David Josephs

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? 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

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

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

Nice to see you finally concede that the so called post 8:00 witnesses (Siebert & O'Neill) describe the same wound as Parkland. You are a moron... post an official autopsy photo/xray of the hole in the back of his head... as described by most everyone prior to Boswell.... That you can't figure out the context of the FBI's report and what Hoover was doing to his men and the USA is painfully obvious... Talking to you Scott is like discussing it with a 5 year old. Actually, I know 5 year olds who you can't hold a candle to... please go back to sleep or to whatever it is you do when not trolling on this forum... ============ Ray, he's all yours... but try to remember You can't fix stupid.

Bernie... I'd be glad to let the anomousity drop... as to how and why these two were chosen and when I would like to offer this thought - Did they choose H&L much later in the equation (around the time they entered the marines - whatever the "plan" was) since he looked like LEE and was going to be used for some "operation", and then go back to recreate his history with his caretaker providing the images of the younger HARVEY, which are virtually all blurry and/or hard to make out... as opposed to trying to find children that looked alike? There are woefully few photos of HARVEY between the ages of 13 and 17... by 18 they did indeed look alike.. but we'll get to that discussion later.... at 12 and 13 I do not think these two look the same, nor do I think their size is the same... so in answer to your question... they were not chosen so they would look the same years later, they were chosen cause they looked the same IN 1956/57 and their histories were merged into one so that HARVEY and/or LEE would become an untraceable asset... Bernie - to be brutally honest, that thought occurred to me as I was typing this post... the quesion you asked is the problem with the mindset and analysis, not the evidence of H&L... they worked BACKWARD from two men who looked similar enough to fool whoever may have looked closely, as opposed to forward from 1952. DJ So let's take it a little at a time... The beginning of this journey is the Summer of 1952 after LEE graduates 6th grade and moves to NYC with his mother... Mr. JENNER - When next did you see your mother or Lee or Robert? Mr. PIC - August 1952, sir. Mr. JENNER - I hand you John Pic Exhibits Nos. 57 and 58. I don't know which depicts this young man at the younger age. Take the younger one. Mr. PIC - Exhibit No. 57, sir, I believe was taken either in late 1951 or early 1952, and it shows a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald approximately how he looked when he came to New York to stay with my wife and I in August of 1952 http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0073b.htm (the photo is a very small piece of the exhibit) So here is LEE anywhere from 1 year and 8 months BEFORE the Bronx zoo photo (early 1952) to even longer before... but appears to be his 6th grade photo, which in many school districts is taken during the first semester of the school year... so Fall 1951... (note: Bronx zoo photo supposedly from summer 1953) You've read John Pic's testimony... he is shown a large number of images of his brother and repeatedly picks LEE from HARVEY... The first image he says is not LEE is the Bronx Zoo photo... Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that? Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City? Mr. PIC - No, sir. Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 284 do you recognize anybody in that picture that appears to be Lee Oswald? Mr. PIC - No, sir. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0413b.htm In 6th grade, on the right in my composite, LEE is 5'4" and 115lbs (we have those records too if you need) and Yes, I did go as far as to find out the heights of the guardrails at the Bronx zoo the photo was taken by Robert Oswald: Mr. OSWALD. This was July or August of 1953. I had my orders to go to Miami, Fla. I took a 10-day leave and left Millington, Tenn., by car and came to New York City and spent 10 days in New York with Lee, mother, John, and his family. <snip> Mr. JENNER. Referring to the 10-day leave in New York City, did you spend time with your brother Lee? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir (Jenner) Do you remember any of the places at which you took snapshots of Lee during this 10-day leave? Mr. OSWALD. The Bronx Zoo I believe was about the only time I can recall taking any pictures of him. So is it fair to say this photo was taken in the Summer of 1953 AFTER he has graduated from a Ft Worth elementary school and in NYC? Is it also fair to say that the WCR informs us that these are the same people? Is there evidence available that contradicts the size of LEE in NYC as not being a LARGE, 5'4" 115lb soon to be 13 year old leader in his class and sometime bully... but being a very small, undernourished looking boy? Do these boys look "identical" to you? Can we agree this is the place to start our discussion of how "identical" these boys are... DJ

Mr. SPECTER. What did you observe as to President Kennedy's condition on arrival at the hospital? Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing Mr. SPECTER - You saw the condition of his what? Miss BOWRON - The back of his head. Mr. SPECTER - And what was that condition? Miss BOWRON - Well, it was very bad---you know. Mr. SPECTER - How many holes did you see? Miss BOWRON - I just saw one large hole. Yup... nothing gets past you Sherlock.... have you found a single photo or xray that looks like what McClellend or Sibert, or O'Neill, or anyone else other than Boswell drew? If that's what the FBI saw... why is there no evidence from that Autopsy that remotely looks like that? (You remember, the entire POINT of the discussion) While what we do have in the way of photos, xrays and autopsy report is Temporal-parietal... Wussamader Scott, Ray have enough and you got noone to play with.... pretty pathetic bringing so much attention to your insightful analysis of the medical evidence while never once actually posting an image which comes FROM the evidence to back you up... But hey, whatever allows you to show off all that research and analysis you've done..

Bob... still trying to understand how we would know by sight, what the exact size of CE399 was before it was fired... And if there are tolerances of 1/1000th of a inch ..... Well, you've known my point all along... That rifle was not Oswald's, it was planted after firing those cartridges found on the 6th floor CE399 was never in Dallas Oswald was not at the window That rifle was probably not even fired that day... So how do the measurements of these items relate to each other... other than to continue to suggest what we have already proven ....? With information/measurements we can never be completely sure about... WE ALL know that the C2766 was a POS, thescope was off, it was supposedly assembled 5 minutes before it was shot, no alignment shots were fired, three men 10 feet from the muzzle can hear the working of the bolt and the drop of the shells, 3 times! - and it's a stretch to believe C2766 nor CE399 were not involved in any way... ?? I'm with you... though... Frazier and the FBI were playing a shell game... DJ

What may be of some importance here is to step back off of Armstrong & me, and just consider the evidence. John is human and of course speculated based on the information he uncovered both in the evidence and that which was never followed up by anyone.. as well as evidence not included in the book but in thousands of pages of notebooks compiled during his research for the book Without John we do not know of Frank Kudlaty and the FBI coming to Stripling the morning of 11/23 to take records of young Oswald from a location he never "officially" attended. So I ask myself - what is so important to Hoover that less than 8 hours after his being charged for the murder of JFK, FBI agents are at a school across the street from where Marguerite is living at the time... to retrieve records for the fall of 1954... 9 years prior.... what "evidence" is to be found to assist in finding Oswald guilty of a murder in Dallas 9 years later? What occurs between the summer of 1952 and 1956 ? What does this evidence which the FBI acquired, copied and submitted (with originals no longer available) as evidence, say? Well, it tells the story of attendance at a school in NYC while also telling of a Truant child remanded to Youth house... with three different versions of a "permanent NYC school record" none of which correctly adding up to the right number of days in a school year.... It tells of a child attending PS44 for 105 3/2 and missing 15 3/2 days, a total of 129 and 6 half days... from 3/23/53 thru early June 1963. Think about that... there are 180 or so school days in a year, yet the records offer 129 in less than a single semester... at EXACTLY the same time he goes from the tallest 5'4" 115lb 6th grade kid to a 4'9" scrawny child with sever mental problems.... truancy, not saluting the flag, etc.... Other WCR records tell of Oswald spending from April 23 thru May 7 at Youth house... CE2224 with no record or interruption in his PS44 attendance... ... what is not said is that there were/are THREE PS44's in NYC... Manhattan, Bronx and Queens. So until one takes the time to reconcile these dates and these records... attacking John or me for focusing attention on these records is directly akin to shooting the messenger... rather than addressing the message. CE1384 is but one of a number of NYC school record copies... here they are side by side: ce1384 on the right and the other versions not at all matching... So before condemnation of the man, how about analysis of the evidence offered and provide your own explanations.... This is but the tip of a huge iceberg... The FBI created a story about LHO... they created stories about all sorts of things which we came to find were fraudulent... Norman Redlich caught them, and said so on 4/27/64.... and it fell on deaf ears... The evidence of HARVEY and family being Hungarian Communists is not extensive at all... it relies on a letter and followup interview of a woman claiming to have known HARVEY's father and uncle in NYC. Is it rock solid? not by any means, imo... so let's put that on the back burner - please - and just look at what the FBI offered as evidence of Oswald's locations and activities starting in the summer of 1952... It has been and always will be about the Evidence... the evidence betrays the conspiracy and cover-up, as we know.... If anyone else has spent the time I have in detailed analysis and mapping of this information, please offer up your expertise... I don't have all the answers, but I do have a very in-depth knowledge of the EVIDENCE from which the book was written... DSL asking why there is no medical evidence in H&L is the same as asking him why there is no H&L in Best Evidence... because it was not the focus of the book... I have not worked my way to the Tippit murder yet via H&L.. John has his ideas based his knowledge of the evidence.. but I do know that those who saw this man who looked like Oswald described him very differently than the man arrested.... yet the evidence gets so much more unavailable as we get closer to the event... When you've completed an analysis of 1952 thru the return from Russia as offered and available, you can come to your own conclusions. When you look at CE1961 and then what Felde says in ce1962 which contradicts where and when Oswald was where the RECORDS says he was... along with half dozen other men never questioned... there is reconciliation to be done.... http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0415a.htm%C2'> Baylor has over 1000 folders with evidence in them... the CD with the book has hundreds of images... It would nice, instead of lynching our own, that we take the time to learn the material, or allow those who do know it to offer their understanding while pointing to it... I do not post my opinions unless I preface it with IMO, or some other indicator that I am not presenting facts... When I present facts/evidence, I go out of my way to provide the source for it.... or an image of it. The time has come to stop attacking John, or Jim H or me over H&L and do the homework.... this is not one isolated misinterpretation... H&L evidence runs rampant for over 10 years from 1952 thru 1963... and the evidence is almost all in the WCR FBI submitted records.... or those actions of the FBI which appear suspect given an "innocent" government's activities to find its president's killer. If you can dismiss all of this evidence - so be it... John nor I have hinged our lives on anyone "getting" it.... Unlike so many others whose lives, income and reputations are built on there not being an H&L in the records Peace DJ

Hi B.A... nice to see you. The following is a composite of all the physical evidence related to Seaport's receiving, processing and shipping of the order, supposedly from January 1963 and not shipped until the same day the rifle is shipped. Mr. BALL. I hand you a document which has been marked Commission Exhibit No. 135. (the mail order coupon) Will you examine that and tell me whether or not you ever saw that before? Mr. MICHAELIS. I saw it the first time on November the 30th. Mr. BALL. The first time? Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. And where did you find that? Where was it when you saw it on November 30? Mr. MICHAELIS. It was attached to our invoice No. 5371, in the records, the red copy. Mr. BALL. Now, this particular mail order, did you have anything to do with filling that order? Mr. MICHAELIS. No Mr. BALL. And it shows deposit, $10. Balance c.o.d., $19.95. What is the significance of that? Mr. MICHAELIS. We received, together with the order, the amount of $10 in cash. Since the sales price is $29.95, the merchandise was shipped with a c.o.d for the balance of $19.95 Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; Mr. Rose usually opens the mail and distributes the mail. This particular order would have gone to the person in charge at that time of the Seaport Traders, who was Emma Vaughn. Mr. BALL. Who? Mr. MICHAELIS. Emma Vaughn, V-a-u-g-h-n. Mr. BALL. Then what would have happened? Mr. MICHAELIS. She would have processed the order in writing up invoice No. 5371. After 1 week she gave out the order to the order filler and packer At the very latest this coupon is dated 1/27/63... (enlargement bottom right) The invoice date is 3/13/63.... Mr. BALL. It is given a No. DL-29. Will you describe it, please? (Exhibit #4) Mr. MICHAELIS. Yes; that is a copy of the receipt which we got from the Railway Express Agency showing that on March 20, 1963, one carton with a pistol was shipped to A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Tex. It shows, furthermore, that Railway Express is instructed to collect a c.o.d. fee of $19.95. And it shows furthermore the number of the original receipt, which is 70638. ... Mr. BALL. Does it identify the invoice in any way? Mr. MICHAELIS. No. .... Mr. MICHAELIS. This document is required in addition by the Railway Express Agency for all c.o.d. shipments, and indicates again the name of the consignee, his address, and lists our invoice number which is, in this case, No. 5371. It directs the Railway Express Agency to remit the amount to be collected to Seaport Traders, Inc. The amount of the c.o.d. is $19.95, and the service charge has to be collected from the consignee. Mr. BALL. I would like to have that marked as Exhibit 5. Mr. BALL. Is there anything in your files which shows that the Railway Express did remit to you the $19.95? Mr. MICHAELIS. The fact that the exhibit number--may I see this green one? Mr. BALL. Five. Mr. MICHAELIS. Was attached to the red copy of the invoice. Mr. BALL. Red copy of the invoice being---- Mr. MICHAELIS. No; was attached to the red copy of the invoice, exhibit number---- Mr. BALL. Two. Mr. MICHAELIS. Indicates that the money was received. The sequence then is 1) Seaport receives the coupon dated as late as 1/27/63 with a $10 CASH deposit - no envelope ala Kleins is offered and no record of a $10 deposit related to that order is offered 2) Invoice 5371 is created on 3/13/63, 7 weeks after the date on the coupon 3) The order is packed and prepared for Railway - Exh #5 - 4) Railway provides Exh #4 back to Seaport completing the transactions with a promise to submit the $19.95 to Seaport and to keep the $1.27 Shipping charge 5) Proof of delivery and payment is, according to Michaelis, strictly that one receipt is attached to another - there is no record of the $21.22 paid to retrieve the shipment for the COD, and since the mailing address is a PO Box... REA notifies the consignee that they have a package to pick-up and pay for.... 6) There remains no record of a notice, no record of a pick-up, no record of a payment, no record or REA sending Seaport payment, no record of REA collecting its COD charge.... While this evidence is easily available within the WCR exhibits, Gil took the necessary additional steps to quantify the charade.... he notes that the order on the coupon was for a $29.95 .38 St. W 2" Bbl yet the documentation shows they prepared a a different pistol - exactly like the Rifle order - as opposed to the one ordered.... a pistol that remarkably is listed on the order form a few rows up, and is the pistol of choice at the side of virtually every Dallas Policeman, a .38 Special 2" Commando. And. much like the Rifle, there is no record of ammunition every being purchased... while the ammo taken from him oddly appears as if taken from a leather gunbelt like those worn by police officers.... Like the rifle, the FBI created the necessary evidence - but only up to a point - never actually believing any of this would see the light of day... an open and shut case... I hope this helps B.A. Take care DJ http://www.giljesus.com/Tippit/handgun.htm If a shipment of a firearm was to a Post Office Box, REA's procedure was to leave a notice in the form of a postcard, notifying the addressee where to pick the package up and of any outstanding charges .... In fact NO ONE FROM RAILWAY EXPRESS AGENCY was ever called to testify about the sale of the handgun.

If you want to have a deep theological discussion with a priest you might want to at least brush up on the facts in THE BOOK. I don't need a theologocal discussion to teach me how it is possible for a dead man to raise himself three days later and physically ascend into the stratosphere. No expert will tell me that this is a book I can find any scientific reality from. Just because a priest may know the bible inside out doesn't therefore make it factually correct does it? Clearly you see yourself a 'priest' on this matter - and Harvey and Lee is your bible. And I? Just a miserable sinner... Make as many ASSumptions you want Bernie... that you don't understand the analogy is obvious. I'm sure I can find hundreds of examples where your "christian behavior" does not jive with what that book which provides you the rules, offers. WHAT?As you can probably tell from the above quote, I am not a Christian. Wow, that just sailed blithely over your head didn't it? How can I put this in simpler words? The world is round. We are agreed on that surely? So would you read a 1,000 page book by the Flat Earth Society? No, of course you wouldn't. The very idea is too preposterous to invest the time required to read it. Unless I come across a forum/essay/article etc... with some convincing arguments that entices me to believe that something isn't quite what it seems, yes of course, then I would want to read the book. So far I (and many others) have seen nothing that would justify such an investment. It does become a tad nauseating for you to simply insist it is only true if you read the whole book. And yet again the analogy is lost to you.... you believe in "X"... that you haven't read the basis for "X" and think you know what it is really about thru osmosis is of no matter... "So can someone in the H/L cult please explain this?" Please look up the word - rhetorical. Did you honestly believe I expected an explanation even though the whole drift of my posts (and so far, your responses) are...that there isn't one! You present a case and then ask for an explanation - and now claim it was a rhetorical question... my mistake for taking anything you post seriously... wont happen again. "come at me with snide BS when I dismiss your lack of manners to do so anyway" Yes david because you didn't give an explanation as to how the plotters knew that these 13 yr olds would grow through adolescence and emerge as identical adults. What, really, are the chances of that? I did indeed, in your haste to show off your wit and sarcasm you must have missed it... "Bernie... if you want to understand something, insults and attacks will not get it done..." Erm, yes, quite. Show me one insult that compares with your above comment please. Just dismissing your theory for the childish fantasy that it is doesn't count. you've neither read the material or familiarized yourself with any of its sources and proudly proclaim you don't "get" it... I was being kind. People like you don't deserve a platform such as this, and is the main reason he is closing up shop. "What is it that bothers you most about the evidence supporting H&L..." I guess it's the elitist, eclectic and staggeringly haughty way in which it is presented. Other researcher's work is trampled over, or it has to be viewd through that prism in order that it remains consistent with the 'faith'. One of the best posts ever placed on this forum, Sean's amazing work on doorway man, eventually lost steam and impetus when five or six pages were effectively hi-jacked so that this theory could be in some way shoe horned into the procedings. No wonder some of the better researchers don't post on here anymore. They left because of people like you Bernie.... Sean did great work and the ball was picked up by a number of us, myself included... I don't seem to remember YOU adding anything of substance to the discussion. "Is that what the BOOK you don't read, which offers the expectations and rules upon which to live your life as a Christian, tells you about how to approach your fellow man?" I haven't got a clue you are talking about. I think, and this is only a stab, you're saying that I would become a better Christian by reading H&L...? I wrote I don't need to read the full bible to know whether I am a Christian or not It's very interesting that you interpreted it in such a rigid way. I'm not a Christian btw, far from it. Why would I want to invest my soul in a book which I know contains huge dollops of superstition and conflicts with known scientific facts? Eg, dead men don't come back to life and ascend into the sky; the blind don't have their sight returned by touch ; seven fish will not feed a multitude of people; no one can walk on water...and so on. These things I know, from newspaper articles, forums, essays etc... But your logic says I'm not in a position to claim to be a non believer because I haven't read the bible in its entirety. Wow are you self-absorbed.... To be a better Christian, reading the Bible might come in handy... To pass the Bar exam, studying the Law could help... Discussion the H&L evidence, or your opinions about it would be so much better facilitated if you actually KNEW anything about the subject. They are called analogies Bernie... so people who have a hard time following along can get it.... look it up. I would refer people to a great thread from two years ago where Greg Parker ripped the whole Beauregard School nonsense to threads. I recall David you pretty well gave up the ghost and did what all the 'followers' do...You repeatedly changed the subject. I can't find it or I would have provided a link (it's probably shredded now). It taught me enough to know that some of these coincidences can be easily explained away with better research, and also that the integrity of some of H&L proponents have been imported from Fetzerland. At the time we had that discussion I was not nearly as well versed in the subject as I am now... I saw that I needed to be more infomred to respond and defend the evidence... what you fail to understand is that this is about the EVIDENCE and the fact the FBI had in its possession the originals of these records while only forwarding copies of copies. Maybe you can fill us in on why the FBI needed to do a year by year chronology of OSWALD's life to help build a case against him for 11/22? I was curious too, so I read the FBI reports on James Earl Ray... the detail on his early life, his GRADE SCHOOL and JR HIGH school days is virtually non-existant... the FBI report of Dec 9, 1963, which became the basis for the WCR is devoted to the man's entire life, in detail.... Maybe tell us why his JR High school records from NYC, Ft Worth and NOLA were so important, and why they reveal alteration and manipulation... You can't since you haven't a clue what I'm talking about... but you still can have that uniformed opinion and ask cute rhetorical questions... Hey David, I'm just a keen student on this forum. It's up to you to convince with your superior knowledge. There is nothing I can teach you about Harvey and Lee, the book. But I reckon the truth can be found only by reading lots of books, without preconceived ideas, or a desperate neccessity for it to fit an already made conclusion. But you are hooked on this now. No ammount of refutation will change your mind. You are committed for the long haul come what may; you can't go back now. That's not the scientific method. Let's face it, it's barely a method! Bernie, that you don't concentrate when you read is plainly obvious. I spent many, many months compiling the information and reading the source materials... the EVIDENCE you so casually shrug off as unimportant enough to look at yourself... Being informed about something takes work and time... There is much about H&L that I do not agree with, yet there is alot I do simply because I've compiled the information and see the conflicts very easily. I will ask again... what have YOU done to further your understanding H&L other than call me a cultist and approach the subject with a completely closed mind? I'm terribly sorry you are so incredibly lazy and don't have the skills or the time to read a book, to ask some honest questions and discuss the honest answers without attack. Thankfully your opinion is just that... opinion based on you being too proud to learn anything about the material... For you, Doorway man or any future new development concerning Oswald) is approached from the viewpoint of "Where does this fit in with H/L?" Whereas, most researchers, certainly the good ones, are just striving for the truth - wherever that may go. So now you're after the TRUTH... are you Bernie? So what are your TRUTHS here? A frontal shot? Alteration at Bethesda? Falsification of records and testimony? What aspects of the TRUTH related to conspiracy do you hang your hat on... for it seems to me that you have no position, that you offer nothing of your own work, and you act the xxxxx so people will look your way for a second before laughing at the attempts... It is the people like you... and that xxxxx Lamson, who I see is lurking about, who gave Simkin and the rest of us here fits. Pull up stakes and ply your trade where your BS will not be tolerated, instead of here where your easily identified tactics of hijack and annoy work so well... The evidence of FBI tampering of the records is offered in the WCR itself... one simple example is CE1961 and 1962, one following the next, contradicting each other... as does the other men who spent time with HARVEY 1957 5 3 HARVEY with ALLEN FELDE JACKSONVILLE, FL USMC BaseKeesler AFB (Henderson Hall Arlington VA) Biloxi MI Radar School Donald Peter Camarata told the FBI that he first met Lee Oswald when they traveled together on a train from Jacksonville, Florida to Biloxi on May 2. Camarata said that during the time he knew Oswald, "He had no recollection .... of any remarks on his part concerning Communism, Russia, or Cuba. " 24 Edward J. Bandoni and James N. Brereton met Lee Oswald when they traveled together on the train from Jacksonville, Florida to Biloxi on May 2. Neither man was interviewed by the FBI or Warren Commission. Martin Schrand also met Lee Oswald when they travelled together on the train from Jacksonville, Florida on May 2. Lee Oswald and Schrand were assigned to the same unit in the Philippines on January 5, 1958 when Schrand was killed by a shotgun blast while on guard duty.It's self indulgent and i honestly believe is being used as a 'spoiler'... Bernie.. I really could care less about someone who can't even find the time to learn what his opinions are based upon... I started my analysis to prove to myself it was NOT POSSIBLE... that John and the Evidence was wrong... yet that was not the case.... I am sure you have not read thru all the WC Documents... there are quite a few... yet they are the source materials for much of the evidence and conclusions presented in the WCR... and contain evidence that the WC made sure never saw the light of day... Bill Simpich's work stems from a huge number of the HSCA Segregated CIA files found at MFF... one can spend YEARS culling thru the documentation that was never offered as evidence yet contains the MEAT of the operational conspiracy. Mr. Laverick, you simply do not have enough knowledge in any one subject, especially this one, to be qualified to tie my shoes... What I've done is collaborative, with the help of many researchers and authors... those you so sincerely respect here at this forum and elsewhere... and even THEY do not have the balls you have to declare a conclusion one way or another because they too do not have a command of the information as I do. You and the Lamsons of this forum will soon loose their platform... sadly for so many, so will those qualified to offer their work for discussion and review by knowledgable peers. But there are places they can go... I wonder again Bernie... what do YOU bring to the table beyond Tommy's patented rhetorical questions, the inability to have a civilized discussion and the use of Adhom to cause friction... btw, THAT was rhetorical... What you do from here is not my concern... blast away and show 'em all that big brain of yours.... from my vantage point and from the emails I receive you're hoping to be noticed for your baseless opinions while strutting your ignorance proud as a peacock.... You aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know.... and there is so much you obvioulsy have no clue about... bu-bye now!

Tommy, bring your circus over to the DPF... see if anyone puts up with your rhetorical specualtion and lack of presentation skills... no wonder JA has had enough of you people.

You got that right my friend.... Bernie here exemplifies the reason John S. has to shut this place down... Cheers and see you over at DPF DJ

Argumentative and defensive Bernie? That's how you want to have an open discussion about the evidence... so be it. If you want to have a deep theological discussion with a priest you might want to at least brush up on the facts in THE BOOK. I'm sure I can find hundreds of examples where your "christian behavior" does not jive with what that book which provides you the rules, offers.... Loudly proclaiming you don't need to read thoroughly or research what you offer your opinions on is .... well... what would you call it? You don't even seem to have the ability to ask a direct question on the evidence yet you can proclaim it "cultish" and wrong... Did you not post: "So can someone in the H/L cult please explain this?" and then come at me with snide BS when I dismiss your lack of manners to do so anyway.... ? or is your memory of what you wrote that poor? http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21061&page=2#entry285270 Bernie... if you want to understand something, insults and attacks will not get it done... What is it that bothers you most about the evidence supporting H&L... not your interpretation of images... not YOUR anything... what specifically do you disagree with in the Evidence and then go about showing us why it is not correct... All you've done to this point is show you're ignorance and refusal to learn anything more since your mind is made up... while insulting the very thing you can't comprehend.. Is that what the BOOK you don't read, which offers the expectations and rules upon which to live your life as a Christian, tells you about how to approach your fellow man? if so, Please post THAT passage....

First off Bernie.. "cult" is condescending and unnecessary... and then you have the nuts to ask for us to help you understand... maybe a Zig Zegler course might help? anyway... children that look similar at age 11, 12, 13 will generally look similar later in life as well... if you consider a 5'11" 165 man and a 5'8" 135 lb "identical"... which they are obviously not... Those two images are from only a WEEK apart... the passport and other ID photos are a week apart. Maybe you can help us understand how John Pic was able to pick LEE from HARVEY at every age and in every instance... HIS BROTHER Bernie... So what you see and believe is your right.... it simply does not trump the evidence. The rest of your post is just assumption and snide sarcasm No worries Bernie.. You reading the very thing you are condemning would only look academically sound and responsible... 1000 pages and tens of thousands of source docs on the CD are only for people interested in an educated discussion.. You a religious scholar now too? you've read the entire Bible, the Torah and the Koran...? or do you just bash things you have limited knowledge about and hope others don't notice, even after you've proclaimed your ignorance and refusal to do your own investigation? There's a line from a favorite band of mine: You ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know... Interested you can ID holes in theory you barely understand... but please... post a list of your questionable holes and I'll do what I can to help you see the evidence... For at the root of all this is NOT John Armstrong, but the evidence he uncovered... The EVIDENCE shows a Harvey & a Lee to be two separate people existing in two different spaces which were merged to create one Oswald for the WCR and beyond.

Paul, Maybe I'm mistaken, but wasn't "Lee" supposed to have been born in Hungary? (Of course back then all Hungarians had to learn Russian, an Indo-European language quite different from their non-Indo-European Hungarian....) --Tommy No Tommy, that was Harvey. Thanks Dawn. But I've got to ask you something: Why the heck is it so gosh darn important for JFK assassination researchers and / or bloggers to get their stupid facts straight, anyway? Sheez! (Just kidding.) --Tommy Message for Martin Blank: It was "Lee" "Harvey" who was from Russia Hungary. Not entirely accurate... There was info from a woman who claims to have known HARVEY's Father and Uncle in NYC who she claims were from Hungary... There is no info on where the boy that becomes HARVEY was born... you know.. for accuracy sake. From my timeline spreadsheet: 1947 1 27 Mrs Jack Tippit (Westport, CT) tells FBI that HARVEY's father and uncle from Hungary live in NYC Yorkville, NYC 77th & 2nd Ave

Larry - appreciate and respect your position. The photo of Roscoe White in his possession listed as "A friend of Lee's in the Marine's" furthers this point. Paul... I completely understand and was in your position up until about 8 or so months ago when John and I became much more closely acquainted and I began this project to help me see the parallels. if you or anyone would like, I took these last months and compiled an incident-by-incident, page-by-page analysis of H&L and the related Baylor materials in the format of a side by side spreadsheet table... This is a snapshot of that work.... I have yet to see how I can upload a spreadsheet... which is truly the only way to see and work with the info... since it allows search, filter, etc... PM me, or email me your email address and I would gladly send you a locked protected version... I have reached a point at 12:55 on 11/22.... the facts about who Reid sees and who others see leads me to believe LEE was in DP and part of the deception.... I too do not necessarily agree with every sentence in the book, yet one needn't to see what the puzzle's picture looks like. I also have a few issues with JA's post assassination movements of LEE with relation to Tippit... yet I have not expanded on my understanding of that time frame - nor do I think there need be any contradiction in the H&L evidence prior to the assassination, with what is proposed for events that occur afterward... as presented in the book.... The spreadsheet is filled with direct quotes from the book and supporting evidence... I've downloaded scores of his Baylor notebooks and all the cd's images/docs. This summary is imo the easiest way to digest the data and in turn find and review the supporting documentation. I express no personal opinions... I simply put the info in and if unsure, a question mark... DJ 1957 9 12 HOW DOES HARVEY GET FROM MARINES to Antioch? Antoich College College Yellow Springs OH Antioch College MACS1, MAG II, 1st MAW FMF Atsugi JAPAN When interviewed by the HSCA in 1978, Cyr produced his original set of Marine orders from the Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Casual Company, Department of the Pacific, Marine Barracks, United States Naval Station, Treasure Island, San Francisco, California. The list contained the names of seven Marines and their addresses, all of whom had served at Atsugi in Japan and knew Lee Oswald. They were: John E. Bordenkircher (Florida), Richard A. Bullock (Atlantic City, NJ), Russell Burton (Long Island, NY), James A. Groden (Tullahona, TN), Lance lves (Belfair, WA), Richard Korson (North Point, Ml), and Charles Benedict (Newton, MA). NOTE: In July, 2003 JFK researcher Bill Kelley interviewed Richard A. Bullock, who 170 knew Lee Oswald in Japan. Bullock knew him as "Ozzie," and said he was 30-40 pounds heavier and 3-4 inches taller than the man accused of killing President Kennedy.Bullock said the Oswald he knew in Japan was not man accused of killing the President.

Larry.... (this is not a call out, just very interested in your take on the following) only 8 hours after he is officially charged with JFK's death... Hoover has agents wake Kudlaty at 7am to retrieve Oswald's records from STRIPLING JR HIGH... Mr Kudlaty cooperates by quickly reviewing the file... noticing that Oswald was in attendance long enough to have partial grades but not long enough to have finished a term... On Sept 5, 1954, Oswald and MO are at 1454 St. Mary's in New Orleans LA attending Beauregard JHS - according to the WCR school records Stripling JHS is across the street from 2220 Thomas Pl... the home MO retrieves furniture from in 1947.. as well as her residence on Nov 22, 1963. I would just like to understand what explanation is possible for the FBI and Hoover's knowledge that LHO attended Stripling at all in 1954... and why it was so urgent, the morning after the accused is formally charged, that these records are at the top of Hoover's must get list.... followed that next week with interviews of the employees of Pfisterer's related to 1957.... both well before Robert's mention of Stripling or Palmer's mention of Pfisterer's... I urge you to review CE1961... specifically as it transitions from CE1961 (US military record) to CE1962, the report of Allen Felde. Felde is one of a number of names the WCR and beyond ignored and buried and John found, followed and uncovered... and was with HARVEY when Lee was elsewhere. As John and I often discussed.... the evidence offered by the WCR itself proves the existence of these two people.... in the early days following the assassination, what kind of fear or need to cover-up a secret of monumental importance pushed Hoover and then the other branches of government and national security to try and bury the evidence leading to this discovery... So whether there was a huge operation to artificially create the dual history merged to one as a false flag... or the reality of their concurrent existence.... There remains occasion after occasion where the location and actions of one contradict the other.... when this understanding finally reaches the mainstream of Conspiracy realists, and they do the due diligence required to understand... maybe, like that falsification of the autopsy evidence... H&L will be accepted and built upon, rather than snickered at and dismissed.. 1947 Sept 5 Lucille HUBBARD drives MO to a house near Stripling to pick up furnitiure 2220 THOMAS PLACE Oswald's school: Benbrook Common School Grade: 2nd (9/5/47) 1505 8th Ave Fort Worth 2nd Lily B Clayton Elementary (Ft Worth #19) Mrs Florence Murphy: LEE the leader of the 7/8yr olds; Phil Vinson recalls in 1963 article 1959 March 15 HARVEY in the "LIGHTER THAN AIR STATION" at Santa Ana while GRAF tells FBI Ely that the LHO he was with was NEVER at MCAF MACS-9 / MCAF Santa Ana CA MAG-3 El Toro, CA Allen D. Graf was transferred from North Carolina to El Toro, CA in the spring of 1959.21 He told FBI Agent Birl Wilson that he was Oswald's Platoon Sergeant for 6-8 months at Marine Air Control Group 3 (MAG 3) in El Toro. Graf remembers LEE as a VERY GOOD MARKSMAN with a score of 229, NOT 191.... and DISAGREES with the FBI report attributed to him. MACS-9 Santa Ana and MAG-3 El Toro are not the same base but are down the road from one another

The only thing the Zfilm is good for is that it remains the trail of breadcrumbs for how images and math were used to create a false history of the event. The alteration evidence shows in the frames, the speed of the limo versus the suvery legends made from the film itself and in the conclusion of the FBI... I cannot stress enough WCD298 and the completely amazing way they present a third shot at the foot of the stairs, z375 or so. The Zfilm, which was at their disposal and use to determine distances from Mr. Z to JFK himself along with the Survey plat if Mr West with its fraudulent legend... Mr. SPECTER. And what model reproduction, if any, did you make of the scene of the assassination itself? Mr. GAUTHIER. The data, concerning the scene of the assassination, was developed by the Bureau's Exhibits Section, including myself, at the site on December 2, 3, and 4,. of 1963. From this data we built a three-dimensional exhibit, one-quarter of an inch to the foot. It contained the pertinent details of the site, including street lights, catch basin, concrete structures in the area, including buildings, grades, scale models of the cars that comprised the motorcade, consisting of the police lead car, the Presidential car, the followup car, the Lincoln open car that the Vice President was riding in, and the followup car behind the Vice-Presidential car. Mr. GAUTHIER. Commission Exhibit No. 879 is a view of the scale model looking toward the southwest, in the direction of the Triple Underpass, from a position on the sixth floor in the southeast corner window. What the WCR fails to mention or refer to is WCD298 and the significance of the placement of these vehicles.... http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10699&relPageId=1 I did what I could to try and see if there are the same strings representing shots on CE 879 as the image from WCD298.... which reads: POSITIONS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CAR WHEN SHOTS ONE, TWO AND THREE WERE FIRED.. but they are not there. This report, in one simple step renders the information related to the shots in the WCR completely false... and Mr Redlich knew it...: The last paragraph of the PREFACE basically tells us that these models replace the need to go to Dealey Plaza, "to GAIN A FULL AND COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THE HAPPENEING SURROUNDING EACH EVENT." Why this remains an issue, when on Dec 4, 1963 the FBI disproved the validity of the ZFILM.. and then gave these results to the WCR which obviously lost it along the way.... is mind boggling. One simple question to ANY DOUBTER.... What did Gauthier and the FBI use to determine the position of the last shot? DJ "MERELY TO SUBSTANTIATE THE HYPOTHESIS WHICH UNDERLIES THE CONCLUSIONS THAT OSWALD WAS THE SOLE ASSASSIN" omfg! and people like Dunkel and DVP defend this stuff We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to frame 190. We could locate the position on the ground which corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the President prior to this point. 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. <snip> 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.

David... thank you. (you as well Daniel...) While what occurred at Bethesda between 6:40 and 8pm is, in my mind, the essence of the historical fraud... the bigger question remains.... How were 3 Rear Admirals and a 4 star general placed on that path? Was this part of the plan or a phone call like the one that went to AF-1: No conspiracy, Oswald alone... which is then communicated from Sit Room/White House to these military players - "Make it look like on shot from behind and CYA" If one was to look a little more deeply into the relationships JFK had with the key Naval players... and his run-ins with LeMay... the hatred was apparent. ONI, DIA and INS are key players who have offered us very little in the way of evidece. Even if they despised the man, overseeing the wholesale destruction of evidence in favor of a smooth coup flies directly into the face of these fiercely patriotic men.... and if they would cover this up... can you just imagine what else was changed and left to history? Again... thanks David. Your work remains thoroughly inspirational... A question if you don't mind: What if anything do you make of Ebersole's gobbledegook claim of the neck wound being sutured when he first sees him.... Upon removing the body from the coffin, the anterior aspect, the only things noticeable were a small irregular ecumonic area above the super ecolobular ridge and a neatly sutured transverse surgical wound across the low neck.

No, David. There appears to be sections of research you are not aware of. This occurs at 8pm Scott... that's was the entire point. O'Neill and Sibert dropped a casket in the anteroom and were asked to leave... they did not see the body again until they were let in AFTER 8pm... That Sibert claims both Boswell's drawing of the head and his drawing represent the same wound is the hurdle you just can't get over... Read BEST EVIDENCE and read HORNE Volume 4... and then look around a little and READ the evidence... Quoting me, back to me is a cope out.... So far all we've seen from you is air... no substance but alot of blowing around... LEARN the subject before you post about it Scott... your ignorance about the subject matter is obvious... For my friends who have read and followed this travesty of rebuttal from these two... I'm sorry they can't present a case or address any of the questions asked with any honesty... Maybe next time on the next forum.. Cheers DJ