Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Jim Hargrove

TWO MARGUERITE OSWALDS -- NEW DETAILS

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Jim H?  I'll have to talk to John about it....  wouldn't be the first thing we disagreed about.

Absolutely!  But before you give up, let's see what Texas Employment Commission employee Laura Kittrell had to say after she met both HARVEY and LEE in 1963....  

 

http://harveyandlee.net/Kittrell/Kittrell.htm

 

She said a whole lot more.... which I'll try to post tomorrow.

 

Edited by Jim Hargrove

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

"... after she me both ..."

"Dear James"

HUH?

(I'm doing you a favor by pointing out your obvious typo.)

Your buddy, (lol)

--  Tommy :sun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

 

Uh, Tommy, you are aware that on his 9/3/59 USMC medical report “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” height is listed at 5’ 11” (which is 71 inches) and his weight as 150 lbs., right?
 

Height_9-3-59%20height.gif?dl=0

 

And you are aware that on his 10/12/59 Armed Forces Report of Transfer or Discharge “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” height is also listed at 5’ 11” and his weight as 150 lbs., right?

 

Height_23:74_Discharge.jpg?dl=0


No doubt you’ll explain this via the legendary prowess of JJ Angleton and his band of merry pranksters, boarding their barium meal time machines and heading back to USMC headquarters to fake all this stuff and eventually confuse John Armstrong and me.  LOL!

Isn’t it amazing that the same 5’ 11” height is listed on LHO’s 1959 passport, his 1963 passport, his 9/14/59 Selective Service Registration card, and many other places.  The public record contains nearly as many references to a 5” 11” Oswald as to a 5’  9” Oswald.  Almost sounds like two different fellows, eh?

Please explain to me how CI/SIG managed to fake all those documents.  If you can’t, I may have to assume that much of what you and others call deliberate CIA misinformation for “marked cards” are actually clear and obvious variations in the public record.

You can explain this, right?  I know I can.

Cat got your tongue?

Bump for TommyB)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Bump for TommyB)!

"Dear James"

Gosh.  I guess the one-and-only Oswald (i.e. Lee Harvey Oswald) really "bulked up" while he was in the Marine Corps, huh?  Guess he done "maxed out" at one-fifty, jus' like his Momma done said!   Rekken' it had anythin' to do with all them push ups an' pull ups he done, and all them latrines he dug, and all them tents he puts up an' puts down, etc, etc, and all them beefs and taters he wolfed down?

An' by golly, looks like that rascal done lifted hisself up one-an-one-halft whole inches on his tippy-toes when they was a-measurin' him! (Either that or the sar-gent who done measured 'em done drunk ten more beers than he usually done did the night a-fore!)  An' can you be-lieve it? That there well-over-hung (lol) sar-gent made such a serious one-and-one-halft whole inches mis-take on them critically im-por-tant DISCHARGE papers!  Dang, that there well-over-hung (lol) sar-gent done made hisself a CAPITOL OFFENSE didnt' he?  I mean, I mean, I mean, I mean ... Them DISCHARGE papers is more critically im-por-tant to The Corps than the INDUCTION ones, ain't they?)

--  Tommy :sun

Thank Gawd that one-and-only Oswald (i.e. Lee 'Arvey Oswald) didn't et up all the hot steamin' an' stinkin' spagettees you likes ta throw up on the walls 'round this here FORUM, cuzzin' iffin he done did, he wouda done eggsploded by now!

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't think a fellow can gain 15 pounds after leaving the Marine Corps?  And I see you're busy stretching 5' 9" Harvey Oswald an extra half inch here.  You got some evidence for that?  Most of the docs I've seen have him at either 5'9" or 5'11".  With you and Tracy making endless excuses about high heels and up on tiptoes and the like, it sure is funny there isn't a single doc listing "Oswald's" height as 5'10".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

You don't think a fellow can gain 15 pounds after leaving the Marine Corps?  And I see you're busy stretching 5' 9" Harvey Oswald an extra half inch here.  You got some evidence for that?  Most of the docs I've seen have him at either 5'9" or 5'11".  With you and Tracy making endless excuses about high heels and up on tiptoes and the like, it sure is funny there isn't a single doc listing "Oswald's" height as 5'10".  

"Dear James"

What does the likelihood that "a fellow can gain 15 pounds after leaving the Marine Corps" have to do with my contention that there was only one Oswald (the Lee Harvey Oswald)?

The 1/2 inch has been documented.  

And look at the issue of whether or not his reported height of 5' 9 1/2" was true this way:

If one day I were to tell you that I'm 6' 4 3/4" tall. and a month or two later I was to say that I'm 6' 5" tall, which would you believe (given the fact that I'm 60-something years old and no longer growing)?

"Most of the docs I've seen have him at either 5'9" or 5'11" "

Most, but not all?  What did the others say?  That he was 5' 6"? , 5' 8"? , .6' 7?

Or did they say (a rounded up) 5' 10?

--  Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Tommy, you say the “1/2 inch has been documented,” but of course you fail to say where since it clearly has NOT been documented.  What has been documented many times is that “Lee Harvey Oswald” was both 5’ 9” and 5’ 11” tall.

I’ve posted documentary evidence above for the 5’ 11” Oswald.  Now, let’s look at the 5’ 9” Oswald.

According to “Oswald’s” autopsy report, he weighed an “estimated” 150 lbs. and was 5’ 9” tall, NOT 5’ 9-1/2” tall as you say “has been documented.“
 

Autopsy.jpg?dl=0

And according to his application for a Texas driver’s license, he himself indicated he weighed 140 lbs and was 5’ 9” tall, NOT 5’ 9-1/2” tall as you say “has been documented.“

 

DL_App.jpg?dl=0

 

And according to his application for employment at the Texas School Book Depository, he weighed 150 lbs and was 5’ 9” tall, NOT 5’ 9-1/2” tall as you say “has been documented.“
 

Employ_App.jpg?dl=0

There are other places where Oswald’s height is listed as 5’ 9” tall, his Leslie Welding application, his Goldrings application, his 8/9/63 New Orleans police report, and so on.  Nowhere is his height listed as 5’ 9-1/2” tall, despite your lame claim that “it has been documented.”

Equally lame is your latest excuse for the 5’ 11” Oswald.  Here’s your verbatim explanation: “looks like that rascal done lifted hisself up one-an-one-halft whole inches on his tippy-toes when they was a-measurin' him! (Either that or the sar-gent who done measured 'em done drunk ten more beers than he usually done did the night a-fore!)

Have you ever won a debate in your life?  I hope your other 6,000 + posts on this forum are better than your posts in this thread.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

 

Well, Tommy, you say the “1/2 inch has been documented,” but of course you fail to say where since it clearly has NOT been documented.  

[...]

And according to his application for a Texas driver’s license, he himself indicated he weighed 140 lbs and was 5’ 9” tall, NOT 5’ 9-1/2” tall as you say “has been documented.“

[...]

And according to his application for employment at the Texas School Book Depository, he weighed 150 lbs and was 5’ 9” tall, NOT 5’ 9-1/2” tall as you say “has been documented.“

[...]

Have you ever won a debate in your life?
 

 

Dear James,

Can you explain why, under your theory, Harvey and Lee and Henry and Hank weren't instructed by the all-knowing and all-powerful CIA to write down the same height (5' 10" would have been a good compromise, imho) when given the opportunity to do so, you know, like when filling out a silly driver's license application / renewal form, or a job application?

You know, so people who read those documents a day or fifty years later would be more effectively led to mistakenly believe that there was only one true Oswald, i.e. "Lee Harvey Oswald"?

Or did the all-knowing and all-powerful CIA somehow overlook that little "tradecraft" detail, in your humble opinion?  James?

 

Uh ...

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=334&tab=page

 

On your driver's license application or renewal form, do you write down the fraction of an inch you are?  (Or do they not let you drive?)

 

You mean after he'd returned from the USSR as a beaten-down,  devious, wannabe spy?

 

Only against you, and David Josephs, and Word Twister Trejo, and Jimmy .....

 

--  Tommy :sun

PS  What's for lunch today?  More handfuls of steamin'-hot-'n-stinkin' ... uhhh ... "spaghetti" ?

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Tommy, you’re going to put up your cop house measurement against the medical examiner’s report and all those other documents I pointed to?   No doubt you will.

But according to you and Parnell, guys tend to exaggerate their heights, and if “Oswald” was really 5’ 9-1/2” tall he would surely round up to 5’ 10” at least once in a while, eh?  But he didn’t, not once.

I win again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

So, Tommy, you’re going to put up your cop house measurement against the medical examiner’s report and all those other documents I pointed to?   No doubt you will.

But according to you and Parnell, guys tend to exaggerate their heights, and if “Oswald” was really 5’ 9-1/2” tall he would surely round up to 5’ 10” at least once in a while, eh?  But he didn’t, not once.

I win again. 

If you say so James Dear.

--  Tommy :sun

PS  I guess you missed this:

Dear James,

Can you explain why, under your theory, Harvey and Lee and Henry and Hank weren't instructed by the all-knowing and all-powerful CIA to write down the same height (5' 10" would have been a good compromise, imho) when given the opportunity to do so, you know, like when filling out a silly driver's license application / renewal form, or a silly job application?

You know, so people who read those documents a day or fifty years later would be more effectively led to "mistakenly" believe that there was only one true Oswald, i.e. "Lee Harvey Oswald"?

Or did the all-knowing and all-powerful CIA somehow overlook that little "tradecraft" detail, in your humble opinion?  James?

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Thanks, Tracy.

I didn't realize that a person's height could vary over the period of one day.

-- Tommy (aka "Tommy San") Graves :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The reason the CIA wouldn't have the two Oswald's merge their heights into one number is because there are some cases where heights are measured. And it is those heights that would be taken seriously, not the self-reported ones.

Greg Parker says that measured heights would all be 5' 9" (or so), and that 5' 11' heights occurred when Oswald exaggerated or someone overestimated his height . He explains away the one exception -- that being the 5' 11" height on exiting the military -- as being a guess since actual height on exiting the military isn't important.

That last explanation seems a little apologetic. But let's assume for argument's sake it is true. (Or that the 5' 11" reading was simply a mistake.) Do you have anything else that counters Greg's argument, Jim?

Edited by Sandy Larsen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I played sports in HS and college, the game programs would often fudge my height.  I'm basically around 6-2 but they sometimes would say 6-2 1/2 and sometimes 6-3 (especially in the football programs).  This is not to say that this is what was going on with Oswald but the point is this...has anyone ever held up their fingers to see what the difference is between 5-9 and 5-11?  I mean it's hardly a huge difference in height.

But amazingly, this "5-9 here" and "5-11 there," along with incorrect reporting records from school, has been spun into a fairy tale of a Hungarian boy and an American boy being cloned up by the super secret agency...and for what end?

Like Graves said, you'd think this spy agency would have at least brought all of these people together - at least once - to sit them down and to go over the details before turning them loose. "Remember, you're always 5-9 in height.  And Marge and Marge II - remember always smile and be happy and pluck your unibrow."

But I guess frumpy, dumpy, mean Marge forgot to do that, going on with a dour attitude, sloppy dress, greasy nicotine-stained fingernails, and letting her unibrow grow branches.

And yet the argument continues, with Jim continuing to post papers from Oswald's life showing the 5-9 here and 5-11 there to bolster the fairy tale.  I'm amazed, too, that Sandy Larsen, I guess with a straight face, continues to rub his chin and say, "Hmm, what about this...or that?"

At least over on the Australian board, they express what's on their minds much more directly about the "deep meaning" of this fairy tale and about the folks who continue to fall for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 5’ 11” height is included not only in the Armed Forces Report of Transfer or Discharge dated 10/12/1959 but also in the 9/3/59 USMC medical exam.

If Parker is making the claim that “Oswald” exaggerated his height on documents he himself filled out, how come there is not a single document anywhere listing his height as 5’ 10”?  That would be a normal “enhancement” for a fellow really 5’ 9”.  And Tommy, citing a single outlying doc, would like us to believe that Harvey was actually 5’ 9-1/2”, making the rounding up to 5’ 10” quite normal.  But it exists nowhere.  By using Tommy’s number, Harvey Oswald actually rounds down his height on any number of docs he himself completed.

The 5’ 11” statistic appears not only in some USMC records, but also on Oswald’s Selective Service Registration Card of 9/14/59, the 1959 Passport, the 1963 Passport, and probably some other places I’m forgetting. (The ‘59 passport is particularly interesting, because although Harvey used it, Lee’s picture was placed on it. Harvey’s picture is on the ‘63 passport.) The evidence that American-born LEE Harvey Oswald was both taller and bulkier than Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald is a consistent thread in the Harvey and Lee research, from early school records onward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×