David Josephs

On ‎10‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 2:15 PM, Michael Walton said:

I have a question about that doc that's mentioned in the article where when they're interviewing Helms and when they ask him about LHO's CIA connections and it cuts off.  Is that a recently released doc or has it been around? If it's old, on which site is it hosted?

Not sure but you may be talking about this that was debunked a while back...

On 10/27/2017 at 4:17 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

It doesn't matter how much work Armstrong did if the conclusions reached from that work are nonsense, which they are. And who decides who is "qualified" to offer opinions-you? BTW, Asperger's is Greg Parker's theory, you're getting your H&L critics mixed up.

I decide Tracy...  And if you don't read the book and don't bother to follow things up... why should I give your opinion any weight?

As for Parker's Asperger's theory...  exactly... a working theory for which he offer anecdotes... no evidence.

As for John's conclusions...  again... who the eff are you?  How many of the same witnesses did YOU talk to?
How visits to the archives to do research for YOUR rebuttals?
Ever even SEEN the CD that comes with the book?

Tracy...  like so many here all you care about it your little bit of attention... the only way to get that attention it appears is to critique others rather than offer your own research time and effort and conclusions up for scrutiny...

What do you bring to the table that we've not already heard ad nausea in rebuttal to the mountain of evidence showing the conflicts brought on by the existence of these two men?  Nothing Tracy...

A bit fact prayer - and as addressed by Sandy... a poorly presented prayer at that...

Without H&L and Armstrong... you think anyone would give your postings or Parker's books a second look?

As many here have noticed... I've posted and published on virtually every subject in this case...  I take the time necessary to research a thing then present it...   

I've had a great number of authors/researchers whom you probably know send kudos for the Mexico City work I published proving the FBI and the Gobernacion manipulated evidence to supply proof of a journey that was never taken.  H&L claims this person was "LEE".  After my research I find that this assumption was correct as of the evidence available at the time.   The extreme compartmentalization of the project caused conflicts in the way the "evidence" was constructed....  but at no time do I conclude this was LEE...

At the same time Tracy... how do you explain all the Alice TX and South Texas sightings of Oswald with a foreign wife and 2 children during the same time?   Never mind Tracy...  again... rhetorical question...  your opinion-based responses truly hold no interest for me...

18 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

As I pointed out before, many CT researchers believe that LHO was impersonated. However, they do not buy the H&L scenario and realize that type of extreme position is not  necessary.

And as is customary for you, Bernie and others;   vague generalities, pronouns, and adjectives...

News flash Tracy... that which is "not necessary" is not by definition (other than your own), incorrect.

Finally, "belief" has nothing to do with the evidence which supports the two men's existence.  One needs to partake in "believability" when one has so little to offer in support of one's position...

FACT:  LHO was impersonated.
FACT:  The records disclose the existence of two men whose pasts were merged into one story to explain away the newly minted LONE NUT explanation.
FACT:  You have not done a fraction of the work nor spoken to a fraction of the people Armstrong did over the course of this 10-year project.  You jump to conclusions, you offer little to no supporting documentation or evidence for you position,

Bottom line Tracy, you are simply not qualified to offer opinionated criticism...   Stick with the exhumation and Asperger's as your pillars... 

The rest of us will continue to deal with the reality of the evidence...

More and more info about 2-3 visits Oswald supposedly had to MEXICO CITY prior to the dates questioned.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=147166&search=mexico#relPageId=9&tab=page

My favorite is the DISCLAIMER at the top:

"The source DOES NOT HAVE DIRECT KNOWLEDGE.....   BUT....  "

Does anyone think that Gilberto P. Lopez was the Oswald in Mexico? 

Does anyone have the photo mentioned in #2? (I think I found one - thanks Wim) 

http://photobucket.com/gallery/user/rwaters_1/media/bWVkaWFJZDoxOTgwOTQ5Nw==/?ref= 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1994#relPageId=3&tab=page 

And isn't amazing how easily they can trace his travel from Dallas to Cuba - yet so much trouble with Oswald.

Just sayin'

2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

What book are you referring to?

I think he means "Wilderness of Mirrors" - an amazing book about Harvey and Angleton....  by David Martin

So I ask myself... if HARVEY was the planner... what leverage is there against those at Bethesda to get them to cooperate... LeMay? Burkley? Galloway?

I just don't get the feeling that the CIA players told the Military players what to do... but vice versa.

On ‎10‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 9:00 AM, Michael Cross said:

It's pathetic.

You mean "no it isn't, believe me" from their side does not mean we're debating....  ??

On ‎10‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 9:00 AM, Michael Cross said:

Josephs and Hargrove have the patience of saints.

I post to keep the playing field level....  anyone can spout off opinions and claim them as facts...  we have an entire administration based on that con-cept.

Those reading threads like this ought to go investigate the source documents themselves....  and then find the other documents those who argue against us prefer we not post:

Their entire argument hinges on the hope that Palmer here was wrong... 

that Allen Felde (CE1961/62) was mistaken despite the FBI taking months and writing reports on the wrong person.

These are conflicting records, side-by-side people.  On the left is what the US Government says Oswald did, on the right - someone actually WITH HIM during the time....

These records also confirm he did go to and return from Ping Tung and was being treated for STDs simultaneously...

The anti-H&L crowd is losing their grip...  that's why they hang their hat on the exhumation and an 18 year gap.

I'm finding things on June Cobb (LICOOKY-1) I didn't have before... nothing amazing yet...

Also read a report that says Duran stapled the photos to each visa application she typed...

Where's the other staple? 

and why does Azcue claim Oswald was there Tues/Wed of that week?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=146943&search=mexico#relPageId=28&tab=page

LICOOKY-1 = June Cobb, the woman who helped start the rumors about Oswald and Duran.

11 hours ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32271437.pdf

 

Sylvia Duran invited Oswald to a party.  Apparently, they had an affair.

Yeah, I doubt it...  Read how she describes the Oswald character...

(Azcue claims he was at the embassy 2-3 days prior to the Visa App...)

And why isn't there a staple or two in the photo on the left?

2 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Check Armstrong's book. It is full of references to work done by the HSCA. You can't credibly pick and choose what information you believe and what you don't believe. 

3 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Brilliant, Kathleen! Satire is exactly what the ridiculous 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' theory deserves.

Bernie made a good point when he wrote that "more people believe the Queen of England is a lizard than believe in H&L." I wouldn't be surprised if some of the members of this minuscule cult believe that the queen actually is a lizard. After all, one of the founders of the theory, the late Jack White, believed that the moon landings were faked. People whose view of the world is essentially paranoid will gravitate towards anything that matches that view.

One of the problems caused by the failure of the authorities to perform a sincere investigation is that the JFK assassination is open to any sort of paranoid, speculative and evidence-free interpretation. The existence of idiotic nonsense such as the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' theory allows the authorities to portray serious critics of the lone-gunman line as crazy, paranoid fantasists. It would be nice if the people Kathleen and Bernie are making fun of would leave the JFK assassination alone and turn their attention to making equally stupid but much less harmful claims, for example that the earth is flat or that the moon landings were faked.

Curious Jeremy...

Which paranoid delusions of conspiracy related to the history of this species do YOU subscribe to? 

If you're not even a bit aware of the actual history of "man" and his constant quest to screw over his fellow man...  WTF are you doing here?

So tell us...  are you claiming that YOU PERSONALLY are aware of the TRUTH which occurred within the events of US History?

You know conspiracy from truth?  What training are you pulling from to give you such power?  For it surely is not a complete analysis of the H&L evidence but only a micro-peek at the few things those in disagreement offer....  You and they can't deal with evidence related to people like Allen Felde, or John Ely, or Gorsky, or Delgado,  without losing it.  It amazes me that you can see how the FBI/CIA altered, destroyed and covered up most everywhere else... just not here?

There are thousands of documents trying to place Oswald in Mexico - he was never there and those who know my work, know I prove it using the evidence offered.
Finding this note from Hoover only corroborates it. 

Jeremy - get over yourself already...  you don't have the history, information or aptitude to present a coherent argument let alone understand the depth of H&L...

Maybe ask yourself... why would J. Edgar cover for the CIA in Mexico understanding that Oswald was in Dallas with 2 Cubans at Odio's that Friday night the 27th?
Hoover HATED the CIA.... for they had taken his SIS division away (the SIS ran intel ops from 1940-1945 in the Western Hemisphere under Hoover.  His pitch to run US Intel abroad lost to the OSS's control of the newborn CIA via military control)

Read some of Larry Hancock's books Jeremy...  LEARN something about history before you stick your other foot down your throat...   k?

Are you so privy to the inner working of the CIA planners that you KNOW history that well ?  That "conspiracy" and all its related CYA was NOT part of this US history?

If so Jeremy, than I feel sorry for you.  You are obviously one of those with his head stuck so far into the sand you don't know which way is up.

Y'know Jeremy... how about reading a bit about spying and US history...  what we Americans have done to fellow Americans as well as to the rest of the inhabitants of this planet is criminal. 

Lost souls such as yourself who cannot fathom much beyond your own small imagination, wind up being the largest hurdle in this discovery process. 
It's AS IF you were planted here for the sole purpose of reminding us how far above your head this information remains...

And then whining like a child while relating JFK and H&L to fake moon landings and the Loch Ness Monster...  you are promoting pure disinformation and to be honest with you, it's disgusting.  We're all sorry you don't have desire or ability to understand the documents or the evidence Jeremy...

From that last post of yours... I'm not too worried about who looks foolish....

3 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

You've done plenty of attacking too, Dave.  You're no innocent babe.

You done whining yet?

And if you and Tracy are so blind that you cannot see what your own overlay shows... that remains your problem not the rest of ours.

Change the size so it matches Mike...  or do you only have "overlay" skills?

If the left eyes are sized and overlaid correctly, the rest of the man's face doesn't fit....  fix the position of the mouth, ears and eyes and the rest wont be anchored...

2 different men:   sorry boys... back to the drawing board for youse....

Just now, Michael Walton said:

You're taking two photos that I took and merely overlaid. That's all.  And now look how desperate you are - it's contrast!  It's this! It's that! Talk about desperate!

Stop being a jerk Mike... 

You did not create that gif to try and prove they were the same?  You say so in your post... or are you so addle-minded that you forgot what you wrote?

 ===========================

"Meanwhile, I also put up a head shot comparison.  Keep in mind the young Oswald photo is supposed to be the HL crazies' clone and then the mug shot is the other.  Birds tweet...crickets chirp.  Not a single reply except Larsen saying "You do know that that's a line drawing."  I was like - WTF?!  Anyone with sense and decent eye sight can tell these photos are of the same person.

Nope.  Not for the crazies."

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

3 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

You're taking two photos that I took and merely overlaid. That's all.

But anchoring on the left eye and making sure it was sized correctly was NOT something you did?  It just magically aligned to the left eye?

You've become so full of it you can't see thru the blinders.  and now you're denying something you just did... 

Now you've just lost it buddy.  

Is this an attack of the info or of the man?  Moderators?

2 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Yes I've read plenty.  Plenty where I've seen you support weirdness like the films were faked, this was faked, that was faked, and this story. In your mind everything is faked. Do you even believe what you see in the mirror or do you think it's a big boogey man staring back at you LOL

You think that just because you've been published on Kennedys and King you're somehow an expert.  The only thing I think you wrote well about is how LHO was not in MC.  That's all. Then I saw you supporting the 67% solution, this goofy xxxxing story and many more and I thought - whew...this guy's a paranoid.

6 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Ha funny Dave - funny how you made an LHO photo green...as in the little green monsters you see running around under your bed at night in your tinfoil covered walled bedroom.

LOL

It's called contrast buddy... it's used to illustrate the point you made about the images not being different...

Sadly for you and your rebuttal, they are.  and here they are with more color contrast so even you and Tracy and Bernie's bad eyes can see the difference...

It's truly sad that grown men like yourself cannot admit they're wrong - especially since it was your own photoshop work which proved the point...

So go ahead and try to resize Harvey to match Lee...  the left eye no longer matches...  bummer, right? 

2 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

For crying out loud, Dave! It's the same person! Or have you found a few more little monsters running around under the bed in your tinfoil covered walled bedroom!

LOL

You truly cannot be blind to your own work...  can you?

Do you not even bother reading posts with which you disagree?   Your own GIF proves they are not the same person...  - duh.

This is the first and last frames of your GIF with 50% transparency...  

If they're the same person why don't the features line up?

On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 3:23 PM, Michael Walton said:

Sigh...it's the same person Jim.  For crying out loud!

and now, just for fun, we can compare LEE in the Marines with the BYP of Harvey...  shadow analysis

In these images the shadow thrown to the ground is virtually identical in terms of angle from the body yet the shadows on the noses betrays the composite nature of the BYP...

Ya see?  a little H&L will take you where you're going... 

yeah, it kinda sucks when you make the case for the other side as you did Mike...

especially since you were trying to prove the opposite...

at least it shut the anti-H&L crowd up for a few hours...  now explain how what you did was not really what you did

On ‎10‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 7:13 PM, Michael Walton said:

Once again as Tracy pointed out, a woman back then gets a little insurance money, buys and sells some homes, profiting on them - a perfectly reasonable and plausible event in one's life - but it's still not enough for the HL crazies to look at it for what it is.  Their cult leader Armstrong even wrote these very numbers in HIS research - haha!  OMG!

And yet they keep whaling away with bits and pieces of testimony to show she was destitute.  What a joke.  You can go to any inflation calculator online and punch in $10k for 1947 and it comes to $92k in today's dollars.  A week's worth of groceries back then cost $15 bucks.  Do the math!

But nope.  The crazies keep at it - "Oh look!  Someone in the WC testimony said this or that."  Want to hear something funny?  The HL crazies believe EVERYTHING has been faked in this case.  Everything!  And yet, here they are cherry-picking the very testimony that the government put up - and NONE of them believe in - to suit this absolutely ridiculous and funny (yet sad too) theory.

Meanwhile, I also put up a head shot comparison.  Keep in mind the young Oswald photo is supposed to be the HL crazies' clone and then the mug shot is the other.  Birds tweet...crickets chirp.  Not a single reply except Larsen saying "You do know that that's a line drawing."  I was like - WTF?!  Anyone with sense and decent eye sight can tell these photos are of the same person.

Nope.  Not for the crazies.

Thank for proving the point Mike! 

Here's the overlay with some transparency...  While the left eye lines up (which I do too btw) the rest of the man does not...
Mouth, ears, other eye, skull shape...  nothing is the same.

Well done Mike!

Harvey arrested, Lee in the Marines...  That T-shirt reveals a lot...  Harvey barely fills it out, the man on the right is larger, wider, taller and more muscular..

The gif on the right shows how these two people also do not match.... same as yours Mike

Putting this to bed now... one of the Parker minions illustrates above how these two people are not the same...

Next stop?  6th floor: back-peddling, excuses and rationalizations for having proven the point...

Let's talk "homes" for one minute then...

101 San Saba remains the greatest problem for deniers. 

Mr. PIC - When we returned home I seen this house and my first impressions were that we are back to where we were. Lee had a dog that a woman had given him, I think it is the same dog we have pictures of, and I kind of had the feeling that our days at Chamberlain-Hunt were ended even though it didn't come officially. Then sometime in the summer of 1948, the divorce took place in Tarrant County, city of Fort Worth. I had to testify. I think they attempted to put Lee on the stand but he said that he wouldn't know right from wrong and the 'truth from a falsehood so they excused him as a witness being he was trader age. 

I don't remember my testimony completely. I dc remember that my mother had made the statement that if Mr. Ekdahl ever hit her again that she would send me in there to beat him up or, something which I doubt that I could have done. 
I was told by her that she was contesting the divorce so that he would still support her. She lost, he won. The divorce was granted. I was also told that there was a settlement of about $1,200 and she stated that just about all of this went to the lawyer. Right after this is when she purchased the house in Ben-brook, Tex., the little house. 
Mr. JENNER - Describe that house. 
Mr. PIC - It was an L--shaped house, sir, being the top of the L was her bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, and living room with a screened-in porch. She and Lee slept together. My brother and I slept in the living room in the screened-in porch on studio couches. When we moved into this house and after the divorce and everything became final, I was-- 
Mr. JENNER - Excuse me, was that 101 San Saba? 
Mr. PIC - No, sir; I don't know nothing about 101 San Saba. 

(Jim - I literally was g3etting ready to hit post when yours pops up!)

Tarrant county records show the purchase of said home in 1947
Marge was divorced from Ekdahl in June 1948.

Robert's testimony leaves off at SUMMER 1947...  yet when he returns to testify he is skipped ahead to summer 1947 1948...  All events related to San Saba and those who saw them there are removed from consideration....  

The replacement Marge lives at 101 San Saba per Georgia Bell.  Believe it or not... it gets weird from here...  lol.

Mr. JENNER. That would be 1947? 
Mr. OSWALD. That would be 1947, Christmas 1946. He was showering us with candies, cokes, and so forth. And mother thought that he was overdoing it. And we argued the other way. We was on Mr. Ekdahl's side. 
Mr. JENNER. But your relations with your mother, as you recall them now, during this period were pleasant, normal, and you were having no difficulties with her? 
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir; pleasant memories to me. 
Mr. JENNER. Anything other than the difficulties two lively boys have when they are naughty? 
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. 
Mr. DULLES. Were you conscious at that time of the growing difficulty between your mother and Mr. Ekdahl? Was that apparent at that time? Or did that only come later? 
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir. At that time, it was not apparent to me. 
Mr. DULLES. At no time was that a factor in your life, particularly? 
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir. I would say at no time it was. In moving up perhaps there to the time of the divorce and everything, I don't remember when Mr. Ekdahl moved out of the house. At that time we were living on Eighth Avenue in Fort Worth. This was during a summer period there. And I think this was the summer after the second year that we attended there this would be the summer of 1947. 
Mr. DULLES. If it is agreeable, I think we will adjourn for just a minute. It is now 11 o'clock. 

Mr. JENNER. At the recess, Mr. Oswald, we were dealing with excuse me. We were dealing with the period of time that you and your mother and your two brothers lived in Benbrook, Tex. This brought us through the summer of 1948, I believe. Am I correct? 
Mr. OSWALD. That is correct, sir. 
Mr. JENNER. Mr. Liebeler has determined that the divorce of Mr. Ekdahl and your mother took place in 1948. We cannot give you the month and the day in 1948, but it was during the year 1948.
We had reached the point in which you related to us that, I believe, following the divorce of Mr. Ekdahl and your mother, she purchased a small home. 
Mr. OSWALD. That is correct. 
Mr. JENNER. And refresh my recollection, please--was that in Benbrook, Tex.? 
Mr. OSWALD. That was in Benbrook, Tex. 

When I was researching for the Mexico City series I put every document I had in digital chronological orders so the file name starts with the date.  WCD#1 and how the WCR parallels it really needs to be read/seen.  Just look at the Table of contents or how "the assailant" subsequently "identified" as Oswald, despite Oswald being the one and only person  for which they looked.

I came upon that Dec 12th memo from Hoover....  IMHO, Hoover, knowing Oswald was a paid informant, wanted to spread the blame especially back to Cuba and Castro...  I see him reluctantly going along and then being leveraged to go along once the CIA placed his asset in a compromising albeit fictitious, position.

--------------------------

The only film in DC that night was - IMHO - 0184 which was flown to Rowley.

They had over 15 hours before Dino sees in Saturday night at NPIC.

Dino did not see a complete film either - again, IMHO.

It always strikes me as very odd, the lack of detailed description of what was seen on ANY film that weekend... sure we get snippets like Rather's head movement and Dino's cloud of blood lasting longer than a frame or two...  but nothing like "wow, the limo stopped"  or "that looked like well more than 3 shots...

And then there's the "OTHER" film a handful saw which includes the turn, the stop, the chaos, etc....

==========

FWIW, one has to wonder about CE884 and the changes to the analysis Shaneyfelt, Frasier and the FBI introduced.  If the film was real, Shaneyfelt would not have to have done what he did with CE884 and complete destruction of anything accurate related to the motorcade.

On 10/15/2017 at 6:39 PM, David Lifton said:

I disagree with this assessment. Completely.  I've read all the detailed memos Hoover wrote on Friday afternoon, 11/22 (and beyond); and listened to most of the available taped conversations he had with Johnson.  Where do you get this idea that Hoover "never subscribed to the LN angle."  That's absurd. 

IDK about Jim, this is where I get it:

Hoover wrote in a memo on Dec 12th to those named, that he did not think Oswald was the "only man".
WCD #1 is the FBI report from Dec 9th which specifically stated he acted on his own.

Memorandum for Messers. Tolson, Belmont, Mohr, Conrad, Deloach, Evans, Rosen, Sullivan              December 12, 1963

page 2

it up with the White House and the President agreed with me that we should reach no conclusion; nevertheless the report does reach two conclusions in substance.

I said I personally believe Oswald was the assassin; that the second aspect as to whether he was the only man gives me great concern; that we have several letters, not in the report because we were not able to prove it, written to him from Cuba referring to the job he was going to do, his good marksmanship, and stating when it was all over he would be brought back to Cuba and presented to the chief; but we do not know if the chief was Castro and cannot make an investigation because we have no intelligence operation in Cuba; that I did not put this into the report because we did not have proof of it and didn't want to put speculation in the report; that this was the reason I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man.

Well done Jim...  

This just in from the obvious department...

Swaying public opinion using "social" media - newspapers - so that an otherwise horrible event would be more acceptable and even welcomed... should it "somehow" occur

hmmmm, now WHERE have we seen that happen in the last year??

2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

I think the Dinkin affair is CIA disinformation

I'll have to disagree with you George...  like claiming Bolden was CIA to give Chicago more credibility...  no dice.

Plus he was right...  CIA disinfo usually only has a shred of truth to support the lies...

"Lack of reports?

You think the FBI will report "Oswald's vault tampered with - all evidence within tainted"

??

We've got eye-witness reports of Oswald in Ping Tung and in Japan at the same time... backed by marine logs and marine sick bay records...
We've got Lee's CO informing us he left the marines in March 1959 and all his records were sent to DC.

We've got 2 entire sets of marines who knew one man and didn't know the other... and provable so.

We've got an iceberg and all you bring to the party is 3 ice cubes and old fritos...

Don't bother me anymore with your lack of evidence and opinionated doubts...

You've got a mountain to climb and it's obvious you have no rope...

On ‎10‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 2:17 PM, Glenn Nall said:

this is in the book, David? I've only read the first few chapters - and not because I lost interest or discounted it, but because I distract easily.

I'll have to get back to it to read about this...

From the Norton Report: