David Josephs

Bernie - are you so severely adle-minded that you don't realize you just described the last 50 years of JFK analysis and research? If you even did 1% of the work you just described you'd at least have some frame of reference from which to comment... but you didn't. Your Objection is simply that... an woefully uniformed opinion about that which you refuse to study in any detail... kinda pathetic, thinking that kind of approach will result in agreement from those who have not yet concluded anything... those that already agree with you...agree with you. Those that don't are obviously not convinced... Can you imagine what you would say to a poster who claimed what you just did about the JFK analysis... Why bother with the autopsy boys... he died, case closed Why bother with 486 frames... Why bother with the actual evidence at all - the FBI says Oswald did it alone... why are you questioning this so obvious a conclusion? Do us all a favor and go back to that life you thankfully have... the one you offer here is terrible pathetic, uninformed and woefully inadequate for supporting a word you utter.... Yet here you remain, worthlessly debating... you see Bernie, it's only worthless to you because you lose so badly every time... to those who have sent me the emails of support and reassurance of how lame you and the other's present your case, it is completely worthwhile for you to continue to be exposed for the rolling, trolling forum disruption you've all decided to become here. Anyone can look back over these few threads and see you and the others being painfully beaten over and over again - 6.1% of 5 years old within 30 months Bernie... you do understand that means 93.9% AGAINST what you claim... that's more than a 15 to 1 difference... even at the lottery that's a bad bet. and yet rather then offer a different study with real facts, you whine about it... Can you even begin to address the height difference from 1959 to 1963? How does a man grow 3 inches to then shrink 2 all before he's 24?

what is this a "bump" the posts you don't like out of the way campaign? Bumps - and moderators correct me if I'm wrong - are usually reserved for topics which have not been addressed for a while... this topic has plenty of activity... It is not necessary to "bump" it for any other reason than to try and push my post farther down... I was aking Tracy a question, he is fully capable of addressing it. so how about "bumping" yourself off... and leave the heavy lifting and addressing of question on the topic to others

To Mr. Parnell Can you explain the height changes? 68" upon entry October 1956, 71" upon leaving 3 years later, 69" at his death 4 years later. The USMC provided documents expressing these figures. They also said he scored a 212 and 191 at shooting tests... did the USMC just ask the marine how they did and write a number down? Unit Diaries... when a group of US Marines boards a ship or is transfered somewhere... do they keep records of such a thing? Can you prove any other USMC records are so badly in conflict with the men who accompanied him as those of Oswald's? We all appreciate you finding the handful of items which you feel are questionable and exploring them... there are thousands of points being made in that work... but why do you never address those which are not questionable, like the height and scar issues? the multiple witnesses to Ruby and Lee together in Dallas while Oswald is in New Orleans with Bannister and friends? The entire Alice Texas and related trip sightings... Making this about an accurate or inaccurate statement about Landes specifically is really not the point now it is. It's not a matter of why ROSE didn't see it, it's why have all his autopsy photos disappeared so it cannot be verified? Why has the Klein's microfilm disappeared when we could use it to check the original order blanks for accuracy as well as SOP for other C20-T750 orders...? Why are so many records that should not be missing, missing, and wind up being some of the easiest to use evidence to support the FBI's conclusions... ?? Address the MEAT AND POTATOS of the argument, not the fringe supporting ideas and theories... I posted a list of a couple dozen conflicts in the H&L evidence without once mentioning Landes... will the anti-H&L group ever get to addressing those? A 5'4" boy in 1951 becomes a 4'10" boy in 1953... how does that happen Mr. Parnell?

We really must also remember that the FBI, DFS, Mexican presidential intel staff, other latin american countries, CIA, Military intel, State Dept and I&NS all had a presence in Mexico City and wanted to know what everyone else knew and/or to learn and convey to others what their spying uncovered. The Mole Hunt Bill describes does not necessarily mean they were looking for CIA officers at all... but that the CIA was doing the hunting possibly trying to find infultration moles from any one of these entities... at least that's what I got from the reading of State Secret. "Here’s the center of the intrigue. It looks like someone in Cuba operations was a prime suspect in an investigation of the impersonation of Oswald. It had to be handled carefully, as SAS had several of its officers embedded at the Mexico City station under Scott’s command. Another prime suspect was the Mexico City branch of the FBI. Even the CIA’s Mexico City station itself could also have been the source of the mole. It is important to note that not only the FBI, but the Navy and the State Department were also included in the investigation. This was because all three of them had responsibilities for Oswald, and hence all three of them had to be examined for signs of penetration by enemy spies." The FBI's SIS was THE intelligence service in the Western Hemisphere from the early to mid 40's... Assets from those operations would not be squandered by Hoover, imo.

Well, David Josephs, I said it before, and I'll say it again: Bill Simpich's 2014 discovery of a high-level CIA Mole Hunt in the summer of 1963 in Mexico City on the subject of Lee Harvey Oswald, marks a new starting point for JFK Research. IMHO, nobody's opinion matters anymore until they give their opinion about Bill SImpich's scholarly discovery. You’re entitled to your opinions Paul… but defining the playing field is not within your purview. That work, like most everything within JFK-world requires quite a lot of attention and analysis before it is understood well enough to express an educated and informed opinion. But I do agree that it does change the way we will look at those events... just as the presentation of the fraudulent travel evidence hopefully gets people to stop assuming the man Ruby killed was ever there. It's very interesting to me that you have personally worked with Bill SImpich, David, because IMHO his work is so central to the future of JFK Research. What is your interpretation of the Simpich Mole Hunt, David? I think, that given the way the FBI assisted the CIA & State Dept by creating a false evidence trail, even in the face of Hoover’s first-hand knowledge that it was not Oswald in any evidence the CIA/State provided (not his voice, not his photo, not on the buses, maybe not even there at all) that some operation was being run using the marked “HENRY” 201 card to find out who knew what about the goings on at the embassies. We don’t agree on everything yet I must defer to his knowledge of the inner workings down there. If we all agree that Tampa and Chicago would require its own levels of planning and cover-up, the use of Lee HENRY Oswald appears to have a dual if not triple purpose. 1) mole hunt, 2)FPCC credibility for Oswald, 3)incriminating “patsy” evidence when presented in that light… all depending on what was needed. The Mole Hunt aspect is in no way related to the assassination other than for the use of LHO… in my understanding of it at this point… “sometime you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right” the looking at right part - the POV – is very critical. Here are my follow-up remarks about that question: (1) The Double-Oswald branch of the CIA-did-it JFK Conspiratorial writers seems to be the logical result of a consistent CIA-did-it hypothesis. Y'all make more consistent use of more testimonial artifacts, and consistently find a CIA plot inside each and every one, than anybody. In fact, it sometimes seems that every CIA-did-it writer will eventually gravitate to your direction in the long run. (2) The only alternative will then be to subordinate the CIA-did-it findings to some other Conspiracy -- perhaps a Civilian Conspiracy. Yet that may be just what the second half-century of JFK Research needs. (3) IMHO, Bill Simpich's Mole Hunt can be easily interpreted to show that the CIA high-command was unaware of the Oswald Impersonation -- and therefore the CIA had no clue that Oswald was being set-up to be the Patsy for a Conspiracy. (4) Finally, all this minutia about tonsils doesn't distract me in the slightest -- because what you're really fighting about is your primary operating principle, namely, that the CIA has to be to blame for every detail of the Mexico City episode of Lee Harvey Oswald. Prove me wrong? Paul – my work did just that, proves you wrong. Every detail of the Mexico Episode is told in mostly FBI and some State and I&NS docs… the CIA kept Mexico info very close to the vest and was one of the main reasons Sprague was fired. Even the CIA’s info appears instead in the FBI reports, not in original CIA reports. In fact, the CIA did a lot of summaries of what was supposedly know when… in light of this the CIA never shared this info with the FBI... IMO Mexico starts out as one thing and fast becomes another - IMO Phillips is the cause of Alvarado's story... and everyone in the CIA and State Dept knew it... The tonsils argument is simply a very lame attempt at being annoyed that John wrote “impossible” as opposed to allowing for some remote chance they grew back. Hurray for the minions, they got one 6.1% right. Whatever. But really, David, please answer my main question: what is your interpretation of the Simpich Mole Hunt? Regards, --Paul Trejo

Nope, it's your job to remain consistently wrong about every bit of rebuttal theory you offer and STILL never offer a shred of supporting evidence. We don't have to prove anything - YOU claim he was treated on the ship - YOU prove it or are you really that bad at this that we need to do that work for you as well? oh, wait, we DID do that work for you... can't see the forest for the trees again? We've proven our case - you and the brigade staring wide-eyed into the headlights does nothing to prove yours. Two men, one in Ping Tung, one in Atsugi.. proving other wise is your job, not ours. And so far, like the marines just taking the word of the soldier, you have proven nothing, offered nothing and can't seem to wrap your head around the fact all you have are theories about Asperger's and tonsils... and even those are not proven, only some small percentage of possibility... and yet y'all continue to post as if you've accomplished something other than show you have nothing to offer... Well done ------------------------------------ I posted the medical records with that location number along with other identifiers and said that the records seem to show that he is consistently at Atsugi.. Steve picked up the ball and confirms this. and rather than the minion brigade admit they were wrong about the records and your conclusions you once again whine about us providing evidence when you provide none, consistently. I also posted that numerous people report seeing and interacting with Oswald in Ping Tung, yet the DoD and HSCA tries to claim he never went. And that remains the central theme to their argument... As usual, wring again. Donovan, ex-FBI, tries to distance himself from Oswald overseas by claiming he was his superior only in CA... and we find that to be false. Wonder why the FBI and the WC never called all these people stationed with LEE, yet gets statements from those with Harvey at every turn... hmmmm The ball remains in the doubters court... we'll see if they ever show up with actual proof of any of their "alternate theories" - the expectation to "trust them" has worn exceedingly thin

If I remember correctly Robert does not mention providing that photo... In fact - what I am realizing now is that Warren Comm Doc 443 is a collection of photos or a variety of sizes and shapes most attributed to Oswald as photographer... a few with Oswald in them in Russia yet no other photos of Lee in Japan, just those 2. What we do not find are any other photos of Oswald The middle photo shows the same building in the background as the Oswald photo https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10877#relPageId=26&tab=page and is listed as "Marine friend of Oswald" on page 2. (This is the same batch of photos which includes Roscoe White (p25) So maybe he handed the camera to his friend and had that photo taken... yet we'd have to go thru all the photos to find one similar to the published one with the square behind his head. It also seems that after page 27 or so the photos are all from Russia or afterward... with a few mixed in from an earlier time it appears. I'm pretty sure that the photo originally given to the FWST had that square and the newspaper simply cropped it down to his face... yet they do not offer a source either... As I say, Robert discusses the FWST article yet makes no mention that he supplied the photo. DJ

When I checked into the JVB story and offered evidence it was easily shown that her evidence was inauthentic... he corroboration simply fell apart when looked at closely. I don't believe that a 93.9% chance that tonsils DON'T regrow invallidates the claim that one Oswald had the operation while the other did not... but it's not 100%. Unfortunately for detractors the tonsilitis in the marines is not the end of the story. The activities of the US investigatory bodies suggest they are trying to remove/alter/recreate information from Oswald's childhood between 1952 and 1956 from the record and from consideration. The evidence which is offered is fraught with contradiction and begs the question, WHY? Why does the FBI need to deal with 5-10 year old background info as if the case hinged upon it? If the recruitment does not happen until adulthood... in the Marines for example... the conflicts in childhood were either created after the fact or were actually there at the time... again, given what I've seen the FBI create in the way of evidence - this option is not so far fetched and is once again reflected in the evidence. Is the hiding as one person from these two individuals, somehow picked out to be involved with intelligence operations of the US, so beyond the pale or ability of the CIA, specifically Angleton's area, as to be impossible? I believe the evidence reveals that it is not and that the CIA in their war aginast the KGB and commies would do ANYTHING they could conceive of. Who recuited who and who was a single, double or even triple agent is again, unproveable yet possibly knowable. I wish I had a better answer for you Jon... it's akin to the rifle evidence... If Oswald never had that rifle - which many believe to be the case - then all the rifle evidence had to be created (including the BYPs) and is the reason we never see any other Kleins paperwork to confirm anything offered as standard operation procedure (which would easily show that a bigger rifle was shipped for the smaller one ordered - the FBI had the records in their possession). When we dig into the evidence we find it woefully inadequate and terribly inauthentic - yet accepted as a WCR conclusion. It seems to me that it would take some pretty amazing planning and execution to get the Ruby crowd to all confirm that Ruby was with Lee throughout the summer of 63 while Harvey is in New Orleans... either they ALL are lying together - but for what end? or they are ALL telling the truth about Lee and Ruby... I have posted this evidence many, many times including the Doctor in the apartment next to Ruby who tells of Oswald coming to that door looking for Ruby when Harvey is in Irving. If these people are in the know, why would they give this away? Which is why, in the face of all the investigation the FBI still claims that Ruby and Oswald did not know each other... We don't know if all these are the same imposter or many men... just that the evidence continues to pile up showing that it is not possible for the evidence to be accurate, or even close as to where Oswald was and with whom. Do we simply have to accept in the absence of all the other potential evidence that only OSWALD's records are so messed up and it's just the "way it is" ? If one is to believe this, one would expect the FBI to produce this incriminating evidence to further solidify the case against Oswald... yet not in one instance does the FBI show what SHOULD be, only what Oswald did and the claim that mistakes are made and his was the same standard operating procecures for all... then they ask that you trust them on this one... ============ It's like answering the simple question - Who killed JFK? There is no simple, reader's digest version. It's a very complicated puzzle. Same with H&L. Both issues have to deal with the FBI's influence on evidence and what is left for us to see. Those like John who have gone to the sources to learn the real story allow us to see a world the WCR et al kept hidden. Also, at some point it needs to be said that John did not spend 10 years and self-publish expecting to make a single dime... he was very wealthy already - so one can only imagine the impetus to fight on other than what he told me... as he dug, the information was simply found (he'd spend 3 weeks at a time with a firend at the Archives pouring daily over the info). He in turn felt it necessary to compile these findings into a book which gave others the impetus to look deeper. That's all he ever cared about - prompting others to take it a step further. I did that and found that what he uncovered is very revealing of what actually occurred as opposed to what the books tell us... I didn't cherry-pick one thing or another... I investigated all of it, subject by subject over a 2 year period and we still explore and learn... If people want to believe it can be explained away as simply as Parker tries, fine. The arguments offered usually only come with theory and speculation... very little evidence... If you;ve followed my work at all, you'd have to admit that evidence of H&L is not something that goes wanting... I post links, passages, conflicts and images... What again do we get in rebuttal but lots of air, insults, nicknames, and very little else... I tend to meet force with force, fire with fire... forum bullies hate it when those they attack are prepared to call them on their bluffs and look especially foolish posting opinions in response to evidence. Take care Jon DJ

Yes indeed, thanks Larry... I believe it is most revealing to learn that it is Anne Goodpasture is at the center of much of this, and to understand the close relationship between she and Win Scott and Dave Phillips/Michael Choaden (Dave would write himself reports in Mexico and send them for only Choaden to receive in DC where he would then travel back, receive the docs and confirm the information within... this is a link to a doc from Oct 2 or 12 1963 asking that CHOADEN bring the "AMMO" if WAVE unable to comply... the ammo requested to be brought from DC (or the WAVE station?) to Mexico is .38 Special Ammo - the same used to kill Tippit... but that's just a coincidence) https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=43903#relPageId=2&tab=page From my next article related to Mexico City: One of Anne Goodpasture’s pseudonyms was “Robert B. Riggs”. In an effort to conceal the existence of the tapes which Win Scott eventually plays for WC Investigators* Anne, writing as Riggs claims the tapes of the 28th had already been destroyed by the 1st of October. LIENVOY were the voice recordings from the Soviet Embassy and were kept for a minimum of 2 weeks. Thanks to David Slawson’s comment* we must now assume that Win Scott kept copies of the tapes for himself. *In a letter dated December 4, 1992 (published in The Investigator), W. David Slawson wrote: Yes, I listened to the tape of Lee Harvey Oswald s telephone conversations with the Soviet Embassy In Mexico City I did not feel that the voice sounded any different from what I expected his would sound like. – Slawson does not go to Mexico City until the mid-70’s for the HSCA Bill Simpich provided me with the documentation links showing that Goodpasture, working with LADILLINGER (Soviet Desk officer Barbara Murphy Manell), took what was obviously a photo from 12:22 on Oct 2nd and represented it as Oct 1 to match the call transcript. What follows from this switch is the Bosch created passenger manifest for the Frontera bus departure at 2pm on Oct 2nd. As I wrote... when this "conclusion" does not work the bus routes are revised and this evidenec along with the testimony that "presidential staffers" picked up all the potentially Oswald related manifests and documents "shortly after the assassination" is buried away in favor of what becomes the Del Norte departure on Oct 2nd at 8:30am... which I go deeply into and show that too was not possible. Bill has been invaluable in my research and I recommend everyone read every bit of State Secret.

The real point of the matter was whether Oswald was ever in Ping Tung Taiwan, Phillipines at all, since the argument against is that he did not go... while the backup argument is that the medical records show the treatment were done in transit... Neither of these appears to have any corroboration while Oswald's CO in CA, an ex FBI employee from '53-'56 "remembers" that they both were in the Phillipines together... On Dec 1, 1963 Donovan contacts the security branch at his academy to report he knew Oswald and had not yet spoken to the FBI or SS. None of this is in the book or CD but is in the 35 page notebook on Donovan at Baylor... Donovan, ex-FBI man, begrudgingly acknowledges he knew Oswald and knew him in Taiwan. Yet the HSCA and the DoD attempt to say that Oswald never made the trip - even in the face of the footnote which states that the book Donovan consulted on says that Lt. Rhodes confirms he did indeed travel to Ping Tung where he has a guard duty incident resulting in his being sent back to Atsugi on Oct 6th. He is in the "hospital" from Oct 7th to the 13th.... yet there is no record of this hospital stay in the medical record. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0125b.htm While Harvey Oswald is in Ping Tung... Lee is being treated in Atsugi for a STD. The two different sets of men who knew one or the other man is very revealing, especially since those that knew Lee were not called. Zack Stout did not know who Harvey Oswald was... only big, southern Lee.

Very glad to hear Clive... it definitely requires more attention and effort than to just read... if you PM me with your email addres I can send you the work I did with John to create a large spreadsheet which puts the events on a side-by-side timeline... makes things a bit easier to follow as the excerpts are from the book. I also recommend you keep the Baylor notebook website available since there is usually much more info and back-up documentation in the notebooks. There are docs scanned from the Archives that can only be gotten from the Archives. http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/tabs/collection/po-arm should take you to the index page... I've downloaded many of these notebooks so they are available in full as reference... on the site you can only view one page at a time. I asked John to see if he did not have any hi res scans of the poster itself... and what the back story was... I'm sure I'll hear soon since he's back in the US and at a location where much of the original records reside. While nothing is definitive in this case, the book, CD and notebooks do present a very thorough case for what the evidence provided and avoided points to related to H&L and their dual lives merged into one history.. The questions that seems to get forgotten in this mess is... Why would the FBI be so interested in the goings on of this man 5, and 10 years before the crime? What difference does it makie which Jr High school he attended for a few weeks or where he worked in 1957 & 1958 unless there were obvious conflicts which needed addressing? Palmer McBride's FBI statement was the initial problem since Oswald was in Japan during that time... Also a problem was his attending Stripling Jr High in the fall of 1954. Literally within 8 hours of Oswald being charged, the FBI shows up to take the Stripling records. Literally the week of the McBride interview (11/26) FBI agents are sent to Pfisterer's to confront the issue One only need check CE1961 to see what the WCR and USMC say about where Oswald was at the time. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/exhibits/ce1386.htm http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0370b.htm Date 11/26/63 (Dictated 11/23) Airman Second Class PALMER E. McBRIDE was interviewed at Air Police Headquarters, Patrick Air Force Base, Florida, and furnished the following signed statement: "Patrick Air Force Base,Florida November 23, 1963 "I, PALMER E. McBRIDE hereby furnish the following free and voluntary statement to JOHN R. PALMER who I know to be a Special Agent of the FBI. I have been advised that this statement can be used in a court of law. No threats or promises have been made to me. "I was born on November 29, 1937, at New Orleans, Louisiana. I enlisted in the United States Air Force on November 25, 1960 and since June 15, 1961, I have been assigned to Patrick Air Force Base, Florida. I am presently an Airman Second Class assigned to the 8550th Maintenance Group with Air Force serial number AF 25589222. "In about June, 1955, I went to work as a dental messenger for the Pfisterer Dental Laboratory Company in the 200 block of Dauphine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana. In about December, 1957, a young man named LEE OSWALD was employed in the same capacity. Because we both enjoyed classical music I invited him to my home at 1416 Baronne Street, New Orleans, and he did visit my home perhaps two or three times. I was living with my parents at that time, and during his visits we would listen to records in my room. "During his first visit to my home in late 1957 or early 1958 the discussion turned to politics and to the possibility of war. At this time I made a statement to the effect that President DWIGHT EISENHOWER was doing a pretty good job for a man of his age and background, but that I did feel..... On 11/23/63 at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida File # TP 62-455 By SA JOHN R. PALMER Date dictated 11/26/63 Palmer McBride is not called to testify ================= In September 1957 Oswald arrived in Atsugi, Japan and was photographed standing in front of his locker. JFKlOl-03 Fellow Marine Zack Stout befriended Oswald and the young men spent a lot of time together. I asked Zack if ever saw Oswald study the Russian language. Zack said, "Most of the time we were with a mobile radar unit. Shortly after he arrived we left Japan and traveled constantly from location to location in the South China Sea (beginning in November 1957). I know Oswald didn't attend any Russian classes or read any Russian books or listen to any Russian records. He didn't have anywhere to get such materials and if he had them we (Stout and fellow Marines) would have known about it. We slept in the same bunkhouse and most of the time worked on the same radar crew. The idea that Oswald studied Russian in Japan is ridiculous-it just didn't happen."2 (2) Author's interview with Zack Stout, November, 1998 Sharing the cubicle with Oswald were Zack Stout. Robert Royce Augg. Ronald Crawley and Thomas Bagshaw Zack Stout remembered the day Oswald arrived and said, "I arrived in August, 1957, and Oswald arrived a month later. He was one of three or four who just came into the barracks one day dragging their sea bags." Zack became one of Lee Oswald's closest friends in Japan and worked with him for 10 months, but was not interviewed by the FBI or Warren Commission ========================== After repeatedly being challenged AND interviewed, Palmer had this to say about the experience. I too called Pfisterer's and got the same answer... Oswald was there when Palmer says he was. One needs to ask whether the evidence offered by the FBI to claim he was in Japan (and all the strings which come with FBI evidence) is more substantial than the unmotivated responses of civilians who claim he was. Over and over in this case we are treated to the evidence manipulations of the FBI... why this situation should be considered any different is to be proven... this is the same FBI that told us Oswald and Ruby did not know each other, that Oswald and 544 Camp were not related and that he took a bus ride to and from Mexico which required the wholesale manufacturing of evidence... the choice is for each of us individually Take care DJ

So basically you're lost and have no answer for the facts provided and are hoping I call you both out for the XXXXXXs you are so I get banned? Try to stay focused little children.... you can't address the height issues - so you whine and quietly try insults you can't address the height issue when they are younger - so you whine and quietly try insults you don't like that you brought up Radionics as a basis for one your your thesis papers and I remind you of it - so whine and quietly try insults You have no answer for the other couple dozen issues so you make it about a website, a photo, a line from the book, something someone said 20 years ago or ANYTHING but having to deal with these issues - so whine and quietly try insults. You cannot defend a single thing you offer other then with remote statistical possibilities and Asperger's... and are amazed when no one buys the tonic you sell - so whine and quietly try insults... When any of the moderators continues to forgive your posting transgressions you get all pissy about why they haven't come to save you from the big bad mean man calling you out for the XX artists you are.. Poor you Greg... Don fight all your battles for you now? You and yours have been exposed for the cowards you are... Post a real response with real evidence just once and maybe someone will begin to believe anything you write again... But since all you have is Radionics, Asperger's, the Marines don't know how to measure and a weak argument about Osteopaths I can understand your reluctance to engage on topic with anything meaningful. gotta go now children... play nice...

Which we are all sure you'd get nothing but jollies from... what does that site have to do with your inability to address this single item from that LONG list with evidence to back you? Parker wants us to believe they simply write down whatever comes to the Marine's mind when asked how much he weighs, how tall he is, what his blood pressure is, his eyesight and his hearing.... as opposed to actually measuring the marine for the results. Maybe via telepathy now that Radionics is such a favorite subject... Could be the Marines were doing ESP and transmission experiments which as a result shortens the subject by 2 inches in 4 years... while simultaneously lengthing his rifle by 4 inches... you boys have it all figgered out ...

15% is much too high... the actual figure is 6.1%... I was being generous and proving you never read the work to begin with... You really are so full of yourself that you'll go to any lengths to show just how wrong you are... and then get all pissy-whiny about it to boot. You remain a skidmark on this community & thinking people everywhere... thanks for posting and continually proving it Long term outcome of tonsillar regrowth after partial tonsillectomy in children with obstructive sleep apnea. AbstractOBJECTIVE:We investigated the long-term effects of partial tonsillectomy, and potential risk factors for tonsillar regrowth in children with obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). METHODS:Children affected by OSAHS with obstructive hypertrophic tonsils underwent partial tonsillectomy or total tonsillectomy with radiofrequency coblation. Polysomnography was performed prior to and 5 years following surgery. Blood samples from all participants were taken prior to and 1 month following surgery to assess immune function. All participants were interviewed 5 years following surgery to ascertain effects of the surgery, rate of tonsillar regrowth, and potential risk factors. RESULTS:All parents reported alleviation of breathing obstruction. Postoperative hemorrhage did not occur in the partial tonsillectomy group compared to 3.76% in the total tonsillectomy group. Tonsillar regrowth occurred in 6.1% (5/82) in children following partial tonsillectomy. Palatine tonsil regrowth occurred a mean of 30.2 months following surgery, and 80% of children with tonsillar regrowth were younger than 5 years of age. All five patients had a recurrence of acute tonsillitis prior to enlargement of the tonsils. Four of the five had an upper respiratory tract allergy prior to regrowth of palatine tonsils. There were no differences in IgG, IgM, IgA, C3, or C4 levels following partial tonsillectomy or total tonsillectomy. CONCLUSION:Partial tonsillectomy is sufficient to relieve obstruction while maintaining immunological function. This procedure has several post-operative advantages. Palatine tonsils infrequently regrow. Risk factors include young age, upper respiratory tract infections, history of allergy, and history of acute tonsillitis prior to regrowth. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved And where can we read of all this on the Harveylee website? Has the webmaster removed it? I wonder why... Losers... So you did read all that and still wasn't able to convey/remember the info correctly? Can't stay on topic for 5 minutes and can't man up when you're wrong... no wonder Parker likes you so much. As for Parker... luckily all one need do is read your work - between Asperger's and tonsils you really have made some amazingly weak arguments here. but that's obvious to all. ... C'mon Parker... use those Radionics you trust in and move something on my desk... Maybe your crazy women shortened Oswald by those 2 inches using her mind as well... As to the long list of H&L conflicts - all you seem to be able to muster is a bad reply to only one of them... Stick with the first point - show us how the USMC simply guesses or asks the marine his height, weight, vision, etc... when he both enters and leaves the Marines... This should be highly entertaining. btw - the Autopsy of LHO shows him to be 69" and 135 lbs... you'll let us know when and where you find out the USMC just wings it on this subject...

They do appear to be the same uniform at about the same time at what appears to be the same place - these are all LEE (except for the altered FWST photo)

David, could you tell us where you think John Woods got these photos? Also David do you or does anyone else here have a better copy of the Evolution of LHO poster where the text under each image is readable? The book refers to it and when and why it was made with Jack White but points only to a collection of twelve mug shots on the CD with the date under each one, red background(jfk101-13). At least on my copy it does. I had no luck with Google. Hi there Clive.... John Woods would send me images from time to time as he knows I'm very focused on them and do a lot of imagery work... I don't know where/how he got it. Given that Pricilla Johnson was CIA connected, the photo is, as JA states, "LIKELY" to have been created by the CIA... If I had to guess, that's what I would think. Regarding the White work: I have also sent an email to John to see what he has... will let you know. DJ http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/JA/DR/.04-sources.html Jack White's "Evolution of Lee Harvey Oswald" poster was created at the suggestion of John Armstrong. It contains 77 images of Lee Harvey Oswald from the cradle to the grave, and is the single most valuable visual resource to seeing for oneself evidence that more than one person was using the name "Lee Harvey Oswald," as well as evidence that someone went to a lot of trouble in a few cases to blur the distinction. It can be ordered at Mr. White's Web site: www.flash.net/~jwjfk [LINK 30 of 30] A miniature version of the poster is reproduced in Robert Groden, *The Search for Lee Harvey Oswald.

15% is much too high... the actual figure is 6.1%... I was being generous and proving you never read the work to begin with... You really are so full of yourself that you'll go to any lengths to show just how wrong you are... and then get all pissy-whiny about it to boot. You remain a skidmark on this community & thinking people everywhere... thanks for posting and continually proving it Long term outcome of tonsillar regrowth after partial tonsillectomy in children with obstructive sleep apnea. AbstractOBJECTIVE:We investigated the long-term effects of partial tonsillectomy, and potential risk factors for tonsillar regrowth in children with obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). METHODS:Children affected by OSAHS with obstructive hypertrophic tonsils underwent partial tonsillectomy or total tonsillectomy with radiofrequency coblation. Polysomnography was performed prior to and 5 years following surgery. Blood samples from all participants were taken prior to and 1 month following surgery to assess immune function. All participants were interviewed 5 years following surgery to ascertain effects of the surgery, rate of tonsillar regrowth, and potential risk factors. RESULTS:All parents reported alleviation of breathing obstruction. Postoperative hemorrhage did not occur in the partial tonsillectomy group compared to 3.76% in the total tonsillectomy group. Tonsillar regrowth occurred in 6.1% (5/82) in children following partial tonsillectomy. Palatine tonsil regrowth occurred a mean of 30.2 months following surgery, and 80% of children with tonsillar regrowth were younger than 5 years of age. All five patients had a recurrence of acute tonsillitis prior to enlargement of the tonsils. Four of the five had an upper respiratory tract allergy prior to regrowth of palatine tonsils. There were no differences in IgG, IgM, IgA, C3, or C4 levels following partial tonsillectomy or total tonsillectomy. CONCLUSION:Partial tonsillectomy is sufficient to relieve obstruction while maintaining immunological function. This procedure has several post-operative advantages. Palatine tonsils infrequently regrow. Risk factors include young age, upper respiratory tract infections, history of allergy, and history of acute tonsillitis prior to regrowth. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved

Pretty funny coming from some who only offers opinions and when given links doesn't read the info there in any case... nice job Bernie... Now how about the point at hand... The records put Oswald in Ping Tung at the same time he is STD treated in Japan... Kinda like the 2 inch drop in height... you have no answer other then to confuse the issue with "what ifs" or "maybe this or maybe that" responses... Maybe the tonsil regrowth took 2 inches off his height ?? There are also accounts of Oswald on Ping Tung, so we know he went ... and the Hospital records in Japan are pretty easy to follow even for you... With your 15% in 5 year olds "probability", the FACT he is listed in two places at the same time in the Marines, and the FACT that Felde and others are with Harvey while a different batch of marines is with Lee ... we do not just have some isolated incidences but a continuing pattern of conflict between two men known as Lee Oswald. So keep trying Bernie... between Radionics, Asperger's, tonsil regrowth and "no official records" your case against the evidence for H&L is proceeding as expected... how did you put it? As dog vomit is to hygiene You see the unit Diaries say one thing while the recaps and WCR exhibits say something else entirely The only time Oswald was in Taiwan was for the Sept/Oct '57 trip to Ping Tung. The Unit/Ship evidence shows him boarding and returning on the dates offered... yet the DoD attempts to say he never left... We know this to be patently false... unless one Oswald stayed and one Oswald didn't... It also seems to show (Folsom & Donabedian exhibits) one Oswald a radar tech and one an aircraft mechanic .... they can't seem to get anything straight.... the two separations are first, 3 weeks for a minor gunshot injury (Donabedian p.606) and second the is not listed in the medical records - that of Oct 7 thru Oct 13 1958 - but is listed in CE1961. Two men with two records combined into one... CE1962 corroborates this as do the USMC unit diaries and Folsom and Donabedian exhibits...

That you remain clueless about this and the other evidence is really no surprise Parker... you want so badly to be right about anything in the face of real evidence stating the opposite... Keep digging buddy... even a broken clock gets it right twice a day !!

Perfect. David's answer to No.1 is..."This does NOT happen 85% of the time, so therefore MUST be excluded as a possibility"!! Then insults me because I don't understand the stats... To No.2...? Well he has been asked many times to provide the proof they were ever taken out in the first place. Zilch. In between the passive aggressive condescension, instead of dealing with this lack of evidence, David will simply put the onus on you to provide proof that they weren't. And on and on it goes... You don't even bother to read Bernie... and there are a great many things you fail to understand - 85% of 5 year olds within 30 months... in THAT study. I wrote: which I have repeated posted I agree with the accusation that stating it is IMPOSSIBLE that Lee has tonsilitis since his tonsils were removed is discounting the remote possibility that a partial tonsilectomy was done AND that Oswald was part of the 15% of children experience some regrowth As to whether they were taken out... asked and answered... it's only Parker who thinks it was done with Radionics during a channeling... There were a few other things on that list Bernie... should keep you and the other minions busy So you also don't have an "alternative" answer to the question of how a 5'4" 6th grader becomes a 4'10" 8th grader... or a 5'11" 20 year old becomes a 5'9" 24 year old... How a boy attends 129 days of school between March 23 and May 30 while spending weeks at Youth House How his brother Pic can correctly choose Harvey from his brother in every case Why Robert lied about his NYC visits Who Louise Robertson is and why she contacted the FBI or became involved with the Oswalds at all Why the handwritten notes show North Dakota yet the final article changes it to NO... Why the FBI sends agents to Stripling Jr High on the morning ot 11/23 Why the FBI needs to speak with Pfisterer's employees about a job he supposedly had 6 years before, the week after the assassination Why Myra Rouse would make things up that amazingly corroborates the Youth House reports and the major differences between Lee and the boy playing Harvey. How Anna Lewis could have met Lee Oswald in February 1962 when Harvey was in Russia How trusted DPD sources puts Ruby and Lee together in all sorts of compromising situations along with Shaw and Ferrie How Oswald is both with his family and trying to over pay for rifles from McKeown How Oswald is proven to be both in Dallas and NOLA concurrently during the summer of 1963 How he can both be in Ping Tung and Atsugi concurrently How an Oswald is working for Pfisterer's while an Oswald is in the Marines How he can be with Allen Felde thru May yet be in Jacksonville at the same time How Major Gorsky has records of Lee Oswald leaving the Marines in March 1959 with all his records sent to DC. How Lee is in the 1000 series platoons (those attending radar school) while Harvey is platoon 2060 How Oswald can be working for both Tujagues in NOLA and ETI Realty in San Diego in the fall & winter of 1955 How he skips school to work at Dolly shoe yet shows near perfect attendance at BJHS Which PS #117 & #44 did OSwald attend - NYC, Bronx or Queens Why the southern boy entering 7th grade did not have a southern accent after living his entire life in either NOLA or TX What the story surrounding 2220 Thomas might be given that Marg was there in 1947, 54-55 and on Nov 22, 1963 Who Alan Graf was and why scores of marines who were with Harvey were never interviewed or called to testify Why the WCR considers the two separate Marine bases in Southern Califoria (El Toro & Santa Ana) as the same place How Marina amazingly meets both Webster and Harvey along with her backstory How in July 1963 while Harvey and family are in NOLA, Marshall Hicks delivers telegrams to "Lee Harvey Oswald" at the Rotary apartments which Ruby rented for Lee Why William Crowe, Wally Weston, Dixie Lynn, and Kathy Kay claim that Lee worked for Ruby in Dallas all thru the summer of 1963 Who it was that Yates drives to Elm/Houston with a 4 foot "rifle shaped" package talking about Ruby and the shooting of the president on Nov 20th Why both an SMU professor and his friend, living next to Ruby claim that Lee Oswald came to their door in the evening of 11/21 looking for Ruby.. the professor's friend wrote a letter to Ramsey Clark about it Why Mary Lawrence claims that Oswald came to her restaurant at 2:15am 11/22 and Ruby joined him shortly afterward - Harvey is in Irving at the time asleep How Helen Forrest and James Pennington see a white shirted man leaving the TSBD and enter a Rambler and both ID the man as Oswald Why Belin changed Craig's testimony of the same activity to confuse the issue further

The intersection of H&L and the assassination only occurs since Tampa and Chicago failed. The activities Oswald was involved in were easily converted to appear incriminating while during the actions themselves they were in the attempt to infultrate FPCC and related assets for the FBI/CIA/MIA...etc. We don't know the actual purpose for their being two men using the same name and each having their own passport... but the intelligence community was aware after the fact and did little to expose the situation. The ridiculous thing about the tonsils comes from a sentence claiming Lee having tonsilitis is impossible - which I have repeated posted I agree with the accusation that stating it is IMPOSSIBLE that Lee has tonsilitis since his tonsils were removed is discounting the remote possibility that a partial tonsilectomy was done AND that OSwald was part of the 15% of children experience some regrowth. I have referred to CE985, the Russian Hospital doc, which state the man's tonsils were not enlarged... IOW, they were normal... which when added to the actual stats on regrowth seems very unlikely... but not IMPOSSIBLE. So while the presentation in the book concludes what a normal thinking person would... that a boy with his tonsils removed has NO small chance of regular sized tonsils or tonsilitis over 10 years after the fact.. there is in fact a small probability he might... The bigger problem is the record of his travel to and from Ping Tung while being treated for a STD obtained in the "line of duty" - if that makes any sense. All these visits are at MACS-1 and it looks as if the Sept 16-Sept 29 reports are the same as Oct 6th... what we don't see is the hospital stay from Oct 7th thru Oct 13th - wonder why...?

That's what I enjoy about the minions... don't bother them with actual evidence, actual research studies, actual stats. And then they call the corroborating evidence what I "think", not what the Nat'l Inst of Health has to say... Less than 15% of the time in children with a mean age of 5, and it usually occurs within 3 years of the operation... You guys must really HATE it when actual evidence trumps your speculation and opinions... "Less than 15% of the time in children with a mean age of 5, and it usually occurs within 3 years of the operation..." WHAT "usually occurs within 3 years" David? Regrowth? is this what you are trying to prove? That regrowth only occurs in less than 15% of children with a mean age of five? So this your rock solid proof that regrowth of tonsils couldn't possibly happen? Because only 15% of children experience that? This is a deliberate wind up or a desperate attempt to create a firewall. Sorry, but I'll just politely stick to the facts. Tonsils regrow. It's pure baiting because you have humiliatingly lost the argument. Then you actually take a haughty condescending swipe at "minions" who's sole point is this...TONSILS CAN REGROW AFTER REMOVAL!! Can you point me to where on the extensive HarveyLee site this tonsil issue is given any prominence? Do you agree it should be removed or hidden? I realize that keeping up is very hard for you Bernie so please try... The links you obviously did not visit reveal that of the 15% of regrowth that did occur due to partial operations (which you boy Parker has still yet to prove, only suggest since he has no clule) and that the average time of regrowth is within the first 30 months after the operation - the mean age of the children was 5 years old. See now here'e the tought part Bernie... if 15% of 5 years old showed regrowth within 30 months... 85% of these children DID NOT EXPERIENCE REGROWTH... 85% is larger than 15% which means there is over a 5 times chance that by age 8 a child with a partial tonsillectomy will NOT experience regrowth. (prove again that the operation was "partial" to begin with) Do you have anything to post which shows our little Lee experiencing ongoing sorethroats and many missed sick days at school from age 6 to 17? Do you have anything related to regrowth after the inital 30 month period? do you have ANYTHING other than standing on Parker's shoulders to deal with the actual stats from the NIH - or is this "national speculation without evidence" day? Better yet... ask Parker if the Dr. used Radionics to telepathically remove the tonsils - he seems to take stock in obscure witchcraft related evidence as fact...

But Rather did try to show what that rifle under Lee's armpit might look like... Mr. BALL - You say he had the package under his arm when you saw him? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - You mean one end of it under the armpit? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he had it up just like you stick it right under your arm like that. Mr. BALL - And he had the lower part-- Mr. FRAZIER - The other part with his right hand. Mr. BALL - Right hand? Mr. FRAZIER - Right. Mr. BALL - He carried it then parallel to his body? Mr. FRAZIER - Right, straight up and down. Representative FORD - Under his right arm? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. 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 - Or, are you guessing? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so. Mr. BALL - You saw him come in the door? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - How much of that back seat, how much space did it take up? Mr. FRAZIER - I would say roughly around 2 feet of the seat. Mr. BALL - From the side of the seat over to the center, is that the way you would measure it? Mr. FRAZIER - If, if you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over toward the center, right. But I say like I said I just roughly estimate and that would be around two feet, give and take a few inches. Mr. BALL - How wide was the package? Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I would say the package was about that wide. Mr. BALL - How wide would you say that would be? Mr. FRAZIER - Oh, say, around 5 inches, something like that. 5, 6 inches or there. Mr. BALL - But the right hand on, was it on the end or the side of the package? Mr. FRAZIER - No; he had it cupped in his hand. Mr. BALL - Cupped in his hand? Mr. FRAZIER - Right.

Paul - just FYI, the measuring of facial features and distance in photographs is a demanding science... You "source" needs to pony up some photogrammetrical proof for what was done... not pixel counts or lines drawn on faces.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2100273/ and http://www.academia.edu/2999539/PHOTOGRAMMETRY_WITH_THE_3_CAMERAS_METHOD_FOR_FACIAL_MORPHOMETRY is a start.... As for when the tampering begins - my GUESS is that it had something to do with the viewing of the zfilm late Friday night via Rowley... it was so obvious there were shots from the front a decision had to be made as to how to proceed... but that is total speculation at this point...

Since the path to connect back to front travels UP, Ford's movement of the entry wound for clarity destroys that possibility... But if you look at where the entry is on the shirt/jacket... it is well below the hole in the neck... you can't have a connection from front to back with a bullet traveling DOWNWARD... so that it emerges HIGHER than the entrance... And David, if you can show us in the autopsy where it says this... you have a version of the autopsy nobody has Mr. Rankin: Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time. We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent, since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through. So that how it could turn, and -- Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went.in a finger's length. Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said