David Josephs Posted December 15, 2017 Share Posted December 15, 2017 (edited) CE 1311 - Photograph of assassination window from inside of building showing person of Lee Harvey Oswald's height .. Repeatedly the H&L naysayers claim there was no height difference or concerns... That despite leaving the Marines at 5"11" and 150 lbs the man at the window was - with 2" man-heels - 5' 7" Why would they make a 5'10" man only 5'7" ?? Even the Rose Autopsy said he was 5'9"... Why is he made out to be so short when all the records seem to claim he was 2 to 4 inches taller? Edited May 24, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 4 hours ago, David Josephs said: CE 1311 - Photograph of assassination window from inside of building showing person of Lee Harvey Oswald's height .. Repeatedly the H&L naysayers claim there was no height difference or concerns... That despite leaving the Marines at 5"11" and 150 lbs David, You might want to read this: https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret_Chapter1.html It talks about the heights of both Webster and Oswald. Oswald based on the Marine photo was 5-9. The investigators in your photos above probably got the numbers off by...2 inches. Think about it - big deal. It's not a big discrepancy. And in the link above, even both newspapers described both Webster and Oswald as "...good looking 6 footers..." So they basically rounded it off to 6 feet. The point is - does it really matter? As myself and many others have tried to explain to you and Team Hardly, this is the whole faulty premise of the Hardly Lee story. Armstrong and Team Hardly have basically taken snatches of testimony, honest clerical errors, testimony from people 20 years after 11/22 and other mistakes and have stitched together the Hardly Lee story. Unfortunately, the Hardly Lee story does nothing to promote revealing the truth about the Kennedy case. As a matter of fact, it does the opposite - it muddles the picture of what happened and causes nothing but confusion and subterfuge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 (edited) I feel sure this is all part of a Massive Conspiracy that meshes perfectly with the H&L theory, and frankly I feel unworthy even to comment on matters so sophisticated, but my little lawyerly brain wonders why, on the measuring stick, the "feet" have only ten "inches," and each "inch" is divided into only five segments? Could this perhaps be a measuring stick from the Alternate H&L Universe, where absolutely nothing is as it seems? Or could it perhaps be a standard engineer's rod, whereby 5.7 feet converts to - wait for it - 5 feet, 8.4 inches. If the latter is true, the top of the LHO Surrogate's crew cut would be almost precisely 5 feet, 9 inches. Engineer's Rod Engineer's rods have graduations that are measured in feet, as well as tenths and hundredths of a foot. The rod is marked very clearly in high contrast; allowing for easy reading. Typically on an engineer's rod, the full foot numbers are marked in red. The tenths of each foot are marked with black numbers, and the hundredths of each foot are marked as tick marks in between the numbers. The tick marks are unique because if the measurement is at the top of the tick mark, it is an even hundredth. If the measurement is at the bottom of the tick mark, it is an odd hundredth. Edited December 16, 2017 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Pierce Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 Good catch. I ran a surveying crew for several years. That is indeed a surveyor’s grade rod, with feet divided in tenths, not inches. The 7 on the rod in the picture is seven tenths, not seven inches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 18 minutes ago, Ken Pierce said: Good catch. I ran a surveying crew for several years. That is indeed a surveyor’s grade rod, with feet divided in tenths, not inches. The 7 on the rod in the picture is seven tenths, not seven inches. Thanks. I was unduly snide in my first post, but it DRIVES ME INSANE the extent to which the conspiracy True Believers consistently, AGAIN AND AGAIN, overlook the obvious because they are blinded by their desire to find evidence for their pet conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Pierce Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 My observation was not to impugn David’s work. His posts, along with a few others, are why I still come to the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 17 minutes ago, Ken Pierce said: My observation was not to impugn David’s work. His posts, along with a few others, are why I still come to the forum. Fair enough, but "impugn" is too soft a word for what I would like to do with the H&L lunacy. Given that this is an example of such "work," hopefully you are a master at separating the wheat from the chaff. There have been too many occasions when I, a mere JFK assassination dilettante, have easily poked holes in the H&L "work" for me to have any confidence that it is anything but a house of cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 17, 2017 Share Posted December 17, 2017 Ken I don't know how familiar you are with this forum but you may want to go to a thread called GEMS. There many of the Hardly Lee ideas are thoroughly debunked. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 17, 2017 Share Posted December 17, 2017 13 hours ago, Lance Payette said: hanks. I was unduly snide in my first post, but it DRIVES ME INSANE the extent to which the conspiracy True Believers consistently, AGAIN AND AGAIN, overlook the obvious because they are blinded by their desire to find evidence for their pet conspiracy. I agree with you and it's why I've unnecessarily driven myself crazy not letting go with trying to debunk the Hardly Lee story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2017 Share Posted December 17, 2017 10 hours ago, Michael Walton said: I agree with you and it's why I've unnecessarily driven myself crazy not letting go with trying to debunk the Hardly Lee story. The folks at this forum hate "philosophical" discussions, preferring to obsess over the minutiae of the assassination, but I truly think they embody the adage about being unable to see the forest for the trees. Any conspiracy theory has to at least make sense from the 30,000-foot level. Sophisticated conspiracies are never unnecessarily elaborate. Whether we're talking about a CIA/FBI/Military Intelligence conspiracy, a Mafia conspiracy, a Radical Right conspiracy or any other form of reasonably sophisticated conspiracy, I have a very difficult time believing it would have involved, even as a patsy, a character like LHO (and if it had, LHO would have never exited the TSBD alive). I have an impossible time believing it would have involved as many screw-ups and left as many red flags and clues as characters like John Armstrong, David Lifton and the Prayer Man crowd think they see. As I've said until even I'm tired of hearing it, in every one of the elaborate conspiracy theories the conspirators are geniuses at steps 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 and clumsy fools at steps 2, 4, 6, and 8. I just don't find that plausible. The more sophisticated the actors (e.g., CIA/FBI/Military Intelligence), the less plausible such a scenario becomes. I've said before that I don't completely reject the Lone Nut theory simply because LHO was a strange and complex character at best and such characters sometimes do surprising things (as we saw recently in Las Vegas). To the extent I'm open to a conspiracy theory, then I believe the only one that makes sense from the 30,000-foot level is a scenario such as Larry Hancock has proposed - a small-scale, somewhat seat-of-the-pants assassination conspiracy by a fairly ragtag bunch, which might plausibly have included LHO (perhaps as an unwitting participant), followed by an unrelated cover-up conspiracy to quickly close the case with LHO as a lone nut in order to avoid embarrassment to the CIA and FBI and a public outcry for retaliation against the USSR and Cuba. If I have any advantage, it's that I'm not obsessed with the JFK assassination. My interest in the assassination goes back to the early 1970s, but I've spent more than 50 years neck-deep in the UFO research community, the Near Death Experience research community, the Shroud of Turin research community, and other assorted Weirdness communities. I've seen how these communities operate. They are ALL THE SAME. I've just returned here from an extended foray back into the Roswell UFO Crash community. It has its own John Armstrongs, its own David Liftons, its own True Believers, its own voices of reason and all the rest. The parallels are really striking. Observing how these communities operate does, I believe, give me a healthy (i.e., skeptical and slightly comical) perspective on the JFK assassination research community as well. In his most recent book, Kevin Randle (the dean of Roswell researchers) says that 20 years ago he was certain Roswell was the smoking gun, the definitive UFO case. 20 years later, eight of his key witnesses have proven to be not who they claimed to be, not where they claimed they were, and simply fabricating for no apparent reason (such as fame or money). Now he is far more open to a mundane explanation for Roswell. My trajectory with the JFK assassination is similar - from gee-whiz conspiracy theorist who uncritically lapped up Lane's, Lifton's and Grodin's work to someone who now finds the Lone Nut theory far more plausible. If there was a conspiracy, then efforts need to be focused on the real EVIDENCE and then fitting that evidence into a theory that at least MAKES SENSE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 17, 2017 Share Posted December 17, 2017 44 minutes ago, Lance Payette said: If there was a conspiracy, then efforts need to be focused on the real EVIDENCE and then fitting that evidence into a theory that at least MAKES SENSE. Lance thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 16 hours ago, Michael Walton said: Ken I don't know how familiar you are with this forum but you may want to go to a thread called GEMS. There many of the Hardly Lee ideas are thoroughly debunked. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) 11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: LOL Sandy - for what it's worth, you may want to read Lance's post above. I honestly could not have written a better one in describing the current state of the JFK conspiracy community. I've always know there were some interesting people out there and how they believe in the most interesting things (including for example, how some don't believe we landed on the moon) but naively thought it wasn't that bad. According to Lance, it's actually worst. And by the way, do you care to comment on how Lance debunked the yard stick thing? Edited December 18, 2017 by Michael Walton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Michael Walton said: And by the way, do you care to comment on how Lance debunked the yard stick thing? No, the silence is always deafening when one points out an obvious mistake. Not even an "Oops, never mind." Pointing out that some of Armstrong's citations simply didn't check out in regard to the "postal money order" issue never even got an "Oops," let alone an explanation. These characters become wedded to their pet theories like religious zealots. There are no errors in their bibles; errors cannot be allowed in a fundamentalist religion. So you end up with a "research community" that is actually operating at cross-purposes, with the members promoting pet theories, books, videos and conferences like televangelist hucksters. The Deep Politics theories that now prevail actually make the least sense but have become practically gospel. In one of my least-popular contributions here, I suggested (and still believe) that large portions of the JFK research community are so dismayed by what America has become under Reagan, the Bushes and now Trump that there is a psychological need to attribute this to the imagined Dark Forces behind the assassination. I happen to be dismayed by what America has become as well and to believe that things would have been at least somewhat different if JFK and RFK had lived, but this doesn't drive me to attribute the assassination to the CIA or Satan if the evidence suggests a more mundane explanation. Certainly, the Mafia, the Radical Right, LBJ, J. Edgar, Cuban exiles and large swaths of the CIA/FBI/Military Intelligence hated JFK and were delighted by the assassination, but this does not inevitably mean they or any of them participated in the assassination. One of my favorite stories is about a woman who was driving across the George Washington Bridge in New York (back in the 1970's, as I recall) with her rear window partially opened. A .22 slug was neatly placed through the window directly behind her ear, killing her instantly and almost bloodlessly. This was an obvious Mafia hit. They use .22's, they place them directly behind the victim's ear, and who but a highly trained assassin could have accomplished this from a moving car? Vast resources were spent trying to nail down the possible Mafia connections of the victim and her husband and associates. What mysterious message was being sent? Eventually the "trained assassins" came forward - two kids who had been shooting a .22 rifle into the river hundreds of yards away - the bullet had ricocheted off the surface of the water. Weird stuff happens. Edited December 18, 2017 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 On 15/12/2017 at 7:15 PM, David Josephs said: CE 1311 - Photograph of assassination window from inside of building showing person of Lee Harvey Oswald's height .. Repeatedly the H&L naysayers claim there was no height difference or concerns... That despite leaving the Marines at 5"11" and 150 lbs the man at the window was - with 2" man-heels - 5' 7" Why would they make a 5'10" man only 5'7" ?? Even the Rose Autopsy said he was 5'9"... Why is he made out to be so short when all the records seem to claim he was 2 to 4 inches taller? Ha ha ha!!!! What a loser! It's an ENGINEER'S ROD!!!!!! They are graded in tenths of a foot!!! This is just priceless. Any apologies for deliberately misleading people here? Or was it just that the hysterical paranoia blinded you to alternative explanations? Either way, you have really humiliated yourself this time. I doubt we'll hear from you for a few days now, that's what you normally do when you make a fool of yourself on here. Nope, you'll lay low for a few days and then do an info dump on the School records as if nothing has happened. You do know that people can still read the previous pages? They don't disappear just because you do! Will there be a recognition of your schoolboy error? 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