David Josephs

Dave... we all appreciate you being able to quote the company lines... but you never take the next step and PROVE anything. We must have FAITH in what you say... and sorry, you simply do not carry that much credibility to take your word for it... So when you can not only offer the evidence which supports your conclusions, but AUTHENTICATE this evidence as factual and real... you've made your point. the following is just your "I wish these were all fact" list... Saying the earth is the center of the universe is true, until proven false. Here is the proof that what you offer here is minor league fluff easily discredited by a simply look at the evidnece offered... ------------------ Reprise..... "I mean that Oswald's provable "actions" and movements, in general, certainly point more toward his GUILT than they do his INNOCENCE. Wouldn't you agree? E.G., ...He leaves the TSBD within minutes of the assassination. So did many ,many people Dave... they all guilty? and what evidence are you using to prove such a thing Dave? Bledsoe describing the arrest shirt before he's gone home to change? Whaley who after 37 years driving a cab in Dallas drops him off at Beckley and Neches... a corner that doesn't even exit? The CHAIRMAN. The witness has been driving a taxicab in Dallas for 36 years. Mr. WHALEY. Thirty-seven, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Thirty-seven. Mr. WHALEY. You name an intersection in the city of Dallas and I will tell you what is on all four corners. Mr. BALL. Did you stop and let your passenger out on this run on the north or south side of the intersection? Mr. WHALEY. On the north side, sir. Mr. BALL. North side? Mr. WHALEY. Yes. Mr. BALL. That would be-- Mr. WHALEY. Northwest corner. Mr. BALL. Northwest corner of Neches and Beckley? Mr. WHALEY. Northwest corner of Neches and Beckley....He dashes in and out of his rented room to get a gun. How about the Baker affidavit... who is the unamed employee Truly and Baker run into on the stairs between the 3rd and 4th floors... "I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." If that was Oswald and he was closer to the 6th floor window here than in the lunchroom, why did Baker not ID this man as Oswald? You mean another man was coming down the stairs as Baker/Truly were running up? Who? Finally, after the police take the names and addresses of the people in the TSBD, they are told they can leave... who is FIRST on the list and why does it say Elsbeth? and listed as HARVEY LEE? ...He acts "funny" and "scared" in Johnny Brewer's shoe store entrance. Based on the expert Johnny Brewer who we come to find did not see Oswald at all but another employee at the store did... A friend of Jack Ruby named Tommy Rowe claims it was he ooops ...He pulls a gun on the police in the theater and fights with them. (And if this isn't a sure sign that Mr. Oswald had done SOMETHING against the law that day, then what would be?) Maybe Dave, his is not so stupid as to believe if the plan he has been hearing about with JFK went down, he may be in danger for his life... if we're allowed to guess what his state of mind is, it is not necessarily in line with the WCR's pre-conceived conclusions... when you can prove he ever had the rifle or that pistol in his possession we can proceed with this tidbit ...He lied to Buell Frazier about the "curtain rods". Wesley is the SOURCE for that lie... not Oswald. Oswald denies ever saying anything to Welsey about curtain rods. Prove who's right. There are no witnesses to Oswald bringin anything into the TSBD that morning, in fact the evidence states the opposite. We can't talk about a bag in a car until you show how and when this bag was made and transported... As you said Dave, it's not just one thing that proves the evidence is crap, it's ALL of it. ...He carried a long paper package into the Depository on the day of the President's assassination (and lied about the contents of that package)." -- DVP; 8/4/15 So not only does the only witness to his walking in the door not see anything in his hands, he confirms that Oswald was on the 6th floor possibly touching boxes as he was removing stock... Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; I saw him when he first come in the door--yes. Mr. BALL - Did he have anything in his hands or arms? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, not that I could see of. Mr. BALL - Did he come in with anybody? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No. Mr. BALL - He was alone? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; he was alone. Mr. BALL - Do you recall him having anything in his hand? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't see anything, if he did. Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time. Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Did you see him again that morning? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; just one more time. Mr. BALL - Where was that? Mr. DOUGHERTY - That was on the sixth floor. Mr. BALL - On the sixth floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - About what time of day? Mr. DOUGHERTY - It was about 11 o'clock-that was the last time I saw him. Mr. BALL - What was he doing up there? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, as far as I could tell, he was getting some stock---as far as I could tell. Mr. BALL - What were you doing there? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I was getting some stock also. Mr. BALL - And were there some other workmen up there at the time? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Not that I know of. Mr. BALL - Well, do you remember Shelley, Dan Arce, Bonnie Williams, Bill Lovelady, and Charlie Givens who were working up there that morning---laying floor on the sixth floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Oh, yes; they were laying floor---yes, sir. Mr. BALL - And were they there at the time you were there? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Oh, yes, sir; they were there---yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Is that the same time you saw Oswald? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir; just about that time. Dan Rather was 5'10"

That your new motto Steve? Up to NOW you've been unable to understand? That's what you seem to be saying since NOW you understand me as well. Lol We all use some of these.. human nature.. LNers only more so since they have to defend the WCR & HSCA and no matter how hard they try The Evidence let's them down every time

Look at the largest boy in 6th grade Greg. The side by side Marine photos I've posted and will when I get back to a computer... That 13 year old is not the same as that 6th grader. At least from my POV. the boy on the left is BACK ROW confriming one of the tallest/largest in the class... In May 1953 he is 5'4" and 115 lbs... At the zoo in July/aug 1953 he is barely 4'10" In Sept 1953 he is 5'4" 115lbs again... Nor are they the same when older He exists the marines 5'11" and dies 4 years later 5"9' And yet this remains an contested issue... Whatever.

Assets are often sacrificed for the bigger picture. I would have a hard to accepting this too if it wasn't for the completely separate sets of people whr knew the different men. Lee's set ignored while Harvey's are interviewed. Donovan and Gorsky knew diff Oswalds. Felde knew Harvey, not Lee. Anna Lewis is sure she met Lee when Harvey is in Russia... And there's more... It's not a matter of belief but of explaining the evidence another way. 3830 6th street #3 Greg. Any significance? Or 120 Telemachas. Do you know what their importance is or not?

B Ft. Worth Star image of Lee C looks like Jimmy Durante D Harvey Bronx zoo A FrankenOswald by White ??

Keep guessing Greg.... How so Greg? Myra is shown a stack of photos of "LEE" just as Pic is shown the photos in LIFE - they are not labeled HARVEY and LEE... so once again you ASSUME without thought since it supports your BELIEFS The LIFE photo layout of Oswald includes the image at the bottom: Pic and Myra were not TOLD these were two different boys but that they were the same. They volunteered, when questioned, whether they knew the image as Lee Oswald, brother or student. Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that? Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 284 do you recognize anybody in that picture that appears to be Lee Oswald? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - There is a young fellow in the foreground-everybody else is facing the other way. He is in a pantomime, or grimace. Do you recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald? (the toothless photo) Mr. PIC - No, sir; looking at that picture and I have looked at it several times--that looks more like Robert than it does Lee, to my recollection. Mr. JENNER - I show you an exhibit, a series of exhibits, first Commission Exhibit No. 281 and Exhibit No. 282 being some spread pages of an issue of Life magazine of February 21, 1964. I direct your attention first to the lower lefthand spread at .the bottom of the page. Do you recognize the area shown there? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Do you see somebody in that picture that appears to be your brother? Mr. PIC - This one here with the arrow. Mr. JENNER - The one that has the printed arrow? Mr. PIC - That is correct, sir. Mr. JENNER - And you recognize that as your brother? Mr. PIC - Because they say so, sir. Mr. JENNER - Please, I don't want you to say-- Mr. PIC - No; I couldn't recognize that. Mr. JENNER - Because this magazine says that it is. Mr. PIC - No, sir; I couldn't recognize him from that picture. Mr. JENNER - You don't recognize anybody else in the picture after studying it that appears to be your brother? When I say your brother now, I am talking about Lee. Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Then there is one immediately to the right of that, a young man in the foreground sitting on the floor, with his knees, legs crossed, and his arms also crossed. There are some other people apparently in the background. Mr. PIC - I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0413b.htm Mr. JENNER - Then to the right there is a picture of two young men, the upper portion of the one young man at the bottom and then apparently a young man standing up in back of that person. Do you recognize either of those young people? Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - Is he the one to which the black arrow is pointing? Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. This last question has to do with the top part of the image... the beginning of my quoted testimony for him refers to the bottom image on the same page in LIFE... Claiming that John did anything to lead Myra to say one was Lee or Harvey is low even for you Greg. But you're not arguing. And I am not distancing myself from Gaal... he has his understandings of the work as I have mine. He has his style of presentation as do any of us. The funniest thing is that you believe there MUST BE a right and wrong to every issue when it has always been only about the evidence. You interpret it one way, others a different way. Why is it that you ask "How did you come to that" of us yet you in turn don't need to show how YOU arrived at your conclusions? Then, when you do post a reason, we find you make a point which conflicts with your own premise... i.e. you posted: 168 + 12 = total number of days of school since 168 was NOT the total number as we both agreed but the number of attendance days added to absences. The grade cards do not support 12 absences - why? you have no clue and just shrug them off as the wrong YEAR... which you got wrong as well and never addressed. Finally, when 168 + 12 is exactly the same concept as 89 + 1 in the first semester of 53-54 at BJHS... you have no answer other than 179 + 5 = 184. Which is the same thing all over again for the 53-54 school year. If 168 is the # of days of attendance in 54-55... why again is 179 not the total days of attendance in 53-54 - per your own argument? ----- That last one sentence you wrote is wonderful... I even had to show you how the grade cards went with the perm record... (bottom image) And we will also get to 3830 W. 6th #3 versus 4936 Collinwood which I am pretty sure you haven't the first clue about... prove me wrong.

Paul... Aren't you the one who keeps pushing uncorroborated evidence as FACT related to Hoover. And when repeatedly shown how this was false you STILL post with that as FACT... Your MO appears to be to post something you have no clue as to whether it is true or not, supported with evidence or not and then go 15 pages round and round while you do what you can NOT to find the evidence. When you finally do get shown you're wrong... you shrug it off as no big thing and go back to the same MO... Greg and I are debating. We have strong personalities and are passionate about our positions. Go back over this thread and jot down every post Greg has posted supporting evidence to his conclusions... then do the same for my posts. We both have our share of outbursts... the difference is Greg simply doesn't BELIEVE in something regardless of the evidence whereas I expect those with a contrary position to present authetnic evidence in their support. The records could not be more clear. 127 + days of attendance and absence in what amounts to no more than 70 days of potential school days WITHOUT going to Youth House from mid-April to May. I'm sorry he doesn't BELIEVE yet math is math. There are simply not enough days from 3/23/53 to 6/29/53 to attend 105 days of school. Sorry. Why the FBI chose 3/23 thru 1/12/54 to say there were 200 days of combined school comes from them putting 127+ days into 3 1/2 months of school. It comes from them counting 55 summer school days. It is a construct andnothing offered by Greg refutes this. You will notice his replies are all "I've done the math and it's correct" without showing anything. I HAVE a solution Paul... Read the book... I know, radical idea but rather than hoping Greg or I have it right... do your own work. Do you trust what the WCR says without checking the footnotes and sources to see how disingenuous they are? of course not. Why would you accept any less from posters here? Another suggestion... don't like the thread... leave. Go to harveyandlee.net and READ. Check the sources. Find the proof of something BEFORE you post it Paul... maybe then people would take you seriously. by the way Greg, simply because the moderators don't look up "spit the dummy" to see what an offensive insult that is and hold you to task for it does not mean I don't find you funny in a juvenile sort of way. I'm sorry you don't understand tautologies or how you're disingenuous as you present them as your arguments... the rest of us do and find your lame attempts at H&L attack - even so far as to put them in your book - to be motivated by some need for attention. Greg Parker gets so much more attention when he attacks H&L, John, me, Steve and Jim H. Like a politician trying to shift the focus by running attack ads... until we find that your own presentation is so lacking you have no other choice but to hitch your wagon to a topic that people are actually interested in. Is a positive campaign focused on your own work and it's sources not within your abilities? People are tired of this bickering and thread since you offer nothing for them to hold onto when reviewing H&L but your unsupported opinions and even worse math skills. SHOW US Greg... if you can. So far on this long thread you've not been able to even accurately count to 200 or explain the problems found in the records... all due to your BELIEF there was no Harvey... your pre-conceived conclusion that regardless of what the evidence shows, you BELIEVE it not possible. Just like DVP BELIEVES the SBT to be real... Belief is great Greg... Faith allows you never to have to prove anything... or listen to anyone else about possible problems within the FAITH... Lucky you. The rest of us use evidence, research and authentication to come to our conclusions. Belief and Faith are for religions, not logic and corroboration which is the antithesis of Faith... I focus on the evidence, what it says and whether it is authentic and how it is or isn't. No belief or faith involved. When and if you post something other than faith and belief, it will be obvious. As obvious as your current arguments being grounded in pure faith, belief and hope that no one notices you have no idea what you're talking about. To wrap up Paul (and mods) - I put images in my posts. Images of evidence and their corroboration, their connections and the reasons why I conclude certain things. You can make up your own minds based on the actual data itself, not the tautological para-phrasing of those who never have bothered to read the work in the first place. If Greg had something with which to refute Ping Tung (or any of the H&L evidence), he would post it rather than another tautology which makes it appear he has a clue about what we are discussing. He was wrong about the ship's doctoring, wrong about the med records, wrong about the DoD/HSCA/Blakey fiasco and wrong about Oswald being in both places at the same time... yet he still claims he is right that there was only one person in either place. that's pure blind FAITH. Like the FAITH that the WCR is correct in its conclusions. Amusing for sure, but tiresome when you expect more from someone claiming to know so much about our man Oswald....

Logic: An empty or vacuous statement composed of simpler statements in a fashion that makes it logically true whether the simpler statements are factually true or false; for example, the statement Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not rain tomorrow Once again Greg... you speak in tautologies. every one of your arguments states its own conclusions within the statement. First off, there are no "you guys" - you are talking with Steve Gaal. Speak to Steve. Address his arguments and posts as you would expect others to treat yours... that they are yours and yours alone. If I or Jim or John has a problem with what Steve is posting... we'll talk to Steve. K? Second, YOU assume "this" is a most delicate and complex doppelganger operation... YOU assume that any of "this" would be impacted by Marge who YOU call a babbling idiot. and then YOU assume it is the presentation of John's H&L theories which are being discussed when you're only talking with Steve. Each piece of that sentence is a "simplier statement in a fashion that makes logical sense" yet they are not factually in themselves. When you explain how anyone would know what was going on with Oswald from 1952 - 1960 in this doppelganger you can explain how it is either delicate of complex. When you explain and corroborate why you think Marge here is "largely" anything or how the doppelganger was put in her hands you've at least stopped with the tautologies... but that has not happened with you yet. Here's a scenario: (ok Marge, says the agent, here is this boy you will care for. His name is Lee Harvey Oswald and this is his life story... - how would she know any better that there was another Lee Oswald who her new son to care for is being groomed to be? She wouldn't. Her only job was to maintain that she was the mother to Lee and the others... and do as she was told. As to her being a babbling idiot... yup, stupid like a fox. Another conclusion within your question. ....and the wheels on the bus go round and round.... If Arthur Valle is the patsy and JFK dies in Chicago, does the world know of Harvey and Lee? Does Marge? There was maybe a handful of people who knew both men even existed. With our 20-20 historical vision we have conclusions within our thought processes which cannot be removed. Moving forward in time from 1952 there is little to no chance of the operation being found out. By the time Harvey (the 5'9" guy) goes to Russia, Lee is a covert agent involved with Cubans, Ruby, gunrunning - who he may be working for and what he is doing is anybody's guess. Part of the scramble in the days and weeks right after the assassination was the FBI's need to hide the evidence of these two men... why else go back 5, 10 or 15 years in the man's life so soon after the act? Yes, I know, a "why" question which only has speculation as answers... if you can offer a reason they did this related to the events of 11/22/63 I'd like to hear them. From Sirhan to Ray, the depth of information generated on thier lives compared to Oswald is ridiculous. There was no reason to see Kudlaty that weekend re: Stripling's records unless something needed to be hidden. Same with Pfisterer's. The FBI with help created false evidence for the Rifle, Pistol, Mexico, Neely, and a whole host of other bits on incriminating evidence... the DPD did their part as well. For those who actually think that a handful of key people cannot direct the actions of many without their knowledge and understanding, to assist in the incrimination of a "commie Loner" I think a new level of naivety has been reached. After that, "going along to get along" made lawyers into senators and an FBI stooge into a president. Ask Bolden or Craig or any of a large group of others what NOT going along did for them... ===== To address the word Disingenuous Your reply? I am asking because I want to know what you guys believe in regard to these questions. I don't intend to argue about your answers. So, Greg, Is "a lot of absolute rot" and your incorrectly restating our position in the form of your famous tautologies you NOT arguing the answers... or is that a standard Southern Hemisphere expression of understanding and appreciation I am not aware of? Adjective disingenuous ‎ 1. Not noble; unbecoming true honor or dignity; mean; unworthy; fake or deceptive. 2. Not ingenuous; not frank or open; uncandid; unworthily or meanly artful. 3. Assuming a pose of naïveté to make a point or for deception. EDIT: Myra and the photo. John tells me that photo was in a pile of photos in an envelope at the archives. He made copies of all these photos and used tham as needed. He showed Myra both Lee and Harvey images and like Pic, was able to know one boy from the other. You're welcome.

one more, just for comparison to Myers If that's the entry from a shot 70 feet in the air, and hits nothing... oh, nevermind already. The Silly Bull#$%t Theory was dead the moment it was announced... Along with Ruby didn't know Oswald and there was nothing going on at 544 Camp.

Why not just use the 1000 words provided by a single frame of that reenactment... and show they actually prove the SBT to be impossible... I think these 1000 words do a decent job as well Or these 1000

Hey Greg... Look up disingenuous... And then ponder the why of your posting... Read the book. I'm tired of being your kindergarten teacher. If the rest of your book attacks H&L with as much inaccuracy, should make for a great fictional tale... Why do you do what you do Parker? Surely you realize how transparent you are... Lol

Thanks Greg... but I don't need any lectures from you on the meanings of words. We are talking about arguments in logic, not that simplistic page of elementary phrases you linked us to... In rhetoric, a tautology (from Greek ταὐτός, "the same" and λόγος, "word/idea") is a logical argument constructed in such a way, generally by repeating the same concept or assertion using different phrasing or terminology, that the proposition as stated is logically irrefutable, while obscuring the lack of evidence or valid reasoning supporting the stated conclusion. pl.tau·tol·o·gies (from your link if you click on Tautology) a. Needless repetition of the same sense in different words; redundancy. b. An instance of such repetition. Logic An empty or vacuous statement composed of simpler statements in a fashion that makes it logically true whether the simpler statements are factually true or false; for example, the statement Either it will rain tomorrow or it will not rain tomorrow When you include the conclusion in the question "the fake Marge's job was to tell a story...." whether yours or Steve's, the conclusion cannot be part of the question as an assumption of the answer... Try, "Why did Marge produce the photo for the WC?" and then maybe we can have a discussion. Whether that photo accomplishes this or that is part of the analysis, not part of the question. but hey, nice try...

This is just unintelligible gobbledygook. I'm sorry - but it is. The school records - as I have demonstrated, are perfectly fine. This is the fake Marguerite we are talking about here. The one who had secrets to keep regarding secret CIA programs that she put at risk according to Gaal to "tell a story" to make Oswald appear to be a normal kid. Thank you for the Voebel information. I accept now that he took the photo. I don't accept there is any evidence that the photo was taken just after the fight. Who knows how long that Hallmark poster was on the wall? Who knows the exact date of the fight? This photo as with other photos, looks like a part of it has been attacked by a marker pen. Those photos have two things in common. Life Magazine and Jack White via the HSCA. As for Mr. Head -- I have already addressed what he said, which was "the abbreviation 're ad' regularly represents 'readmitted' and added that his interpretation of the numbers set forth opposite this abbreviation would represent a total listing of school days for a given school year." He changed his mind only because he could not work out why the figure was below the mandated minimum days of 170. And the answer to that was simple. You have to add back on the days absent 168+ 12 for 54-55 and 179 + 5 for 53-54. Anything on the Myra photo? No Greg... your NYC records work is complete junk. The list of days I posted proves it... believe what you will... even you cannot get 127 days of school from 3/23 thru 6/29, the end of the 7-8 Spring semester. That's the only incorrect line on this attendance record. One also wonders how a child can miss a semester and a half of school and still be promoted to 8th grade... If you look at his actual grades for that first semester and a half he barely averaged a 50%... after youth house, all that changes. And thanks to you proving that Re-Ad is added to absences to arrive at a total number of school days in a year... 89 + 1 is the same as your 168 + 12 argument. Re Marge... Steve has his POV. I cannot know WHY things were done until I know the actual plan. Killing JFK was not something related to this in any possible way... not from 1952 thru 1960 at the least, probably even later. With respect to Steve... her job was to play the mother. Period. The record the FBI created speaks for itself... He cannot be at Youth House and then be Class president. He cannot go to ps44 in Manhattan AND the Bronx AND/OR Queens at the saem time. He cannot attend 105 days and miss 15 from 3/23 thru 6/29 - not possible. Her testimony if filled with mistakes about her own life and the lives of those around her. Silly woman, I know. Greg, why do you think the zoo photo is something that jeopardizes the entire thing? There is nothing to compare it to other than the 1951 6th grade photo and the 1954/55 BJHS photos... The caption in LIFE suggests he is Truant in this photo (they don't mention it was taken in summer when school was out). The Crop of the Zoo photo hides the size of the child... In 1964, who would have known the difference - I mean they believed the SBT and that there was no conspiracy... except in a few US circles and most of the rest of the world... You and I know more about the assassination that even the Commissioners or lawyers did at the time... we cannot think with 2015 minds and 50 years of study when we talk about the WCR and the context of those times. The Evidence IS the Conspiracy Greg. That's all it is. Closed-loop Corroboration used over and over to build a case - that with the most cursory analysis it's weaknesses scream "look at me". (i.e. Why would the FBI leave two conflicting reports in the same WCD? One report has Dolan taking the Microfilm from Waldman at Kleins... except the 2 pages prior to this report is the SAME REPORT, SAME DATE, SAME # except it has the signature of all three of the FBI agents who were there - not just Dolan - and says that the FBI is to subpeona Waldman if they need the evidence since he has put the Microfilm in his safe. Or CE1961 and CE1962 which contrdict each other. The records are full of reports like this - contradicting the value of the evidence out of the gate... and you want to know WHY?) So tell me, consensus in Australia at the time and again now... Oswald guilty? a conspiracy involving him? a conspiracy with him as Patsy? Just curious.

Greg... these are your speculations - not anyone's conclusions. "might blow the whole scheme" is YOUR attempt at creating a tautology again. You set up the circumstance with a preconceived WRONG assumption and then build an argument around it... Let's start this way Greg... Have you ever in your life encountered documentation illustrating the details of a long-term, intelligence-agency-run covert action? Can you explain what the plan was in 1952 (before and beyond) related to the creation of duplicates for the purposes of intelligence? I know I can't. So if we don't know the plan... how can we judge what would blow it up or not or what is related to JFK or not? ------------ Hartogs will be another discussion...

(regarding the FBI reports and NYC attendance) The school records reflect that FBI report Greg. There are not 127 potential days from March 23 to the end of that semester... THAT is the problem Greg... not the FBI report. The FBI simply added to get to 200 and changed the info on the NYC records. Copies of copies of copies Greg... and none match the original PERM Record from the first semester at ps117... but you keep dancing to your own tune on that one No Greg, I cannot tell you WHY Marguerite did anything. Can you? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10407#relPageId=427&tab=page is proof that VOEBEL gave the snapshot to John Corporan of WDSU-TV who in turn made a print. With regards to the time frame - (too bad you don't feel it necessary to read the book Greg, your lack of familiarity with it is painfully obvious while your ongoing need to attack what you've never read is even more painful... but no worries - if you;re not going to trap me into an argument here I have no problem filling in the blanks for you and others) From H&L: In early 1996, I wrote to Hallmark, included an enlargement of the photograph from Life Magazine, and asked if they could date the advertisement. I soon received a letter from Hallmark Archivist Sharman Robertson who informed me that she had located a copy of the ad, which appeared in the November 17, 1954, edition of Scholastic Magazine. The advertisement was for a TV adaptation of Macbeth, which was shown on the television program "Hallmark Hall of Fame," and aired on NBC on November 28, 1954. 54-15 The advertisement for "Macbeth," posted above the classroom blackboard, was probably part of an English class assignment. The date on the Hallmark advertisement meant that Lee Oswald, who was showing off in front of his friend's camera, knew Voebel before the November 17, 1954, edition of Scholastic Magazine was posted on the blackboard. Therefore the beginning of their friendship, and Lee Oswald's fight with Johnny Neumeyer during which one of his front teeth was apparently knocked out, occurred shortly before the advertisement for Macbeth was posted in Helen Dufour's English class. (EDIT - I did not respond to the Myra Mardi Gras question... it says that John showed the photo to Myra, so I am asking John where he acquired it and will get back to you) And since this is all about H&L... here is the statement from Asst Pricipal Head about the records... Seems to say to me that Re-Ad = Attended Which would explain why 168 is there... The "89" in the Fall semester Re-Ad column should also be considered his attendance if the record is consistent.. and since you do add 179 and 5 to get your 184 school days... your own calc corroborate this... Is there anything else Greg?

Those grade cards appear to me to be for the 53-54 school year - not the 54-55. "most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance" Except you." Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences. C'mon Greg... If you are going to say these are from 53-54 - how can anything you ever say be taken seriously if you'd get something this easy this wrong? Just match the grades per trimester and the final grades... the only thing wrong is the absences not matching and the Gen Math grades... i.e. English: 62, 77.3 & 70. The grade card shows 62 (+ 2 absences), 77.3 (3 absences) for a final grade of 70 (total 5 absences) General Science? 75.6, 77, & 76. Grade card? 75.6, 77, for a final grade of 76 and 5 absences... "Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences" So we need to add back the absences to the Re-Ad # to get the total number of school days... 168 + 12 = 180 179 + 5 = 184. You've claimed both of these #'s are correct for the total days in the 53-54 school year (184) and the 54-55 year (180)... yes? So where are the 12 absences? and why are there also absences of 5, 6, 7 & 9? Here's a hint Greg... the FBI created fraudulent evidence. Now Greg...if you're going to attack witnesses it cuts both ways... And the statement you linked to does not discuss what witness testimony says when the FBI creates physical evidence which is a lie. Witness testimony is usually a problem when the physical evidence contradicts their testimony since in most cases (we'd hope), the evidence is authentic. In this case the evidence is NOT authentic... when Jean Hill claims 4-6 shots and some from the behind the fence she is countered NOT by real evidence but by the insistence of the FBI that she's wrong... regardless. In our case, a witness is as reliable if not moreso that the FBI which was tasked with accumulating the evidence. The FBI can be shown to have created evidence repeatedly in this case and simply does not get the benfit of the doubt. The films and photos in their control are also suspect for authenticity where as witnesses are corroborated by many, many others... If we're going to discount witness testimony - we ALL suffer the consequences. It seems that if the witness accounts can be authenticated, they carry much more weight than the FBI's.

Greg, (edit - WHY questions do not help any of us Greg... how would we know why anyone does anything related to these events other than to guess? "Why" does MO get so many questions about her and her family's history wrong in your WC testimony? "Why" did the SS hand over a Money Order to the FBI as payment for the rifle when they should have known it was never put thru the banking system? "Why" is there nothing but clues to the conspiracy and NONE related to who or what really went down?) If we look for photos of Oswald between 1952 and 1955 we come to find, there aren't any. We have his 6th grade photo, which was most likely taken in the fall of 1951.. And we have the 1955 photo Voebel took and there is a photo from 1954 Mardi Gras which Myra says is Harvey... Maybe it just seemed strange that during these transition years we are offered NO PHOTOS of either boy... so the Zoo image becomes the summer of 1953 (??) We are reminded that none of the school records from NYC other than the Carro reports and some ancillary contact reports are offered by the FBI. No grades, yearbooks, or anything to substantiate the incorrect Spring 1953 semester's attendance #'s. and since we are on these important years... can you simply address what the FBI claims was his total attendance and absences from 3/23/53 thru 1/8/54? the FBI tells us a total of 200 days were spent in school or absent during this time... and for some reason you cannot seem to understand how the FBI arrived at that figure... out of a total of 210 weekdays during this time period, the FBI has him in or out of school 200 days. Yet removing Summer and Youth House and we are left with much fewer than 200 days.. How dat? Seems they were off by quite a bit. You still having a tough time figuring out how 200 days fits into 210 days with 55 weekdays of summer and 17 weekdays at Youth House? These are connected Greg... the records are wrong and the boys are in the process of being switched... there is not an administrator in the world who would put 105 days attended from March 23 thru June 29... that's an FBI mistake.

Greg... Are you asking a question or teeing up a golf ball? The first rule a lawyer learns is to never ask a question they didn't already know the answer to in order to setup their case. Am I wrong in thinking you have your answer to that question and are waiting to pounce... Or is this genuine interest in an answer and discussion? For some reason Robert and John conflict about a 1952 visit. And John does not recognize that boy as his brother. Whereas Robert claims he took this in Aug 53. It's Sunday and I'm turning all the gadgets off... But if you want to offer one or the other side of the answers to the question, it is a facinating subject, and it'll be Monday... Taking a breathe and going to smell some roses... Enjoy your day....

That's good to hear Stephen.. the Tragedy of the Commons and Perpetual Peace are wonderful pieces of work on the human condition...

Uh, yup, I'd say you're crazy... There was never "the america we once had"... never existed Glenn. The evils we all accept today were much better hidden - but they were still there and running things... So I'm not sure to what you refer. When the decision was made to sacrifice people and planet for profit... or people and planet for control... I fail to see the ability to stop that slide. My other project has to do with the history of nation owning and how the intelligence services arose from the wealthy private sector... What I'm saying is that even in Plato's days, the rich were controlling the strings. Property rights and sovereignty related to the Tragedy of the Commons remains, imo, the root of humanity's problems. There are always people who feel that if they do not exploit the Commons, they in turn we be exploited. Kant wrote about it in "Perpetual Peace" I think what we do here is to increase the awareness base. And turn the tide a millimeter at a time. That 911 can happen and be so in your face about the lies just shows we've made no progress since 1964... in fact the progress is in the wrong direction, now they don't even bother hiding much... The reply is "so what, deal with it"... And we do.

Greg... the same exhibit which offers the perm record, offers the grade cards which feed into that record... Show us where 12 absences are recorded on grade cards to corroborate the permanent record. if 168 + 12 = 180, you are saying that 12 means something and was derived from actual records... that 12 equates to his absences from school... no? "168" is written there and as you explain, it makes up the rest of the school year.. most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance" Except you. THESE are the records in evidence.. if one does not begat the other... the origin of the other comes into question. Now why would the actual records of those specific years need creation ???? and what again is the significance of 3830 West 6th Apt 3 ... and then you can tell us where he was from Oct 55 thru Sept 56... You wrote a book about this time period, didn't you? why is getting the details correct so hard for you? You've been trying to make some point about "Re-Ad" yet you don't seem to be able to close this circle of your guesswork so it actually means something. If there were 180 days in a school year, and the student missed 12 days... how many days did he attend? If 168 is your answer, and 168 appears under the Re-Ad column... I'm thinking even you can connect those two dots...

How can that be known Jim when the Evidence itself is contradictory? When the FBI excludes reports in their presentation of exhibits from WCDs it's a sure sign they were not happy with the way it was pointing. The offering that McCabe finds photos as well as Rose/Stovall may be to deflect the planting aspect of these images and negatives... They were NOT there the day before, now they are there when this team of 5 looks more carefully.. They've literally taken just about everything not nailed down that may be linked to Oswald, just not the camera? And if they only took the two photos and two negatives.... when does 133-C show up prior to Nov 29th when they put Det Brown in that exact position? It may also simply be courtesy to the Irving PD since the DPD is going into their area... I have to say, assuming his presence and the Hosty report are just business as usual never seems to pan out...

Yup... exactly as you tried to prove earlier... Remember 168 + 12... for a total of 180 days of school and then 184 for the fall semester figured the same way... Says 89 + 1 on that line for a total of 90 Says 168 + 12 on the bottom line for a total of 180.... Just using the info you provided and claimed there is (or did you claim there is not) a connection between this number and the total number of school days? So if 168 does not equal the number of attendance days, why do you bother adding it to anything, using it for anything in this discussion? Why do you bother adding 89 + 1 + 90 + 4 to come to 184 if these numbers do not relate to his attendance? And doesn't it strike you as odd that a school record states there was 184 days one school year and 180 the next, (which you support) but that we are not supposed to know the actual attendance of the student in question, even though the Re-Ad number added to the absences give us the correct total number of days... You never seem to get to what YOU think Re-Ad is... other than to show when added to the other number, we get the total school year... You've contradicted your own presentation. As for the grades... they represent the entire 54-55 school year yet only show 5 absences... you simply can't understand what's going on,can you?

Even a broken clock is right twice a day Greg... You want a gold star? And why not mention it was in the "Oswald leaving the TSBD" thread... which of course has nothing to so with your post until you wrongly assume that PM is holding a camera... based on nothing but your imagination... Amazing how much you can pull from your arsenal and throw up against the wall... I didn't notice a reference in your post to this Hosty report... as I said - twice a day... but as long as you take credit and feel good about yourself mate... you keep on searching thru your old posts, I'm sure at one time or another you've said just about everything.

Really? What do these Grade cards refer to then Greg? Except for the Gen Math grades... they match each of the 54-55 classes in the perm record. Where do you suppose the numbers 168 & 12 come from and who put them there? And don't answer what you think I think... use your words to represent yourself for a change.