Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

So Guy Banister's outfit was the original requester of the trucks [i.e. Ford Bolton Incident].  We all know Banister got Oswald to hand out the leaflets in NO later.  Fine. It's one more piece of evidence that Oswald was being sheep dipped to make him look like a mad Marxist.

That's all.  It's got nothing to do with this supposed Oswald's Hungarian clone.

 

Problem is, Michael, the Ford Bolton incident happened with one Oswald (i.e. not the one who was in Russia at the time), whereas the NO leafleting happened with the other Oswald (the one who had been in Russia).

Are you saying/implying then that you agree there were two Oswalds?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Are you saying/implying then that you agree there were two Oswalds?

Not at all. Read State Secret. It explains pretty much everything you need to know about the Oswald that was over there in the USSR, came back with Marina, was led around by the White Russians, by Banister, started working in the book building, was arrested and killed two days later in Dallas.

I'm not going to say anything more about you (Sandy) and others believing in HL. Whatever you want to believe is what you believe.  The same goes for me and others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harvey Oswald’s Photo
on Lee Oswald’s DoD ID Card

Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald (the man killed by Jack Ruby) was 5’9” (69 inches) tall.  American-born LEE Harvey Oswald was 5’11” (71 inches) tall.  It is becoming increasingly apparent that someone pasted a Russian photograph of the shorter Oswald on the U.S. Department of Defense ID card of the taller Oswald.

The subject of this ID card is explored on the following Education Forum thread:

 

 

In the Ed Forum thread, I posted these illustrations of the card:

LHO%202%20ID%20cards.jpg

 

LHO%20ID%20card.jpg

 


A number of people on the forum questioned the circular post office stamp dated October 23, 1963 that is on the card.  Some people thought the card might have been “lost” and dropped into a U.S. Mail box.  Chris Newton and Mark Knight noted that it appeared to be the type of card issued to U.S. military “dependents.”  Jim DiEugenio, Mark Stevens and others noted that the photo on the card appeared to be identical to a photo of Oswald purportedly taken in Minsk AFTER the ID card was allegedly issued.

Below, from the Warren Commission, are two photos of “Lee Harvey Oswald” allegedly taken in Minsk.  In Commission Exhibit 2892 (right), note the off-white roughly quarter circle that appears to be painted on the lower right of the image.


Minsk_LHO_PX.jpg

 

Tom Hume pointed out that the card should have been laminated, but didn’t appear to be.  Other forum members agreed.  Chris Newton published a better image of the suspect card.


cmn_best_id.jpg

 

Richard Price and Sandy Larsen  pointed out that the postal stamp appeared to be forged.  Sandy wrote:


… the three circles on the photo don't line up with the three on the ID. Also, it looks like the "IUL" is really ‘IUI.’”  Chris Newton wrote, “Another problem: The "Expiration Date" : 7 Dec 1962 ...    no real clerk in the military writes "1962" there.  It's just "62" gentlemen.”  Sandy asked, “Has the erased semicircle of the photo been discussed? The lower-right corner of the photo has been painted white for some reason. The whited out part is in the shape of a semicircle.”  Chris posted the following image as “an aid to visualizing the circles:
 

cmn_best_circles.jpg

 

Then Chris posted the following image of a 1946 Soviet passport.  Note the photo and the stamp.

 

104.png
 

I posted that  “… you could make the case that the LHO photo on his suspect DoD ID card was actually created, and processed, by a Russian passport authority….  Is it possible that the circular stamps were created mostly to obscure the tell-tale Soviet circular inset in the bottom right portion of the photo?”  Chris said he was inclined to agree.

I wrote, “According to the Official Story®, Oswald flew from Minsk to Moscow on Saturday, July 8, 1961, called Richard Snyder at home, and said he wanted to return to the United States. Snyder said he wanted to interview Marina, and she, apparently like her husband, also flew to Moscow the following Monday, and like her husband, didn’t seek police permission. That same Monday, Snyder supposedly renewed Oswald’s U.S. passport.

“Why then, do we have what appears to be a Soviet passport photo of Oswald attached to a phony DoD ID card?  Could it be that the official story is untrue, that Oswald DID NOT get his U.S. passport renewed at the American Embassy, and instead traveled back to the U.S. on a Soviet passport?

“Would there be any other reason for Oswald to have obtained a Soviet-style passport photo of himself? Has anyone ever seen a hint of any evidence that Oswald had a Russian passport?”

Sandy Larsen noted that “In my searching around I found that 1) stamping over the photo was a common thing in Europe at the time; and 2) they would do that for all kinds of IDs.

Here's a Soviet ID for some kind of sports union:”

MS-Card-and-Pin11.jpg


 

Sandy also noted that “Oswald might have had a number of ID cards. For example, a residency card and a work permit.”

 

David Josephs posted two images showing “a bit more detail on those circles…. “

59a6fc7d2fc59_OswaldDoDdd1173Postmarkana

David indicated that this is how the card “SHOULD have looked when issued:”

59a6fd077c907_OswaldDoDdd1173Postmarkana

 

Sandy Larsen analyzed the graphics from the bogus DoD ID and the Russian passport and wrote that he would propose “that the photo on Oswald's ID card came from an ID that he used while in the Soviet Union. He (or somebody else) removed the photo and pasted it to the military ID card. Upon doing so, the photo showed a remnant of the old Russian stamp, but of course the ID had no such stamp. So Oswald (or somebody else) decided he had to fake a stamp on the ID so that the stamp on the photo-only wasn't so obvious. He took a circular stamp and made a couple of impressions, with one lining up pretty well with the outer, Russian stamp. (The blue line, above.) Then he stamped it again with the circle, offsetting it from the first to give it some "depth" or complexity. And then he finished up his work with the date stamps. By making it complex, it provided some camouflage for the stamp on the photo. Without looking close, uninformed people would see something that looked about right, and that looked official.”


Sandy added the following hypothesis:

I suggest that that is a possibility. That Oswald was indeed a "DoD civilian employee contractor" at some point.

And here's something for Harvey & Lee theory adherents: LEE Oswald may very well have been  a "DoD civilian employee contractor and needed access to a US facility overseas" after his time in the Marines. In which case his (and not HARVEY's) photo would have originally been pasted on the card.

And here's an add-on hypothesis: On assassination day, HARVEY wasn't killed as planned because Officer Tippet got cold feet. Tippet had to be taken out and his killing blamed on Oswald if at all possible. The assassination wrap up team had to come up with a fake Oswald wallet on the spur of the moment. They found that they has LEE's expired DoD Civilian Contractor card and one of HARVEY's expired Soviet identification cards. They ripped the photos off the two cards and pasted the Russian ID photo onto LEE's DOD Civilian Contractor card. Then they did the silly stamping to camouflage the Russian stamp on the photo. And they put this card inside Oswald's fake wallet.”

The thread excerpted above is, at the time of this writing, still very much in progress on the Ed Forum.  I just got home from a nearly week-long mini-vacation and I’m still catching up to recent developments on this subject.  But the question remains….

Why did a photo of the 5’9” (69 inch) Russian-speaking Oswald get placed on a DoD ID card, apparently of the type issued to DoD dependents, that clearly refers to a 5’11” (71 inch) Lee Harvey Oswald?  Was the original picture that of the taller American-born Oswald?  Why was a photo used that  appears to have been taken and processed inside the Soviet Union?

From what I’ve read so far, Sandy Larsen’s theory immediately above seems logical.   The ID card is one of the pieces of evidence that has always intrigued the author of Harvey and Lee, as indicated by the cover of the book.

Book.jpg


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Jim,

Welcome back.

It seems certain that the original photo on the military ID card was one of Lee. Because:

  1. Oswald used the card to get his 1959 passport. The photo he submitted for his passport is of LEE. So it seems the military ID he used to get the passport would also have a photo of LEE.
  2. The photo from the military ID was later removed and replaced with the Minsk photo of HARVEY. Why would that have been done if the ID already had a photo of HARVEY on it? However, if the ID originally had a photo of LEE, then it makes sense that it would be replaced with one of HARVEY.

Now here is the frustrating part... we have already concluded on the Military ID Card thread that the card was issued to Oswald for the sole purpose of his obtaining his passport. He needed his passport for his fake defection. Why did HARVEY use a photos of LEE for his defection passport.

Does this topic need its own thread?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another mystery:

I have taken the photo that's on the military ID card, split it in halves, and pasted together the left half to its mirror image, and the right half to its mirror image. The image made from the right-half looks like HARVEY, but from the left-half looks like LEE. So the photo that's on the military ID card appears to be a composite photo.

But how can that be? Presumably that photo was taken in Minsk for some sort of Russian ID. (It has the semicircular white area and stamp.)


BTW, to test this process for determining whether a photo is a composite or not, I used the same process on a known photo of HARVEY. The resulting left-half and right-half images both looked like HARVEY. I did the same with a photo of Lee (the 1959 passport photo) and both the left-half and right-half images looked like LEE. So the process seems to be reliable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Sandy,

Probably like you, I'm wary of the photo evidence in this case. I'm not very good with faces, for one thing, but there is a more important issue here, one that's mentioned in a couple of places in James Norwood's essay on the H&L website.  James writes....

Due in part to the internet and the easy accessibility of images related to the JFK assassination, photographic evidence is all-too-often studied at the exclusion of more substantial evidentiary resources. 

....

From the inception of the Warren Commission hearings, photographic evidence has been used to sow dissent and confusion for JFK researchers.  

....

The unreliability of the pictorial evidence should alert students of the JFK case to the danger of over-reliance on photographs—both of documents and images of people.

The irony, of course, is that an analysis of photos is helping us make great strides in identifying falsified evidence in this case.  The very simplest question here is, Why would ANYONE need to paste a mug shot of "LEE HARVEY OSWALD" on an allegedly valid DoD ID card?  What was being hidden, if not the face of Lee Harvey Oswald? 

Your logical thinking here is most appreciated!

Edited by Jim Hargrove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Here's another mystery:

I have taken the photo that's on the military ID card, split it in halves, and pasted together the left half to its mirror image, and the right half to its mirror image. The image made from the right-half looks like HARVEY, but from the left-half looks like LEE. So the photo that's on the military ID card appears to be a composite photo.

But how can that be? Presumably that photo was taken in Minsk for some sort of Russian ID. (It has the semicircular white area and stamp.)


BTW, to test this process for determining whether a photo is a composite or not, I used the same process on a known photo of HARVEY. The resulting left-half and right-half images both looked like HARVEY. I did the same with a photo of Lee (the 1959 passport photo) and both the left-half and right-half images looked like LEE. So the process seems to be reliable.

 

I think this is what you did....   But I don't see a LEE lookalike from either side

????

59b8004b2ded4_OswaldDODphotobothsidesreversedandpasted.thumb.jpg.b8ddb3e17ea25b8387f39ae02b198333.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, David Josephs said:

I think this is what you did....   But I don't see a LEE lookalike from either side

I don't either.  Agreed.  But the the bogus DoD ID card is fascinating.  Do you think Harvey could have put this together on his own?  Are you absolutely certain the signature isn't Lee's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

I don't either.  Agreed.  But the the bogus DoD ID card is fascinating.  Do you think Harvey could have put this together on his own?  Are you absolutely certain the signature isn't Lee's?

No, not sure about the signature yet it seems to be...  I always found that Lee was the source for the better penmanship while Harvey angles it more forward and rushed thru it...

FWIW 

59b865c8220fe_Oswaldsignatures.thumb.jpg.9bea0e7adafdead129163b52a206e6b3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, David, and Sandy

Great work in presenting the evidence of the Oswald identification card. 

Without a doubt, one of the most fascinating sidebars concerns the circumstances of how a copy of the Oswald ID card would have come into the possession of Richard Case Nagell.

As noted by Dick Russell in The Man Who Knew Too Much, "Nagell was in jail after September 20, 1963--which means that he must have had this Oswald ID card in his possession before that time, two months and two days before the assassination." (p. xviii).

We may not unravel all of the mysteries of the ID card.  But it certainly offers additional evidence connecting Oswald to American intelligence prior to the assassination.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:
20 hours ago, David Josephs said:

I think this is what you did....   But I don't see a LEE lookalike from either side

I don't either.  Agreed. 


Jim and David,

Are you aware that John Armstrong apparently agrees with me? Look at the ID photo on the front cover of his book. I'm sure he meant that line drawn down through Oswald's face to mean something.

For a fair comparison you need to compare each reconstructed photo to one of LEE or HARVEY made from only his right or left side, whichever is appropriate. I will show that in my next post.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sandy,

I know, but that isn't helping me see it.  As I said earlier, I'm not good with faces and, beyond that, I don't trust the photographic evidence in this case.  The only way we can figure out what happened is to understand what's left of the legitimate evidence that American Intel, Hoover and the WC neglected to alter or suppress.  To that extent, at least, it's a good thing this case is so complicated!

This doesn't mean, however, that the Armstrong/White dissection of the mug shot is wrong.  Strange things happen to faces when they are split and mirrored, even for a single person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When comparing decomposited photos, one needs to keep in mind that Oswald didn't face 100% directly into the camera. His head would have been tilted in any of the three different dimensions. Because of this, there is going to be some distortion in the reconstructions. For example, a skinny or wide forehead, nose, or chin. Ears that stick out too far or not fare enough.

When the composites were made, the hair was touched up. So the hair needs to be ignore when comparing. Therefore I cut off the top part of LEE's photos so that his hair doesn't show. I didn't cut it off for HARVEY because his hair just happens to match... there must have been very little touch up done on that side of the composite.

Note that I didn't want to spend a lot of time on this. So I made just simple vertical cuts and tried to fit the halves together as best as possible.

To make for a fair comparison, I took LEE's photo, cut off its right half, and attached the remaining left half to the the mirror image of itself. I did the same for HARVEYs' right half. Here is what I got:

59b925f9f2686_hl_lee.jpg.abf8f1a57c2d98c90df305ca313f651b.jpg59b925e22ea32_hl_harvey.jpg.3cd0aa9252319a51ce39b39e02e34f00.jpg

 

Now here are the reconstructed photos from the left and right halves of the ID photo, respectively:

59b92f5117d9c_hl_id_left.jpg.78380ae3f96567695698080862208438.jpg59b9279b2a7d4_hl_id_right.jpg.bc9a2aa1792698d7fbe83cf6a934c02d.jpg

 

To me, HARVEY on the right is an easy-to-recognize match. The left ID photo doesn't look at all like HARVEY. But it does look similar to the LEE photo above it. They both have than intense look in their eyes.

 

Now, to anybody still unconvinced that the left ID photo looks like LEE, consider this question: Why then doesn't it look like HARVEY?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Why would ANYONE need to paste a mug shot of "LEE HARVEY OSWALD" on an allegedly valid DoD ID card?  What was being hidden, if not the face of Lee Harvey Oswald? 


Well David thinks that the DOD ID card originally had a photo of LEE on it. Which makes sense because the ID was used to get a passport, and the passport also has a photo of LEE on it.

What David thinks (that the DOD ID card originally had a photo of LEE on it) also makes sense because someone decided later that the LEE photo would not do, and so that person removed the LEE photo and put in its place the Minsk photo, which looks like HARVEY. (That that photo might be a composite is another issue. For this issue, the important thing is that the photo looks much more like HARVEY, and not much like LEE.)

This is all well and good. But it does make one wonder why HARVEY went to Russia on a passport bearing LEE's photo.

And while I think that there is some merit in what James Norwood says about photos, which I take as saying we need to remember that switcheroos were possible and so we shouldn't get bogged down with them, I also believe that we shouldn't ignore them altogether. After all, we can learn something new by discovering that a photo was switched. I'll also point out that what James said about photos applies to other types of evidence as well. A number of switcheroos have been discovered in the evidence. But that doesn't mean we should ignore it all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...