Jump to content
The Education Forum
Vince Palamara

Bush not in Dallas- He is dead

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, François Carlier said:

 

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 !

 

Francois,

Doesn't it strike you as odd that, as observant as Mr. Callaway made himself  out to be -- that from 56 feet away he could make out enough details to be 100% certain in identifying the shooter -- that he 1) didn't notice the cut on Oswald's face in the lineup from only a few feet away... even after being instructed to LOOK CAREFULLY; and 2) didn't notice that the others in the lineup were well dressed and groomed whereas Oswald was unkempt and wearing a plain old white tee shirt? He thought they were all dressed the same.

Gee, I wonder if Mr. Callaway could have been influenced by the way Oswald looked?

But you know what? It doesn't really matter. Because there are number of other problems with the evidence that pretty much show the shooting was a frame-up. I'm not an expert on the Tippit evidence, but I am aware of a few problems. For example, that the shooter dropped an Oswald wallet at the Tippit site. Which is odd because the DPD removed Oswald's wallet minutes later at the theater. How do you explain that, Francois? And why was this fact buried for such a long time? (Well, of course we know why... because it shows that Oswald was being framed for the Tippit murder.)

Another thing...

One witness knew that the exact time of the shooting was 1:06 PM, because a TV personality happened to announce the time at that moment. Another witness who arrive shortly thereafter looked at his watch and said it was 1:10 when he arrived, thus roughly corroborating the 1:06 PM time of shooting. The DPD radio log indicates that the ambulance arrived within a minute later, or 1:10 to 1:11 PM. The ambulance driver said he got to the hospital within 4 minutes, which would make it 1:14 to 1:15 PM when Tippit's body arrived at the hospital. So there is no surprise that Tippit's death certificate states that Tippit was DOA (dead on arrival) and that his time of death was 1:15 PM. All of this evidence fits together perfectly. Tippit was shot at 1:06 PM.

Problem is, The Warren Commission's own timeline shows that Oswald could not have arrived early enough to shoot Tippit. They had to add eight or nine minutes to everything that occurred in the Tippit case to make room for Oswald's arrival. They state in their report that Tippit was shot at 1:15 PM, 9 minutes after the true time.

What say you about that?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, François Carlier said:
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 ?

 

Yes, I did say that. But Marina's opinion is not testimony.

 

Share this post


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

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.


Well I don't recall this 2017 news article ever being discussed here. It's news to me... and it's important evidence showing that Oswald did indeed attend Stripling Junior High, even though officially he didn't. This adds to the credibility of the other Stripling witnesses Jim linked to above.

Keep in mind that the author of this article is not a CTer and is not an H&L promoter... he's probably never even heard of H&L. Yet he says that Oswald went to Stripling Junior High.

The author is Bud Kennedy and he LIVED near Stripling and the Oswalds when he was a kid. Here are two quotes from his article:

In 1966, when I was 11, my wallet was stolen at what is now Stripling Middle School in the Arlington Heights neighborhood.

A woman who lived nearby called our home saying it had been tossed in her yard. I bicycled to her home on Byers Avenue and thanked her.

“Your name is Kennedy?” she asked, peering sternly through the screen door, and I nodded.

She did not smile as she said, “Well — I’m Mrs. Oswald.”


So that's his encounter with Marguerite, then living near Stripling, three years after Oswald's death. Now read this:

Teachers and classmates remember him as attending Stripling, though there is no official record.

So, as a resident of that area, the author knew that Oswald had attended Stripling. How else would he know that? It's just as the principal of Stripling told John Armstrong, it was "common knowledge" that Oswald had attended the school.

Note that the author says that there "is no official record" of Oswald's attendance. How would he know that? Well if you read the article you will see that the author did a fair amount of research is putting the article together. So he probably asked for copies of the records himself. He actually does show a photo of an elementary school record in the article. I assume he got that from the school district.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Sandy.  On the Tippit killing, the throw-down wallet makes it even more obvious that this was a setup all along, but it seems to me that researchers need to come to grips with the fact that, despite the bad lineups and the WC/FBI’s falsification of the timeline and the conflicting eyewitness observations, the best evidence seems to show that Tippit's killer resembled Classic Oswald®.  Are we to believe this was just a coincidence?

Share this post


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

Well I don't recall this 2017 news article ever being discussed here. It's news to me... and it's important evidence showing that Oswald did indeed attend Stripling Junior High, even though officially he didn't.

Actually, no it isn't. Evidence would be documentary such as a yearbook photo or any photo of LHO such as those that do exist from other schools that he did attend. Most of the witnesses are simply remembering Robert years and years later but a few may be lying for reasons known to them-people lie all the time, a fact that H&L supporters seem to be unaware of.

Frank Kudlaty never said a word to anyone about the FBI confiscating records or his suspicions that LHO attended Stripling. Not until his friend Jack White told him about Armstrong's "research" that is. Then he "remembered" the story that Armstrong is promoting. But it's the same old story-all anyone would need is one piece of documentary evidence, which undoubtedly would exist, and produce that evidence to show that the WC was lying about LHO's background. But all that exists are unverified reports. But this type of evidence is what the H&L theory is built on and is the reason that it can exist.

BTW, Robert Oswald never said LHO attended Stripling, only that during that time period "he would be" at Stripling, which he would have been had they not moved to NYC. But I am not going to hijack this thread any further. Lurkers can do a search for more information and also check out Greg Parker's site.

Share this post


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

Actually, no it isn't. Evidence would be documentary such as a yearbook photo or any photo of LHO such as those that do exist from other schools that he did attend. Most of the witnesses are simply remembering Robert years and years later but a few may be lying for reasons known to them-people lie all the time, a fact that H&L supporters seem to be unaware of.

Frank Kudlaty never said a word to anyone about the FBI confiscating records or his suspicions that LHO attended Stripling. Not until his friend Jack White told him about Armstrong's "research" that is. Then he "remembered" the story that Armstrong is promoting. But it's the same old story-all anyone would need is one piece of documentary evidence, which undoubtedly would exist, and produce that evidence to show that the WC was lying about LHO's background. But all that exists are unverified reports. But this type of evidence is what the H&L theory is built on and is the reason that it can exist.

BTW, Robert Oswald never said LHO attended Stripling, only that during that time period "he would be" at Stripling, which he would have been had they not moved to NYC. But I am not going to hijack this thread any further. Lurkers can do a search for more information and also check out Greg Parker's site.

Thank you Tracy.
We most certainly need your knowledge, wisdom and hindsight any time that the Harvey-and-Lee issue is brought up !
And yes, in the absence of any document (yearbook, etc.), it's seems logical to conclude that Lee Oswald never went there and people don't remember correctly !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:
1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Well I don't recall this 2017 news article ever being discussed here. It's news to me... and it's important evidence showing that Oswald did indeed attend Stripling Junior High, even though officially he didn't.

Actually, no it isn't. Evidence would be documentary such as a yearbook photo or any photo of LHO such as those that do exist from other schools that he did attend.

 

Testimony IS evidence, Tracy. If it is sworn testimony, it is admissible AS EVIDENCE in a court of law. Look it up.

 

Share this post


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

Thank you Tracy.
We most certainly need your knowledge, wisdom and hindsight any time that the Harvey-and-Lee issue is brought up !
And yes, in the absence of any document (yearbook, etc.), it's seems logical to conclude that Lee Oswald never went there and people don't remember correctly !


"Thank you Tracy??"

All he did was come up with some unsubstantiated excuses for how all that testimony "must be wrong."

You should take a look at the documentary evidence, Francois, that shows Oswald attending two schools simultaneously. (Of course it is really two different Oswalds doing that.) Tracy doesn't have an answer for that other than "somebody made a big booboo on the document."
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

BTW, Robert Oswald never said LHO attended Stripling, only that during that time period "he would be" at Stripling

Oh fer cryin out loud!  Was the Fort Worth Star-Telegram also part of the H&L conspiracy you are trying to push on us?

From the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Oct. 31, 1959 (see the bottom paragraph):

Stripling_1959.jpg

 

From the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, June 3, 1962 (bottom paragraph):

Stripling_1962.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there's the fact that Oswald was missing two teeth, both of which magically reappeared when his body was exhumed.

Of course, the truth is that one of the Oswald was missing two teeth, and the other Oswald was missing NO teeth.

This thread is for one of those teeth:
 

 

And this thread is for the other tooth:

 

 

Naturally Tracy will think up whatever excuses he can to explain these. And whatever he can't explain, he'll say that Greg Parker has an explanation... even though his explanations are gibberish. (I've challenged all the H&L critics to explain Parker's "explanations" to me and none of them can.) And finally he'll throw his hands up in the air and say an expert is needed to to evaluate the obvious. Oh wait, one more thing... he'll then say that I need to get the obvious that I've pointed out peer reviewed in some journal.

And then all the critics will high-five each other like Francois just high-fived Tracy for making his unsubstantiated excuses.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 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.

 

Thank you Sandy.  Fc still only reads pre1980 information apparently.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, François Carlier said:

Thank you Tracy.
We most certainly need your knowledge, wisdom and hindsight any time that the Harvey-and-Lee issue is brought up !
And yes, in the absence of any document (yearbook, etc.), it's seems logical to conclude that Lee Oswald never went there and people don't remember correctly !

Lol will fc admit that Oswald's mother knew him? She claimed his innocense.  Yet fc fails to address that.  Surely one can admit when one is wrong? Cheerios!

Edited by Cory Santos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,

Isn't it amazing how everybody knows that LHO attended Stripling Junior High with the exception of the Lone Nutters (and a few CTers)? I mean, on record is an Oswald classmate, an Oswald neighbor, a teacher, the school principal, the school vice principal, the mother, and the brother! But little ol' Tracy here knows more than they all do. He knows that they lied and were mistaken, even about their own family member.

And in the case of the documentary evidence for Beauregard Junior High, somebody made a big booboo.

This is an example of the tortured thinking an ideologue must undertake when faced with a barrage of evidence contradicting his beliefs.

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen

Share this post


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

Oh fer cryin out loud!  Was the Fort Worth Star-Telegram also part of the H&L conspiracy you are trying to push on us?

Ok, I had forgotten about that article. I should have said that he never stated in his WC testimony that LHO attended Stripling.

Share this post


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

Naturally Tracy will think up whatever excuses he can to explain these.

There is nothing to explain. Sandy is not qualified to make the observations he is. If and when a forensic dental expert reviews the material and thinks there is merit to it then Sandy will have something to talk about. 

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...