David Josephs

So according to you guys, this most delicate and complex doppelganger operation was put largely in the hands of a babbling idiot.

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

I replied to your first post:

Greg... Are you asking a question or teeing up a golf ball?

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?

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?

"What a lot of absolute rot.

So according to you guys, this most delicate and complex doppelganger operation was put largely in the hands of a babbling idiot."

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)

1. a. Needless repetition of the same sense in different words; redundancy.
   b. An instance of such repetition.
2. 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...

(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

This is just unintelligible gobbledygook. I'm sorry - but it is. The school records - as I have demonstrated, are perfectly fine.

No Greg, I cannot tell you WHY Marguerite did anything. Can you?

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.

So the fake Marguerite's job was to tell a story which included producing a photo of the fake Lee which might blow the whole scheme, but the risk was worth it because they wanted to show Lee was a normal child with sever psychiatric problems per Hartogs which would eventually manifest in killing Kennedy. Intriguing!

And completely idiotic.

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...

Thank you.

Can you tell me why the fake Marguerite produced the photo of the fake Lee thus jeopardizing the whole thing?

Can I ask also what proof is there that the Voebel took that photo and what proof is there of the time frame? I ask because I can't find anything that doesn't trace nack to just Armstrong's word for it. Voebel never said he took it.

And one more... did Myra produce the Mardi Gras photo from her own collection?

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

Regarding the FBI report -- I will only repeat - it is an FBI report - not an official school record. The school records add up perfectly.

(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?

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...

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....

Now I understand.

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

that brings to my mind the next question. what do I want out of this, finally? vindication? for the bad guys to suffer (many are already dead)? for this "other" form of government to fall...?

to regain the america we once had...?

am i effin' crazy?

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...

Can we get back to the point?

Is McCabe to be taken seriously?

Why is it, from what I can see, that he is the odd man out?

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?

The number 168 does indeed fall below the mandated 170 days. That tells us it cannot be the total number of days in the school year. What we need to do is add the number of days listed as “absent”. In the case of the 1954-55 school year, we see 168 + 12 = 180 days – the exact number of days Head claimed to be the “regular”! If we do the same for the previous school year, we get 184 – more than the “regular”, but the term does imply occasional variation. The important point is that nowhere in the record does it show Oswald’s total number of attendance days. To work that out, we need to also know the dates Oswald commenced and finished at the school, along with the start and end dates of the school years involved.

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.

LOL...

D. seems to feel that we CTers don't believe in any evidence

Yes, that's his backup argument... "you mean ALL the evidence is not believeable?" [incredulity shining thru]

The book I am writing, "The Evidence IS the Conspiracy" will explain in detail this exact thing.

(like I did for Mexico City and that pile of steaming evidence created a discarded repeatedly by the FBI even though they KNEW he was never down there... in fact I think they KNEW he was at Odio's and is the reason the reports on Oswald don't pick up again until Nov 1)

So to LNers, no, the evidence we are offered in the WCR and HSCA is not authentic. none of it. It does not illustrate the event, it illustrates what the FBI, CIA, SS, I&NS and a handful of others compiled which says just about everything in the world but that Oswald killed JFK alone. It doesn't even show that he did it as part of conspiracy.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy... so when DVP or other LNers want to refer to any Evidence during their arguments, have them AUTHENTICATE IT. Prove it's provenance, Prove that a court of law would accept it as admissible...

Since that never happens... and they build their arguments on facts made of pixie dust... well, you know the rest.

It's all they've got Glenn. The number of things that can be said for certain from that day is woefully small. That can be proven, even smaller.

The WCR and HSCA report are some of the greatest works of Fiction this world has ever seen... and they include the facts which prove it.

Peace

DJ

With the great work Jeff has done in his presentation... all I can do is stay true to my premise about the Evidence being the Conspiracy.

While Jeff does a wonderful job with McCabe and the Imperial Reflex stories... I found evidence in the form of a Hosty report on Feb 3, 1964 which presents a different set of circumstances.

In THIS report, Hosty writes that McCabe says the "box with camera and other photographic equipment" was in the living room, that it was obvious to McCabe it belinged to Ruth and Michael, and he just left it.

As Jeff correctly wrote:

According to the FBI, McCabe is “certain that he saw a light gray box camera in a box in Mrs PAINE’s garage. MCCABE stated that this camera was in a box which contained books and photographs belonging to LEE HARVEY OSWALD. MCCABE stated that he searched this box and did not take the camera since he did not consider it to be of evidentiary value.” (CE2557)

CE2557 is taken from WCD724 which also does not mention the Hosty interview from 1/28, dictated 1/30 and has a 2/3 date at the top. The first date in CE2557 is 2/16 with Robert.

Jeff's discussing the conflict between where these photos and negatives were found and this Hosty report being excluded from CE2557 is the beginning of my article.

DJ

People have a tendency to believe that "eyewitness" evidence is the good stuff and circumstantial evidence is useless, when this is far from the truth. The three bullet casings appear to be solid evidence to some people, but actually carry very little weight in and of themselves. They prove nothing. I think this is what you're referring to when you presented to us the idea of "closed loop corroboration"...? Evidence that stands (or doesn't stand) on its own...?

I've been meaning to get back and ask you if you'd give me a good example of what you mean by this; the fingerprint(s) found on the gun are completely dependant upon about a thousand other factors lining up like the planets never will in a million more years. this is what's NOT a - may I? - CLC.

I'm tired of fighting and of being annoyed... that's whya few posts back I wrote to Steve what I did.

Like getting mad at the sun for setting. DVP and LNers in general really have no other choice.

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

As for CLC (as if the world needs another 3 letter acronym) - I like it

What I meant that to mean is a set of evidence that only corroborates each other. The VC# assigned by Klein's to C2766 has only 3 pieces of evidence from which to corroborate it... 1) the 2 page VC# list of the 100 rifles 2) the Crescent packing slip #3620 for carton #3376 with C2766 in it and 3) the Order Blank with C20-T750 wherethe VC# and Serial # is written in.

If I only show you only those three documents it APPEARS that VC836 = C2766 = what HIDELL was shipped

As long as we never see other VC# = Serial #'s pages

As long as we never see what happened to the other 99 rifles

As long as we are never shown what Klein's shipped for other C20-T750 orders...

This evidence corroborates itself. Yet in the paper CTKA is putting up shortly, I prove how these items are FBI frauds and why the FBI steered clear of any other records which showed what Klein's did inthenormal course of business... all we get is OSWALD's business docs...

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

As for your fingerprint comment... I don't think that's what I posted... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22128&page=3#entry310335

and no, the fingerprints cannot be CLC unless the fingerprint card it is compared to and the finger prints on evidence were never checked against Oswald's actual fingerprints. By stating that the fingerprints on the rifle match "this" fingerprint card which we claim is Oswald's can only stay closed-loop if we were neer allowed to authentically take his fingerprints and compare them.

I am NOT saying this happened.. here me DVP, NOT... just an example of how fingerprints could qualify for a CLC.

----

Hope that made sense. Most CLC is used to authenticate evidence for which we should have recourse tro but don't. The Klein's microfilm is yet another.

I asked DVP about this and he's never addressed it. WCD7 pages 187-188-189 show two teribbly conflicting reports with virtually all the same info except that in one Waldman keeps the microfilm and in the other FBI SA DOLAN takes the film with him.

Since the film is now missing from the archives and the copy which Dolan claims he gave Waldman has not turned up, there is no way to corroborate that ORDER BLANK as authentic... the Closed Loop Corroboration is the FBI reports claiming what they say was on the film, was...

Same page?

DJ

What do his maths grades have to to with you guys deliberately misinterpreting what "re-ad" means, and the process necessary to find the total number of school days that school year?

I know I know - like everyone else at the Bates Motel, you're very busy...

whatever

Seems you've checked in at the Bates as well - tends to happen when you're stuck as to what to do next...

Don't like how I addressed your inaccuracies?. You're so wrapped up in dissing H&L you forget about the grade cards or to do a real timeline with the evidence to see what a joke the FBI left us...

So let's go Greg... Since I know you've not done your homework related to these documents and rely instead on the poor, wrong and terribly sourced arguments you offered years ago without update... this NEW VOLUME of yours will undoubtedly be full of these errors.

Gonna post another passage? Or need to figure out how you got it so wrong.

You mean to tell us that you, the man who knows everything about Oswald, cannot tell us when the BJHS year began or why the grade cards conflict with the permenant record?

And yet you write a book on Oswald anyway. This will be like showing Posner or Myers for what they were... 5% truth mixed into 95% speculative and inaccurate fluff.

Please tell me you continued on in that new volume to Easton, Arlington and beyond with the same attention to detail.

Your take on Tujague's should also be illuminating... but first... punch your way out of this paper bag.

of all the data in that post you don't understand, your only concern is that you don't see the math grade problem...

Why don't the grade card absences match the 12 absences you claim adds to 180 days?

Why don't the math grades match at all?

Why does Re-Ad have 89 days next to the fall 53-54 semester if 168 + 12 is the total number of school days...89+1 is the total of attendance and absences for the fall semester?

There's a lot more to come Greg. This is the easy stuff...

I look forward to your reply.

Having trouble with the math Greg? how does 5 = 12 ?

As for the start of the 53-54 school year:

This is for NYC - if you have something which shows a different start date for BJHS... as you have all the early Oswald answers - post it.

and this one is for CT... same start date, Start date is actually Sept 9 which is earlier like the end date. 90 total days of school would mean the semester ends January 27th. unless there are more Winer vacation days in New Orleans. Yet if Oswald starts on Jan 13 as the WCR claims... how does he wind up with ANY grades for those 2 weeks and why does the "Re-Ad" not say 10-15 days as opposed to the full 89 of the semester?

We can get to the BJHS to Easton to Arlington problems when you figure out how you botched the 168 + 12 presentation given the grade cards are in the same WCE and show only 5 absences...

Watching you explain FBI altered evidence as pristine and original and then getting all caught up in the mistakes that were made creating them in the first place should be interesting to say the least....

You might start pondering where he was from Oct 1955 till Sept 1956... and how that is corroborated... given that the Easton records sent to Arlington in Sept 1956 and the Easton record shows he left Easton 10-14-56...

And we will also get to 3830 W. 6th #3 versus 4936 Collinwood... You know Collinwood, the address on his enlistment papers

But one step at a time. Where did you think the 12 absent days came from when you wrote this passage?

The number 168 does indeed fall below the mandated 170 days. That tells us it cannot be the total number of days in the school year. What we need to do is add the number of days listed as “absent”. In the case of the 1954-55 school year, we see 168 + 12 = 180 days – the exact number of days Head claimed to be the “regular”! If we do the same for the previous school year, we get 184 – more than the “regular”, but the term does imply occasional variation. The important point is that nowhere in the record does it show Oswald’s total number of attendance days. To work that out, we need to also know the dates Oswald commenced and finished at the school, along with the start and end dates of the school years involved

of all the data in that post you don't understand, your only concern is that you don't see the math grade problem...

Why don't the grade card absences match the 12 absences you claim adds to 180 days?

Why don't the math grades match at all?

Why does Re-Ad have 89 days next to the fall 53-54 semester if 168 + 12 is the total number of school days...89+1 is the total of attendance and absences for the fall semester?

There's a lot more to come Greg. This is the easy stuff...

I look forward to your reply.

Creating Mayhem with Historical Records

Proponents of the “Two Oswalds” theory (Harvey & Lee: how the CIA framed Oswald by John Armstrong, Quasar Books, 2003) have completely misunderstood the Beauregard school records of Oswald.

In fairness, they have been aided and abetted in this misunderstanding by the contradictory advice given to the FBI by the Assistant Principal of Warren Easton High, Wilfred Head, whose help they had sought in interpreting the records. In regard to attendance, Head stated that the abbreviation “Re Ad” usually represented “Re Admitted” and that the numbers listed opposite represented the total number of school days for a given school year.

The advice given above by Head is not entirely correct, but then he compounds the error by stating contradictorily that 180 days was the usual number of days in a school year and in any event, state law mandated that the total number of school days must not fall below 170. Given that the figure shown as “Re Ad” for 1954-55 was 168, Head surmised that the figure must represent the total number of days Oswald actually attended.

It is a little surprising that neither an educator, nor the author of Harvey & Lee (let alone any of his many acolytes and proselytizers) could not do the simple math involved.

The number 168 does indeed fall below the mandated 170 days. That tells us it cannot be the total number of days in the school year. What we need to do is add the number of days listed as “absent”. In the case of the 1954-55 school year, we see 168 + 12 = 180 days – the exact number of days Head claimed to be the “regular”! If we do the same for the previous school year, we get 184 – more than the “regular”, but the term does imply occasional variation. The important point is that nowhere in the record does it show Oswald’s total number of attendance days. To work that out, we need to also know the dates Oswald commenced and finished at the school, along with the start and end dates of the school years involved.

The Two Oswald theorists in short, need the “Re Ad” figures to indicate total number of days attended because this would mean overlap with New York school records and since Oswald cannot be in two places at once, it must denote a second boy using the same name.

At its core, this theory deploys the same unscrupulous manipulation of the evidence to achieve a desired outcome as demonstrated by the Warren Commission.

I'd be glad to discuss these BJHS records with you Greg.... and not use your juvenile multi-syllabic generalizations in the process.

But I don't have the time right now so I'll just leave you with the actual records for 54-55... and those 12 absences and the actual grade cards.

12?

(That the Math Grades don't match is something we can talk about later... ok?)