A Couple of Real Gems from the "Harvey and Lee" Website

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Why don't you show us the so-called "common sense" explanation you speak of Jeremy?

The records are being misinterpreted or are incorrect or both.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Why don't you show us the so-called "common sense" explanation you speak of Jeremy?

The records are being misinterpreted or are incorrect or both.

How incredibly lame.

But then, that's what I predicted.

 

[Michael Walton]

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

As I predicted, Mr. Bojczuk just gives us another link to Greg Parker (now doubled to two links!) and has nothing to say on his own about the conflicting school records.  In other words, he refuses to debate the subject on the "JFK Assassination Debate" forum.  What a surprise!

Jim - you do this all of the time, too LOL.  You constantly post testimony from the WC...the same source of information that you and others claim is 100% bogus, false information! You can't have it both ways - you can't claim that the WC testimony that you constantly quote from is all bogus, then use it for the HL fantasy. Isn't that like a double negative - cancelling each other out? LOL

Have you even read Greg Parker's stuff?  He even discovered that Oswald had roundworm for crying out loud. To me that's a helluva lot more new analysis on Oswald than the HL crew have done of late.  The most I've noticed of late from you, Larsen and others is "SHOW US!" We have! And "It's all in the contrast" and "Shoulders matter, buddy!"  LOL

[W. Tracy Parnell]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

How incredibly lame.

But then, that's what I predicted.

 

That is one common sense explanation and is not lame at all. You guys have to interpret the evidence in your own way for H&L to exist at all. Another explanation, offered by Greg Parker, is that the Beauregard records reflect LHO's attendance in both NY and Louisiana. You can read all about it at his website (which really does exist BTW). He even addresses your personal arguments.

[Jim Hargrove]

Without any evidence whatsoever, Mr. Parnell says Mr. Parker claims that the 89 days in the top “Re-Ad” column of the Beauregard cumulative record includes days Oswald attended PS 44 in New York City.  There are no forwarded records from PS 44 in Oswald’s Beauregard file.  The only mention of PS 44 in the Beauregard file is in a record that indicates he previously attended “PS #44-Byron Junior High" in New York City.

But there is no “Byron Junior High” in New York City and, according to the New York Historical Society, there never was.  Since there are PS 44s in at least four of the five New York City boroughs, how would Beauregard have requested information from an incorrectly identified school?  And if they had received information, why didn't they know the name of the school?  And if they did get information about Oswald's course work in NYC from a school they couldn't identify, why was Oswald in New Orleans given a passing grade in an entirely different course from the NYC courses he supposedly took that very semester? John wrote: “Perhaps a false name for the school was provided so that Beauregard school personnel would be unable to obtain Oswald's New York school transcripts by mail.”  H&L critics will tell you they have a better explanation, but they don't.

It is abundantly clear that "Oswald's" passing grades in the first semester at Beauregard had nothing to do with New York City.  It is also abundantly clear that the very next semester, one Oswald attends Beauregard School in New Orleans and the other Oswald attends Stripling School in Fort Worth, Texas.

Edited November 6, 2017 by Jim Hargrove

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Without any evidence whatsoever, Mr. Parnell says Mr. Parker claims that the 89 days in the top “Re-Ad” column of the Beauregard cumulative record includes days Oswald attended PS 44 in New York City. 

His interpretation of the school records is just as valid as yours. And note that the number of days works out perfectly per his explanation.

[Jim Hargrove]

How does anyone at Beauregard know how many days Oswald" attended school in NYC if they don't even know the name of the NYC school?  How does Oswald get a passing grade at Beauregard in a course he didn't even take in NYC?  Is this what you call a "valid" interpretation?

[Jim Hargrove]

Still waiting for an H&L critic to explain why the Fort Worth Star Telegram published such an unidentifiable picture of “Lee Harvey Oswald” at the very time “Oswald” began his spying assignment in the Soviet Union.

 

Still waiting for an H&L critic to explain why the Associate Press/Wide World Photos file copy of this picture has such a laughably modified version of “Lee Harvey Oswald.”

 

The rather obvious reason for this chicanery is that sponsors of the Oswald Project didn’t dare expose the people of Fort Worth to a good photograph of Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald, because some of them might have known American-born Lee Oswald and recognized the differences.

C’mon, boys, let’s hear your counter explanations!  Do we need to wait for more talented H&L critics to get an explanation that passes the giggle test?  Why was a false nose and chin put on "Lee Harvey Oswald's" picture way back in 1959?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Why was a false nose and chin put on "Lee Harvey Oswald's" picture way back in 1959?

It wasn't. As I've mentioned before, Gary Mack told me he had evidence about the photo and why it looked the way it does. Unfortunately, he passed away before he could tell me. No doubt it was something to do with the photographic process used at the time. But it the H&L world it is "evidence" of the plot.

[Jim Hargrove]

What a lame excuse!  Although the image is deliberately washed out, you can see "Oswald's" huge nose in the 1959 newspaper reproduction.  No doubt Mr. Mack’s secret explanation involved a time machine, eh?  Your reply is ridiculous!

[Jim Hargrove]

What kind of "photographic process" do you call this, Mr. Parnell?

[David Josephs]

19 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Have you even read Greg Parker's stuff?  He even discovered that Oswald had roundworm for crying out loud.

You may want to read a bit more about that MW....

Have you seen the source materials?

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

What kind of "photographic process" do you call this, Mr. Parnell?

I don't call it anything. As I said, I suspect Gary was referring to photographic processes effecting the image. He and I were mostly discussing the "Frankenstein" image but it could apply to other images as well. If a person wants to "see" alterations because  a bias toward a certain theory, they probably will. Like many other things there is probably an innocent explanation. Too bad I didn't get a chance to hear Gary's ideas on this.

[Guest]

Did anyone say Frankenstein?

[Jim Hargrove]

Yep. Interesting thread.  I didn't notice it for quite a while, and when I did, the rest is history.  I'm quite sure that his bogus claim that my link to the following image contained a virus is what got Mr. Parker banned from this forum.  He didn't want anyone to see the AP/Wide World Photos file copy of "Frankenstein Oswald" and so, instead, we didn't see Mr. Parker any more.

Still waiting for someone to explain why American newspapers hid the face of "Lee Harvey Oswald" in 1959.