Harvey and Lee: John Armstrong

[W. Tracy Parnell]

As I posted in a thread prior to 2009, I personally witnessed a story in the Village Voice, sometime between 1980 and 1983, that associated the actor Steve (R.) Landesberg with the activities ascribed to Stephen H. Landesberg / L'Eandes. So this topic has had some coverage in what was, by the early 1980s, a mainstream newspaper; and it predates John Armstrong's 1993 letter to the actor by a decade or more, and also Armstrong's meeting with the broadcaster Golz.

My recollection was that the Voice story was written by a regular columnist to that paper and appeared in its front pages, where regular columns routinely appeared. I cannot vouch for the contents of the story, but they were substantially similar to the L'Eandes history in Parnell's article.

Interested parties with access to a Voice index for those years may be able to track this coverage down. I cannot promise how much satisfaction it will bring. But it happened.

Dave,

I'm not saying such a story doesn't exist. But it makes me wonder why Armstrong wouldn't have used it instead of citing the 61-62 era stories which don't support his assertions? If the story from the 80's exists another explanation could be that is where Armstrong got the idea in the first place. But the main point is, coverage from the Voice of Landesberg's appearance at rallies doesn't mention anyone except the unknown girl.

[David Josephs]

John's most recent work on Landes(berg). The discovery and learning process never ends...

Curiously, this is the same time period that Anna Lewis says she mets Lee Oswald in New Orleans - Feb 1962.

I hope this helps clarify the line of thought and manner in which John accumulates and presents information... Evidence is offered, options are considered, more research needs to be done...

===============

A number of JFK researchers, including author Carleton W. Sterling, Professor Stan Weeber (UNT, Denton, TX), attorney Carol Hewitt, and myself have written about Steve Landesberg's real or imagined involvement with LHO in late 1961 or early 1962. If Landesberg was involved with (LEE) Oswald during this period it is very significant, because during this time (HARVEY) Oswald was living in the Soviet Union with his wife, Marina.

Steve Landesberg (alias Rizzuto and L'Eandes), born Stephen Harris Landesberg on Sept., 24, 1940, was from Queens, NY, graduated from Forest Hills HS in 1957, dropped the German/Jewish "berg" from his name and thereafter used the name to "Landes," and attended Rutgers University from June, 1957 thru Feb., 1960 (where he was enrolled as Steve Landes and made the Dean's honor roll). According to attorney Carol Hewitt, who's practice is limited to social security, Landes/Landesberg received social security number 126-30-3500 between 1955 and 1957. This number was subsequently used by ex-Nazi Wersh, who was born in Germany in 1900, lived in NYC, and died in 1985. Landesberg then began using ss number 126-30-3503--only one number ("3") different from his original ss number. During the first 20 years of his life, there was no indication that Landes/Landesberg had mental issues. In Feb, 1960 he dropped out of college. His mother was concerned and asked him to visit a Park Ave. psychiatrist, Dr. Efhraim, which he did to appease his mother. For the next few months he travelled, and finally returned home on July 13. Four months later, on Nov 12, 1960, Landes/Landesberg joined the marines. Five days after joining he was interviewed by the Provost Marshall after refusing to sign a statement confirming that he had read and understood the Uniform Code of Military Justice. During the interview he continually stammered and stuttered profusely. The Provost Marshall referred him to the Psychiatric Unit where he made very revealing statements during interview. Landes/Landesberg told the psychiatrists, "I don't take stimulants or depressents. I don't believe in drugs, they are not right. You don't have to use me for a guinea pig." Guinea Pig? Landes/Landesberg was observed to be "suspicious of the physician's motivations and extremely apprehensive." They sedated him with thorazine, found him to have psychiatric issues, and had him committed to the US Naval Hospital in Philadelphia. Seven months later, in June, 1961 he received an honorable discharge (for physical disability, diagnosed as a schizophrenic reaction, paranoid type, chronic) and returned home where he was treated by another Park Ave psychiatrist, Dr. Kalmanoff. In the fall of 1961 Landes/Landesberg moved into an apartment on East 84th St, with no known employment. He later moved into an apartment at 165 E. 49th St, with roommate Michael Dunn, again with no known employment. It was during this time, according to statements given to the FBI, that he was acting as a paid agitator for the purpose of attending Jewish and liberal rallies in order to create disturbances. By Sept, 1962, it appears that his days as a paid agitator were over, and he returned to Rutgers. A year later, in Sept. 1963 he began attending Columbia and may have received an MBA in 1967. In 1978 Steve Landes was living in Florida. Information from the 1991 edition of Standard & Poor's Register of Corporations, Directors and Executives shows that "Stephen Landes," employed as Secretary of Rocky Mountain Undergarment Co., Inc., was living at 1259 N.W. 16th St. in Boco Raton. In 1998 he was living at 9775 Boca Gardens Circle, Boca Raton, and in 2000 he was living at 533 W. Gulf Beach Dr., in Eastpoint, FL. In the early 1990's Landes/Landesberg's parents (George and Edna) were living at 6100 S. Falls Circle in Ft. Lauderdale. A check with the Social Security database showed his SS number in 1993 to be 126 30 3503 (the last digit is now shown as "3," while the original SS number assigned to Landes/Landesberg in 1955-57 was 126 30 3500.

Barry Gray was a radio announcer for WMCA radio in NYC. In late 1961 Gray interviewed a man who identified himself as "Steve L'Eandes" on one of his programs, but who was this man? During the radio interview there was no indication of speech impairment or stuttering on the part of L'Eandes. Two years later, within hours of President Kennedy's assassination, a man who identified himself as "Jim Rizzuto" called Barry Gray at WMCA radio. This man said that "Steve L'Eandes" had been seen with Lee Harvey Oswald in Greenwich Village in late 1961 and early 1962. Gray invited Rizzuto to their station for an interview, and then telephoned the FBI at 1:30 AM (11/23/63) to advise the bureau of his conversation with Rizzuto. While Rizzuto was en route to the radio station, FBI agents Leonard McCoy and Wayne Morse were dispatched to the radio station. Rizzuto arrived at the station at 3:00 AM and was interviewed by Gray, while the FBI agents listened (Rizutto would soon tell the FBI his real name was Steven H. Landesberg, aka "L'Eandes" and he stuttered profusely during the interview). It is very possible that the man who identified himself as "L'Eandes" (who had a southern accent and did not stutter) to Barry Gray in late 1961-62 , was NOT the same person who identified himself as "Jim Rizzuto" (aka L'Eandes and Steven Landesberg) two years later on Nov 23, 1963 The fact that Barry Gray did not recognize "Jim Rizzuto" (aka L'Eandes) as the same man he previously interviewed as "L'Eandes," is reason to believe these were two different people. Readers should remember that when interviewed by the FBI on 12/5/63, L'Eandes/Landesberg said the information pertaining to Lee Oswald and Earl Perry was furnished to him by someone else. In other words, the L'Eandes interviewed by Barry Gray in 1961-62 could have known and associated with Oswald, but the L'Eandes/Landesberg (aka Rizzuto) was paid to furnish this information during the radio interview with Gray. So, who was the "L'Eandes" who knew and associated with Oswald?

During the radio interview with Barry Gray "Rizzuto" said that he met Steve L'Eandes and Lee Oswald in the Marine Corps at Camp LeJeune in the summer of 1956 (L'Eandes/Landesberg was only 15 year old in the summer of 1956-too young to join the Marines). After his Marine Corps service he kept in touch with L'Eandes, Oswald, and a man named Earl Perry. In 1961 he saw L'Eandes at the Hotel Tamiana, in Florida, who said that Oswald had gone back to Texas. In the fall (1961) a man who identified himself as "L'Eandes" appeared on the Barry Gray radio program in NYC. In December he ("Rizzuto") and L'Eandes attended a political rally for Mark Lane. In January, 1962 he (Rizzuto), L'Eandes, and Earl Perry attended a rally of the American Jewish Congress. Posing as right-wing activists they created a disturbance while Oswald took photos, one of which was allegedly published in the "Thunderbolt" magazine. Their disruptive behavior at liberal rallies was reported by the Village Voice, who said that L'Eandes was connected to Pro-Facist and anti-Semitic groups. But these same reporters could not understand why L'Eandes/Landesberg, who they believed was Jewish, would want to wreck havoc among Jews in NYC while posing as a southern bigot from Mississippi. L'Eandes was quoted as describing himself as "a former US Marine who is trying to be heard on vital American issues." On March 7, 1962 L'Eandes attended a Democratic Party rally in the Village where he heckled Hubert Humphrey. A few weeks later L'Eandes attended a meeting of the NAACP in Greenwich Village, where he made anti-segregation remarks and a fight ensued. During the interview "Rizzuto" described L'Eandes as a close personal friend of Oswald and said they were both professional agitators who attended meetings of the American Jewish Congress and other organizations and tried to disrupt meetings. Rizzuto said that he last saw L'Eandes on Tuesday, November 19, 1963 at a bar on west 10th St., who told him that Oswald and Perry were together in Texas.

From information provided during the radio interview the FBI launched a manhunt in NYC for Steve L'Eandes and also searched for Earl Perry. From a photograph taken at one of the rally's, the FBI soon learned that "L'Eandes" was actually Steven Harris Landesberg, who lived at 66 W. 10th in NYC. On Dec. 5 Landesberg was interviewed at the NYC office of the FBI, and spoke with a severe stutter and became coherent. He admitted that he was the "Rizzuto" interviewed by Barry Gray, and also used the name "Steven Yves L'Eandes." He told the Bureau agents that the activities he had attributed to L' Eandes were actually his own activities. Landesberg's use of the name "L'Eandes" was a cleverly disguised version of the name "Landes," which he had adopted (dropping the "berg" from Landesberg) in 1957. However, L'Eandes/Steven Harris Landesberg told the FBI that the information pertaining to Lee Oswald and Earl Perry was furnished to him by someone else. He also told the FBI that he was a "paid agitator" (NY Times, 12/6/63), but declined to say who was paying him. It is worth remembering that somehow, within hours of the assassination, L"Endes/Steven Harris Landesberg said that he was given detailed knowledge about Oswald's life. And, within hours, he was disseminating this information thru a NYC radio station. But this was before information related to Oswald's background began to appear in newspapers and the media. In the weeks following the assassination reporters at the Village Voice could not understand why the information provided by L'Eandes/Steven Harris Landesberg showed Oswald to be a rightist, denouncing liberal causes, and a member of the "States Rights Party" when the government and media were proclaiming Oswald to be a Communist. This author cannot understand how anyone could have known much of anything about Oswald's background within hours of the assassination, unless they had previous contact with Oswald. Regarding Earl Sheldon Perry, the Bureau was advised that in order for his records to be released they would have to receive permission from TAG, the Pentagon. On Nov 26 those records were released to the FBI, and showed that Perry actively served in the Marines from April 24, 1954 to January 23, 1956 and then served in the US Army reserve until Jan 23, 1962. His military occupation while in the Marine Corps was listed as "chaplain's assistant."

L"Eandes/Steven Harris Landesberg was charged with providing false information to the FBI and was committed by Federal Judge John Cannella to 10 days at Bellevue Hospital for psychiatric observation. Being locked up for providing false information to the FBI is understandable. But what is not understandable is the FBI's apparent reluctance to question Steven Harris Landesberg about any involvement he may have had with Oswald, especially in late 1961 or 1962, and who paid him to support right-wing causes. In an attempt to learn more about Landes/Steven Harris Landesberg's possible involvement with Oswald the author travelled to the US District Court House for the Southern District of NY at 40 Foley Square in NYC. After locating an index card titled "USA vs. Stephen Harris Landesberg" I requested the court file from Rosemarie Fugnetti, supervisor of the Records Control Division. Mz. Fugnetti soon discovered that the microfilm file record had disappeared, and said that she would request the original "paper" file from their archives/warehouse. After learning that the paper file had also disappeared, she told the author this was the first and only time that she knew of a microfilm case record, and the original "paper copy," disappearing. If Landesberg was questioned by the FBI about his knowledge or involvement with Oswald in 1961-62, or about those who paid him to be an "agitator" at liberal rallies, those records disappeared. All federal records relating to his arrest and incarceration have disappeared.

L'Endes/Steven Harris Landesberg's 10 day commitment to Bellevue makes it appear as though he was mentally unstable, just as the FBI tried to do with numerous troublesome JFK witnesses. When confronted with witness testimony that conflicted with the government's "official story," the bureau would often claim the witness was "incoherent, mentally unstable, delirious, confused, etc." This became the FBI's cover for leads the Bureau did not want to pursue. But L'Endes/Steven Harris Landesberg was an honor role student, attended Rutgers, received an MBA from Columbia, and became a successful businessman in Florida--very different from the man the FBI had committed to Bellevue in an apparent attempt to suppress his statements about Oswald or identify the people who paid him to make those statements or identify the people who paid him to cause disturbances at liberal political rallies.

The FBI successfully avoided Steven Harris Landesberg and any connection he may have had with (LEE) Oswald in 1961-62. Throughout their investigation of JFK's assassination the Bureau repeatedly avoided numerous "inconvenient" eyewitnesses to the double lives of LEE and HARVEY including Sylvia Odio, Marita Lorenz, and Ralph Leon Yates. Odio met one Oswald, who visited her home in Dallas at a time when the other Oswald was allegedly boarding a bus to Mexico. Lorenz knew LEE Oswald in Florida at a time when HARVEY Oswald was residing in the Soviet Union. Yates gave LEE Oswald a ride to the TSBD at 10:00 AM two days before the assassination, while HARVEY had been working in the same building since 8:00 AM. Desperate attempts were made to discredit these witnesses and expunge the documentary record. These people were treated with utter contempt by the Warren Commission and the HSCA, and their stories were nearly lost to history. As FBI official William Sullivan said, "If Hoover decided there were documents that he didn’t want to come to the light of the public, then those documents would be destroyed and the truth would never be known." Our national security network, including FBI, CIA, and the Warren Commission, selectively drew upon eyewitnesses and documents that suited their purposes in order to craft the biography of one "Lee Harvey Oswald."

There is a distinct possibility that L'Eandes/Steven Harris Landesberg was a paid informant in 1961-62. This possibility is enhanced when we consider:

* Both Oswald and Landesberg were interviewed by radio stations concerning their political views-Oswald in New Orleans, and Landesberg in NYC.

* Both Oswald and Landesberg were involved with radical organizations-Oswald with the "FPCC" and Landesberg with the "Magnolia Rifles"

* Both Oswald and Landesberg had created "staged" confrontations in both New Orleans and NYC, designed to attract media attention

* Both Oswald and Landesberg used alias's.

* Both Oswald and Landesberg appear to have been used to take blame for the actions of others.

* Both Oswald and Landesberg had a second person who was using their name, in the same city, and at the same times.

* Both Oswald and Landesberg's actions were so similar that one must consider the possibility that both were government agents.

In the 1940's, 1950's, and 1960's there was another "Steve Landesberg" living in NYC. This was Stephen Richard Landesberg, the actor ("Barney Miller" TV show). He was born Nov. 23, 1936, grew up in the Bronx, and graduated from DeWitt Clinton HS in 1954. According to social security attorney Carol Hewitt he received his social security number between 1952 and 1955. After graduating from high school in 1954, at age 17, the future actor could have joined the military, attended college, found a job, or attended acting school. But the future actor's whereabouts and activities for the next 15 years, from 1954 thru the late 1960's, are and remain unknown. When 15 years of a young man's life are unaccounted for, especially after becoming a celebrity in later life, these missing years are highly suspicious. What was Landesberg (the actor) doing from age 17 thru 33? Why did he hide, continue to hide, and refuse to provide any information whatsoever for these missing 15 years? Why did Landesberg (the actor) continuously provide various birth dates until 1989, when he finally provided his correct date of birth? And why, to this day, has he never publicly provided his middle name (Richard)? Landesberg's acting career began 15 years after he finished high school in 1969, with the NY Stickball Comedy Team, and he continued acting throughout his adult life. Landesberg was a life-long die-hard Yankee fan and in later years became good friends with Phil Rizzuto, a former Yankee shortstop. Curiously, this was the same surname used by L'Eandes/Steven Harris Landesberg when interviewed on the radio station and when interviewed by the FBI.

At first glance it seems as though the actor, Steven Richard Landesberg, had no connection with Steven Harris Landesberg/L'Eandes, the paid agitator who was paid to report that "L'Eandes and Oswald were together in 1961-62. But the future actor's complete disappearance from age 17 thru 33, his continual refusal to provide his correct date of birth, his continual refusal to acknowledge or use his middle name, and his admission during an interview that he "was sorry he ever got mixed up with Oswald" is problematic. It remains unknown if the actor (Steven Richard Landesberg, using the name "L'Eandes") was interviewed by Barry Gray in 1961, as does the extent of his involvement with Oswald, if any, in 1961-62. In 1993 I wrote to the actor (address obtained thru voter registration in Calif), identified myself and my interests, and asked him for a response. I (and fellow researcher Jack White) soon received phone calls from a man who identified himself as Tom Walker, and said that he was head of security for Mr. Landesberg. Mr. Walker, or whoever made the call (could have been the actor Landesberg), told me and fellow researcher Jack White to stop researching Landesberg "or else." "OR Else?" What about this man's past was so important to keep hidden that threatening JFK researchers was necessary? What is it about this man's past that has he been hiding for so many years, and for what reason?

Whatever connection there may have been between Steven Harris Landesberg the agitator, Steven Richard Landesberg the actor, and LEE Oswald in 1961-62 (while HARVEY Oswald was in the Soviet Union) remains unknown. But the similarities in character between Landesberg the agitator and Landesberg the actor are worth remembering:

* Both Steve L'Eandes/Landesberg and Steve Landesberg (the actor) were close to the same age

* Both Steve L'Eandes/Landesberg and Steve Landesberg (the actor) had very similar physical characteristics (height, weight, hair color, etc.)

* Both Steve L'Eandes/Landesberg and Steve Landesberg (the actor) had the ability to speak with a convincing southern dialect.

* Both Steve L'Eandes/Landesberg and Steve Landesberg (the actor) were born, grew up, and lived in the NYC area.

* Both Steve L'Eandes/Landesberg and Steve Landesberg (the actor) made comments relating to involvement and/or knowledge of Oswald.

* But there are very distinct differences between these men. L'Eandes/Landesberg (the agitator) had a life-long speech impediment, while Steve Landesberg the actor did not. L'Eandes/Landesberg's (the agitator) biographical history is well known and documented, while Steve Landesberg the actor's biographical history from age 17 thru age 33 is entirely and completely missing. L'Eandes/Landesberg (the agitator) always gave his correct birth date, while Steve Landesberg the actor gave multiple birth dates throughout his life.

Clearly the story of the two "Steve Landesbergs" and their relationship with Oswald, whether real or imagined, raises more questions than it answers. But the intriguing questions it raises are not easily forgotten, and perhaps some day these questions may be answered by further research. We may never fully understand the identities and activities of Steven Harris Landesberg/Steven Richard Landesberg/Landes/L'Eandes/Rizzuto. But one point is clear beyond any doubt: one or both of the Landesberg's were inconvenient eyewitness because their experience suggested and/or demonstrated the existence of the two Oswalds in late 1961 and early 1962.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

David Josephs wrote:

John's most recent work on Landes(berg). The discovery and learning process never ends...

Curiously, this is the same time period that Anna Lewis says she mets Lee Oswald in New Orleans - Feb 1962.

I hope this helps clarify the line of thought and manner in which John accumulates and presents information... Evidence is offered, options are considered, more research needs to be done...

There is absolutely nothing new in this "most recent" work. All of these points have been covered either in my article or in my previous reply to Hargrove. I may summarize this when I get time. In the meantime, lurkers can see my article and decide:

http://wtracyparnell.com/the-hoaxster-and-the-conspiracy-theorists/

[David Josephs]

Good deal Tracy...

Thanks for taking up the cause and offering real work... Maybe you can tell us why Anna Lewis places Lee Oswald with her husband, Bannister and Martin in New Orleans in Feb 1962... repeatedly.

In the room is Judy Baker who is trying to have her friend corroborate "Lee & Me" from the summer of 1963. When that subject finally does come around she says Oswald came in to where she worked, did not talk to her or acknowledge her and left... This is JVB and her friends witnessing their love affair... You'd have thought she could lie a little for her friend for the sake of the book... but no such luck.

What do you make of it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyN37x3OfHs

[W. Tracy Parnell]

David,

One reason witnesses lie is for the attention they are receiving. Take Palmer McBride for example. He was told that he was not wrong in his remembrances concerning Oswald. That is a powerful motivation for anyone-hey I wasn't wrong after all. Then he was told he was a witness to history and people at JFK conferences wanted to hear his story. Now he was not only right but a star as well. That is a powerful motivator IMO.

Remember the show Seinfeld? George Castanza said, "its not a lie if you believe it." And some people convince themselves they are telling the truth even when they are not.

Finally, some people are just mistaken. Most people have had the experience of remembering an event a certain way and then finding out their memory was wrong. I know I have.

But no, I don't know why Ms. Lewis is saying the things she is. Attention would be my guess.

[Jim Hargrove]

...When shown one of the photographs taken of "Oswald" while distributing FPCC literature, here is what "Oswald's" own half brother told the Warren Commission:

Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 291, at the bottom of the page, there is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the young man handing out the leaflet?

Mr. PIC - No, sir; I would be unable to recognize him.

Mr. JENNER - As to whether he was your brother?

Mr. PIC - That is correct.

Jenner then switches topics. Isn't Jenner's lack of interest in this information remarkable?? Why don't you talk about that?

There are just too many simple explanations why Mr. Pic didn't recognize his half-brother, Lee Harvey Oswald, in that photograph:

(1) The photograph was poor in quality

(2) Oswald's half-brother had not seen him for many years

(3) Oswald's behavior (Communist leafleting) was incomprehensible to Mr. Pic. As when any close person's behavior changes, we commonly say, "I don't recognize you anymore."

Jenner's question wasn't clear about the word, "recognize;" whether regarding facial features as shown in a given (poor) photograph, or regarding behavioral features as shown in Un-American behavior in 1963.

Mr. Pic's answer was equally brief and non-descript -- showing his grasp of the question and the situation at hand.

For Mr. Pic, IMHO, the elephant in the room was that his brothers were all in the Marines -- and here is one of them in New Orleans behaving likes a Communist FPCC agitator, and also being blamed for the murder of JFK.

No wonder Mr. Pic didn't "recognize" him.

The framing of Lee Harvey Oswald as the "Lone Nut" killer of JFK was enforced by the FBI, the CIA, the State Department and the Justice Department, and finally the whole US Judiciary, Executive and Legislature.

The stigma of this Big Lie upon the Oswald family -- especially Oswald's two daughters, June and Audrey -- was overwhelming.

After the Top Secret TRUTH about Lee Harvey Oswald is finally published by the US Government on 26 October 2017, and it becomes clear that Oswald was merely a Patsy in a larger Conspiracy, I propose that the US Government also award June and Audrey two well-deserved Congressional Medals, because of the lifelong stigma that they wore for the USA in the interest of National Security.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

The quality of the photo was quite good. See Warren Commission Exhibit 291. John Pic, Robert Oswald, Lee Oswald, and their families were together for hours just nine months earlier on Thanksgiving Day, 1962. Home movies were taken showing Pic sitting next to (Harvey) Oswald on a couch. This was he same man who was handing out leaflets in New Orleans nine months later and Pic refused to identify him as his brother.

How do you know Oswald's behavior was incomprehensible to Pic? Got any documents?

Jenner's question had nothing to do with behavioral changes. He merely asked Pic if this was his brother.

Can you also explain why Pic refused to identify the famous Bronx Zoo photo as his brother? No un-American behavior here!!

You need to study Pic's testimony more thoroughly. Mr. Pic readily identified pictures of American-born Lee Oswald as his brother, but when shown pictures of Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald at the Bronx Zoo and passing out FPCC flyers in New Orleans, he said he didn't recognize the young man as his brother.

As for you final paragraph, you have a lot more confidence in any upcoming USG releases than I do.

[Jim Hargrove]

John did NOT make an error in his write-up, but this minutia about camermen and witnesses is minor stuff. What is in error here, is to focus on unimportant little details while ignoring the enormous elephant in the room here. When shown one of the photographs taken of "Oswald" while distributing FPCC literature, here is what "Oswald's" own half brother told the Warren Commission:

Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 291, at the bottom of the page, there is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the young man handing out the leaflet?

Mr. PIC - No, sir; I would be unable to recognize him.

Mr. JENNER - As to whether he was your brother?

Mr. PIC - That is correct.

Jenner then switches topics. Isn't Jenner's lack of interest in this information remarkable?? Why don't you talk about that?

How is this not an error? Maybe Armstrong's definition of "error" is different than mine-that would explain alot. In an attempt to tie the cameraman at the leafleting incident to the FBI or CIA he states Aucoin was the cameraman when he wasn't-Rush and Mike O'Connor were. Aucoin didn't even work for WDSU. And talk about switching topics, that is what is going on here-what does Pic have to do with this? Aucoin was not the cameraman, that is my point or rather Gary's point.

Tracey, you are the one who changed topics. This thread is about HARVEY and LEE, not about a 2nd cameraman who photographed Oswald. John Pic's WC testimony that the man handing out FPCC literature was not his brother is central to the HARVEY and LEE thread. Would you care to discuss and try to debunk Pic's testimony?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Jim Hargrove wrote:

Tracey, you are the one who changed topics. This thread is about HARVEY and LEE, not about a 2nd cameraman who photographed Oswald. John Pic's WC testimony that the man handing out FPCC literature was not his brother is central to the HARVEY and LEE thread. Would you care to discuss and try to debunk Pic's testimony?

So me pointing out an error in the book Harvey & Lee is off the topic of Harvey & Lee? Fine Jim if you say so. I have commented on Pic before-he did not say it was not his brother, only that he could not recognize him from that particular photo. Paul Trejo gives a very good list of explanations.

While I have you here Jim, could you provide a citation for the claim that Aucoin was an FBI informant? I am not saying it is not true, just that I can't find it anywhere.

[Jim Hargrove]

David,

One reason witnesses lie is for the attention they are receiving. Take Palmer McBride for example. He was told that he was not wrong in his remembrances concerning Oswald. That is a powerful motivation for anyone-hey I wasn't wrong after all. Then he was told he was a witness to history and people at JFK conferences wanted to hear his story. Now he was not only right but a star as well. That is a powerful motivator IMO.

Remember the show Seinfeld? George Castanza said, "its not a lie if you believe it." And some people convince themselves they are telling the truth even when they are not.

Finally, some people are just mistaken. Most people have had the experience of remembering an event a certain way and then finding out their memory was wrong. I know I have.

But no, I don't know why Ms. Lewis is saying the things she is. Attention would be my guess.

The evening of the assassination McBride told Air Force security officers that he had worked with Oswald in 1957-58. He told the same thing to the FBI (CE1386). And you think he did this for attention?

William Wulf and McBride were close friends, and neither man could understand why Wulf was asked to testify about Oswald when he only knew him for a few hours. McBride, however, had worked with Oswald from Oct, 1957 through May, 1958, but was not asked to testify. John met personally with Wulf in the mid 1990's, who described in detail when he met Oswald. Wulf said it was "shortly after Christmas" the year he returned to school (1957-58 school year) after a one year absence. If you don't believe McBride perhaps you would like to speak with William Wulf. He works as a computer systems analyst and lives in Slidell, LA.

And you don't believe Wulf, perhaps you would like to speak with Walter Gehrke, who met Oswald during a NOAA association meeting at his home in early 1958.

Until a few years ago you could have spoken with James Harrison Vance, who was living in Mexico, another member of the NOAAA who met Oswald when he was working with McBride in 1958.

And, of course, there is always the current president of the Pfisterer Dental Lab, Linda Faircloth. Years before John met Linda, she gathered information from former employees and owners of the dental lab regarding Oswald in preparation for a presentation to her company. Linda learned from colleagues that Oswald worked for Pfisterers in 1958 as a delivery boy (see YouTube interview of Ms. Faircloth).

Of course the FBI made sure Oswald's employment at Pfisterers would not be discovered when they confiscated Oswald's employment file and records shortly after the assassination. Each of the owners of the company, and each employee, was taken into a private room and warned not to mention or discuss Oswald with anyone at any time. And when Marina applied for Social Security benefits after Oswald's death, there were no employment records prior to 1962 upon which to base her SS award benefits. And when the HSCA requested Oswald's SS records prior to 1962 they were advised, in writing, to refer to the Warren Report.

Now, Tracy, we look forward to you providing a single document (or even more) to confirm the basis of any reply you may care to make. It may be easier for you to just use your imagination to debunk the preceding.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Jim Hargrove

[Greg Parker]

(As you go thru the book, write down two lists, the marines with LEE and those with HARVEY... see where that takes you.)

If you start with the presumption that there is a "Harvey", it is no surprise that you will find one. It is the same logical fallacy you employ over and over again.

How about you sort that out in your own head, and then start your own investigation with no such presumptions. Instead, look for alternatives to your conundrums. If you can positively rule out all other alternatives in each case, you're on your way to a possible real live "Harvey". But here's a clue. Blanket or cover-all statements that the FBI covers up stuff and changes documents cannot be allowed without specific evidence supporting each contention. Same goes for accusations that the FBI put perfectly sane witnesses into mental asylums and murdered them. Allowable only if there is specific evidence in specific cases.

New found witnesses cannot be counted where contemporaneous accounts tell a different story and there is no valid reason OTHER than the new witness to discount the old witness/es.

Old friends of those close to the Armstrong investigation cannot be used where there has been no disclosure of said friendship.

Photos that are represented as being of two different people need to be verified as such by external experts (i.e. not Jack White or any other "expert' already with a dog in this fight)

School records need to be explained by someone actually familiar with the school systems involved. Let those chips fall where they may.

Do all of that and see where it takes you...

I've done all that Greg... and placed it on a spreadsheet side-by-side to illustrate these conflicts...

No you haven't.

You have started with your conclusion that there was a "Harvey" and then put all the anomalous records into a spreadsheet, using those conflicts as your evidence. Not once have you explored alternative possibilities for any of them.

And this reply is yet another in your arsenal of logical fallacies. Proof by verbosity ( submission of others to an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details)

I'm not going to even attempt to deal with all of it because I do not have unlimited time.

But to deal quickly with a few items...

I did account for the 55 days and time in Youth House, The numbers came out close to your magic 180 figure. I suggested getting someone actually familiar with such records on the basis that you disagree with me. I am quite confident that my figures would be shown as correct by anyone familiar with such records. I would further suggest someone not involved in this locate such a person. Not sure what your objection could possibly be to that.

You say "You want to believe that you know more about the Kudlaty-White relationship than is offered" No. See, this is just another example of how you skew things.

I DO NOT know MORE than what has been offered. I only know WHAT has been offered.

And what has been offered has been 2 contradictory stories to me from White about his relationship to Kudlaty and a third story from White to Armstrong which contradicts BOTH of those stories. If this had been an FBI agents giving 3 different stories about a witness, you'd be screaming blue murder. But because it is Jack White, you dance around it like a prima ballerina.

You ask "Was Anna Lewis lying when she met Oswald in Feb 1962?" when the question should be, is she mistaken in her memory, is she lying or is she telling the truth with the aid of an accurate memory? In trying to determine that, you need to amass all of the available data about Oswald's whereabouts during the timeframe given, look at Anna herself to determine her credibility and also look at those behind this interview and their possible motives. When you do all of that, it doesn't look very promising.

You ask, "Where was Harvey when the FBI/CIA/State/I&NS make up the fraudulent evidence for the Mexico trip?" Again putting your conclusion into the question. The correct answer is... nowhere. He was yet to be born via John Armstrong's vivid imagination. See... the idea is that you prove the existence of something prior to asking where it might be found at a given point in time. Logic 101.

You ask, "Who is the Alice TX radio station job hunting Oswald?" No idea. Never looked into it. When I get a chance, I will and I will get back to you.

You ask, "How many people does it take to have seen Ruby and Oswald together in the summer of 1963 while he and his family are in New Orleans?" List names, dates, places and again I'll get back to you.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Jim Hargrove said:

The evening of the assassination McBride told Air Force security officers that he had worked with Oswald in 1957-58. He told the same thing to the FBI (CE1386). And you think he did this for attention?

No, of course not. His initial comments were simply in error. The attention stuff came later after Armstrong got a hold of him.

And, of course, there is always the current president of the Pfisterer Dental Lab, Linda Faircloth

Yes, she was another of the people recruited in Armstrong's "witness recruitment program".

Each of the owners of the company, and each employee, was taken into a private room and warned not to mention or discuss Oswald with anyone at any time.

Prove it, and when you can do that take it to Morley.

Now, Tracy, we look forward to you providing a single document (or even more) to confirm the basis of any reply you may care to make. It may be easier for you to just use your imagination to debunk the preceding.

That's easy, the tax documents that show when Oswald worked at Pfisterers and when he was in the service do that nicely. Those same documents forced Armstrong to say they were faked.

BTW, I'm still waiting for the citation on Aucoin. If I don't hear anything, I'll have to assume there is none and I'll reflect my webpage accordingly:

http://wtracyparnell.com/orvie-aucoin/

Edited June 16, 2015 by W. Tracy Parnell

[Jim Hargrove]

David,

One reason witnesses lie is for the attention they are receiving. Take Palmer McBride for example. He was told that he was not wrong in his remembrances concerning Oswald. That is a powerful motivation for anyone-hey I wasn't wrong after all. Then he was told he was a witness to history and people at JFK conferences wanted to hear his story. Now he was not only right but a star as well. That is a powerful motivator IMO.

Remember the show Seinfeld? George Castanza said, "its not a lie if you believe it." And some people convince themselves they are telling the truth even when they are not.

Finally, some people are just mistaken. Most people have had the experience of remembering an event a certain way and then finding out their memory was wrong. I know I have.

But no, I don't know why Ms. Lewis is saying the things she is. Attention would be my guess.

The evening of the assassination McBride told Air Force security officers that he had worked with Oswald in 1957-58. He told the same thing to the FBI (CE1386). And you think he did this for attention?

William Wulf and McBride were close friends, and neither man could understand why Wulf was asked to testify about Oswald when he only knew him for a few hours. McBride, however, had worked with Oswald from Oct, 1957 through May, 1958, but was not asked to testify. John met personally with Wulf in the mid 1990's, who described in detail when he met Oswald. Wulf said it was "shortly after Christmas" the year he returned to school (1957-58 school year) after a one year absence. If you don't believe McBride perhaps you would like to speak with William Wulf. He works as a computer systems analyst and lives in Slidell, LA.

And you don't believe Wulf, perhaps you would like to speak with Walter Gehrke, who met Oswald during a NOAA association meeting at his home in early 1958.

Until a few years ago you could have spoken with James Harrison Vance, who was living in Mexico, another member of the NOAAA who met Oswald when he was working with McBride in 1958.

And, of course, there is always the current president of the Pfisterer Dental Lab, Linda Faircloth. Years before John met Linda, she gathered information from former employees and owners of the dental lab regarding Oswald in preparation for a presentation to her company. Linda learned from colleagues that Oswald worked for Pfisterers in 1958 as a delivery boy (see YouTube interview of Ms. Faircloth).

Of course the FBI made sure Oswald's employment at Pfisterers would not be discovered when they confiscated Oswald's employment file and records shortly after the assassination. Each of the owners of the company, and each employee, was taken into a private room and warned not to mention or discuss Oswald with anyone at any time. And when Marina applied for Social Security benefits after Oswald's death, there were no employment records prior to 1962 upon which to base her SS award benefits. And when the HSCA requested Oswald's SS records prior to 1962 they were advised, in writing, to refer to the Warren Report.

Now, Tracy, we look forward to you providing a single document (or even more) to confirm the basis of any reply you may care to make. It may be easier for you to just use your imagination to debunk the preceding.

Still waiting for a full answer!

[David Josephs]

(As you go thru the book, write down two lists, the marines with LEE and those with HARVEY... see where that takes you.)

If you start with the presumption that there is a "Harvey", it is no surprise that you will find one. It is the same logical fallacy you employ over and over again.

How about you sort that out in your own head, and then start your own investigation with no such presumptions. Instead, look for alternatives to your conundrums. If you can positively rule out all other alternatives in each case, you're on your way to a possible real live "Harvey". But here's a clue. Blanket or cover-all statements that the FBI covers up stuff and changes documents cannot be allowed without specific evidence supporting each contention. Same goes for accusations that the FBI put perfectly sane witnesses into mental asylums and murdered them. Allowable only if there is specific evidence in specific cases.

New found witnesses cannot be counted where contemporaneous accounts tell a different story and there is no valid reason OTHER than the new witness to discount the old witness/es.

Old friends of those close to the Armstrong investigation cannot be used where there has been no disclosure of said friendship.

Photos that are represented as being of two different people need to be verified as such by external experts (i.e. not Jack White or any other "expert' already with a dog in this fight)

School records need to be explained by someone actually familiar with the school systems involved. Let those chips fall where they may.

Do all of that and see where it takes you...

I've done all that Greg... and placed it on a spreadsheet side-by-side to illustrate these conflicts...

No you haven't.

You have started with your conclusion that there was a "Harvey" and then put all the anomalous records into a spreadsheet, using those conflicts as your evidence. Not once have you explored alternative possibilities for any of them.

And this reply is yet another in your arsenal of logical fallacies. Proof by verbosity ( submission of others to an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details)

I'm not going to even attempt to deal with all of it because I do not have unlimited time.

But to deal quickly with a few items...

I did account for the 55 days and time in Youth House, The numbers came out close to your magic 180 figure. I suggested getting someone actually familiar with such records on the basis that you disagree with me. I am quite confident that my figures would be shown as correct by anyone familiar with such records. I would further suggest someone not involved in this locate such a person. Not sure what your objection could possibly be to that.

You say "You want to believe that you know more about the Kudlaty-White relationship than is offered" No. See, this is just another example of how you skew things.

I DO NOT know MORE than what has been offered. I only know WHAT has been offered.

And what has been offered has been 2 contradictory stories to me from White about his relationship to Kudlaty and a third story from White to Armstrong which contradicts BOTH of those stories. If this had been an FBI agents giving 3 different stories about a witness, you'd be screaming blue murder. But because it is Jack White, you dance around it like a prima ballerina.

You ask "Was Anna Lewis lying when she met Oswald in Feb 1962?" when the question should be, is she mistaken in her memory, is she lying or is she telling the truth with the aid of an accurate memory? In trying to determine that, you need to amass all of the available data about Oswald's whereabouts during the timeframe given, look at Anna herself to determine her credibility and also look at those behind this interview and their possible motives. When you do all of that, it doesn't look very promising.

You ask, "Where was Harvey when the FBI/CIA/State/I&NS make up the fraudulent evidence for the Mexico trip?" Again putting your conclusion into the question. The correct answer is... nowhere. He was yet to be born via John Armstrong's vivid imagination. See... the idea is that you prove the existence of something prior to asking where it might be found at a given point in time. Logic 101.

You ask, "Who is the Alice TX radio station job hunting Oswald?" No idea. Never looked into it. When I get a chance, I will and I will get back to you.

You ask, "How many people does it take to have seen Ruby and Oswald together in the summer of 1963 while he and his family are in New Orleans?" List names, dates, places and again I'll get back to you.

You're the best Greg...

but I'm done now. I've made my point to those who pay attention.

Have a nice life.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Jim Hargrove said:

Still waiting for a full answer!

My answer is that anyone can say anything. Palmer McBride and Wulf and Faircloth can say what they want. And you can tell me what great people they are and you would be right I am sure. And they may believe they are telling the truth, but the documentation proves otherwise IMO. Now having said this, I will be doing what I can as I have time to refute as much as I can as an ongoing project. But Rome wasn't built in a day.

Edited June 16, 2015 by W. Tracy Parnell

[W. Tracy Parnell]

BTW, while I'm thinking of it, David Josephs is asking "what about Alice TX, what about people who saw Ruby & Oswald."

I saw a report on the men that broke out of prison in upstate NY. They have had over 800 people call in with tips and sightings even in that little rural area. How many of those do you think really happened? How about maybe as few as zero since Cuomo admitted they may be in Mexico for all he knows.