David Josephs

Dear Jo Jo,

How do you explain the part of Warren Commission Exhibit 1961 that Greg Parker posted which shows that Lee Harvey Oswald was at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego (basic training aka "boot camp") for twelve weeks?

Do you claim that it is "a forgery", or that it was somehow "altered"?

If Armstrong and your ilk can be so wrong about such a basic issue as how long LHO was at boot camp, your credibility is destroyed IMHO.

http://www.maryferre...9&relPageId=828

I explain it by stating the one man the WC found who spent time with HARVEY gives us a completely different timeline.

I explain it by reiterating the premise - there were two men using the name Lee Oswald yet the records of these men were combined to create one record.

The records and information we find in the WCR and HSCA reports is designed to do one thing, implicate Oswald.

And yet you are incredulous and suprised to find out that some of these FBI sourced reports were either fabricated, altered, and/or combined as needed.

Or, instead of the highly motivated FBI creating a document to help tell the Oswald story, an un-motivated Marine associate of HARVEY's tells his story and must be what, lying? mistaken? Sorry Tommy but the FBI and their data has proven themselves untrustworthy, has Felde somehow done that to you?

(I found the FBI took a Sept 1964 report and back-dated it to December 1963 so that there would be a bus for OSwald to leave New Orleans upon. So please Tommy - if you don't know of what you speak, better to keep it to yourself)

The information in the WCR's CE1961 is a composite - and is why the FBI went out of its way not to investigate the men who would contradict this information.

Felde was only found out due to a May article in LIFE magazine. Like Tague, they simply did not care to be concerned with any evidence which could contradict their investigation.

Sadly you seem to have stopped short of reading CE1962 or haven't the time or desire to go to the Baylor site and look it up. http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/tabs/collection/po-arm

LHO: 1957, Military, Jan. – Aug. - Felde, Allen is a 60 page notebook trying to make sense of the FBI's wrong FELDE reports.

Felde's dates and the FBI exhibit conflict. What you do from here is up to you. My position is clear and the H&L work is available for all to see.

Thanks for your condescension though... me and my ilk will proceed accordingly

DJ

"you aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know"

Jo Jo,

Now that Greg Parker has left, feel free to push your religion on us.

Hopefully, Greg opened some eyes to the fallacies of your "Genetically-Engineered Harvey and Lee and Henry, Too" theory during the brief time he was here.

For example, he showed us all that Lee Harvey Oswald was at Marine Corp boot camp for the standard twelve weeks, not your alleged five weeks or whatever.

BTW: Do not mistake my refusal to reply to your future posts on your implausible theory as any inability on my part to do the requisite research.

It's just that I value my time, Jo Jo, and I, like many, "have bigger fish to fry."

Tommy -

You havent' read the book - like GP

You haven't read the notebooks - like GP

You haven't bothered to speak with John Armstrong - like GP

You haven't bothered to actually study the info - like GP

You don't bother to actually look at and consider the real evidence provided here - like GP (how can the WCR state Felde was with the man yet nothing Felde says matches the MILITARY record as to where he was and when..?)

Did you even bother looking at CE1961 versus 1962? Do you know what the Ping Tung situation was and how the DoD messes it up again via Blakey?

Does it not bother you that none of the people who were LEE in the Marines are ever asked a question?

Does it not bother you that when GP posts evidence on a question about the '53-'54 school years he gives me 7 links to unsigned, unsourced boiler plate FBI reports about 1954-55? And then claims I'm playing games.

Yes, Tommy, I'm sure your time is oh so valuable, no one has asked that you read or comment upon my posts or the threads I start - amazingly enough, you make those decisions all on your own and now have to inform me that your decisions are beyond your own control? You have "fish to fry" (whatever that means) and don't have the self control to leave me alone and go fry them?

Your disdain and lack of respect for Armstrong's work is most unfortunate - you seem able to do your own thinking and not rely on me or GP... but that takes a little work that you dont seem interested or willing to commit.

Fine. that I spent all that time and effort to understand the theories and then created tools to help others falls on your deaf ears. Those who are interested in the subject and have done more than just give it lip service understand what I've done and continue to share and grow that understanding.

Here's a thought: Don't read my threads, Don't read my posts and Don't pretend to care about what is written about H&L... cover your eyes, ears and mouth and go your merry way - I'm not taking it personnally or having to go start my own Board so I can post whatever I want without worry of rebuttal. I post here from time to time and anyone can offer up whatever they can in discussion. Expecting that these discussions include more than opinion and speculation is just too much I guess.

I happen to think you offer a good mind and good questions that lead threads in positive directions. You sound more like VonPein accepting the WCR when you defend Mr. P's POV here... all faith and very little understanding.

David Josephs,

Your post #30 interests but puzzles me.

Do you believe the extant Z-film is an accurate recordation of what happened? Just a question.

Second question: In your opinion is the extant Altgens 6 an accurate depiction of what happened close to Altgens, ignoring the background and PM?

#1 - No, the extant Zfilm is not an accurate recordation of what happened... not even close.

#2 - I happen to believe that Alt 6 is an exact print of the negative - Oswald is not in that photo yet may be the person at the top left of the landing in the shadows... but that's even a stretch for me without better evidence... That person is standing there from well before the motorcade to well after...

the bigger concern imo is Altgens 7 which does not have a negative and looks nothing like the other photos in terms of sharpness, contrast, detail and that the top right of the image has been cropped off...

Altgens claims that the photo he took which is related to Z255 or so (Alt6) http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0304b.htm was of a limo and subject that were 30-40 feet away

Mr. LIEBELER - And you say Exhibit No. 203 was taken about 30 feet away?

Mr. ALTGENS - But it might be 40 feet, but I couldn't say that that's exactly the distance because while it may be in focus at 40 feet, my camera has it in focus 30 feet. It's the same thing--if I focus at 15 feet, my focus might extend 20 feet and it might also be reduced to 10 feet, but my focusing was in that general area of 30 feet.

He then states that JFK himself was about 15 feet from the left side of the limo when JFK was hit.

Mr. ALTGENS - This would put me at approximately this area here, which would be about 15 feet from me at the time he was shot in the head--about 15 feet from the car on the west side of the car--on the side that Mrs. Kennedy was riding in the car.

One assumption to make is that the front of the limo was 30 feet away with JFK about 45 feet for Alt 6 and the left side of the limo was 15 feet with JFK about 20 feet further north.

In either case the limo between Z255 and the "headshot" barely moves. Corroboration?

BREHM expressed his opinion that between the first and third shots, the President's car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet. It seemed to him that the automobile almost came to a halt after the first shot, but of this he is not certain. After the third shot, the car in which the President was riding increased its speed and went under the freeway overpass and out of his sight.

By this time he was directly in front of us and I was looking directly at him when he was hit in the side of the head.

/s/ William E. Newman, Jr.

Muchmore claims to NOT having taken any film of the shooting yet the above image supposedly comes from her camera...

The main point was that any moment in time does not necessarily tell an absolute truth and requires much more corroboration even to SPECULATE correctly.

Speculation is step one

Corroboration and authentication is Step two

Evidence speculated upon cannot be accepted as evidence if it cannot be authenticated and/or corrorobated - yet this case is full of such evidence being accepted as evidence (such as C2766 was ordered, owned and used by Oswald - the evidence related to this conclusion can be proven false and/or unsupporting of the conclusion).

So a 5'8" boy becomes a 5'11" man after Basic - and then becomes a 5'9" dead man.. ok.

The FBI goes out of its way to find the WRONG FELDE and reports thru the end of May 1964 that this FELDE did not know any Oswald.

And then they find out they had the wrong man and finally, on June 26, 1964 interview Felde which becomes CE1962.

According to the one and only man they seem to have bothered to find who actually spent time with our Oswald, the WCR recap of his USMC record is wrong.

That Combat Training began at Camp Pendleton and lasted until May 1957 when they are sent to Jacksonville - except by May 3rd LEE Oswald has already completed this training...

Felde (the right one not the one the FBI wanted us to believe they found) goes on to say that in July 1957 they go to Memphis for Aviation School - by JULY, USMC records have him completing this Memphis training and is already back in CA.

In Sept 1957, when Felde is transferred to FL, Oswald is sent to Atsugi.

(Note: if he was a radar operator why do his USMC records (and the WCR) tell us he was trained and preferred to be an Aircraft Mechanic?) - Page 7 of the Folsom Exh #1

Are we now going to say that THESE USMC are correct (Felde is wrong) while the ones related to his trip to Ping Tung while being treated for STDs are not...

The records for Oswald in the USMC are a composite of two different people at these similar yet different locations (El Toto and Santa Ana are not the same facility)

According to David Josephs, this would be two different people....

Mr. P, don't credit your words, thoughts or ideas as anyone elses's - especially mine...

You use unsigned and unsourced FBI documents that describe the wrong years, wrong situations and wrong people to rebutt the H&L points - and then can't even admit you got it wrong -

while offering up nothing but speculation and accusations.

All the way down to accusing the doctor who performed the tonsillectomy of not being qualified or able to perform said operation and that MO made the entire thing up - again, wrong speculation without a speck of proof and when proven to you you can't even have the class to admit your errors...

If you can't tell the difference between the two men I posted side by side - so be it Greg... your "acceptance" of these arguments or lack thereof is nothing I give much thought to... Someday, when you are actually qualified to discuss H&L we can pick it up again... until then maybe it's best if you just stick to your own work... (or at least bring some corroborated facts to the table so we're doing more than dealing with your opinions)

David Josephs,

I agree. I was a high school basketball player.

Today, I'm an old guy, 52 years older,

I've maintained exercise.

My face has changed, but my physique hasn't.

The symptoms of Asperger's syndrome vary and can range from mild to severe. Common symptoms include:

1. Problems with social skills: Children with Asperger's syndrome generally have difficulty interacting with others and often are awkward in social situations. They generally do not make friends easily. They have difficulty initiating and maintaining conversation.
2. Eccentric or repetitive behaviors: Children with this condition may develop odd, repetitive movements, such as hand wringing or finger twisting.
3. Unusual preoccupations or rituals: A child with Asperger's syndrome may develop rituals that he or she refuses to alter, such as getting dressed in a specific order.
4. Communication difficulties: People with Asperger's syndrome may not make eye contact when speaking with someone. They may have trouble using facial expressions and gestures, and understanding body language. They also tend to have problems understanding language in context and are very literal in their use of language.
5. Limited range of interests: A child with Asperger's syndrome may develop an intense, almost obsessive, interest in a few areas, such as sports schedules, weather, or maps.
6. Coordination problems: The movements of children with Asperger's syndrome may seem clumsy or awkward.
7. Skilled or talented: Many children with Asperger's syndrome are exceptionally talented or skilled in a particular area, such as music or math.

1. LEE Oswald was regarded as the leader in his classes and was always with friends.

   HARVEY was alone yet he seemed to make friends in Russia with ongoing correspondence shown in the WCR... All the photos I've seen of him in Russia shows him with women and men having a great time... Are there any examples you can offer to corroborate the claim, GP?

2. Neither child/man exhibited these

3. Anything evidentiary to point to here GP?

4. HARVEY was always staring into the eyes with those he spoke - he gave speeches in fact

   LEE we do not have as much info yet there is nothing to indicate he did not

5. HARVEY's Photography maybe - so now a strong interest of hobby can be attributed to Asperger's?

   LEE had no such concerns

6. Not that I've seen of either man

7. Again, maybe photographic skills but nothing earth-shattering

"The exact cause of Asperger's syndrome is not known. However, the fact that it tends to run in families suggests that it may be inherited (passed on from parent to child)."

Are we aware of any evidence that suggests mom or dad or any of the uncles and aunts had a form of Asperger's?

Is there anything to offer beyond speculation?

Yup... they weren't killed for not naming the man they ran into coming down the stairs.

They agreed to lie about the encounter and put Oswald further away from the 6th floor window than he could have been if Baker and Truly tell us the man coming down the stairs is Oswald.

What would be more important than adding to the incrimination of Oswald - who could this person have been that he had to be ignored on purpose.

Does this not suggest to you there was no lunchroom and only the affidavit's description of the scene?

Mr. BELIN - How long did you stay in the lunchroom after Truly identified this person as being an employee?
Mr. BAKER - Just momentarily. As he said, "Yes, he works here," I turned and went on up the stairs.

Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. There is a door there with a glass, it seemed to me like about a 2 by 2, something like that, and then there is another door which is 6 foot on over there, and there is a hallway over there and a hallway entering into a lunchroom, and when I got to where I could. see him he was walking away from me about 20 feet away from me in the lunchroom.
Mr. BELIN - What did you do?
Mr. BAKER - I hollered at him at that time and said, "Come here." He turned and walked right straight back to me.
Mr. BELIN - Where were you at the time you hollered?
Mr. BAKER - I was standing in the hallway between this door and the second door, right at the edge of the second door.
Mr. BELIN - He walked back toward you then?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - I hand you what has been marked Commission Exhibit 497 which appears to be a diagram of the second floor of the School Book Depository, and you will notice on this diagram there are circles with arrows. I want you to state, if you will, what number or the arrow approximates the point at which you were standing when you told him to "Come here". Is there a number on there at all or not?
Mr. BAKER - This 24 would be the position where I was standing.
Mr. BELIN - The arrow which is represented by No. 24, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER - That is correct.
Mr. BELIN - On Exhibit 497. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0119b.htm When you first saw him in which direction was he walking?
Mr. BAKER - He was walking east.
Mr. BELIN - Was--his back was away from you, or not, as you first saw him?
Mr. BAKER - As I first caught that glimpse of him, or as I saw him, really saw him?
Mr. BELIN - As you really saw him.
Mr. BAKER - He was walking away from me with his back toward me.
Mr. DULLES - Can I suggest if you will do this, put on there where the officer was and where Lee Oswald was, or the man who turned out to be Lee Oswald, and which direction he was walking in. I think that is quite important.
Mr. BELIN - Yes, sir. We are going to get to that with one more question, if I can, sir. When you saw him, he then turned around, is that correct, and then walked back toward you?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Was he carrying anything in his hands?
Mr. BAKER - He had nothing at that time.
Mr. BELIN - All right. Were you carrying anything in either of your hands?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; I was.
Mr. BELIN - What were you carrying?
Mr. BAKER - I had my revolver out.
Mr. BELIN - When did you take your revolver out?
Mr. BAKER - AS I was starting up the stairway.

Again, it sure seems to me that he speaks as if what occurred in his Affidavit was accurate... He is virtually always on or near the stairs yet position #24 is inside the first auto closing door and near the lunchroom entrance... Not exactly by the stairs... yet this is something open to interpretation and not specific evidence - other than it is 4 months later, Oswald is now dead and the lunchroom scene is now famous.

Too bad it contradicts the affidavit and the lawyers for the WC did not ask a single thing about the conflict, even though Baker mentions writing his affidavit at the DPD HQ when Oswald was there.

Greg Parker,

I have photos of myself from high school in 1962 and from my fraternity days in 1966. Also of the photo that accompanies this post.

My visage has changed.

Yet from 1962 to 1966, my visage didn't change much. The changes in my photos occurred mainly in the 1990s, when I was in my 40s and 50s.

There are very basic difference in their body structure...

LEE has sloped shoulders while HARVEY has squared off shoulders - shows in every image of either man...

Can that condition affect body structure as well? (no word on the Basic Training problem - I guess the answer is "ignore" )

David Josephs,

Your post #66 is important IMO.

To me, the central figure in the three photographs is not the same as the flanking individual.

The central figure shows what happens to young men who go through boot camp. No more, no less.

Speaking of boot camp Greg, why is it that you cannot answer the question about only 5 weeks of Boot Camp when every Marine goes thru at least 13 weeks with up to 3 more weeks special training?

CE1961 and 1962.

Real evidence with which you actually have to deal... or ignore. Up to you .

Getting back to the question of the Thread....

I truly feel it is a bit naive to proceed under the assumption that everything that occurs to incriminate Oswald as a Lone Nut was something that was arrived upon at the spur of the moment. Even poorly executed and planned activities are "planned" at some point.

The autopsy was specifically designed to turn multiple shots and directions into "shots from above and behind" as a result of Bundy contacting AF-1.

If Hoover can be credited with the idea, so be it yet I have yet to be convinced of that theory. Hoover was taken in by the Mexican charade as well and firmly believed that Alvarado was telling the truth... Until early December at least.

If the CIA/Military was behing this as I think they were, how hard is it to put a CASTRO CUBAN in the 6th floor window, or on the knoll. They provided Powers with bogus documents for the downing of his U-2, first time he ever had these docs... So if CUBA and/or Russia was the goal, a real Reichstag fire would have made sure to set up a Russian or Cuban...

But that didn't happen. There was an out from the very beginning. I firmly believe the references to Cuba and Russia were designed to curtail the investigation from the beginning as was part of the planning. The goal was the death of JFK... invading Cuba, while desired, was imo just an excuse. It was a place the CIA and FBI could not infultrate successfully. and that infuriated them.

Kennedy infuriated them even more.

DJ

David Josephs,

Your post #66 is important IMO.

To me, the central figure in the three photographs is not the same as the flanking individual.

Thanks Jon - I find it most revealing who offers links and evidence and who offers rhetoric and speculation.

No Jon, it is not... flanking the New Orleans born LEE OSWALD are photos of Lee HARVEY Oswald as called by those in this charade.

Folsom Exhibit #1 in Volume XIX starts off showing that in 1956 the Oswald who enters the Marines is 68" (5'8") and 135 lbs. (I believe LEE's USMC photo is placed on this record as part of the process)

In 1952 LEE is 5'4" and 115 lbs as a 6th grader. He winds up being a 5'11" Marine with wide shoulders, large body who likes to drink, cause trouble and be with his friends.

We can't know it this record is Lee or Harvey yet with mention of the scars it is most likely a composite.

I'd suggest you read the testimony of John Pic and keep the related images he is commenting upon nearby... He separates Lee from Harvey in every case.

Mr. JENNER - How did he look to you physically as compared with when you had seen him last?

Mr. PIC - I would have never recognized him, sir.

In your opinions, perhaps you should have just restarted the PM thread. The point is without substantial evidence it is not verifiable. It is hard to overstate the required evidence is necessary to have a reliable conclusion. In my view by demanding others accept the hypothesis without the evidence offered proves nothing but your commitment to an idea. If it is not what you claim, it forces us to waste time, how many prior "doozies" have been offered without substantial evidence? Color me unimpressed.

Bravo Carmine... Seems amazing to me how much time we need to spend listening to GP "explaining" himself while claiming other's offerings do not make any sense or are easily disproven with a word or phrase; adding evidence to the rebuttal that actually corroborates has never been successfully accomplished on his part, imo.

Here is a moment in time as Mark so eloquently put it... Altgens tells us that this last shot occurs when JFK is about 15 feet from him or 40 feet past z313... this is supported by the FBI's WCD298 and SS's CE884.

Yet the image shows the shot having already taken place up the street...

What is the "truth" when we have such conflicting evidence? The WCR and Specter would have us believe the physical evidence trumps the witness evidence... yet the physical evidence puts a shot 15 feet from Altgens, only the Zfilm doesn't corroborate this... which info is "false"?

When Oswald exited the Marines - on Sept 11, 1959 per his USMC records - he was 71" tall (5'11") and weighed 150 lbs and had entered the USMC with a variety of scars noted on his record.

The FBI interviewed Maj GORSKY, https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10434&relPageId=2, who told them on Nov 22 that the LEE HARVEY OSWALD under his command in CA was discharged in MARCH 1959 a full 6 months before our Oswald.

When ROSE does Oswald's autopsy - below - he is measured at 5'9" (69") and an ESTIMATED weight of 150lbs - (by the time he dies, little Ozzie barely weighed 135 soaking wet) and has none of the scars the USMC identified.

Maybe "that condition" is the cause for a normal healthy male shrinking 2 inches between the ages of 21 and 24 ... while also healing and removing scars, regrowing tonsils, make an air traffic controller an Aircraft mechanic, speak Russian with a native accent as well as being determined that English was the man's 2nd language, create the ability to magically be in 2-4 places at once and to telepathically convince others that people using his name is just a coincidence and has no bearing on the case...

Mason is a curious figure. However, I think the real importance is that the FBI could not find any locations where Oswald purchased ammo. He didnt buy any when the rifle was purchased (my gun enthusiast friends say that almost never happens) and there were no fingerprints on the shells found in the TSBD.

You make a good and important point Lawrence...

Virtually everything the FBI tired to corroborate related to Oswald's guilt came up terribly short or in fact pointed in the opposite direction... (CIA placed the order for the 4 million rounds of MC ammo)

Same deal with Mexico - Lee Harvey Oswald, killed by Ruby, did not go to Mexico yet the FBI was charged with proving he did. So they created one story that had to be changed to yet another sotry which also came up short.

This runs rampant throughout... the Evidence (which as you'd know by now if you read anything of mine) IS the Conspiracy and good for little else but to illuminate it little by little.

DJ

(edit: Thanks Robert for you explanation)

The key thing if you're an assassination plotter is not to work on manipulating him. He does a fine job all by himself. If you're an assassination plotter who wants to create a diversion, the thing is to implicate Oswald immediately after the assassination.

He was implicated immediately after - by Roy Truly.

It actually wasn't unti May 1964 and Sept 1964 that Truly's story finally jives with Baker's March testimony which directly conflicts with his same day affidavit which does not mention a door, a window, a Coke or a lunchroom...

One has to wonder why Truly does not remember the events described on Baker's same-day affidavit... ?? Especially since leaving him on the stairs coming down is much more incriminating in placing Oswald back at the window... if the person they ran into was Oswald... the description doesn't really match, does it?

This is yet another example of the use of uncorroborated and inauthentic evidence used to prove a point. Roy Truly and Marrion Baker lied to the WC during their testimony.

Except a few small hints slip thru:

Mr. BELIN - Did you notice, did he say anything or was there any expression after Mr. Truly said he worked here?

Mr. BAKER - At that time I never did look back toward him. After he says, "Yes, he works here," I turned immediately and run on up, I halfway turned then when I was talking to Mr. Truly.

If Baker is in the lunchroom, as opposed to the stairs like his affidavit says, he cannot "run on up" unless he actually WAS on the stairs and not in the lunchroom at the time... Truly was very aware of what was going on in the TSBD

NOVEMBER 22, 1963

A man stepped forward and stated he was the building manager and that he would show me where the stairs were. I followed the man to the rear of the building and he said, "Let's take the elevator." The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.

s/ M. L. Baker

MAY 14, 1964

Mr. TRULY. This officer was right behind me and coming up the stairway.

By the time I reached the second floor, the officer was a little further behind me than he was on the first floor, I assume--I know.

Mr. BELIN. Was he a few feet behind you then?

Mr. TRULY. He was a few feet. It is hard for me to tell. I ran right on around to my left, started to continue on up the stairway to the third floor, and on up.

11-22-63: As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me

MAY 14, 1964

Mr. BELIN. It could have been open or it could have been closed, you do not remember?

Mr. TRULY. The chances are it was closed.

Mr. BELIN. You thought you opened it?

Mr. TRULY. I think I opened it. I opened the door back and leaned in this way.

Mr. BELIN. What did you see?

Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?

Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door

11-22-63: As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me

MARCH 25, 1964

Mr. BAKER - As I came out to the second floor there, Mr. Truly was ahead of me, and as I come out I was kind of scanning, you know, the rooms, and I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this--I happened to see him through this window in this door. I don't know how come I saw him, but I had a glimpse of him coming down there.

11-22-63: As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0308b.htm

This affidavit from ROY TRULY is the only thing which matches his testimony and is dated from September 23rd 1964 - only a day or so before the release of the WCR...

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0358a.htm

This affidavit from ROY TRULY MARRION BAKER the only thing which matches his testimony and is dated from September 23rd 1964 - only a day or so before the release of the WCR...

(this is the crossed out Coke affidavit) and these two look very similar, even the signatures....

================== parting thought to consider - what is Sawyer doing here?

Within 4 minutes of the shots SAWYER and a couple men also go up into the TSBD - to the 4th floor, are there less than a few minutes to "make sure noboby was hiding"

and then is back down

Mr. SAWYER. We immediately went inside the building. I took--I believe Sgt. Harkness may have gone with me. I am not positive of that.

Mr. BELIN. Was the elevator on the first floor when you got there, or did you have to wait for it to come down?

Mr. SAWYER. Best of my recollection, it was there.

Mr. BELIN. You got to the elevator, went up, looked around back there. How long did you spend up there at the top floor (4th) that the elevator took you to?

Mr. SAWYER. Just took a quick look around and made sure there was nobody hiding on that floor. I doubt if it took over a minute at the most.

Mr. BELIN. To go up and look around and come down?

Mr. SAWYER. To look around on the floor. How long it took to go up, it couldn't have been over 3 minutes at the most from the time we left, got up and back down.

Mr. BELIN. Then that would put it around no sooner than 12:37, if you heard the call at 12:34?

Mr. SAWYER. Yes, sir.

Thanks for that Thomas. Newman has been making the point recently that CIA operations routinely had multiple layers. One way this is accomplished is by using multiple pseudonyms for operatives like Phillips.

David - I like your Mozart analogy. I mentioned to you before that I read some of Armstrong's book but had to stop because I found it impossible to follow. Even when you give short proofs of the two Oswald's my eyes glaze over.

The result of the work I described is a large Spreadsheet by date showing side by side who was where and when...

If you IM me your email address I can send it to you. I posted it in a H&L Facebook group but you needed to be part of the group....

Doesn't explain everything yet makes what we do see much more understandable.

Thanks for your kind words

DJ

{yawn}

"the name Oswald was never mentioned"

And he said, "We wanted you to meet this American. His name is Leon Oswald." He repeated it twice. Then my sister Annie by that time was standing near the door.

come to any conclusion you want

Tommy...

There are 1050 pages in the book, A CD full of docs and images and 1100 folders at Baylor which took me 2 years and virtual constant discussion with John to understand the depth and breadth of the information. We did not agree on every detail... but we knew WTF we were talking about and refused to use boiler plate FBI reports as gospel.

Making fun of the man and his work is beneath you. If you disagree with something, show your work.

btw - We are not arguing. Mr. Tidd is a welcome presence here adding objectivity and common sense with intellect and curiosity. there is respect and discussion finally happening here again..

I think it's great

DJ

Jo Jo,

That's very impressive.

Unfortunately, quantity does not correlate with quality, except in ... hmmm.... let me think..... nope, not even in rock 'n roll. Too much volume just ruins it, IMHO.

--Tommy

I'd simply like to discuss Mozart with someone who is not deaf. H&L is not a jingle, it's a balls-out symphony and most who discuss it have barely listened to the tuning up of the instruments...

yet can declare with authority there are, "simply too many notes"

Parker...

This is why you never post evidence or the links. You're wrong every time. The source is always in conflict with what you said it said.

The men who called back the next day did not use the name Oswald... So now rant and rave and tell me I'm changing the subject or some such nonsense, then go back to your yes-man forum where you putting up 25 of 28 posts per thread supposedly counts as a discussion.

I know who Leon Oswald was too... As did Sylvia and her sister.

Mrs. ODIO. Well, her reaction to it when Oswald came on television, she almost passed out on me, just like I did the day at work when I learned about the assassination of the President. Her reaction was so obvious that it was him, I mean. And my reaction, we remember Oswald the day he came to my house because he had not shaved and he had a kind of a very, I don't know how to express it, but some little hairs like if you haven't shaved, but it is not a thick moustache, but some kind of shadow. That is something I noticed. And he was wearing--the other ones were wearing white dirty shirts, but he was wearing a long sleeved shirt.

Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned when your sister saw Oswald's picture on television that she almost passed out. Did she recognize him, do you know, as the man that had been in the apartment?
Mrs. ODIO. She said, "Sylvia, you know that man?" And I said, "Yes," and she said, "I know him." "He was the one that came to our door, and it couldn't be so, could it?"
That was our first interview. We were very much concerned after that. We were concerned and very scared, because I mean, it was such a shock.

The Odio incident was not Oswald. She admitted in her testimony that the name used was "Leon" and that name "Oswald" had not been mentioned. Again, I have a good idea who that person was...

Mrs. ODIO. They told me they were coming because of the assassination of President Kennedy, that they had news that I knew or I had known Lee Harvey Oswald. And I told them that I had not known him as Lee Harvey Oswald, but that he was introduced to me as Leon Oswald.

And he said, "We wanted you to meet this American. His name is Leon Oswald." He repeated it twice. Then my sister Annie by that time was standing near the door.

Mrs. ODIO. The next day Leopoldo called me. I had gotten home from work, so I imagine it must have been Friday. And they had come on Thursday. I have been trying to establish that. He was trying to get fresh with me that night. He was trying to be too nice, telling me that I was pretty, and he started like that. That is the way he started the conversation. Then he said, "What do you think of the American?" And I said, "I didn't think anything."

And he said, "You know our idea is to introduce him to the underground in Cuba, because he is great, he is kind of nuts." This was more or less--I can't repeat the exact words, because he was kind of nuts. He told us we don't have any guts, you Cubans, because President Kennedy should have been assassinated filter the Bay of Pigs, and some Cubans should have done that, because he was the one that was holding the freedom of Cuba actually. And I started getting a little upset with the conversation.
And he said, "It is so easy to do it." He has told us. And he (Leopoldo) used two or three bad words, and I wouldn't repeat it in Spanish. And he repeated again they were leaving for a trip and they would like very much to see me on their return to Dallas. Then he mentioned something more about Oswald. They called him Leon. He never mentioned the name Oswald

All local Dallas false sightings were of Larry Crafard

Larry Crafard?

This dude http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0098b.htm is your idea of who Ruby called "Lee" all summer 1963 in Dallas while Ozzie was in NOLA? Of of those who tells us they see Ruby with Lee...

Ok GP...

Tommy...

There are 1050 pages in the book, A CD full of docs and images and 1100 folders at Baylor which took me 2 years and virtual constant discussion with John to understand the depth and breadth of the information. We did not agree on every detail... but we knew WTF we were talking about and refused to use boiler plate FBI reports as gospel.

Making fun of the man and his work is beneath you. If you disagree with something, show your work.

btw - We are not arguing. Mr. Tidd is a welcome presence here adding objectivity and common sense with intellect and curiosity. there is respect and discussion finally happening here again..

I think it's great

DJ

This diary asks whether Oswald was an intelligence agent.

Intelligence agents become agents by being recruited by an intelligence service. They are recruited because they are able and willing to provide certain information.

Question: What valuable information did Oswald possess that some intelligence service wanted?

An "agent" in which sense of the word Jon. we both know that working on someone's behalf can be considered "agency"...

If he was recruited to help ID Castro sympathizers in New Orleans while working at a CIA/FBI related front by holding meetings and gathering names, that's one form of agency.

When he slips and says he's under the protection of the US when in Russia does it matter if it was CIA, ONI, MID, etc.... he did gather intel on Minsk. There was a project in place for fake defectors to do just that...

In the late 50's early 60's the intel services especially the FBI were using ordinary citizens to report on the goings on of suspected groups. Their patriotic duty. Clay Shaw may not have been CIA payroll but part of his expectations were to deliver info and convey info. an ASSET rather than an AGENT... i seem to be saying...

DJ

...As one great Liberal said last December, if a strategy fails for fifty years, it's time to try something new.

The CIA didn't kill JFK. Get over it.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

You got that right... it was Military all the way.

Well, yes and no -- a former General of the US Army did it -- he was the only US General to resign in the 20th century, Ex-General Edwin Walker; that's my theory.

He had all the skill of a victorious WWII General -- including Special Operations. He was a tactical wizard.

Intellectually he was limited by the John Birch Society. But tactically, he had few peers on Planet Earth.

He not only hated JFK and RFK for political reasons, but he seriously and honestly believed that RFK was trying to murder him.

We have proof of this in his personal papers. He had a large army of followers among the Minutemen and radical JBS followers -- armed, trained and ready to go.

He had supporters among the Cuban Exile Community and Bay of Pigs veterans in Louisiana and Florida, too. This was his route to meeting CIA Officer David Morales.

Keep looking at Ex-General Edwin Walker -- and you'll see that most of the pieces from most of the witnesses from 50 years ago fall into place.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul, I appreciate the passion you put into your work and convictions.

If we agree that we are dealing with a 1000 piece puzzle where only 100 pieces are available and there is no picture on the box, and no color on the pieces... then anyone with a theory and the evidence to support it could be closer than anyone knows.

We know more about what it wasn't than what it was... the evidence for what it was, is imo, gone and only the shadow it may have cast here and there will ever be seen. Attempting to put things into context has been the most difficult hurdle due to our vantage points and states of mind and the difficulty of understanding CI planning.

The Evidence bears this shadow, but only faintly. The Conspiracy reeks within the Evidence.

I can't reconcile why Galloway and Burkley would cover for Walker, or how the CIA or FBI would not be aware of his activities in pursuit of this end nor have I done the work necessary to come to an educated opinion.

Even a Walker does not attempt to pull it off without knowing his back was covered...

If you can clarify the Walker-Bethesda/Galloway connection for the autopsy's cover-up it would be appreciated

DJ

While I think Bill has done an amazing job, it's a theory. A well sourced and wonderfully presented possibility. There are other explanations which fit the evidence..

All depends on your perspective which is why it's so hard to agree on a single explanation. I think we greatly underestimated what the FBI really knew about mexico

Well done Tommy, well done.

Paul - what is Mellen's source for this meeting?

Besides, you made a leap of faith in order to connect your gang of villains with Morales, without a shred of actual evidence. Face it man, your grasping at straws. If Morales was involved it leads upwards in the CIA, not outwards to the crazy New Orleans crew....

Well, Paul B., I'm clearly not grasping at straws -- Joan Mellen is my source, and she's a good source.

Because Bill Simpich provides evidence that the CIA Top Brass was engrossed in a MOLE HUNT, they were not involved in the JFK Murder. I realize this contradicts fifty years worth of JFK "Research," but that's OK since the past fifty years of JFK "Research" has failed to solve the JFK Murder.

As one great Liberal said last December, if a strategy fails for fifty years, it's time to try something new.

The CIA didn't kill JFK. Get over it.

Sincerely,

--Paul Trejo

You got that right... it was Military all the way.

..