David Josephs

So much has been written about those few days in between the trip to and from Mexico than the trips themselves.

Like the question of Oswald even being at the window in the first place having a bearing on whether he could shoot well or not...

if he wasn't there... .

As I journey thru what the FBI and CIA left behind in the evidence to get Oswald to and from this fictitious trip I am struck with a thought and theory that I believe will bear out.

The Oswald in Mexico has nothing to do with the Oswald going into and coming out of Mexico - which appears more and more never to have actually happened but is a series of evidentiary elements designed to give an impression. Like the Klein's rifle evidence. That it is inauthentic isn't the point, it incriminates Oswald so why ask to authenticate it?

http://ctka.net/

I have a few articles up including a first one, The Evidence IS the Conspiracy, that mirrors a thread I started here a while back about how getting Oswald to the window at 12:30 with a rifle was a fabrication and nothing the evidence provided can support.

Jim D. has been a great help and friend by editing my work to produce what is becoming to be one of the few complete works on the TRIPS themselves.

I try to approach the articles like these threads where the images of the evidence is included, not just referred in the work

I hope you enjoy and can get something out if it.

DJ

Carmine...

Authenticated Evidence placing Oswald in that corner would be great. I personally believe "Out front with Shelley" from Fritz's notes refers to a time after the shots when Oswald finally leaves.

I was not inferring it was Oswald due to a lack of witnesses at all... I am suggesting that the FBI can make evidence disappear or change to its needs. That no one ever comes forward to say they saw Oswald standing there, even to private researchers is quite telling since so much has been discovered that was said to the FBI yet was never reported or was changed.

Those who have taken the time to show by process of elimination that there are few if any others if could be... it is VERY possible that it's Oswald as Ms Arnold places him near this door at the right time: I did the accompanying composite to illustrate how it could indeed be Ozzie

Bob... this is at least 30-60 seconds after the shots... I think the white head is a scarved woman...

DJ

What I find strange though is how he disappears from one frame to the next...

He was there before the motorcade, during and after...

Mrs. Reid walks in and

Mr. BELIN. All right. You went up through the stairs and then what did you do?
Mrs. REID. I went into the office.
Mr. BELIN. You went into your office?
Mrs. REID. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. And then what did you do?
Mrs. REID. Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several feet and I told him, I said, "Oh, the President has been shot, but maybe they didn't hit him." He mumbled something to me, I kept walking, he did, too.

Mr. BELIN. And then you went through your actions, what you saw, your conversations that you had, and your actions in going back into the building and up to the point that you saw Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mrs. REID. That is right.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember how long by the stopwatch it took you?
Mrs. REID. Approximately 2 minutes.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember whether he had any shirt or jacket on over his T-shirt?
Mrs. REID. He did not. He did not have any jacket on.

Don't we find it a bit surprising that not a soul in the years since mentions seeing Oswald on the stairs.... The "fear factor" did not stop Craig or Yates or Bolden or Ms Arnold from coming forward.

Here is Baker running toward the TSBD while our man is standing there... I guess it is possible that Truly supports Baker's affidavit to testimony story change NOT in order to move Oswald from higher up on the stairs coming down - for we are sure that Baker and Truly saw one of his employees in the stairway a flight or so up rather than in the lunchroom but to place Oswald INSIDE the building at all right afterward, at least that was better than his not in the building at all.

The more I dig into Mexico City the more I find the FBI playing with the evidence. That someone may have said something about this being Oswald and that info disappearing is not so far fetched. In fact it is more in line with all the other activities of the FBI than not. Frasier NEVER says it was Ozzie out front? "Out front with Bill Shelley" with Shelley being the man in the tie behind Lovelady makes alot of sense.

How can it be proven once and for all though?

DJ

I can't quite follow what you're asking.

Are you wondering if Albert Osborne might have picked up the leaflets?

How are Osborne and Gaudet directly related to 544 Camp?

How does Thornley figure in?

I am one of those who is very reluctant to make IDs from old photos.

Sorry for not being clear enough Stephen...

OSBORNE is on the 1000 flyer receipt, the man who was described picking up the flyers is hard to connect to Thornley given his slight frame where as OSBORNE is obviously "husky"...

OSBORNE adds to the mystery as to who was on that bus with him, if anyone at all (I am seeing ALL of Mexico as akinto the Kleins evidence, completely fabricated to tell a specific story with nothing but conflicts and zero corroboration)

The FBI also combines the two different bus lines so that the Australian girls, Bowen and the MacFarland's are on the same bus.

Gaudet worked with Banister as well as the other "Cuban-related" CIA/FBI teams... he just happened onto the Oswald leaflet scene (if I remember correctly most everyone involved with that event was intelligence connected)

From H&L:

CIA Agent William Gaudet, who referred to Oswald as "Harvey,"43 said, "Somebody

had to be feeding him .... .I don't know who .... .I tell you a man who certainly should

give you some information on Lee Harvey Oswald, because he interviewed him on the

radio ..... is Ed Butler."44 Gaudet was a close personal friend of Butler and knew that he

ran the CIA-sponsored "Information Council of the Americas (INCA)." AUG,63-09 Gaudet

also knew David Ferrie and said, "He (Ferrie) became a private pilot .... .! mean, he used

to give flying lessons and ..... er ..... he was a friend of a lot of queers, including Clay

Shaw."45

NOTE: Gaudet worked for the CIA for many years and was very familiar with the intelligence

community in New Orleans (Banister, Butler, Stuckey, Shaw, Arcacha, etc.).

Gaudet and Oswald obtained Mexican tourist visas from the Mexican consulate in New

Orleans on the same day, but the FBI hid this information from the Warren Commission

and the public.

Gaudet was hidden from view as having been at the Mexican consulate and buying a tourist visa for "1 day" just before the one attributed to Oswald. When the FBI provided a list of visa purchasers, 24084 was omitted even though in DeBruey's early december report, Gaudet is listed... WCD75 I think https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=332393

Gaudet specifically tells us that Banister is involved in operations involving Cuba in his HSCA questioning (Armstrong's GAUDET notebook at Poage is quite detailed)

One has to wonder what purpose OSWALD would have had for getting a Mexican tourist visa in order to arrange travel thru Cuba to Russia when he was already cleared to travel to Russia the same route he left... no need to raise flags regarding Cuba... add to this the charades in Mexico to implicate and ID Oswald with Cuba and Kostikov and one wonders if HARVEY was even involved.

Thornley is said to have picked up the FPCC flyers, but why. At the Coffee House in NOLA he seems to have been close to Oswald, was with him in 1959 and again in Atsugi...

I don't know the role of Thornley

Coming a bit full circle here...

Posted 23 March 2008 - 09:08 AM

Bill,

Harold took a bunch pictures of Garrison subjects down to the print shop and showed them to the Jones and Myra Silver. They picked out 4 pic's of Kerry Thornley as looking most like the person who picked up the order.
Weisberg told us he was reluctant to name Thornley, as he had doubts about his guilt after talking to David Lifton.

-Bill O

Mr OSBORNE is listed on the reciept as well as corroborated by Myra Silver.

Mr OSBORNE supposedly picks up the finished handbills yet most claim that it was Thornley.

(Albert) OSBORNE = (John) BOWEN = THORNLEY? delivering a rough draft that looks like Harvey's writing or whoever would have impersonated him...

Thornley nor Oswald were definitely not considered "husky" while Albert was....

Could begin to connect dots with the trip to Mexico where Osborne & Gaudet are involved and directly related to 544 Camp and Banister...

Roy?

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1410.pdf

H&L p.543

Following the assassination Mrs. Silver was shown a photograph of Lee Harvey

Oswald by FBI agent John McCarthy. Mrs. Silver said she did not recognize the person

in the photograph as the man who placed the order for the handbills. The owner of the

company, Douglas Jones, was also shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald and said

he was not the same person who placed the order. Jones remembered that man who

placed the order and described him as a "husky type person, on the order of a laborer."

Albert Osborne aka John Bowen

By Sunday evening the 24th the FBI had taken ALL the evidence from Dallas and had been working with it most the weekend...

Items that never existed in Dallas, that were never initialed by the DPD personnel, came back to Dallas while items that were taken to the FBI Labs, like the Minox camera, never returned.

The case against Oswald had already, by the 24th, been created and finalized... The FBI report that is delivered on Dec 9th is a travesty of investigation and flew in the face of what Hoover voices on the 12th in a memo to his staff...

that we, the FBI, not say that Oswald was alone... this stems from his CIA created time in Mexico City... and that even by Dec 9th, leads had not yet been run out...

Yet on Dec 9th, the FBI's report concludes just that... Oswald alone did it... and there is no evidence of a connection between him and Jack Ruby...

WE also know that Redlich wrote a memo to Rankin in April 1964 which had the following paragraph.... it is completely obvious that the Warren Commission was the means, via Dulles and Ford, to watch over the process and rubber stamp the work of the FBI and Secret Service... yet:

I should add that the facts which we now have in our

possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and

Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will

present a completely misleading picture.

Needless to say... the reports not only were not corrected, but they became the WCR almost to the letter....

DJ

Another from the famed man... United Fruit... scary topic

LA UNITED FRUIT CO.

Text by Pablo Neruda (1904-1973), Canto general, 1950

Set by John Mitchell (1941-), op.95, no.4 (1993

When the trumpet sounded
everything was prepared on earth,
and Jehovah gave the world
to Coca-Cola Inc., Anaconda,
Ford Motors, and other corporations.
The United Fruit Company
reserved for itself the most juicy
piece, the central coast of my world,
the delicate waist of America.

It rebaptized these countries
Banana Republics,
and over the sleeping dead,
over the unquiet heroes
who won greatness,
liberty, and banners,
it established an opera buffa:
it abolished free will,
gave out imperial crowns,
encouraged envy, attracted
the dictatorship of flies:
Trujillo flies, Tachos flies
Carias flies, Martinez flies,
Ubico flies, flies sticky with
submissive blood and marmalade,
drunken flies that buzz over
the tombs of the people,
circus flies, wise flies
expert at tyranny.

With the bloodthirsty flies
came the Fruit Company,
amassed coffee and fruit
in ships which put to sea like
overloaded trays with the treasures
from our sunken lands.

Meanwhile the Indians fall
into the sugared depths of the
harbors and are buried in the
morning mists;
a corpse rolls, a thing without
name, a discarded number,
a bunch of rotten fruit
thrown on the garbage heap.

Gee Tommy...

"Some guy who told me he was a friend of Ed's MUST have known Oswald....and therefore nothing H&L uncovers is true..."

you being a parrot... who can't take the time to read a book or open a link

and can only critique that which you have no knowledge of....

rather than offer anything resembling intelligence must make you so proud to contribute here...

Below are links to the files resulting from 10+ years of work... but please do NOT lift your head up from your grazing and learn how foolish you sound with every smiley face post

... your Honey BooBoo act is very entertaining and provides the much needed comic relief on what could be a serious educational site

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/ref/collection/po-arm/id/42986

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/ref/collection/po-arm/id/27534 (Ed Voebel)

Polly want a cracker....

Santos honesty = oxymoron = historical truth

By 1962, according to an associate, Florida Mafia boss Santo Trafficante was saying that the Kennedys were “not honest.

The U.S. Congress’ Assassinations Committtee, the second official probe into John F. Kennedy’s assassination, would identify Trafficante as one of two Mafia bosses it suspected of involvement in the President’s murder.

Santo Trafficante calling another "not honest"...

The HCSA says he was involved in the murder...

And this, Doug, is worth posting 4 months after the fact... why? Heimlich not working ?

Around 1990, I met someone who was a good friend of Eddie Voebel, and--consequently--also got to know Lee Oswald (in the same way that if I am "best friends" with Joe Smith, then I will likely get to become acquainted with some of Joe Smith's friends).

This person who was "best friends" with Voebel--call him "Vince Morton"--knew Lee Oswald (because he was "best friends" with Voebel) for about a year immediately after LHO moved to 126 Exchange Place in the fall of 1954.

So Vince Morton knew Oswald for both terms of that school year--i.e., fall of 1954, Spring of 1955. He was also a member of the CAP and his membership there overlapped with Oswald and Voebel.

"Vince Morton" is a fictitious name to protect him..?. his confiding in you remains very suspicious... I have the complete list of those who attended BJHS in 53-54 and 54-55...

Voebel does mention a name, but I will not post it as there appears to be some concern over it....

Not possible you got snowed David...?

What do you suppose DeBrueys was doing interviewing all of Oswald's classmates from 1953-54 and 1954-55 yet only asked about the 54-55 year...

and was able to write a report by Dec 2.... they gonna break the case wide open with these all important interviews after he's already dead?

As far as I know (and in my very strong opinion)

well understood David...

if you took a moment and read the FBI interviews of Oswald's classmates you'd see that not a single one is asked about 53-54, but only 9th grade - 54-55

While those who do recall 53-54 and are shown HARVEY's picture & don't recognize him...

In April 1955, LEE and MO move to Exchange...

HARVEY Oswald's records at Stripling JHS from Sept-Oct 1954 are given to the FBI...

that LEE HARVEY OSWALD had attended her English classes

from September, 1954 until June, 1955, And she explained

she was at a loss to explain that she had no recollection

of either the name OSWALD or identification of his facial.

characteristics, from representations of his photographs

XXXX stated that although school records indicated that she taught LEE HARVEY OSWALD, General Math during the school - -

term of 1954 that she could not recall OSWALD as a pupil in her class.

It appears you have much to learn about the subject matter here before you can offer "informed" opinions...

It's well accepted that we all have "strong" opinions.

I've had these discussions with Dr Mantik... thanks for posting these excerpts...

They are all based on the "original" xrays.... I have no doubt that there were things done to these images to make them even more incriminating toward Oswald...

Yet:

This left unaltered a large, dark area at the front of the skull,

I see you here lurking Scott... as you see me... how about that evidence in support of your conclusions...

Can there possibly be more to you than just argumentative talk and unsupported opinions?

Be espcially nice if you actually came here and attempted to prove something...

Say what you want, David, but it is obvious to anyone that the photos are of two different people.

Thanks Bob, I will "say what I want" and back it with evidence not airy opinions

Bob... I am literally thru dealing with those who only want to give us their IMPRESSIONS of what THEY see, as opposed to any evidence to support these conclusions.. yet I guess I need to do this yet one more time.

===

"Obvious to anyone" is Non sequitur and a poor excuse for evidence supporting your conclusion.

"anyone" consists of you and a handful of equally vision impared individuals not willing to take the time to read and illustrate the autopsy evidence so their opinoion are actually based on something.

READ what the autopsy says, what HUMES says about the autopsy he performed and from which he authored the document in the record which in itself has a dubious history...

Below are illustrations of what he describes...

This is called analysis of the evidence not "I see it that way so it must be true" tautological mumbo jumbo presented by Mr Speer, Mr Tame and now you of all people...

I honestly thought you had a clue here Bob...

How about you stick to the ballistics and proving that the rifle that wasn't his, that wasn't fired that day, fired a bullet that wasn't ever in Dallas nor hit anything other than either water or cotton... and does not come into existence until the Chief of the Secret Service hands it to Elmer Todd.... so it can become the "BULLSH!T" in the Single BULLSH!T Theory...

And let those who can address the evidence with honesty and effort do the heavy lifting for you...

so all you need keep are opinions about that which you seem incapable of analyzing impartially or thoroughly.

Ya, I know.. I'm an A$$hole and abrasive... yet opinions are not analysis. and I'm tired of hearing it presented that way

Perhaps this is a dumb question, David. Are you claiming those two photos of Marguerite are different people? Because they sure look like the same person to me...

P.S. On several of your recent posts you have made reference to Norman Redlich's complaint about the SS and FBI. I'm not sure if you appreciate the context of that complaint. He was claiming--quite correctly, IMO--that the SS and FBI re-enactments of the shooting were inaccurate, and would not stand the test of time. As these re-enactments both placed the head shot at a location far beyond where the head shot was shown to have happened in the films and photos (upon which these re-enactments were purportedly based) Redlich realized that the WC needed to clear up this matter, and come up with something that would pass the simplest of smell tests. It is telling, moreover, that those performing the SS and FBI re-enactments were not questioned as to their methodology, or the reasons for their mistakes. This suggests, at least to me, that Redlch and Specter etc. felt these mistakes were no coincidence...and that the FBI and SS were blowing smoke.

Pat...

Given the opinions you've offered on the wounds and the shooting scenario I am not comfortable with anything you offer as your opinion of visual evidence....

that you neglect in your reply all that follows those photos in my post from is to be expected .... and then in turn you change subjects...

Talk to me of 126 Exchange and 1454 St Mary's and the conflicting evidence of DeRouse and Voebel before you side-track the thread...

===

I will take a minute to address this memo... as you introduce a line of thought I had not considered before...

This suggests, at least to me, that Redlch and Specter etc. felt these mistakes were no coincidence...and that the FBI and SS were blowing smoke.

You seem to be saying that this memo's reference to "the reports of the FBI and SS" are those that ONLY deal with the recreations (WCD 298, & 88) and not WCDs: 1, 3, 77, 79, 80, 305, 320, & 677..

which for the purposes of this relply, I will accept.

If we are indeed only talking about these recreations... you seem to be implying that Redlich is aware that both page 3 of WCD88 describing the location of the last shot (4 feet short of 5+00 or 4+95, 30 feet further down the street than the survey's 4+65) , and the FBI's WCD 298 which also shows a shot at the foot of the stairs are "incorrect"... and needed correcting or they would give a "totally misleading picture".

This is of course compared to the Zfilm evidence... the Nix film and the Muchmore film... as well as the Moorman photo.... which the SS and FBI surely had in their possession in order to create these models and conclusions.

These "Miselading WCDs" are buried, never corrected and not included in the volumes of the WCR. Not because they were "blowing smoke" but because they presented a more accurate picture of the location of the limo at times when the men inside were hit with bullets...

I had assumed that Redlich was being truthful and trying to get at the accuracy of the situation when quite the opposite appears true...

JFK was hit - from the front - at the foot of the steps just across from Hudson to the north and Altgens to the south... as they testified.

Redlich is assisting in hiding the facts and basically proves that the ZFILM which contradicts these reports - was altered before anyone had a chance to see the original showing that shot hitting home right where the FBI and SS puts it.

So I will ask you the same question I've asked others... from what source does the SS and FBI conclude that shot occurs at approx Z375? Given their access to these films and photos showing something different... unless these films and photos did NOT show what they currently do?

What benefit is there to the FBI and SS who are assisting in the cover-up, to offer ANY evidence that contradicts the physical evidence from that day and then place it into evidence - oversight? Altruism of some underlings? Breadcrumbs for future generations?

Please read the testimony of the man who created the FBI model and the single image from that model which does not show the strings from the 6th floor, along with NO questions as to what the model was intended to do or say...http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/gauthier.htm

No Pat... other than your helping me see Redlich in the same league as the rest and NOT the whistle-blower I thought he was... you've basically set the stage for the PROOF that the film/photo evidence has been terribly altered...

That the FBI and SS got it frighteningly correct and that...

Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin.

the model in WCD298 and the only image of it from the WCR.... I'll finish with my question from above: What source materials did the FBI and SS use to conclude what we see here and read in WCD88?

If he was indeed on the EAST side of the overpass... and why talk about a train blocking his view?

Strange stuff... as if anything we EVER come across is as it appears...

Take care Ron

DJ

I would ask this Bob...

Which original Autopsy materials have you, Pat, Tame or anyone else here seen at high magnification. What did Doug Horne, see?

What information would you like to offer that refutes Doug's viewing of these images and the conclusion they are images of an altered head, not altered images?

Who, prior to Boswell's drawing, claims to have seen anything remotely similar to the lateral xray showing the Frontal Bone and the front of the parietal missing?

Now.. Look at the overlay of Boswell's drawing and the image showing the top of his head split open.. eerie how similar it is, no?

Now the covered back of the head as opposed to Boswell's 1997 drawing showing virtually all of the top of the head over to the left side of the skull missing.

I drew in the laceration line to illustrate that MAYBE scalp was more intact than we thought and was indeed avulsed outward and over to his anatomical left...

That for the sake of misleading history, the scalp was pulled across this rear head wound to, or placed on top of this rear head wound to give the impression the shot exited the front.

Bob... these images are after Humes obliterates the wounds using a saw across the forhead and as testified to, a hammer-like tool to break up the skull...

Please reread my posts about the craniotomy and how it it performed...

Can you please also remember that the brain stem was cut thru, rntirely, so that after 8pm the brain, which showed no damage to the left side, the skull, no damage to the left side, was cleanly separated from the anatomy whcih holds it in place... I posted those images too... the ones taken from the autopsy evidence as offered... and applied to the anatomy of a head... earlier in this thread...

And finally I will post this yet again... where from parkland are there any similarities to the lateral xray, to the photo above swhoing an open skull , not in the occipial but temporal-parietal...

I asked Mr Tame who is sure they are forgeries to post the evidence he feels supports that conclusion... the offer is open to you as well... NOT your impressions of the photos

You remember Dr Ebersole... Have you read the 26 page HSCA deposition of this amazingly self-important man who sees sutured lips, makes up medical terms, and was at the and then compared that to the actual xray technicians (Custer & Reed)) doing the work? Maybe check the chain of command as well - who tells Ebersole what needs "taking care of" ?

Dr. BADEN. You took the head, chest, abdomen, extremities?
Dr. EBERSOLE. The order was skull first, then chest, the trunk.
Dr. BADEN. I see. When Colonel Finck came in these had already been taken?
Dr. EBERSOLE. Yes, and repeated once.
Dr. BADEN. Now when you say repeated, were X rays repeated after the autopsy had started? Do you have an independent recollection of that?
Dr. EBERSOLE. The second group of X rays were taken either before the incision was made or very shortly thereafter.

Q: Do you see the portion in line seven and eight, where he (Ebersole) refers to carrying the cassettes containing the X-rays?

REED: That’s - Yes.

Q: Did he do that?

A: No.

Q: Are you certain that he didn’t do that?

A: I’m 110 percent certain that he did not do that.

Q: And the reason that you’re certain that he did not do it is because… ?

A: I did it. Four flights of stairs, running four floors And I was 20 years old.

I was in great shape. I don’t think Dr. Ebersole could have crawled up those steps as many times as we did, and carry the cassettes. Four or five at a time at a time - at the end, you know.

Q: Did you, at any time, hear any Secret Service agents make requests with respect to taking X-rays?

A: No.

Bob... I am literally thru dealing with those who only want to give us their IMPRESSIONS of what THEY see, as opposed to any evidence to support these conclusions...

"JUST LOOK AT IT" is not evidence...

64th generation internet images are NOT "original Autopsy materials" by any stretch...

I've never been to Mt Everest... but there are those who have and say that it does indeed exist... there are photos of it available...

But I still have never been there to see for myself... I have to trust those who have...

Have you been to the metaphorical mountain to know first hand what's up?

the two men on the overpass were Foster and JC White both of whom drew a diagram of where they were... Both of their testimonies places them at the North East in the RR yard or by the TSBD afterward.

White is the man who stated his view was blocked by a train passing over the the overpass at the time of the shots, as he was on the west side of the overpass... which we all know did not happen.

Mr. BALL. Did you see the President's car come into sight?
Mr. WHITE. No, sir; first time I saw it it has passed, passed under the triple underpass.
Mr. BALL. You were too far away to see it, were you?
Mr. WHITE. There was a freight train traveling. There was a train passing between the location I was standing and the area from which the procession was traveling, and-a big long freight train, and I did not see it.

Yet in his drawing he places himself on the EAST side of the overpass....

Mr. WHITE. As soon as the train passed I went over and on the northwest side of the Depository Building. On the northwest side of the book store up there with the rest of the officers and after about 30 minutes they told me to go out and work traffic at Main and Houston, and I stood out there and worked traffic.

Looks to me that in Dillard versus Cancellare there is someone in the exact spot White says he was - and directly above Tague, on the east side... and is gone soon afterward.

FWIW

DJ

Edit - not sure what it looked like that day - there are a few images that do appear as if there was nothing to stop someone from coming down the WEST side of the overpass and back under the overpass...

DJ

I posted a simple request which evidently got deleted ??

Mr. Tame... can you post any evidence that justifies your conclusion that the following photos and xrays are forgeries... and/or how, when and where it was done ?

In many respects it is not what the documents say, as much as what they don't say...

The blanks and the reading between the lines has led to discovery that the documents in most cases are the first and front line of the deception.

The concepts of knowledge and truth are very ellusive...

In our world, Truth is what has been sold and accepted - even in the face of overwhelming evidence...

We will still hear how Bin Laden was the cause of 911, thought the FBI never charged him with it due to lack of evdience

or that "Saddam was involved in 911" is still considered TRUTH despite it all...

What do the school books in the UK say about JFK, RFK, MLK, Iraq, etc.... as opposed to the school books in Russia, China, Korea, etc....

TRUTH may be absolute... KNOWLEDGE... not so much.

my .02

DJ

To be fair, that thread is 3 years old and well before I spent a year discussing and analyzing the evidence with John...

Thanks for the "emphasis" Tommy... curious though - when do you bring anything of your own to the table? or are you just a critic of other's work with little if anything to add yourself?

Those that can't do, coach... those that can't coach become critics.

=========

Bernie... appreciate the graciousness... yet to Tommy's beleaguered point... much of the evidence from the FBI/WCR was altered or changed to fit the circumstance

(Dulles's editing of Cadigan's WC testimony about there being 400 items at the FBI lab over the weekend for example becoming, in the final printing, a "fingerprint" problem... shown below)

When the direct testimony of an FBI expert can be DELETED and his testimony written for him, what does that do to the credibility of all the other "evidence" offered by these men?

At some point though David i would like to hear your take on the Mcwatters 'escape' scenario

To be honest Bernie my analysis/understanding of what occurs after the shots are fired is still evolving...

Could you point me to the passage of information you are talking about....

From what I remember, Greg Parker and friends did a great job proving Oswald was not on that bus.... which makes sense to me.

Especially if the outburst over the Rambler happened. In my mind, "Keep Ruth out of this" meant just the opposite, but the Paines were treated with such kid gloves... IDK.

My own feeling is that it was LEE who shot Tippit as part of the plan with Ruby... what I find interesting is the lack of fear Ruby & the conspirators on the ground had with Oswald in custody...

If he was actually in the know... he nevers indicates it other than the "Patsy" comment - which in itself suggests a suspected plan... "I'm innocent" is the cry of a truly innocent man.

Bernie, I can't stress enough that this is not about being an Armstrong disciple.... his work and vast collection of evidence are but doors to be walked thru and discovered...

I do not agree with each and every conclusion be it speculation or not...

I simply had a hard time DISPROVING what the evidence itself suggests while relating it to and corroborating it with other evidence...

If it's all a sham, all a set-up then these discussion and forums have served their red-herring purposes...

The belief I have come to accept is that they didn't get everything thinking that much of it would never see the light of day... that there are needles in the haystack that lead to some unavoidable truths...

either that, or "it's just a dream we dreamed, one afternoon, long ago" -Phil Lesh, Box of Rain

Peace

DJ

• With regards to BJHS... I wonder if you;ve done this analysis?

  The transfer date was 1/13/54.. Each of the school years has a FALL, SPRING and TOTAL

  We have two grade cards from the FALL of the 53-54 school year... yet it states he did not start attending until January 13, 1954.

  On one card there is 1 absence, the other has 2 for that same time period.... According to this article from NYC the school year was starting on Sept 14, 1953..

  and ending June 29th.

  Would this be the same for NOLA? I was unable to find the dates for NOLA, yet we can make an assupmtion and see where that takes us....

  We agree that this child attended all of the SPRING semester... total possible attendance 90 days, as you posted...

  90 days prior to June 29th is February 23rd... so, ok... subtract for a few holidays (7 for spring break is now Feb 15th, and a few single day holidays)

  We are now at Tuesday, Feb 9th as the START of the spring semester. which may make sense since LEE starts on Jan 13, 1954... attends the end of the FALL semester in PE and Science, and gets two 70's.

  90 days prior to Feb 9 is Oct 6th... remove Xmas holiday and Thanksgiving plus a few single day holidays and we are at Sept 16th... very reasonable starting date given what was written about NYC schools...

I don't understand. Let's just stay with the Beaureguard records for now and allow me to return on the other parts later.

I honestly don't know what point you're trying to make. Other than mine! He started, as you have correctly stated, on the 13th January a full month before the start of the spring semester. So as well as his 90 days minus four absences for the Spring semester he also has an attendance record for the fall semester too. And in the only month he attended of that fall semester, that is early January to early February, he took one day off!

We have two grade cards from the FALL of the 53-54 school year... yet it states he did not start attending until January 13, 1954.

Yes that's right, he attended the last 4 weeks of the Fall semester. So he has grades and absences in the Fall and in the Spring. You actually then go on to explain this...

We are now at Tuesday, Feb 9th as the START of the spring semester. which may make sense since LEE starts on Jan 13, 1954... attends the end of the FALL semester

Nothing in the Beareguard record implies he started before the 13th January 1954. Nothing.

As I said Bernie... the records were falsified so they work...no real big mystery there... but you stop short of the entire CONFLICT section of the post...

BJHS is not an island.. it interconnects with a bunch of other evidence from that exact time period, to dismiss that and try to reconcile it on its own is the same as looking at three cartridges on the floor and calling it a day.

During the SPRING SEMESTER of 1954 he is living at both 126 Exchange and 1454 St Mary's... he is both loud and large at Lillians as well as small and quiet on Exchange...

I really recommend that you read Myrtle Evans' testimony to see how she describes LEE and MO... Lillian Murret's as well...

Maybe also watch the DeRouse interview...

=====

We needn't agree Bernie... it was I who lead us down the analytical path regarding the days of the school year that evidence represents... you didn't take us there Bernie... you didn't use it as an agument against me... all it took was a 53-54 calendar, an article about the NYC school year and some counting...

I COULD BE WRONG about the NOLA school year... the info I posted was for NYC, no NOLA... So how about doing some work and telling us when the NOLA school year actually started, actually ended and match that to the BJHS records... develop an argument on your own and defend it... I think that's fair, don't you?

Instead, I did that and freely admit that the BJHS evidence is not necessarily indicative of a conflict, but it is not exactly complete now is it, as I just said regarding the NYC school year.... what follows does show conflict though... if, by law there are at least 180 days in the school year (which we DO have evidence for)... the 54-55 records are in conflict stating there were only 168. Add further that 12 days absent is not shown on a single grade card... not one Bernie.. where does "12" come from?

It's as if the 12 and 168 are there just to add to 180....

why do you suppose the information from those 54-55 grade cards is not accurately represented in the final record of one Oswald, Lee from 807 French St?

=====

I will add one more thing to this - Louise Robertson, a maid hired by MO while living in NYC made a statement to the FBI... you aware of that... and those implications?

I would appreciate you not thinking I am goading you on about the evidence and lack of time or effort to uncover the information on your own. It is not just talk when I say that the volume of information is monumental.. yet you dismiss it as unnecceary time and effort... which is your right, but please don't expect to be taken seriously when everyone else is doing your work... and you proudly proclaim your desire NOT to look for yourself... not to follow-up yourself...

To me, and many others, it appears lazy and provides baseless, argumentative, chatter from a partially informed pundunt... rather than someone debating with facts culled from their own analysis and follow-thru.

DJ

So let me get this right,

<snip>

Thanks for responding...

Best,

Bernie

You're welcome Bernie... in terms of getting it right... I don't think you've mirrored what I said:

The NYC school records in the WCR Exhibits shows Lee as 5'4" and 115lbs..

The photo I posted was to show you that over 18 months later the boy is no where near 5'4" tall, nor is he strapping or large...

The boy on the right, Lee, was...

You kept asking how they would know these boys would turn out looking so similar...

As I posted, the realization came to me that they didn't... that the pairing of these two happens in the Marines, while they are in the hands of their government...

Whoever HARVEY was... he had his own history, the people who saw one then the other years later were amazed at the tranformation, bot Lee and his mother... her own sister, his own brother

With regards to BJHS... I wonder if you;ve done this analysis?

The transfer date was 1/13/54.. Each of the school years has a FALL, SPRING and TOTAL

We have two grade cards from the FALL of the 53-54 school year... yet it states he did not start attending until January 13, 1954.

On one card there is 1 absence, the other has 2 for that same time period.... According to this article from NYC the school year was starting on Sept 14, 1953..

and ending June 29th.

Would this be the same for NOLA? I was unable to find the dates for NOLA, yet we can make an assupmtion and see where that takes us....

We agree that this child attended all of the SPRING semester... total possible attendance 90 days, as you posted...

90 days prior to June 29th is February 23rd... so, ok... subtract for a few holidays (7 for spring break is now Feb 15th, and a few single day holidays)

We are now at Tuesday, Feb 9th as the START of the spring semester. which may make sense since LEE starts on Jan 13, 1954... attends the end of the FALL semester in PE and Science, and gets two 70's.

90 days prior to Feb 9 is Oct 6th... remove Xmas holiday and Thanksgiving plus a few single day holidays and we are at Sept 16th... very reasonable starting date given what was written about NYC schools...

With a few exceptions...

1) 809 French street (changed from 757 French by the city) was Lillian Murrat's place, Margeurite's sister.

In February 1954, LEE and Mother lived on French street... and then moved to 1454 St. Mary's - Marge's friend Myrtle Evans' multi-room house she was renting to all sorts of people.

(for some amazing testimony please read Mr and Mrs Evans' account of the LOUD and boisterous LEE as compared to the descriptions of HARVEY at the time)

On problem... HARVEY and his caretaker were living at 126 Exchange at the same time.... which was confirmed by Myra DeRouse, Dorothy Duvik and Ed Voebel...

and this photo of MO on the left from the National Archives taken at 126 Exchange states on the back: "NO, La, 1954"

the photo on the right is also taken at 126 Exchange but in 1956 and is of the real MO.

On February 19, 1954 the tall, nice-looking Marguerite Oswald began working

at Burt's Shoe Store at 1117 Canal Street, and listed her address as 1454 St. Marys Street

Voebel further stated that he first met Oswald in 1954 or

1955 and knew him for about 1.5 years. Voebel stated that he

took music lessons at Werleins on Canal Street and would go to

Oswalds home at 126 Exchange Place to see Oswald on these dates.

Ed Voebel was one of the few people in this history who became aware of the two different boys... as you can see... there is some evidence that a person calling himself HARVEY Oswald was seperate and ditinct from LEE...

In my working backwards scenario, this DOES NOT ACCOUNT for them being manipulated during that time... so as I've always said, knowing the extent ot hese plans and the plans of say, Angleton, is beyond my comprehension..

The evidence offered to assist in the conviction of Oswald focuses very heavily on timeperiods which exhibit conflict... why should we care about Oswald in 7th grade? Was Sihan's life, or James Earl Ray's picked apart in the same manner and depth? Not even close... so I have to ask you... what was the point of this in-depth, in-detail analysis of Oswald's Junior High & High School days in Ft Worth, NOLA and NYC which in turn brought us to his military days which also are filled with conflict....

2) Myra DeRouse and the entire SPRING of 54 semester, she is not in contact with LEE, but Harvey... and his "mother" who was supposedly workin at a bar in the Quarter at the same time LEE's mother is working at BURT SHOES.

3) When we move forward to 54-55 grade cards... we find they do not match the Cumulative record at all regarding the dates of attendence...

Furthermore... there are 180 days AT LEAST, in a school year... 12 + 168 is 180... suggesting that these days are added together to come to a total for the year, NOT that 168 was the total number of days in the year... but only those he attended... does that matter in relation to 53-54... should there be some consistencey there... ? I guess that's up to how you interpret it...

Bernie... my job is not to convince you of anything... but to get you to look at the evidence yourself... and let you correlate it yourself - don't take my word or anyone else's...

If you feel there are reasonable explanations for it all... so be it.

If you feel you are the H&L cop for the forum and its your duty to dispell what was offered, reading the book and scanning the support documents might be in your best interest...

I did not live the 10+ years Armstrong did researching and compiling this info... I only spent the last year digging into it, finding conflict after conflict with the evidence the FBI and USMilitary provided....

When we look at all the other places the FBI, Military and WCR offers evidence which is easily proven to be inauthentic, created, altered and/or completely misleading

AND one of the lead lawyers expresses his concern over the inaccuracy or the FBI and SS reports, only to be shut down... one has the gut feeling that something our of the ordinary was up...

I tend to lean toward an organzied effort NOT to allow us to understand the true history of the man Ruby killed... that may change in time as I continue to search and uncover... and as our government releases documents related to a LONE NUT/No-Conspiracy that were classified for 75 years for SOME reason...

I'm more than willing to be 100% wrong... yet until you address the totality of the evidence which pieces together the lies and deceit in order to rewrite history... MY POV will continue to be that there is something there with H&L... and that it is more important than we understand...

Beyond that all I can do is wish you luck in your understanding and your research efforts to explain that tragic event.

Peace

DJ