choose to use these FBI reports as the defense for your rebuttals is quite a surprise... unless you have something to corroborate them? I'm done with this now Greg... So you're not going to say who has been loading your gun? we are at an impass and I respect your postings too much to continue just disagreeing. Arguments that are based in "everything offered against the truth must be a MISTAKE" is a LNer tactic and is simply beneath you imo... fast forward a little while and this red-blooded american is now a defecting, Russian speaking communist/marxist... that's quite the transition. Meanwhile here is a list of items that you guys haven't touched. Direct quotes from past posts: one) there is no equivalence between Armstrong's Two Oswald Theory and the Lonsdale affair. Assuming the ID of dead people has long been an option for spies and criminals. The de La Guardia twins were arrested and tried on drug trafficking charges - which may or may not have had a political motive concerning one of the other arrestees. I have searched for some indication that they were involved in spying and if so, that it entailed assuming each other's identity, and have found none. What exactly does Armstrong claim about them that he believes shows equivalence? Bottom line -- if they were in fact spies, and if they did pretend to be each other as part of their spy activities -that at least makes some sense. They looked very much alike and shared personality traits and personal history. The theory that two unrelated boys - one noticeably shorter and brighter than the other - were used in a lifelong project involving one pretending to be the other - and moreover, necessitating the use also of a doppelganger mother for the one dubbed "Harvey", is the stuff of z grade movies. As for the files marked "Harvey Lee Oswald"... don't forget the one marked "Henry Oswald" -- maybe we should go for a triplet project? Or maybe there were other reasons for it. The work done by Bill Simpich may help clarify. The Armstrong case for two Oswald's is a lot like the WC case for a lone assassin. It is built on often misunderstand, or deliberately reshaped circumstantial evidence - padded out with irrelevancies and bloated to a supersized burger for public consumption. Both can look appealing for those hungry enough for a solution. Just don't put the ingredients under a microscope! The main difference is that whereas the WC never met an"Oswald sighting" it could accept - Armstrong never met one he could reject. But both extremes were in support of a predetermined conclusion. two)"Mr Firorello recalled Oswald was employed for approximately two months in the first part of 1956, and when he quit, he stated he was going to Texas to sell shoes... Mr Fiorello said that he [Oswald] associated mainly with another messenger Palmer McBride... McBride's main interest was astrology [sic] and he and Oswald often had long discussions on this topic. They also discussed and often argued about Russia but not specifically communism..." "Another employee at the dental lab, Lionel Slater, was interviewed and stated that he too was employed as a messenger during Oswald's period of employment... and associated mainly with Palmer McBride... He too stated that Oswald and McBride were interested in and frequently discussed astrology [sic]... " http://www.maryferre...21&relPageId=42 "John B Ulmer, Jr... worked as a messenger for Pfisterer Dental Laboratory Company from 1953 to 1961... does not recall Lee Harvey Oswald, although Oswald's photograph , taken while a student in 9th grade at Beauregard School, New Orleans, resembles a messenger who was employed there for just a few weeks in about 1956..." You cannot dismiss them as being wrong without speaking to them and investigating there claims. That was the benchmark Armstrong placed on McBride's evidence when it was suggested he was mistaken about the dates... three) From AJ Weberman's nodule on McBride In April or May 1958 OSWALD stated he was moving to Fort Worth, Texas, with his mother. In about August 1958, I received a letter from him saying he was employed as a shoe salesman in Ft. Worth. In this letter he stated he had gotten mixed-up in an anti-Negro or an anti-Communist riot in a high school grounds in Ft. Worth, Texas. I have checked google news archives and cannot find any news stories from 1958 about any riots in Forth Worth. Period. Regardless of their nature. The official timeline has Oswald moving to Collinswood St, Fort Worth in July, 1956... and Lo... I found a number of stories of riots in and around Fort Worth from early September, 1956 Here is one of those stories Ft Worth riot one Here is another scroll down to this sub-head violence threatens So long McBride... so long "Harvey"... four) The fact is that January was lying through his teeth when he claimed to be "amazed" by what the FBI report said. How do I know? The FBI interviewed PL Newman of UPI over a story he published citing an un-named source that Oswald had tried to charter a flight at Redbird during the summer. He gave the name Wayne January as his source. As a result, January was reinterviewed. http://www.maryferre...22&relPageId=71 "January reiterated the fact that the man who approached him last summer regarding this charter flight was definitely not Lee Harvey Oswald..." He goes on to repeat that the man who looked like Oswald was seated in the car the whole time. http://www.maryferre...22&relPageId=72 Now in order to protect the January story, you'll have to claim that not one, but two interviews with January were fudged, the interview with Newman was likewise fudged, and the FBI then went around and destroyed all copies of Newman's UPI story or somehow fudged the dates in it as well. Isn't that going a bit too far to protect a story that you like? five) Kudlaty This friend of Jack White from their old college days claimed he was ordered to get Oswald's school records from the school and give them to the FBI. Yet in every single other case, school records were kept, and could only be obtained from, the School District Board. six) The NYC school records I have no idea what you think they show or prove. I do know I have scrutinized them in the past and found them to be unremarkable and non-contradictory. What the record does show is an absence covering his time in Youth House, and the fact that he did not start truanting until after his 13th birthday and ceased again as soon as John Pic left his Coast Guard position as a commie chaser. seven ) The Bronx Zoo photo Your composite shows the same boy. I don't know how you can say with such certainty that one is a "big boy". The only difference appears to be the hair style. Then, like now, young boys liked to experiment with different hair styles. Robert took the photo when he visited in the Summer of '53. In this instance, it was John Pic who miss-remembered. But in Armstrong's usual fashion, all statements are true so long as they fit with the theory. So... one visit becomes two... and Pic never said the photo was not his brother - only that he didn't recognize his brother in the photo. Hardly surprising. There were large time gaps in between seeing each other, and the next time pic saw lee after '54 was not until late 1962. I've looked at photos of one of my brothers when he was a kid and doesn't look as I recall him - and that is without any large gaps in seeing each other over the years. It's both a product of memory and of the nature of photographs. eight) For Dr. Kurian's memory to be accurate, you have to posit that John Carro was part of the plot and/or cover-up. I think that is a despicable aspersion to cast on someone who had an impeccable reputation as a Parole Officer and a distinguished career as a judge. Kurian may have interviewed some kid named "Harvey" or "Oswald" - not totally uncommon names. It just wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald, or anyone pretending to be. nine) This is just more rabid speculation [re John and Minnie Smith]. They were not pseudonyms. His full name was John Ray Smith and he was born Jan 9, 1901. Their address was 6731 Norway, Dallas - a 6 bedroom, 6 bathroom home. ten) Because the one who had a mastoidectomy at age 5 7 6 had it. (source: FBI report) The one who was at YH had it. (source: YH medical reports) The one who turned up in Family Court had it. (source: WC testimony of Marguerite) The one in the Marines had it. (source: Marines medical reports; testimony) The one who entered hospital in Minsk had it (source: Minsk medical records, which specifically state "diagnosis when admitted: Chronic Otitis Media...") The only way I can see around this for Armstrong's theory to work is to say that both boys had this particular ear problem. But if you go down that road, my response is going to be, "so the CIA was smart enough to use boys who both had Otitis Media, but this same CIA was too dumb to match them on height, intelligence, language ability, or even eye color." I'll now add, but I guess you could also claim all the documents cited are faked, and Marguerite never said what the transcript says she did. eleven) The actual facts about "father" and "uncle". http://reopenkennedy...ppit-phone-call Peace DJ Edited August 29, 2012 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted August 29, 2012 Share Posted August 29, 2012 (edited) Quote Here is the record you're talking about. There is a major problem with what you say. It is NOT the same doctor, as can be seen with just a quick glance at both the hand writing and the initials. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=141372 Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document; that you've only taken Armstrong's word for what it shows - behavior consistent with being a devotee in a cult rather than an independent and open-minded researcher? You're right Greg... it appears he was seen by a variety of doctors... I saw what looked like an "H" and the previous initials are "WH"... but a closer look shows it's just dated 11/3, the day AFTER Oswald leaves Japan. I have all the H&L documents in a local flash drive... I don't need to go look for them... Your comment was unnecessary... and the cult/devotee bullsh!t ought to end, at least if we're going to discuss this as adults. The October 6th Unit Diary shows LEE OSWALD returning from Ping-Tung YOU have him staying behind to receive treatment for STD as a result of a DoD response to a Blakey inquiry. So once again.. the Marines are inable to determine who boards a ship and who doesn't? You want us to believe that when departing from Taiwan back to Japan the US MARINES did not check to see if who they said was on the ship, actually got on the ship? On Oct 6, 1958 do you suppose the MARINES were already falsifying documents for the CIA to show that a soldier was not where he was said to be, and when corrected, the US MARINES still have him returning from a place you say he never went.... ?? He was not crossed off the Unit Diary... it was never updated for his "remaining behind" so all we have is this letter from the DoD saying so in response to a Blakey inquiry William Trail states in one of theose FBI reports you put so much stock in, that he was in Taiwan with Oswald... that he was his difficult self and didn't get along with the other men (HARVEY that is) but you know all that right Greg? You have these docs memorized... How did you put it? "Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document"? http://www.maryferre...510&relPageId=9 So basically you come at me with a sentence from a DoD response to Blakey as your definitive proof that Oswald remained in Atsugi - since the medical records OBVIOUSLY show a L.H. Oswald receiving treatment for STD in Japan... What I offer are US MARINES documents that state Oswald served in Japan and Taiwan as a "aviation electronics operator"... That he was on the ship that took him to Taiwan That he was on the ship that brought him back and that during this stay the records indicate a LEE Oswald rec'd STD medical treatment... YOU want to hang your hat on a DoD letter basically stating all this was a big MISTAKE... that's one helluva weak argument Greg... btw - you keep referring to the 7 students who attended Beauregard in 54-55 with Oswald... when our discussion is about the 53-54 school year... there is no doubt about 54-55... When we have a report card for both PS44 and Beauregard.. in the 53-54 school year records for Beauregard it shows attendance for 179 total days... the transcript also shows him taking only 2-3 classes for the FIRST SEMESTER (9/53 - 1/54) and attending 89 days of school with 1 absence from 1/54-6/54 he attended school 90 days with 4 absences Yet the PS44 records show him in NYC from 9/53 thru 1/54... If he didnt start at Beauregard until 1-13-54... how does he attend school for the entire 179 day school year when the SAME RECORD has him attending 168 days in the 54-55 year? Let's keep this civil Greg... I am NOT a cultist... there are obviously conflicting records and statements in many areas of this case... You have problems with the McBride statements... I have concerns with Robert Oswald, Marina Oswald, Marguerite Oswald and what John Pic all say about our LEE/HARVEY, where he was, when he was and who he was.... That you continue to ignore the obvious physical differences described by witnesses along with the drastic ideological changes... AND the fact we cannot get an accurate height on HARVEY after 1958, nor do we see any images of LEE after 1958 with his mouth open showing his teeth bleeds right into this scenario being true... To conclude, I respect your opinion and your attempt at substantiation of this info... but I feel that a DoD letter stating something to be true when all the records indicate otherwise is not sufficient to superceded the existing records. DJ Edited February 28, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 30, 2012 Author Share Posted August 30, 2012 Here is the record you're talking about. There is a major problem with what you say. It is NOT the same doctor, as can be seen with just a quick glance at both the hand writing and the initials. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=141372 Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document; that you've only taken Armstrong's word for what it shows - behavior consistent with being a devotee in a cult rather than an independent and open-minded researcher? You're right Greg... it appears he was seen by a variety of doctors... I saw what looked like an "H" and the previous initials are "WH"... but a closer look shows it's just dated 11/3, the day AFTER Oswald leaves Japan. A closer look? My god, David, the initials AND the writing are obviously NOT the same. A quick glance should be sufficient. But you saw what you wanted to see. I have all the H&L documents in a local flash drive... I don't need to go look for them... Your comment was unnecessary... and the cult/devotee bullsh!t ought to end, at least if we're going to discuss this as adults. Not bullxxxx. It's fact. Belief in mythical beings is a cornerstone of cults, as is being impervious to any argument against such belief, as is having a head guru with multiple lieutenants doing his talking. Armstrong is the L. Ron Hubbard of JFK research. But I'll do a deal. You address all of my points as I do with you and all the others, instead of hand picking one or two, and stop referring to "Harvey" as if he were a real historical figure instead of a theoretical entity, and I will stop referring to cults. The October 6th Unit Diary shows LEE OSWALD returning from Ping-Tung YOU have him staying behind to receive treatment for STD as a result of a DoD response to a Blakey inquiry. Nope. I have him staying behind for diagnosis and treatment of a possible STD. It's obvious to me from the reply, that the DoD didn't have a clue where he was; they were concerned only with giving an answer which might stop speculation. The reason they didn't have a clue is that the records were a mess. You want to use that in order to buttress Armstrong's theory when the theory has had the sword put through it from a hundred different angles in this thread already. I've worked in public administration. Files get messy - especially when worked on by different people at different times with different record keeping skills.Most of the time it doesn't matter. Most of the time, the file doesn't belong to someone who goes on to become an historical enigma. You take such a person and then start trawling through his public records for anomalies. But what you need to do is to demonstrate that Oswald's records were uniquely anomalous. Then you might have something - if you can also overcome the myriad other problems with the theory. So once again.. the Marines are inable to determine who boards a ship and who doesn't? You want us to believe that when departing from Taiwan back to Japan the US MARINES did not check to see if who they said was on the ship, actually got on the ship? Looks to me like two days prior to sailing, a desk jockey was given the list of those going so that it could be recorded in the diary. At the last minute, Oswald was pulled out, but the record wasn't updated. On Oct 6, 1958 do you suppose the MARINES were already falsifying documents for the CIA to show that a soldier was not where he was said to be, and when corrected, the US MARINES still have him returning from a place you say he never went.... ?? Here you go again.... starting with the assumption that "Harvey" existed and then putting aspects of the paper trail in a certain sinister light for the purpose of buttressing your case. One of the most egregious errors you've made was projecting YOUR inability to look at alternative explanations on to me. I'm open to a few possibilities. You can only see one. He was not crossed off the Unit Diary... it was never updated for his "remaining behind" so all we have is this letter from the DoD saying so in response to a Blakey inquiry I think if we looked hard enough. one of us might come up with more - but what would be the point? You would dismiss it, or ignore it, just the same as you have with everything else. William Trail states in one of theose FBI reports you put so much stock in, that he was in Taiwan with Oswald... that he was his difficult self and didn't get along with the other men (HARVEY that is) but you know all that right Greg? You have these docs memorized... Trail stated he had very little memory of Oswald and seems to only really recall that Oswald was supposed to going to Taiwan. The Oswald/Taiwan thing is vague from Traial to say the least. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=57729&relPageId=12 And this pro-Armstrong page gives Trail short shrift, dismissing him as someone who "saw little of Oswald". http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/JA/JR-JA.html Donovan on the other hand told the FBI that Trail had discussed knowing Oswald in JAPAN and the trouble he (Oswald) had been in there. Trail apparently said nothing to him about Taiwan. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=331798 How did you put it? "Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document"? http://www.maryferre...510&relPageId=9 Yep. That's the report that quotes Trail as saying he "saw little of Oswald". Maybe an indication Oswald did go, but he saw little of him, because he was quickly flown back. So basically you come at me with a sentence from a DoD response to Blakey as your definitive proof that Oswald remained in Atsugi - since the medical records OBVIOUSLY show a L.H. Oswald receiving treatment for STD in Japan... No David. It is you (and others) coming at me with things like this which have alternative explanations, but where you (and others) only see one because you have already made up your mind. If the evidence doesn't fit, it is because the FBI/DoD/CIA interfered with it. You are using what you consider anomalies in the records and using those as definitive proof of the existence of "Harvey". I'm not saying they are definitive proof of anything. On the contrary, I'm saying the records can't be used as definitive proof of any one theory. See the difference? See how you project what you do on to me? What I offer are US MARINES documents that state Oswald served in Japan and Taiwan as a "aviation electronics operator"... That he was on the ship that took him to Taiwan That he was on the ship that brought him back and that during this stay the records indicate a LEE Oswald rec'd STD medical treatment... YOU want to hang your hat on a DoD letter basically stating all this was a big MISTAKE... that's one helluva weak argument Greg... No. I'm saying it's explicable in a number of ways, and the simplest of those ways is that the anomalies arose out of common garden variety sloppy records keeping. Yours is the extraordinary claim, but what you offer by way of proof for it falls far short of "extraordinary". to be continued Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) On 8/30/2012 at 6:45 AM, Greg Parker said: On 8/29/2012 at 0:46 PM, David Josephs said: Here is the record you're talking about. There is a major problem with what you say. It is NOT the same doctor, as can be seen with just a quick glance at both the hand writing and the initials. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=141372 Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document; that you've only taken Armstrong's word for what it shows - behavior consistent with being a devotee in a cult rather than an independent and open-minded researcher? You're right Greg... it appears he was seen by a variety of doctors... I saw what looked like an "H" and the previous initials are "WH"... but a closer look shows it's just dated 11/3, the day AFTER Oswald leaves Japan. A closer look? My god, David, the initials AND the writing are obviously NOT the same. A quick glance should be sufficient. But you saw what you wanted to see. Still says 11/3 Greg. The day AFTER HARVEY leaves… not something you want to address… just another “Dr. Desk jockey” mistake to relieve the WCR of culpability… such a simply response that so easily lets you off the hook… and repeatedly weak. I have all the H&L documents in a local flash drive... I don't need to go look for them... Your comment was unnecessary... and the cult/devotee bullsh!t ought to end, at least if we're going to discuss this as adults. Not bullxxxx. It's fact. Belief in mythical beings is a cornerstone of cults, as is being impervious to any argument against such belief, as is having a head guru with multiple lieutenants doing his talking. Armstrong is the L. Ron Hubbard of JFK research. But I'll do a deal. You address all of my points as I do with you and all the others, instead of hand picking one or two, and stop referring to "Harvey" as if he were a real historical figure instead of a theoretical entity, and I will stop referring to cults. I refer to HARVEY so that the discussion can be followed… The THEORY is that there were two men, the support for that theory MUST differentiate them for clarity. What YOU believe about Armstrong justifies ad hominem? Isn’t that the last refuge of a simply mind? So instead of describing the belief that the CIA used any and all tricks at its disposal including the creation of identities for the purpose of espionage – you want to insult? “Harvey” will continued to be used to describe the activities and history of a person that does not match LEE’s. You want to STOOP to ad hominem – have at it. I will focus on the FBI evidence you offer and the FACT you choose to believe a DoD letter to Blakey over the official records of the US MARINES. The October 6th Unit Diary shows LEE OSWALD returning from Ping-Tung YOU have him staying behind to receive treatment for STD as a result of a DoD response to a Blakey inquiry. Nope. I have him staying behind for diagnosis and treatment of a possible STD. It's obvious to me from the reply, that the DoD didn't have a clue where he was; they were concerned only with giving an answer which might stop speculation. The reason they didn't have a clue is that the records were a mess. You want to use that in order to buttress Armstrong's theory when the theory has had the sword put through it from a hundred different angles in this thread already. I've worked in public administration. Files get messy - especially when worked on by different people at different times with different record keeping skills.Most of the time it doesn't matter. Most of the time, the file doesn't belong to someone who goes on to become an historical enigma. You take such a person and then start trawling through his public records for anomalies. But what you need to do is to demonstrate that Oswald's records were uniquely anomalous. Then you might have something - if you can also overcome the myriad other problems with the theory. The records were NOT a mess by any stretch…they show plain and clear that he was both in Taiwan and being treated in Japan… YOU want to explain it with anything BUT H&L… when there being two of them is just as realistic a scenario as everyone only making mistakes in relation to Oswald’s innocence. the BS story being concocted to cover the mistake of not removing these records is a mess… Chalking it up as yet another administrative mistake because the FBI/DoD tells you so strikes me as extremely naïve on your part. But then again you want to believe so badly that H&L are a fallacy you’d buy the mistakes of a clerk over the lies of the DoD/FBI… So once again.. the Marines are inable to determine who boards a ship and who doesn't? You want us to believe that when departing from Taiwan back to Japan the US MARINES did not check to see if who they said was on the ship, actually got on the ship? Looks to me like two days prior to sailing, a desk jockey was given the list of those going so that it could be recorded in the diary. At the last minute, Oswald was pulled out, but the record wasn't updated. Greg… on the October 6 Unit Diary, Oswald is sailing back from Taiwan… I can understand if there w2as a last minute switch or stay-behind…. But when leaving Taiwan I find it very hard to believe that they left his name on the roster and did not know he was never there…… the RECORDS indicate an Oswald was in Taiwan and the records indicate an Oswald was in Japan at the same time. On Oct 6, 1958 do you suppose the MARINES were already falsifying documents for the CIA to show that a soldier was not where he was said to be, and when corrected, the US MARINES still have him returning from a place you say he never went.... ?? Here you go again.... starting with the assumption that "Harvey" existed and then putting aspects of the paper trail in a certain sinister light for the purpose of buttressing your case. One of the most egregious errors you've made was projecting YOUR inability to look at alternative explanations on to me. I'm open to a few possibilities. You can only see one. Because all your alternatives require everyone to be complete morons… the record keeping of the US MARINES in relation to the lives they are entrusted with is simple crap… When transporting a person from one place to the other… they don’t know how to create a manifest… Do you realize that you are doing the same thing in reverse… H&L is simply not a possibility so nothing done will EVER lead you to that as a possibility. In reverse… you can accept the ongoing and systematic mistakes of everyone who ever came into contact with HARVEY who was no longer the same as the LEE they knew. Again Greg… how many “sorry those records were taken by the FBI and disappeared” or “no, the records are mistaken” do you need before the light goes off that maybe something fishy is going on? He was not crossed off the Unit Diary... it was never updated for his "remaining behind" so all we have is this letter from the DoD saying so in response to a Blakey inquiry I think if we looked hard enough. one of us might come up with more - but what would be the point? You would dismiss it, or ignore it, just the same as you have with everything else. As would you Greg… I am not on an island here… you are convinced of your position… fine. I think you are wrong and refuse to see the puzzle and would rather examine the pieces as separate and distinct from the picture is becomes. William Trail states in one of theose FBI reports you put so much stock in, that he was in Taiwan with Oswald... that he was his difficult self and didn't get along with the other men (HARVEY that is) but you know all that right Greg? You have these docs memorized... Trail stated he had very little memory of Oswald and seems to only really recall that Oswald was supposed to going to Taiwan. The Oswald/Taiwan thing is vague from Traial to say the least. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=57729&relPageId=12 And this pro-Armstrong page gives Trail short shrift, dismissing him as someone who "saw little of Oswald". http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/JA/JR-JA.html Donovan on the other hand told the FBI that Trail had discussed knowing Oswald in JAPAN and the trouble he (Oswald) had been in there. Trail apparently said nothing to him about Taiwan. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=331798 “Little memory of”, “saw little of Oswald”, “Trail said nothing” Greg, give us a break already… If you are a little bit pregnant – you’re pregnant If he saw him only a little bit, from time to time, and did not hang with him but knew of his behavior… how do you equate that with HE WASN’T THERE? oh yes... that he was there but flew back... except that's not what the letter says.... it says "Oswald did not sail from Japan on Sept 16, 1958..... I posted it above... Trial doesn’t say he NEVER saw him, that he wasn’t sure if Oswald even was in Taiwan… He saw him there…. The DoD says he never left Japan - where DID you get that airplane back to Japan story anyway? Another “mistake” according to you? “Seeing Oswald just a little” not enough to establish his being there… please. How did you put it? "Why do I get the impression you've never actually seen this document"? http://www.maryferre...510&relPageId=9 Yep. That's the report that quotes Trail as saying he "saw little of Oswald". Maybe an indication Oswald did go, but he saw little of him, because he was quickly flown back. Other than the DoD response to Blakey – where do you get this ? So basically you come at me with a sentence from a DoD response to Blakey as your definitive proof that Oswald remained in Atsugi - since the medical records OBVIOUSLY show a L.H. Oswald receiving treatment for STD in Japan... No David. It is you (and others) coming at me with things like this which have alternative explanations, but where you (and others) only see one because you have already made up your mind. If the evidence doesn't fit, it is because the FBI/DoD/CIA interfered with it. You are using what you consider anomalies in the records and using those as definitive proof of the existence of "Harvey". I'm not saying they are definitive proof of anything. On the contrary, I'm saying the records can't be used as definitive proof of any one theory. See the difference? See how you project what you do on to me? Please stop whining Greg, that’s not what we/I am doing at all. "coming at you" ? and you haven't made up your mind here? You have a single letter.. a single line in a single letter stating that Oswald NEVER LEFT Japan, sent to HSCA from the DoD (posted again above) which in your mind refutes the records and memories of the time period... With as bizarre as things are in the case from all parts of the world... you have trouble with the possibility of H&L being real. You are claiming that the records related to his being transported to and from Taiwan are simply mistaken – since you do not want to acknowledge the probability Armstrong is right. Whether these specific records related to this one episode can or cannot be used as a reliable means of determining H&L is where you seem to keep getting held up. These are not isolated, one time records of these two people Greg... The school records show two Oswalds… one at PS44, one supposedly at Beauregard, attending part time during the first semester of the SEPT 53 - JUNE 54 8th grade school year. The attendance record for this Oswald at Beauregard shows 79 days attending and 1 day absent. It also shows 80 school days and 4 absences for the 2nd semester for a total of 179 days attending school… The PS44 record shows that on 9/30/52 Oswald enters 7th grade in NYC… Now what did Robert say? Oh yes… more MISTAKES…. Even though ROBERT visits them in NYC in both OCTOBER 1952 and the SUMMER of 1953… he STILL insists that his brother went straight from 6th to 7th grade in Ft Worth. Mr. JENNER. And, at that time, I take it your brother Lee was attending Arlington Heights High School? That would be 1952? Mr. OSWALD. Just a minute, please. In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then. Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades. And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School. Mr. JENNER. As soon as he finished the sixth year at Ridglea Elementary School, he entered W. C. Stripling High School, as a seventh grader? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir--junior high school. How many school days are there from Sept 53 – December Break? In the total school year. Any reason Beauregard and Myra DeRouse have him attending 80 days of school during this time? Oh yes… mistakes again. Such a convenient reponse. What I offer are US MARINES documents that state Oswald served in Japan and Taiwan as a "aviation electronics operator"... That he was on the ship that took him to Taiwan That he was on the ship that brought him back and that during this stay the records indicate a LEE Oswald rec'd STD medical treatment... YOU want to hang your hat on a DoD letter basically stating all this was a big MISTAKE... that's one helluva weak argument Greg... No. I'm saying it's explicable in a number of ways, and the simplest of those ways is that the anomalies arose out of common garden variety sloppy records keeping. Yours is the extraordinary claim, but what you offer by way of proof for it falls far short of "extraordinary". to be continued Greg this is not some isolated incident… what’s extraordinary is your ongoing refusal to connect any of the dots… the records were not designed to confuse the issue as you would suggest… they simply tell the story of the two men involved where one of the men’s history all but disappears… But not completely… they are called “loose ends” Greg… not necessarily sloppy mistakes. The records of HARVEY before 1958 and LEE after 1958 are virtually gone. Before 1958 Oswald needed to be remembered as LEE – even in the face of his brother and others REFUSING TO ID Harvey as Lee… so the early HARVEY records are gone... I'm surprised the Bronz zoo picture didn't go by the way of so much other evidence about HARVEY... After 1958 LEE’s history becomes HARVEY’s past to create a new future. He is now remembered ONLY as the small, argumentative commie reading loner… when LEE was never seen in that light by ANYONE who described him… Even in the Marines there was a transition between the roughneck LEE and the little HARVEY. And even more substantiation... John is perfect in his picking out the LEE images from the HARVEY - any explanation for his 100% accuracy regarding the Life pictures? Mr. JENNER - How did he look to you physically as compared with when you had seen him last? Mr. PIC - I would have never recognized him, sir. Mr. JENNER - All right. Your brother Robert said something along these lines. You had last seen him in 19-- that was prior to this occasion, the last time you had seen him was when he was in New York City? Mr. PIC - Which was a little over 10 years. Mr. JENNER - Well, just about 10 years. Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - Of course you had seen him in February 1953, I think you said. Mr. PIC - Right. But we walked in and he walked out. Mr. JENNER - But you saw him? Mr. PIC - Right, I had seen him for a moment. Mr. JENNER - He was then at that particular time in the neighborhood of 13 years of age? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - Now, when you saw him 10 years later he was 23. Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - You noticed, did you, a material change, physically first, let's take his physical appearance? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Physically I noticed that. Mr. JENNER - What did you notice? Mr. PIC - He was much thinner than I had remembered him. He didn't have as much hair. Mr. JENNER - Did that arrest your attention? Was that a material difference? Did that strike you? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; it struck me quite profusely. Mr. JENNER - I show you an exhibit, a series of exhibits, first Commission Exhibit No. 281 and Exhibit No. 282 http://www.history-m...Vol16_0413a.htm being some spread pages of an issue of Life magazine of February 21, 1964. I direct your attention first to the lower lefthand spread at .the bottom of the page. Do you recognize the area shown there? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Do you see somebody in that picture that appears to be your brother? Mr. PIC - This one here with the arrow. Mr. JENNER - The one that has the printed arrow? Mr. PIC - That is correct, sir. Mr. JENNER - And you recognize that as your brother? Mr. PIC - Because they say so, sir. Mr. JENNER - Please, I don't want you to say-- Mr. PIC - No; I couldn't recognize that. Mr. JENNER - Because this magazine says that it is. Mr. PIC - No, sir; I couldn't recognize him from that picture. Mr. JENNER - You don't recognize anybody else in the picture after studying it that appears to be your brother? When I say your brother now, I am talking about Lee. Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - In the upper portion there are a series of photographs spread from left-hand page across to the right-hand page. Take those on the left which appears to be a photograph of three young men. Do you recognize the persons shown in that photograph? Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize ,this photograph, the people from left to right being Robert Oswald, the center one being Lee Oswald, and the third one being myself. This picture was taken at the house in Dallas when we returned from New Orleans. Mr. JENNER - You mean from--when you came from New Orleans after being at the Bethlehem Orphanage Home? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - And you went to Dallas? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - It was taken in Dallas at or about that time? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - The next one is prominent; in front is a picture of a young boy. There is a partially shown girl and apparently another boy with a striped shirt in the background. Do you recognize that picture? Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - Do you have any impression as to when and where that was taken? Mr. PIC - Just looking at the picture, I would guess first, second grade, maybe. I would have to guess at it. Mr. JENNER - Then there is one immediately to the right of that, a young man in the foreground sitting on the floor, with his knees, legs crossed, and his arms also crossed. There are some other people apparently in the background. Mr. PIC - I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - Does anything about the picture enable you to identify as to where that was taken? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Then to the right there is a picture of two young men, the upper portion of the one young man at the bottom and then apparently a young man standing up in back of that person. Do you recognize either of those young people? Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - Is he the one to which the black arrow is pointing? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that? Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 284 do you recognize anybody in that picture that appears to be Lee Oswald? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - There is a young fellow in the foreground-everybody else is facing the other way. He is in a pantomime, or grimace. Do you recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald? Mr. PIC - No, sir; looking at that picture and I have looked at it several times--that looks more like Robert than it does Lee, to my recollection. Mr. JENNER - All right. On Exhibit No. 286, the lower right-hand corner, there is another picture. Do you recognize that as your brother Lee in that picture? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; that is about how he looked when I seen him in 1962, his profile. Mr. JENNER - Do you recognize the person, the lady to the right who is pointing her finger at him? Mr. PIC - No, sir; I don't. Mr. JENNER - Exhibit No. 287 is two figures, taking them from top to bottom and in the lower right-hand corner, do you recognize those? Mr. PIC - No, sir; I don't. Mr. JENNER - Neither one of them? Mr. PIC - No, sir. The lower one appears to me to look like Robert rather than Lee. The upper one, unless they tell me that, I would never guess that that would be Lee, sir. Mr. JENNER - All right. Exhibit No. 288, there is ill the lower left-hand corner, there is a reproduction of a service card and a reproduction, also, of a photograph with the head of a man. Do you recognize that? Mr. PIC - That looks to me approximately how Lee Oswald looked when I seen him Thanksgiving 1962. Mr. JENNER - Directing your attention to Exhibit, Commission Exhibit No. 289, do you recognize any of the servicemen shown in that picture as your brother Lee? Mr. PIC - No, sir; I do not recognize them. Mr. JENNER - Exhibit No. 290, the lower left-hand corner there is a photograph of a young lady and a young man. Do you recognize either of those persons? Mr. PIC - He appears to me as Lee Harvey Oswald in 1962 when I seen him. Mr. JENNER - And the lady? Mr. PIC - She is his wife, Marina, sir. Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 291, at the bottom of the page, there is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the young man handing out the leaflet? Mr. PIC - No, sir; I would be unable to recognize him. Mr. JENNER - As to whether he was your brother? Mr. PIC - That is correct. So the man who "appears to me as Lee Harvey Oswald in 1962", who is the same man handing out leaflets - HARVEY - is not recognizeable to his own brother.... From my POV you will need much more that a series of mistakes and a DoD letter, that seems ALWAYS to center around HARVEY Oswald’s innocence being proven… Hey… maybe WALDMAN put the C2766 on the wrong order – you know, by MISTAKE. But that would HELP HARVEY… so of course those Mistakes NEVER occurred. So let me ask you… if it wasn’t HARVEY on the bus… or in the cab, or shooting Tippit…. Or in the balcony, or in the alley, or in the car, or on the plane with Vinson, or at Red Bird, or in Mexico, or in Alice TX, or Montreal, or ordering trucks, or shooting at a range, or asking that a scope be mounted,… Who was saying and/or representing themselves as such? PS… really Greg, how about taking it down a notch in what you think I am thinking about this okay? Mine… Armstrong’s claim and supporting evidence adds up to more than simple mistakes… Lee HARVEY Oswald remains an enigma for very specific reasons… and to continue to promote the idea that the CIA would not use its power to confuse the historical record of a man THEY sent to Russia for some purpose is again naive... that this twosome (and the peripheral players) were then redirected to accomplish some other purpose - the PATSY for the killing of an AMERICAN President... is really no big stretch given the players themselves... Phillips, Barnes, Donovan, Dulles, Hunt, etc, etc, etc.... btw - have you read NEXUS yet... I'm just starting... but when men gather together behind closed doors and they discuss the wholesale murder of the opposition in foreign countries - that doesn't give you pause to believe that ANYTHING is possible with enopugh money, depravity and creativity... Rule #1 of the Watergate Rules of American Politics: “No matter how paranoid you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you can imagine” At some point “mistakes” take on the appearance of a plan… and to believe that “intelligence” did not have a plan for Oswald(s) is again… very naïve in my book. Edited March 8, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now