Jump to content
The Education Forum
Vince Palamara

Bush not in Dallas- He is dead

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Oh, you mean the Robert Oswald who insisted (along with his mother) that LHO attended Stripling Junior High, whereas school records show him attending Beauregard Junior High? Oh yeah, he's someone whose story you can trust! LOL

I honestly don't know about that. Fill me in or I'll do some research.
Could it be a honest mistake ?
At any rate, I'll be a big fan of John Armstrong's two Oswalds' theory before I even contemplate thinking that Robert Oswald might have lied !

Edited by François Carlier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, François Carlier said:

I honestly don't know about that. Fill me in or I'll do some research.
Could it be a honest mistake ?
At any rate, I'll be a big fan of John Armstrong's two Oswalds' theory before I even contemplate thinking that Robert Oswald might have lied !

Francois,

Robert Oswald did indeed make an honest mistake when he stated that his brother had attended Stripling. The H&L people have tried to turn this into "evidence" to support their theory. I explain it here in a short piece:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/robert-oswald-and-stripling.html

Edited by W. Tracy Parnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, brother....

During this school semester, LEE Oswald was attending Beauregard JHS in New Orleans and HARVEY Oswald was at W.C. Stripling junior high in Fort Worth, Texas.  Since the Warren Commission published the Beauregard records indicating “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended classes at Beauregard for the full fall semester of 1954, evidence that he also attended Stripling school at the same time would be a serious problem.  (Just as the Beauregard and NYC records, both published by the WC, are a serious problem now.)

So, what evidence is there that “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended Stripling School in Fort Worth?  H&L critics refuse to believe ANY of the following:

Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlaty in 1963 met FBI agent at the school and gave them “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” Stripling records.  His YouTube interview is here.

On two separate occasions,  Robert Oswald told a Fort Worth newspaper that his brother attended Stripling.  See one of the articles here.

Robert also testified to the Warren Commission that his “brother” attended Stripling.

Harvey Oswald’s classmate Fran Schubert said she attended Stripling with Oswald and watched him walk home from Stripling to his house at 2220 Thomas Place.  See her YouTube interview with John here.

In the 1990s, Stripling School principal Ricardo Galindo told John that it was “common knowledge” that “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended Stripling.  Not one “researcher” here has made an effort to contact Galindo to see if he is still alive and if he would repeat his claim.

John also spoke to local student Bobby Pitts, who remembered that Oswald attended Stripling with his younger brother and that he (Bobby) remembered seeing (Harvey) Oswald standing on the porch at 2220 Thomas Place, directly across the street from Stripling.  John also spoke with former Stripling student Doug Gann, who attended ninth grade at Stripling with Harvey and remembered that he live “across the street from the basketball courts and one or two houses to the left,” which exactly describes 2220 Thomas Place, where “Marguerite Oswald” lived at the time of the assassination of JFK.  H&L critics have not one bit of interest in any of these witnesses.  They just want to describe them as liars.

H&L critics have no explanation why a Forth Worth Star-Telegram article from November 2017 would indicate that Oswald’s “teachers and classmates remember him at Stripling, though there is no official record.”  Read the article here.

Isn’t it remarkable the the H&L critics work so hard to say that all this Stripling School business is nonsense, but they don’t have even a tiny bit of curiosity about discovering whether it might be true?  

Share this post


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

Francois,

Robert Oswald did indeed make an honest mistake when he stated that his brother had attended Stripling. The H&L people have tried to turn this into "evidence" to support their theory. I explain it here in a short piece:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/robert-oswald-and-stripling.html

Thank you very much. I have read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Oh, brother....

During this school semester, LEE Oswald was attending Beauregard JHS in New Orleans and HARVEY Oswald was at W.C. Stripling junior high in Fort Worth, Texas.  Since the Warren Commission published the Beauregard records indicating “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended classes at Beauregard for the full fall semester of 1954, evidence that he also attended Stripling school at the same time would be a serious problem.  (Just as the Beauregard and NYC records, both published by the WC, are a serious problem now.)

So, what evidence is there that “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended Stripling School in Fort Worth?  H&L critics refuse to believe ANY of the following:

Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlaty in 1963 met FBI agent at the school and gave them “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” Stripling records.  His YouTube interview is here.

On two separate occasions,  Robert Oswald told a Fort Worth newspaper that his brother attended Stripling.  See one of the articles here.

Robert also testified to the Warren Commission that his “brother” attended Stripling.

Harvey Oswald’s classmate Fran Schubert said she attended Stripling with Oswald and watched him walk home from Stripling to his house at 2220 Thomas Place.  See her YouTube interview with John here.

In the 1990s, Stripling School principal Ricardo Galindo told John that it was “common knowledge” that “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended Stripling.  Not one “researcher” here has made an effort to contact Galindo to see if he is still alive and if he would repeat his claim.

John also spoke to local student Bobby Pitts, who remembered that Oswald attended Stripling with his younger brother and that he (Bobby) remembered seeing (Harvey) Oswald standing on the porch at 2220 Thomas Place, directly across the street from Stripling.  John also spoke with former Stripling student Doug Gann, who attended ninth grade at Stripling with Harvey and remembered that he live “across the street from the basketball courts and one or two houses to the left,” which exactly describes 2220 Thomas Place, where “Marguerite Oswald” lived at the time of the assassination of JFK.  H&L critics have not one bit of interest in any of these witnesses.  They just want to describe them as liars.

H&L critics have no explanation why a Forth Worth Star-Telegram article from November 2017 would indicate that Oswald’s “teachers and classmates remember him at Stripling, though there is no official record.”  Read the article here.

Isn’t it remarkable the the H&L critics work so hard to say that all this Stripling School business is nonsense, but they don’t have even a tiny bit of curiosity about discovering whether it might be true?  

That's interesting.
I'm not an expert on that but I'll read on.
Just one question : could it be, as W. Tracy Parnell suggests, that people remember Robert instead of Lee ? And how come, as W. Tracy Parnell writes in his website (I quote) : "There is no documentation, no yearbook photos (as there are at other schools LHO attended) no evidence at all that LHO attended Stripling" ?

I'd like to have your answers on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Jim why do you waste your time? Lol.  FC solved the case based on Robert Oswalds opinion because as FC notes he knew LHO and you didnt.  I guess FC conveniently again forgets evidence  namely that LHO's mother and wife claimed LHO was innocent.  So by FC logic I guess their opinions should be higher but it seems that w fc facts and logical arguments are always conveniently ignored.  Jim ignore him.

 

Good point Cory.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, François Carlier said:
On 12/28/2018 at 9:48 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

You don't know what LHO did Francois, you only know what the coverup artists want you to believe.

Whatever do you mean ? Yes, I know what Lee Oswald did on November 22, 1963. He took his pistol. He killed a policeman in public. Then he tried to kill another policeman. Then he lied when he was interrogated, while being accused of assassinating the President of the United States !

 

LOL, you crack me up Francois. Don't you see that you're using  circular logic in your reasoning? It goes like this:

  1. The Warren Commission said the Oswald killed a policeman and Kennedy. Therefore....
  2. Oswald is a despicable man.
  3. Critics find serious flaws in the Warren Commission's conclusions and claim that Oswald appears to be innocent.
  4. Francois says the critics must be wrong because... <go to #2>.

Francois has gotten himself in this infinite loop and he can't escape!  LOL

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, François Carlier said:
On 12/28/2018 at 9:48 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

Oh, you mean the Robert Oswald who insisted (along with his mother) that LHO attended Stripling Junior High, whereas school records show him attending Beauregard Junior High? Oh yeah, he's someone whose story you can trust! LOL

 

Oh, come on !
Please.
Please don't resort to slander, or defamation of character.

 

I didn't slander Robert, Francois. I was just pointing out that he didn't know the LHO we know near as well as he knew his real LHO brother. I think that Robert and our LHO were both good, decent men.

 

Share this post


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

 

I didn't slander Robert, Francois. I was just pointing out that he didn't know the LHO we know near as well as he knew his real LHO brother. I think that Robert and our LHO were both good, decent men.

 

Sandy, allow me to correct fc yet again.  Lol. First, one cannot slander the dead for they have no damages.  Lol.  Robert Oswald died recently; perhaps fc is not reading the news?    Second, even if what you said was defamatory,  as fc falsely accused you of, it would be libel as it was written.  Slander is spoken.  So fc yet again your legal analysis was incorrect.  Sandy enjoy a cheers on this.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has come to remind me of a joke about two lawyers who went hunting together.  They came across some tracks and one proclaimed these are antelope tracks.  The other protested No!  They are Deer Track's.  They were still arguing when the train hit them.

Once again, Bush was not in Dallas when JFK was assassinated.  Even though he spent the night before there.

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Good point Cory.

 

No, not such a good point, after all :

Chairman STOKES. Now again you know Priscilla Johnson McMillan, don’t you ?         
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, sir.
Chairman STOKES. That is the lady who wrote the book "Marina and Lee."     
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.       
Chairman STOKES. And you talked with her with reference to what she was writing about the book, didn’t you ?   
Mrs. PORTER. Sure.      
Chairman STOKES. You have read that book ?      
Mrs. PORTER. Yes ; not recently but a year ago.   
Chairman STOKES. I beg your pardon ?   
Mrs. PORTER. A year ago, yes.  
Chairman STOKES. A year ago, right.       
Let me read this passage to you from the book. I am reading at page 436.       
"Marina was now certain that Lee was guilty. She saw his guilt in his eyes. Moreover, she knew that had he been innocent, he would have been screaming to high heaven for his rights, claiming he had been mistreated, and demanding to see officials at the very highest levels, just as he had always done before. For her, the fact that he was so compliant, that he told her he was being treated all right, was a sign that he was guilty."     
Did you tell Miss Johnson that ?  
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.       
Chairman STOKES. Now in addition to it, you told Miss Johnson, did you not, about the police coming and taking away many possessions, and one of the possessions that they left was a small demitasse cup, and when you looked and discovered the fact that they had not taken the cup, you also found in there Lee’s wedding ring. Did you tell her about that ?   
Mrs. PORTER. Well, I do not--I remember the demitasse, but it is missed. I don’t know where it is.            
Are you asking me did I find Lee’s ring ?   
Chairman STOKES. Did you find his ring ?               
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, sir.
Chairman STOKES. And then did you tell Miss Johnson this :             
"‘Oh, no, ‘ she thought, and her heart sank again, ‘Lee never took his ring off, not even on his grimiest manual jobs.’ She had seen him wearing it the night before. Marina suddenly realized what it meant. Lee had not just gone out and shot the President spontaneously. He had intended to do it when he left for work that day. Again things were falling into place. Marina told no one about Lee’s ring."       

Did you tell Miss Johnson that ?  
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.

(1978)
At that time, conspiracy theorists cannot claim that Marina didn't know English, or that she feared that she could be extradited. Yet, she clearly said that she thought that her husband, Lee Harvey Oswald, was guilty of the crime of which he was accused !
So, Mister Sandy Larsen, see, you'd be well advised not to repeat the mistakes that other members make !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

LOL, you crack me up Francois. Don't you see that you're using  circular logic in your reasoning? It goes like this:

  1. The Warren Commission said the Oswald killed a policeman and Kennedy. Therefore....
  2. Oswald is a despicable man.
  3. Critics find serious flaws in the Warren Commission's conclusions and claim that Oswald appears to be innocent.
  4. Francois says the critics must be wrong because... <go to #2>.

Francois has gotten himself in this infinite loop and he can't escape!  LOL

 

Mister Larsen, I know that you have so far showed very little understanding of what critical thinking is, but now you are getting ridiculous !
Your post is as wrong as can be ! I'm sure you can't even convince yourself !
I don't have to rely on the Warren commision to say that Lee Oswald killed J.D. Tippit. Let's take an example. Have you heard of Ted Callaway ?
Watch this, for a start : 

Try as you might, you'll never be able to deny that Lee Oswald killed Tippit. Everybody knows that.
It's not François Carlier who says it. It's the indisputable evidence.
Now, if you want to pretend that Oswald did not kill Tippit and did not try to shoot at McDonald either, well, what can I say, if you really want to deny reality. It's your choice. You probably prefer a world of make believe.
But don't use low tactics and try to pretend that I use circular reasoning when I say that Oswald killed Tippit. That's just ludicrous on your part !
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, François Carlier said:
7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Good point Cory.

 

No, not such a good point, after all :

Chairman STOKES. Now again you know Priscilla Johnson McMillan, don’t you ?         
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, sir.
Chairman STOKES. That is the lady who wrote the book "Marina and Lee."     
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.       
Chairman STOKES. And you talked with her with reference to what she was writing about the book, didn’t you ?   
Mrs. PORTER. Sure.      
Chairman STOKES. You have read that book ?      
Mrs. PORTER. Yes ; not recently but a year ago.   
Chairman STOKES. I beg your pardon ?   
Mrs. PORTER. A year ago, yes.  
Chairman STOKES. A year ago, right.       
Let me read this passage to you from the book. I am reading at page 436.       
"Marina was now certain that Lee was guilty. She saw his guilt in his eyes. Moreover, she knew that had he been innocent, he would have been screaming to high heaven for his rights, claiming he had been mistreated, and demanding to see officials at the very highest levels, just as he had always done before. For her, the fact that he was so compliant, that he told her he was being treated all right, was a sign that he was guilty."     
Did you tell Miss Johnson that ?  
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.       
Chairman STOKES. Now in addition to it, you told Miss Johnson, did you not, about the police coming and taking away many possessions, and one of the possessions that they left was a small demitasse cup, and when you looked and discovered the fact that they had not taken the cup, you also found in there Lee’s wedding ring. Did you tell her about that ?   
Mrs. PORTER. Well, I do not--I remember the demitasse, but it is missed. I don’t know where it is.            
Are you asking me did I find Lee’s ring ?   
Chairman STOKES. Did you find his ring ?               
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, sir.
Chairman STOKES. And then did you tell Miss Johnson this :             
"‘Oh, no, ‘ she thought, and her heart sank again, ‘Lee never took his ring off, not even on his grimiest manual jobs.’ She had seen him wearing it the night before. Marina suddenly realized what it meant. Lee had not just gone out and shot the President spontaneously. He had intended to do it when he left for work that day. Again things were falling into place. Marina told no one about Lee’s ring."       

Did you tell Miss Johnson that ?  
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.

 

(1978)
At that time, conspiracy theorists cannot claim that Marina didn't know English, or that she feared that she could be extradited. Yet, she clearly said that she thought that her husband, Lee Harvey Oswald, was guilty of the crime of which he was accused !

So, Mister Sandy Larsen, see, you'd be well advised not to repeat the mistakes that other members make ! 

 

But this is 2018 Francois, not 1978. And now Marina believes that her husband isn't guilty. So Cory was right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, François Carlier said:

Mister Larsen, I know that you have so far showed very little understanding of what critical thinking is, but now you are getting ridiculous !

Your post is as wrong as can be ! I'm sure you can't even convince yourself !

 

But you HAVE been using circular logic!

However, because of your protest, I reconsidered the infinite loop concept I presented and did find I had no basis for including item #2 in it. So I removed that and am left with the following:

  1. The Warren Commission and HSCA said the Oswald killed a policeman and Kennedy.
  2. Critics find serious flaws in the Warren Commission's conclusions and claim that Oswald appears to be innocent.
  3. Francois says the critics must be wrong because... <go to #1>.

That's better. And it's accurate because -- up till now -- you've been citing almost exclusively the findings of the HSCA and its experts to support your view.

Fortunately you have now broken out of the loop and have produced, in the video you posted, some evidence to support your view. Good for you.

 

Share this post


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

 

But this is 2018 Francois, not 1978. And now Marina believes that her husband isn't guilty. So Cory was right.

 

Weren't you the one who said that earlier testimony has more value than later one ?
Besides, there is one important point that you fail to grasp. Marina Oswald's 2018 beliefs or opinions are NOT based on her personal knowledge at all, they are based on what conspiracy theorists have told her over the years. That's a big difference.
I claim that Robert Kennedy or Marina Oswald knew Oswald better than James DiEugenio does or I do. Who could deny that ? That's why I give more weigh to what they both have to say. And it is a fact that both Robert and Marina said in their early statements (at least from 1963 to 1978, as far as Marina is concerned) that they believed Lee Oswald to be guilty. Robert never changed his speech.
It is true that Marina changed her mind. I know that very well. Some years ago I uploaded a video of an interview of Marina (see YouTube) :

 

But it is very important to realize that Marina Oswald/Porter's defense of her late husband is NOT based on her personal knowledge or personal experience with him. It is based on what conspiracy theorists have concluded and told her.
If Marina had tried to defend her husband in 1963 or 1964, saying things such as "My husband told me in jail that he didn't do it and I believe him", or "Lee showed me a letter that he had received from the CIA asking him to play the part of the scapegoat", that would be very important and I would agree to say that it tends to show that there may have been a conspiracy.
But you have nothing of the kind.
You do not have a Marina telling you something that she experienced herself with her husband Lee, but you have a Marina repeating in a vague way what conspiracy theorists have written in their 1990's books.
That's something else altogether !
When I talk about Robert Oswald, I use his personal experience, not some vague statements found in a book that Robert would just repeat.
See the difference ?

Edited by François Carlier

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

×
×
  • Create New...