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

[W. Tracy Parnell]

20 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If a lie was put in the report, how will a forensic pathologist know any better?

 

Were the photos faked too? And were the 15 other individuals present at the examination all told to lie? If so, one of them, Paul Groody, didn't listen. He ran around for years and years talking to anyone who would listen. At some point , all of this becomes unbelievable. But then I shouldn't be shocked because here is a list of who would have to be in on the plot. In fact, I should add the people from the exhumation, although I don't have all their names.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/harvey-lee-who-was-involved-in-plot.html

EDIT: List updated-thanks for the idea Sandy,

Edited September 22, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell

[W. Tracy Parnell]

10 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

Michael,

I have reported your post to the forum administrator, as it is in violation of the agreed-upon forum guidelines.  The rule is explicit about avoiding casting personal aspersions on fellow members.  While the discussions may get intense, the goal is to discuss ideas, not attack others personally.

Clean it up!

P.S.  Please add my name to the list of advocates of the work of John Armstrong

Well that is twice today alone that the good doctor has reported someone who disagrees with him to the forum administrators. They attack me here all the time doctor, but I'm sure you're not as concerned about that.

[Jim Hargrove]

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

The mastoid is not under the hairline Tracy...  nor does Oswald have hair there...

Rose noted the "scratch" and recent antiseptic on the left mastoid muscle... so he certainly looked at that area...

But Rose would have no reason to NOT disagree with the official story...  not like people who disagreed were dying or something... 

 

     

It sure is hard to keep up with this thread, but thank you for posting this, DJ.  Where is the scar behind "Oswald's left ear?

[Jim Hargrove]

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Not so much Tracy...

Why do the Marines claim this man had 5 missing teeth yet the exhumation claims only 1, and are supported by the photos...

Shouldn't there only be 2 molars per side if this is the same person as the Lee Oswald the entering Marine?

Fascinating questions, DJ.  Another fascinating question:

How did a 5' 11" Marine become a 5' 9" cadaver just four or five years later?  Anyone want to examine the evidence for this?

[Sandy Larsen]

19 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Were the photos faked too? And were the 15 other individuals present at the examination all told to lie?

Is there a photo of the mastoid bone?

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

45 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Is there a photo of the mastoid bone?

 

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/paul-groody.html

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Here's James Norwood, in one of his first posts on this forum, reporting me to the moderators for "casting aspersions on other forum members":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=359133

Here's James Norwood reporting Paul Trejo to the moderators for "casting aspersions on fellow members":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24241-oswald’s-proficiency-in-the-russian-language/?do=findComment&comment=360472

Here's James Norwood reporting Michael Walton to the moderators for "casting personal aspersions on fellow members":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=360554

James Norwood clearly doesn't like anyone casting aspersions on fellow members. Oh, wait. Here's James Norwood calling Tracy Parnell "Trolling Tracy":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=360550

Here's Sandy Larsen claiming, without citing any evidence, that I'm a "lone nutter":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=359053

Here's James Norwood claiming, without citing any evidence, that I have a "belief in the Warren Report" and "a bias in favor in the findings of the Warren Report":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=359084

Sandy at least had the decency to apologise for his comment. I'm still waiting for James to do the same.

Here's Greg Parker inviting James Norwood to debate the Harvey and Lee nonsense:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1573-invitation-to-dr-norwood

Here's Greg Parker inviting Sandy Larsen to actually deal with the question of the school records:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records#20913

[Jim Hargrove]

Wow!  Mr. B is in such a snit about James Norwood that in his latest list of urls he completely forgot to say how horrible I am!  That’s not fair!

How has Professor Norwood managed to get the H&L Hit Squad to go to DEFCON 1 so quickly?

Could it be Dr. Norwood’s recent article about agent Oswald’s amazing Russian fluency?

http://harveyandlee.net/Russian.html

That’s probably the real threat to the Hit Squad’s security.  Keep up the great work, James.  When you’re this much of a target, you know you’re doing something right!

[Michael Walton]

In order to really, truly analyze the documentation to this case, you have to turn off all irrational thoughts about not only the case but about your ability to trust public institutions and so on. Because they don't have this ability to do that, this has what led Josephs, Larsen and others to believe that "everything is a conspiracy."  I recall seeing elsewhere that Josephs used the term "the evidence IS the conpiracy."  That's actually a perfect example of what I mean.

Evidence is the stepping stone that leads to guilt OR innocence. It does not favor the case one way or the other.

Everything is not sinister in this case as well. For example, there is plenty of evidence that Oswald was set up to take the fall without saying that the "evidence is the conspiracy." Here's a short list:

 - The shell casing with a dent lip (proving the shell could not have been fired)
 - The timeline of shots could not be pulled off as shown in the Z film
 - Oswald's patsy statement
 - The termination of the back wound
 - Connally's statement that the shots could not have happened as stated
 - The number of wallets that belonged to the supposed assassin

But because of the mindset of Josephs and others - that he cannot trust ANYTHING the government or public officials say - he pre-judges anything and everything about this case to the point where he:

 - Thinks there was a clone of Oswald back in1953 that "somehow" played a role in setting the real LHO up
 - Thinks all films and photos - even the Towner film that was shot way up at the top of the intersection - was altered
 - The measurement drawings taken of the street were altered by officials because "somehow" they would show conspiracy if they were not altered

In my opinion, this is why the conspiracy wing of this case is in such shoddy shape today.  Back in the 60's you had respectable opposers to the case like Mark Lane and Sylvia Meagher. Her radio broadcast from back in 1967 is a pefect example of someone showing respectfully how things could not have happened the way the WR says it happened. She took the evidence and made clear, thoughtful plausible analysis of it and came to her conclusions.

Unfortunately, as time went on others - perhaps starting with James Fetzer - came out of the woodwork and started coming up with truly outrageous - and outrageously false - stories of guns down in the sewer drain, shiny objects being held by the limo driver, the old guy down on the knoll holding a black object (a gun?), the secret agent codes of Nagell and on to the funny but sad Oswald clone story, and all other nonsense.

That's why today the conspiracy wing has a negative connotation to it, where it's wrapped up with "buffs," nuts, and so on and is laughed out loud about by even those who don't always buy into the official story. It's also a very strange occurrence when even those who believe and know that there was a conspiracy but don't buy in to ALL of the ridiculousness are themselves then called naive and worst, just because they don't believe in all of the foolishness floating around.
 

Edited September 22, 2017 by Michael Walton

[Michael Walton]

12 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

13 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Is there a photo of the mastoid bone?

 

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/paul-groody.html

Tracy - I'm not sure what to make of this post.  First, I don't trust Groody for one reason - I think he was in it to make a buck and he therefore would have some dramatic stories to put into his book to push book sales (like the other guy we know here in this thread is pushing the other $60 product). And if you read his story, it's pretty inconsistent.

But for what it's worth, if this is about whether Oswald's head was examined during autopsy or not, there is some evidence to support that it was.  View the photo below showing Oswald pre- and post-autopsy. Once the skin wrapping the head is cut open to reveal the skull, the tautness is lost forever. No amount of magic by the funeral people can ever put it back the way it was. He was pretty skinny and young too so that flab is NOT a result of normal skin flab.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Michael,

Sandy was asking for a photo of the mastoid bone and that is the reason I linked to my article on Groody which contains a photo that shows LHO's skull at the exhumation and the defect in the mastoid bone. You are right, Groody was a character and made unsupported claims over the years. He had no problems with the exhumation at first and only started making his claims after a couple of years had passed and then relied on his faulty memory of the events. The photos and documentation provided by the Norton team do not support his stories.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

4 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

That’s probably the real threat to the Hit Squad’s security

The term "hit squad" implies organization. My question is, who does Jim think is running the "hit squad?"

[Jim Hargrove]

FBI stumbles across
two Oswalds... again

According to an FBI report located at the National Archives by John Armstrong in May 1999, the FBI had tracked Oswald's alleged return trip to the U.S. from Mexico City, indicating that Oswald took a La Frontera bus from Mexico City and arriving at the border town of Nuevo Laredo on the morning of 10/3/63. Noting that Oswald also applied for unemployment compensation at the Texas Employment Commission that same day, the report found it "highly improbable that Oswald could have traveled" the 426 miles "from Laredo, Texas to Dallas, Texas on 10/3/63, in time to appear personally" before Laura Kittrell at the Texas Employment Commission. The agent who wrote the report was obviously unaware that two people were sharing the identity of Lee Harvey Oswald.  Not to mention that entire facets of the Mexico City saga were fabricated.

Here is page 2 of the FBI report:

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Here's the thing about the H&L theory. It doesn't operate in the real world. That is, the world where you must prove your assertions. If the H&L supporters really believe they have solved the JFK assassination (that is what they are saying of course) why wouldn’t they be taking this to their congressman, senator or local investigative reporter?

It seems in a way they once did. In 1998, Joe Nick Patoski did a piece on Armstrong for Texas Monthly. Patoski wrote:

The theory is so implausible that its popularity now might be taken as a sign that conspiracy research has at last hit a dead end. It’s one thing to believe that Oswald was involved in a plot; it’s another to believe that the plot began when he was thirteen. Who could believe this stuff and why?

… The existence of two Oswalds would be simple enough to prove. All that would be necessary is valid physical evidence showing Oswald at place A and valid physical evidence showing a second Oswald at place B at the same time. (If the deception lasted almost eleven years, from the time Oswald was thirteen until November 1963, such evidence must be in abundance.) Armstrong can’t do that. Instead, Armstrong regaled me for hours with minutiae.

Armstrong told Patoski the Frank Kudlaty story of records being taken by the FBI. It seems Patoski, who went to school at Stripling, was impressed by Kudlaty’s story and interviewed him. Despite this interest, Patoski’s attitude can be summarized by the following quote:

Is there a good explanation for what happened to those records? Was Kudlaty wrong? And what was Hoover talking about in that memo [the infamous impostor memo], and what’s the story behind it? I don’t know the answers and I’m not going to devote my life to finding out.

It’s obvious that despite being somewhat impressed with Kudlaty, Patoski didn’t really believe there was anything to Armstrong’s theory. Why just drop it otherwise? Patoski went on to write a book about Willie Nelson, but had no more time for John Armstrong. It is clear to me that Patoski didn’t believe Armstrong’s tale at all.

So, maybe the H&L have gone to the media and the reason they don’t bother anymore is that journalists (and anyone else that might listen to them) must operate in the real world. There are things like common sense and evidence that must be dealt with. And as Patoski pointed out, the theory should be simple to prove-if it were true. So, the only place that H&L can flourish is right here on the EF, on Hargrove’s website and in the pages of Armstrong’s book.

Patoski’s article:

https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-two-oswalds/

[Jim Hargrove]

The Texas Monthly article by Joe Patoski ends with these two paragraphs:

I tracked down Kudlaty in Waco, where he now lives in retirement after a lengthy career as a school administrator in several Texas cities. He related the incident that turned out to be his brush with infamy. The day after the assassination, Mr. Wylie, Stripling’s principal, asked him to pull Oswald’s records and hand them over to FBI agents. Kudlaty recalled those events and briefly examined the records before handing them over. “I do recall the grades were not good,” he told me. That has bothered him ever since. “A person of that mind could teach himself Russian and pass himself as Russian? I don’t think so,” Kudlaty said.

The Hoover memo and that short conversation with Kudlaty put more doubt in my mind than the two days I spent with Armstrong and his blizzard of documents. Is there a good explanation for what happened to those records? Was Kudlaty wrong? And what was Hoover talking about in that memo, and what’s the story behind it? I don’t know the answers and I’m not going to devote my life to finding out. But here was one undeniable, strange, and tantalizing fact in the memo and the personal testimony of a man I knew and respected, and that almost had me going. It was enough to let me understand why a man like Armstrong has fallen under the spell of the Two Oswalds.