James DiEugenio Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) TG is beginning to rival PT as per nonsensical blather which has no relation to anything I wrote. Because he has not even read the book. As I have said before with TG, if you don't have anything to say, don't say anything. But you can't help yourself. But keep it up with Morales' voice on the call and scratching the back of his neck in New Orleans. Real research there partner. Especially with the scratch not really being a scratch. Talk about the Deep State. And barium meals. Oh for the days of RCD, Dwayne Dunn and Jeffries. But alas, they are long gone. Edited March 31, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said: Dear James, You don't seem to realize that in order for one to believe in Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites, one must not only read the book, but be of a gullible, paranoiac, "We Live In A Deep State!" disposition, as well. Vladimir Putin loves it, because he knows that that kind of thinking (which he engenders and makes palatable to both the Alt Right and the Alt Left, through his xxxxx factory in Saint Petersburg, and by Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear through Gucccifer 2.0 and Assange) is tearing this country apart. How does it feel to know that you might be doing Putin's dirty work for him, unwittingly of course? -- Tommy PS Short memory eh, James? Doesn't my proving that "Larry Florer" really was Larry Florer, or my proving (by going to the La Jolla Library's History Room) that the guy whose car was photographed outside the Mexico City Soviet Embassy on 11/23/63 really was living on Fay avenue in La Jolla in 1963, and that David Ferrie had called a BANK in La Jolla in April, 1962, and what about my interviewing of retired ONI special agent Robert D. Steel, and my recent posting that there were ALPHA 66 meetings in La Jolla in 1963, and my going to the Brass Rail bar in the Hillcrest part of San Diego a few years ago and finding out it had never been owned by Hungarians, doesn't any of that count for anything in your book? edited and bumped with the following comment Dear "Deep State" James, Can you disprove anything I've pointed out about "Neck Scratcher"? In other words, can you prove that I'm wrong about his being David Sanchez Morales? Did I ever say for sure that Morales impersonated Oswald on the phone, or did I only suggest it as a possibility? -- Tommy Edited March 31, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) The opera was specifically Boris Godunov. John actually found the original program for the presentation to nail down the date. See, that's research. As I said,you cannot really appreciate what he did unless you read the volume through continuously. Which is what I did for two straight weeks at Mimi's in Lakewood. You can't just accept what other people write about it, especially with someone who has an agenda like Parnell. That is simply not credible And you do not have to buy into all of John's ideas--which I do not-- to respect the depth and scope of his research which no one had ever done before. John goes way beyond what the WC, Epstein, Melanson and Newman did with Oswald. Because he actually went to many of these places and talked to people who not only did no one talk to before, but nobody ever heard of before, like Bell. But that is OK here, after all we have neck scratchers and barium meals. Edited March 31, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 1 minute ago, James DiEugenio said: The opera was specifically Boris Godunov. John actually found the original program for the presentation to nail down the date. See, that's research. As I said,you cannot really appreciate what he did unless you read the volume through continuously. Which is what I did for two straight weeks at Mimi's in Lakewood. You can't just accept what other people write about it, especially with someone who has an agenda like Parnell. That is simply not credible And you do not have to buy into all of John's ideas--which I do not-- to respect the depth and scope of his research which no one had ever done before. John goes way beyond what the WC, Epstein, Melanson and Newman did with Oswald. Because he actually went to many of these places and talked to people who not only did no one talk to before, but nobody ever heard of before, like Bell. But that is OK here, after all we have neck scratchers and barium meals. Dear "Deep State" James, Sounds like you could use a massage and some Pepto Bismol. -- Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said: Dear James, You don't seem to realize that in order for one to believe in Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites, one must not only read the book, but be of a gullible, paranoiac, "We Live In A Deep State!" disposition, as well. Vladimir Putin loves it, because he knows that that kind of thinking (which he engenders and makes palatable to both the Alt Right and the Alt Left, through his xxxxx factory in Saint Petersburg, and by Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear through Gucccifer 2.0 and Assange) is tearing this country apart. How does it feel to know that you might be doing Putin's dirty work for him, unwittingly of course? -- Tommy PS Short memory eh, James? Doesn't my proving that "Larry Florer" really was Larry Florer, or my proving (by going to the La Jolla Library's History Room) that the guy whose car was photographed outside the Mexico City Soviet Embassy on 11/23/63 really was living on Fay avenue in La Jolla in 1963, and that David Ferrie had called a BANK in La Jolla in April, 1962, and my interviewing of retired ONI special agent Robert D. Steel, and my recent posting that there were ALPHA 66 meetings in La Jolla in 1963, and my going to the Brass Rail bar in the Hillcrest part of San Diego and finding out it had never been owned by Hungarians, doesn't any of that ... count for anything in your book? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ edited and bumped with the following comment: Dear "Deep State" James, Can you disprove anything I've pointed out about "Neck Scratcher"? In other words, can you prove that I'm wrong? Did I ever say for sure that Morales impersonated Oswald on the phone, or did I only suggest it as a possibility? -- Tommy Bumped yet again for James. Because he keeps missing it. In more ways than one. -- Tommy Edited March 31, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 Not missing it at all Tommy Baby. But you have more bumps than a seventies disco dancer and most are just a waste. See, as far as I am concerned, we are beyond that silly stage in this case. I am only interested in what I can demonstrate at least at the level of "by the preponderance of the evidence". For example, see my article on Max Holland and Don Carpenter vs Garrison and the ARRB. If you want to talk about neck scratchers then fine. Maybe you can dig up a photo of Morales scratching his neck, and say, "Look, its the same motion!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: Not missing it at all Tommy Baby. But you have more bumps than a seventies disco dancer and most are just a waste. See, as far as I am concerned, we are beyond that silly stage in this case. I am only interested in what I can demonstrate at least at the level of "by the preponderance of the evidence". For example, see my article on Max Holland and Don Carpenter vs Garrison and the ARRB. If you want to talk about neck scratchers then fine. Maybe you can dig up a photo of Morales scratching his neck, and say, "Look, its the same motion!" Dear "Deep State" James, You're the one who brought up the subject of my (supposedly non-existent) research. And now you want to change subjects, just like Donald Trump. LOL -- Tommy P.S. What about my interview of Robert D.Steel? Edited March 31, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Thomas Graves said: Kudos to you, Tracy! Notwithstanding two minor typos in the form of a missing comma in the sentence "Nothing was 'suspended', and a professor should know better." , and the minor boo-boo in the sentence, "However, Kudlaty apparently didn’t think anything sinister was going before speaking to Armstrong on since he never reported the alleged 'confiscation,'” you, sir, have written a decisive and definitive disputation of the Harvey-and-Lee-and-the-Two-Marguerites beliefs of the (soon to be non-tenured?) Professor and his Deep State-believing coreligionists. -- Tommy Thanks Tommy, I put that together quickly so that explains the errors. I'll fix it after dinner. Edited March 31, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) Some critique. Why would it be a confiscation? Especially if the principal at the time knew about it. As he did. Edited March 31, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said: Some critique. Why would it be a confiscation? Especially if the principal at the time knew about it. As he did. Dear "Deep State" James, Well, gosh, one would think that that principal didn't routinely let the FBI take away the records of his students, and therefore he would have remembered and commented upon, way before Armstrong so effectively "jogged his memory," the subject of their coming to take Oswald's away, wouldn't one? -- Tommy Edited March 31, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Tracy, Well written debunk of the "Harvey and Lee" silliness. Regards, --Paul Trejo Thanks Paul! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: So if you read the HSCA critique of Wilcott, Blakey could have only gotten some of that info from the CIA. And I won't even go into what the CIA ended up doing to Wilcott personally. But this is what I expect from Parnell, since that is his bag. As per Kudlaty, I mean please. This proves that none of you read the book. John writes about the whole Stripling issue for 5 pages. The idea that Kudlaty has no corroboration is simply false, although again, I expect this from Parnell. There is Robert Galindo, the principal at that time, there is teacher Mark Summers, and there are early statements from Robert Oswald. And I mean, how do you get a better witness than Kudlaty who ascended up the education establishment to be a superintendent. Or didn't you know that either? I would be interested to know what Blakey got "from the CIA" on Wilcott and what the CIA "did to" him. The bottom line is that Wilcott could not provide any proof for his allegations. Kudlaty and his supporters also have only their statements and nothing else. Who doesn't get a receipt when someone takes something-especially records? And why did they say nothing until Armstrong spoke to them? How concerned could they have been? Armstrong finds someone and conducts his "witness recruitment program" on them telling them they are a part of history and so on. As for McBride, he is fully debunked and Parker debunked the opera thing, it is here on EF somewhere. But I have a question for you Jim. Do you believe in 2 Oswalds? If so, why do you write this on the Deep Politics Forum on March 3, 2014? "I don't agree with everything in the book. And I wish John had let me look at it first." What don't you agree with and why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 Tracy P Because Oswald was innocent until proven guilty, the murder of JFK should be investigated by the entity which had jurisdiction. Back in 1963 there was no distinction between the murder of a US president or the murder of a private citizen. Murders were to be investigated and tried in the jurisdiction where the murder occurred. Therefore the murder of JFK should have been investigated and tried in Dallas by the attorney general of Texas. The death of Oswald was lost evidence. Sometimes evidence is lost but that does not stop a trail. The authorities in Washington, including the president, broke the law. They had no authority to convene the Warren Commission to investigate the murder of JFK. So in that respect Norwood is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said: Tracy P Because Oswald was innocent until proven guilty, the murder of JFK should be investigated by the entity which had jurisdiction. Back in 1963 there was no distinction between the murder of a US president or the murder of a private citizen. Murders were to be investigated and tried in the jurisdiction where the murder occurred. Therefore the murder of JFK should have been investigated and tried in Dallas by the attorney general of Texas. The death of Oswald was lost evidence. Sometimes evidence is lost but that does not stop a trail. The authorities in Washington, including the president, broke the law. They had no authority to convene the Warren Commission to investigate the murder of JFK. So in that respect Norwood is correct. George, Can you cite me one time in US history when an individual who is dead has been tried for murder in a court of law? Once LHO was dead why in the world would Dallas PD continue to investigate the case? The President certainly did have the authority to form a presidential commission to investigate the circumstances of the assassination. The Texas people were going to have their own commission but yielded to the WC-that was their choice as I remember although they were probably encouraged to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted March 31, 2017 Share Posted March 31, 2017 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: There is Robert Galindo, the principal at that time, there is teacher Mark Summers, and there are early statements from Robert Oswald BTW, I checked this and they do not confirm Kudlaty's story, they simply think LHO went to Stripling. 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