Jump to content
The Education Forum
Jim Hargrove

New Article by John Armstrong

Recommended Posts

Here's a newsflash for ya Tracy...

You've convinced no one but yourself and a handful of disgruntled posters that of Johns thousands of supporting items of evidence, you found a couple from the outskirts of the theory to pull on and get all jolly over finding in the first place...

You tug at shirt tails and pretend like you've accomplished something...

As for Jim H... he can fence with you if he likes...  people like you come and go with very little notice...

You spend an awful lot of time on his work...   hoping maybe someone will spend some time on yours...  if you had any to offer that is...

:up

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Armstrong mostly just makes flat statements that are uncited. When he does provide a source, it is often to a WC or other document that is many pages long and references no specific page.

Exactly right.  And the funniest thing of all, it seems like all Hardly Lee believers DO NOT buy into anything the government wrote.  In other words, they think EVERYTHING is fake in the Warren Report.  Richly ironic.  But when it suits them, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll start reciting chapter and verse ANYTHING  in that so-called fake record to suit their fun-and-games HARDLY LEE story. LOL, indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

First, about Probe.  It's not online -- it's still being sold as a 'back issue' deal by DiEugenio et al.

As for OJ Simpson, I still maintain his innocence of the actual murder, though I remain convinced that OJ always knew who did it.  (The glove didn't fit -- they had to acquit.)

OK thanks Paul.  And whew - maybe in another life we'll discuss the merits of the OJ case LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One has to wonder about a child-like man who needs to borrow pet names from others just to find a little acceptance...

Kinda sad Mike - this anger you carry around...  

and the fact that you and Trejo are peas in a pod...

:up   Perfect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

"He hasn't done anything constructive in the JFK assassination in years-all he does is sit around and criticize and nit-pick other people's work.

I don't know if Marrs was referring to Mack or Perry here but he was wrong in either case. Both worked on the case extensively, writing articles and appearing on TV in  documentaries. And of course, Gary was one of the top JFK experts in the world and curator of the Sixth Floor museum. He was also a fantastic man who was willing to help anyone with his extensive knowledge. Apparently, Gary and Dave committed the "sin" of confusing Armstrong and Marrs with a little common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

One has to wonder about a child-like man who needs to borrow pet names from others just to find a little acceptance...

It's called comedy David. When I saw it over on Greg's site, I literally spit all over my PC screen it was that funny. You may not agree with anything over there but I'll give him credit - he can be a riot. And no, I'm not a member there.  But he's done a whole of good debunking of the Hardly... oops, I mean Harvey & Lee story over there. He even discovered why Oswald came back skinny from the USSR - he had tape worm for goodness sake. In my book that goes a helluva lot further than any Hungarian clone fantasy.

But nope - you Hardly guys just keep plugging away saying it was a Hungarian clone of LHO, they look alike, their MOTHERS look alike (except one is stumpy and one is smiling), they were practically living in each other's shadows, they operated on the clone's mastoid to match the other one, they broke into the coffin to switch skulls and teeth, one has a bridge, then dentures, then no front teeth....do you not realize how incredibly goofy you look with all of this?  How can you expect anyone to take you seriously with anything ELSE you write?

 Your belief in this does actually make me wonder if I can believe the better works you've done like the paperwork for the rifle and gun as well as the MC trip. In other words, if you're that snookered into Hardly Lee with absolutely no room for debate and calling me and others names when we rebut you, how can we possibly trust you with anything else in this case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:
30 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:


Sure you do Tracy. You know me.

 

I said independent-take it to an investigative journalist and let me know what they say.


I have absolutely no ties to John Armstrong.

And by saying the person needs to be a journalist, you have changed the goal posts.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Just started reading the free version of the Armstrong book. It seems like some people in this thread may have been among those attending the JFK class described in the opening.

Andrew,

While you are reading the book perhaps you will take time and read an article I did which summarizes why Palmer McBride was wrong:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/palmer-mcbride.html

And remember, as Armstrong admits, McBride formed the basis for the H&L theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sandy Larsen said:


I have absolutely no ties to John Armstrong.

And by saying the person needs to be a journalist, you have changed the goal posts.

 

I admit that it would probably be difficult to find a truly independent source to evaluate the H&L claims. I would say either a journalist or former investigator would be qualified to do the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Seems to be quite civil as well. Maybe Jim and Sandy will reconsider and debate as well.

I was actually surprised at that too - pretty respectful. I thought it was going to get out of hand because on the GEMS thread there was one point when Norwood was threatening to report EVERYONE who didn't agree with the Hardly...er, Harvey and Lee fantasy LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:
41 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:


I have absolutely no respect for people who are like the two in Marrs' class.

What did they do that was wrong in your opinion? They simply informed Armstrong that other evidence showed his theory was incorrect.

 

Armstrong wrote:

I soon noticed two middle-aged men sitting at the back of the classroom and became annoyed when they began talking loudly, mocked nearly every speaker, and were very disruptive. These two men were self- proclaimed "experts" in the Kennedy assassination and questioned and criticized most of the speakers. Week after week they argued continuously with Jim Marrs, Jack White, guest speakers, and students.

"He hasn't done anything constructive in the JFK assassination in years -- all he does is sit around and criticize and nit-pick other people's work.

I concluded that this man was not a JFK "expert, "but rather a cynical and narrow-minded individual who thought he knew all the answers.

 

Here's what he did wrong, Tracy:

  • He argued with the teacher too much. He had no business being in a class where he didn't allow the teacher to teach. He was disruptive to the class.
  • He mocked others.
  • He criticized and nit-picked too much.
  • In short, he wasn't in the class for the right reasons. If he thought he knew more than the teacher, he should quit disrupting that class and gone off to teach his own class.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Walton said:

I was actually surprised at that too - pretty respectful. I thought it was going to get out of hand because on the GEMS thread there was one point when Norwood was threatening to report EVERYONE who didn't agree with the Hardly...er, Harvey and Lee fantasy LOL.

Yeah, I'd like to see Hargrove and Larsen go over there. If it became abusive, they could just cite the abuse and quit. I think Greg would be civil though and would relish the chance to debate them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I admit that it would probably be difficult to find a truly independent source to evaluate the H&L claims. I would say either a journalist or former investigator would be qualified to do the job.

Unfortunately, you never hear humility from the Hardly crowd like this.  Bill Simpich is good at this too - he basically did an outstanding job of his SS story but admits it's not perfect.  Not so with the Hardly crowd.  It's all rabid breaking into coffins and stealing teeth and pigeon holing testimony that is supposed to be fake and "you're despicable...get out of here" when you disagree with them LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Here's what he did wrong, Tracy:

  • He argued with the teacher too much. He had no business being in a class where he didn't allow the teacher to teach. He was disruptive to the class.
  • He mocked others.
  • He criticized and nit-picked too much.
  • In short, he wasn't in the class for the right reasons. If he thought he knew more than the teacher, he should quit disrupting that class and gone off to teach his own class.

Well that was their side of the story. I can't remember if Gary or Dave ever provided their version. 

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

×