David Josephs

September 23, 2012

The photos are supposedly 11 days apart... September... 1959.

not the same person to me...

Send me a PM and we'll find a way regarding the Book and CD... the content.

DJ

September 23, 2012

“To conclude, what was happening in 1953 has nothing to do with 11/22/63 Bernie... NOBODY makes that leap, which is why you ought to read first and condemn after...”

in response to...

I am presuming that the CIA's interest in this project is solely confined to a 'defection' and not, way back in 1953, looking at a future patsy option for an assassination ten years later!

“In the early 1950's an intelligence operation began that involved two teenage boys--Lee Oswald, from Fort Worth and a Russian speaking boy who was given the name "Harvey Oswald", from New York. In 1952, these boys were brought together in New York City. They lived parallel but separate lives, often in the same city. The ultimate purpose of this operation was to switch their identities and eventually send Russian speaking Harvey Oswald into the Soviet Union. This is exactly what happened, 7 years later, when Harvey participated in a CIA sponsored defection program in 1959.” (Armstrong)

How in 1952 could anyone have known that the facial features of these 'two' individuals would be almost symmetrical seven years later? We already know that phsyically there was, apparently, a huge discrepency at this time, one tall well built and the other like a concentration camp victim, so was the fact they grew through adolescence ending up looking almost identical just an unexpected bonus?

Best regards,

Bernie

My bad Bernie... I misread.

With regards to knowing whatever you think they needed to know in 1952... was it necessary that these two men look so much alike... no Bernie, of course not... the ultimate target would have no idea what the "real" story behind the scene was.... I think that they did wind up looking somewhat alike... and it is only somewhat... no where near as much as you make it sound

Which is why you have very few photos of LEE after 1956..... or why we never see LEE smile...

finally, they were NOT trying to look the same in 1953, agree? They were simply creating a false history, combining histories, and removing one...

I do not live and breath this theory... but it is much more compelling and supported that either two of you try to make it sound...

If you look,... you find out how many people who were asked and who knew Oswald in the SPRING of 1954, were never asked WHEN this person started BJHS...

whether there were any times in 1953 at BJHS that they spent time with Oswald....

Nope, what we get are boilerplate FBI, unsigned statements stating that Oswald was remembered in 1954... and those that DID KNOW HARVEY are never called and whose statements are mysteriously GONE.

Cheers

DJ

September 23, 2012

Your selective cut and paste is yet another con job Greg... nicely done...

It is NOT resolved... far from it...

I make the comparison of the 1/13/54 to the handwritten notation on the HIDELL order by Waldman... it relates to a real rifle, just that the rifle had nothing to do with that order..

You neither quote the section or address it.

So I gather you believe Kleins shipped Oswald a FC weapon in place of the rifle ordered... simply because Waldman hand wrote a serial number of the order...

No need to look at any of the other evidence related tot he rifle... this one piece will do...

That's what you are doing with the BJHS record... while ignorning the testimonies and records from MANY, MANY sources.

and you never bother to address how mangled Lee's "mother"'s testimony about her history is...

That woman confidently and emphatically recalls dates and events that happen for one child and not the other... that happen years out of sequence.... etc...

Yes we know Greg... MISTAKES....

And here I thought I could get away from more of this with you... and I am, I have neither the strength or desire to convince you of anything, I make the case as I understand it... you make yours... anyone willing to do more than armchair QB from the sidelines should actually read the book for themselves.

I will return to my other areas... the FACT, for example... that z132, 133, 134 is a splice and not a stop/start of the camera for one...

http://www.jfkassass...pic,7009.0.html enjoy..

DJ

Same with the records.. This is not Alford telling stories, this is the records of the WCR... your claiming of VICTORY is hollow and insincere... as I believe you are discounting the first indications in 1952/53, of what was happening. and what became of it

Greg...

Fair enough... I know LEE started BJHS on 1/13/54... we both know this Greg.

I am not saying that date does not mean something... it creates reasonability... the records that are missing are HARVEY's...

David,

I'm glad that has been resolved. The document is worthless as evidence regarding the existence of "Harvey".

But that's the problem. The web is infested with claims that this document is proof that "Harvey" was in New Orleans in 1953:

In in the fall of 1953 this Warren Commission exhibit (LEFT-SLIDE 9) shows Lee Oswald attended 62 days of school in the 8th grade at Public School #44 in the Bronx. At the same time this Warren Commission exhibit (RIGHT-SLIDE 9) shows an "Oswald" attended 89 days of school in the 8th grade at Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans. Once again, we have two different sets of school records published in the Warren volumes: Lee in New York, Harvey in New Orleans during the Fall Semester of 1953.

http://www.mindserpe...ong/UMinn99.htm

Next, look once again at the NY school records for PS 44 (look for the last day of LHO's (LEE) attendance--early January, 1954). Now, locate and examine the cumulative record for Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans (WC volumes). Specifically, look at LHO's (HARVEY) attendance in thefall semester of 1953. Now, place these two junior high school records side by side and try to explain how LHO (LEE) can attend PS 44 in the fall of 1953 in New York (near perfect attendance record) and LHO (HARVEY) can also attend Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans in the fall of 1953 (near perfect attendance record). While you're at it, look at the FBI interview of Louise Robertson (Oswald's housekeeper) who said the Oswald's (HARVEY and his caretaker/mother) left New York in the summer of 1953. They moved 1st to Stanley, North Dakota and then to New Orleans, while LEE and his mother remained in New York City until mid-January, 1954
.

http://jfkhistory.co...hp?topic=1961.0

And we see this stuff repeated and repeated and repeated all over the web. The same goes for the now fully discredited McBride recollections. It is a virulent disease and the only way to stop it's spread is by exposing it to the light. It's no different with those who fall for the likes of Alford and her sex fantasies. There is a willful suspension of disbelief whereby whatever comes out of her mouth is regarded as true without any effort at all put into verifying one word of it. And so it is with Armstrong. He waves around the records and tells you what they mean -- and that becomes the Gospel Truth. And even as it dawns on you that McBride and the school records are not what you were told they were -- you are still unable to lance this noli me tangere you call "Harvey" precariously protruding from the rump of our quest for historical accuracy.

Do it, David. Cut this nonsense loose and concentrate on the areas you've shone in - areas where you actually did your own thinking.

September 22, 2012

Greg...

Fair enough... I know LEE started BJHS on 1/13/54... we both know this Greg.

I am not saying that date does not mean something... it creates reasonability... the records that are missing are HARVEY's...

It means the same as Waldman supposedly writing C2766 on HIDELL's order.. it connects to a PART of the story... LEE's start date because LEE was in NYC and moved in January...

Moved in with Lillian and then to St Marys and attended BJHS.... the boy known as HARVEY is on Exchange...

I know you follow but you just dont think it is the correct interpretation... Would you agree that Waldman's C2766, the ONLY THING LINKING the rifle to Hidell to Oswald, is an accurate piece of evidence as to which rifle KLEINS says was "shipped" for that order? Do you believe C2766 was shipped for that order? That Kleins was shipping FC rifles for all of those C20-T750's ordered?

I don't. And I believe that there is enough coroborrated evidence for a smaller boy named Harvey Oswald to have been thru Stanley ND and to BJHS in Sept 1953. A boy different enough from LEE as to cause a number of people to notice - any idea why Pic is able to ID LEE from HARVEY in each and every case? Did Armstrong get to him too?

Finally... would you say you have a handle on everything Gottlieb did? You are privy to know whether Angleton did or did not create numerous programs to influtrate, expose, dangle, or whatever he needed to do to catch communists... ? Is the concept of H&L so beyond the pale given what we KNOW the US and other governments have done?

You want cut and dried here Greg... it's not... just like the shooter(s) in DP... we KNOW shots came from other locations..we KNOW it.... not having a photo of a man firing a weapon does not change this.

H&L does not just "pop up"... it provides a plausible explanation for what amounts to YEARS of deception and planning (if true)...

Is this another thing beyond the capabilities of the CIA... Long term planning?

Could there be other explanations?

Yes Greg... you're explanations for some of the events discussed could be correct... and they could be wrong... That you cannot entertain that possibility, given what you know, is disappointing -

You might as well tell us that Oswald took the rifle in the paper bag into the TSBD, built the Snipers Nest and pulled it off and took the bus and cab home, killed Tippit after teleporting to 10th&Patton by 1:06... against ALL of the evidence to the contrary.

Cause in the end... We really don't know, Do we.

======================

Bernie,

I am presuming that the most impressive facts to back up the Harvey/Lee story are available online and not just guarded exclusively for use in the hard copy book.

No doubt you can look at the stars and pick out constellations... if you want to learn a bit more about the stars themselves you need to get specific.... take a closer look and do some research.

H&L is a theory to explain what was presented as evidence in the WCR... Evidence that repeatedly suggests that two people may have been used to create one history for SOME reason...

What reason? I believe we need to understand J.J. Angleton and all that he did... The CIA and all it did, and the Intelligence structures of the USA to fully comprehend what was happening...

There were a number of "defectors" at this time... one even going to and coming from Russia around the same time as Oswald... Marina even refers to an event in this other man's life when speaking of meeting Oswald... Robert E Webster was the man's name (Man Who Knew Too Much)

Anyway... Rather than sift thru the Baylor raw materials... The book makes its case in one place... the CD that offers many many images of the documents inquestion is invaluable... searching and finding some of these requires time and effort at the archives, let alone if it's even available on-line ... and even then it can be difficult....

Yes of course you can go online and find 1000 puzzle pieces in 100 different places as you try to build your picture... but doesn't it make sense to acquire the 1000 pieces all in the same box with a photo of the completed image on the cover? If you don't want to "make" that picture, fine.... but believing you can see the completed image by looking in places that dont even let you know if that piece belongs to that puzzle, is pure folly

I think you do a disservice to the theory and to the man when you can pull together 20 of 1000 pieces and say you can see how he is wrong...

To conclude, what was happening in 1953 has nothing to do with 11/22/63 Bernie... NOBODY makes that leap, which is why you ought to read first and condemn after...

Wilderness of Mirrors.... is something I am just now getting into... Nexus, by Larry Hancock... currently reading as well...

We were in a do or die fight with the KGB, and there was simply NOTHING not considered.. evidenced by Operation Northwoods....

Developing ASSETS ala H & L does not seem so far fetched...

Cheers

DJ

September 21, 2012

Mike... the core assumption here is that 2 seconds of film... approximately 30 feet at 10mph at 18.3fps... has been removed from the Zfilm.

The MATH is designed to show where and how that WAS accomplished...

By drastically slowing the limo during certain frame sequences (saying a much shorter distance was covered than actually was)

and by switching from JFK in the limo to the front of the limo

Chris (via Tom Purvis) has shown that either:

1) the speeds offered based on the recreation/Zfilm is severely understated and during the ACTUAL MOTORCADE the limo moved much farther during each frame sequence than is offered

which in turn means frames were removed so that the count from Point A to B has much fuwere frames than was actually taken,

We KNOW the limo did not speed up from 3mph to over 20 from 161 to 185... we can see that...

or

2) the limo was slowing considerably from 185 thru 313 to include a stopping or crawling along at less than 3mph... so that Hill catches the limo in 3 steps - not possible at 11mph, sorry.

If the limo slowed enough to add 1-2 seconds that were removed before the "original" was recreated... the math has to account for it.

the LEGEND was never supposed to be published... never supposed to be available to look at... or for at least many years so this type of analysis could not be done.

and then the LEGEND was changed from its original state...

Craig would have you believe this was all very innocent - cause the FBI is known for innocence... when in reality it was desgined to make it impossible to to analyze the ZFILM with any accuracy since the Zfilm was no longer "original"...

To me the first tell tale sign of alteration is the splice from 132 to 133... there should not have been a splice there... and the film does not indicate that the camera started ans stopped at this point. it simply CUTS from one scene to the next... In each of the STOP/STARTS elsewhere on the film, the first few frames l;ook like 001-003...

Mr. LIEBELER - And it proceeded then down Elm Street toward the triple underpass; is that correct?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's correct. I started shooting--when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street.

Sitzman: Yes. Well, he stood up there, and he asked me to come up and stand behind him, 'cause when he takes the pictures looking through the telescopic lens, he might get dizzy, and he wanted me to stand behind him, so in case he got dizzy I could hold onto him. so I got up behind him, and we saw the motorcade turn the corner at Main onto Houston. He hadn't started taking the pictures there then, and we watched them as they came down Houston; and just as the motorcycles that were leading the parade came ... started ... came around the corner and started down the hill, he started taking the pictures then. And there's nothing unusual about it ...

September 21, 2012

Wow, this is really funny. He has not read the book but knows it is all wrong. David you are wasting your time here. You cannot argue with someone who refuses to look at the evidence. You are just banging your head against a wall.

Dawn

Thank you Dawn... At some point, when pointing to the sky and saying it's BLUE, and Mr. B here says it's GREEN... what up?

- it shows that this student took two classes, General Science and PE and got a 70 in each - a passing grade

Yeppers.

- it shows this student attended 89 days and missed 1

Bzzzt! It shows there were a total of 89 school days that semester with one days absense.

Greg, you are simply wrong here...

Maybe you just have no clue how school years work... If a child does not attend, it is impossible to be marked ABSENT..

If a child does not attend, it is impossible to be given a grade...

If a child does not attend, the TOTAL # OF DAYS they go to school for that year is NOT the TOTAL number of days POSSIBLE... but the actual # of days in attendance...

That you state it this ways shows you have no understanding of the records... not the rest of us.

You ask for evidence why the FBI SHOULD ask about Oswald at BJHS in 1953.... because the school records indiacte a LEE OSWALD took 2 classes in the FALL of 1953 GREG.

The RECORDS indicate that this child attended 89 of 90 school days in that semester...

Do you see how they ADD the attendance days and Absence days to come to a total for 1953/54?

There are not 5 TOTAL ABSENCE DAYS in the semester Greg, that is the number of days THIS CHILD was marked absent...

You are simply wrong and cannot see it... sad.

Kind of like the Unit Diary about the trip to Taiwan... The number of enlisted and officers is determined, the personnel on the ship is identified - otherwise why even bother with a Diary?

The records indicate he was in Taiwan and Japan at the same time... the DoD has to make up that he didn't even go... was held back at the last moment...

Yet miraculously he is on the ship BACK from Taiwan to Japan... Miraculously there are witnesses to his guard duty episode in Taiwan... People who remember seeing him in Taiwan...

People the FBI didn't bother finding or speaking to....

I've had enough of you playing DVP for everyone here... You are a man who has seen a alternate version of the Zapruder film... who has helped prove the lies of the FBI over and over... yet you just can't pull yourself away from the hatred of the H&L idea long enough to be objective...

YOU ARE WROING ABOUT YOUR READING OF THE RECORDS AT BJHS... as I asked before... show the record without any discussion to ANYONE... and ask them what they see for the 53/54 school year...

Yes. And with this particular record, you work out the number of days attendance by subtracting total days absent from the total number of school days in that year. You can’t do it for the 53/54, because we don’t know the exact start and end date for the school year, so we can’t tell exactly how many day he missed simply by not having commenced yet. Where you are going wrong is in blindly following Armstrong instead of thinking for yourself. I assume Armstrong was the one who originally mistook the number of school days in the year for the number of days Oswald was present in a semester or a year or whatever the claim is?

This is completely WRONG Greg... you work out the # of days in attendance by counting the days a student attends class... attendance was taken in the morning at every school... you work out the # of days absent by COUNTING THE DAYS A STUDENT IS MARKED ABSENT (btw - did you attend school in the US in the 60's/70's? I did)

You have lost your way here Greg... you need to take a breath, take a step back and look at these records without the HATE for Armstrong and H&L that you bring to each discussion.

ASK SOMEONE ELSE to read the records for you Greg... get a 2nd, 3rd and 4th opinion of what those records show...

Or look at the NYC PS44 records and see the same thing... A student cannot attend 109 days when staring in March...

A student cannot attend both Youth House and PS44 at the same time..

I wont be bothering with discussing this with you anymore... go read the book and then maybe we can talk about this...

September 20, 2012

On 9/20/2012 at 3:49 PM, Craig Lamson said:

On 9/20/2012 at 1:29 PM, Chris Davidson said:

David,

,...since we know that frame 161 is actually surveyed Frame 168...

And we get to the very crux of your mistake. There are no surveyed frames. There are only GUESSES. A recreation is GUESSES piled on top of more GUESSES.

Garbage in, Garbage out. Kind of like this entire thread.

Let me see if we understand your argument Craig.

CE884 http://www.history-m...Vol17_0464b.htm

is a table that offers:

1 - Frame numbers related to the Zapruder film

2 - Station No's (distances) based on where the limo was at different Zapruder frames BASED ON THE RECREATION...

OK, now we're getting somewhere

So they RECREATED the location of the limo based on the Zapruder film, frame by frame, and then did their measurements...

Potentially they placed the car in the wrong place based on the film, so there potentially are errors in the distances and angles from the window to the car and from the car's location to the next -

Craig - would you say these errors were inches, feet or yards at any one specific frame location?

Let's use one frame as a reference to see how far off they could be...

From z161 to z166, CE884 tells us the limo moved .9 ft. How would they determine this?

As Craig says, they RECREATED thelocation by looking at z166, placing the car there, and measuring.

How far off is that .9 ft measurement?

Well... CE888 is a recreation of Frame 161 and gives us a distance of 94.7 feet from Station C ( a fixed landmark )

CE889 is Frame 166 and give us a distance of 95.6 feet from Station C... .9 feet farther away...

Makes sense as the limo was indeed moving away from Station C. Yet, it takes 5 frames to go that distance which equates to 2.25 mph.

At 11.2mph - the stated speed of the limo - how much ground would be covered in 5 frames?

Well, 11.2 = 16.42feet per second @ 18.3 fps = .8976 FEET PER FRAME, so the limo SHOULD have moved 4.5 feet in 5 frames...

Craig, they off by 450% ?? Well, hey - let's go check the actual Zfilm and See... this is 166 overlaid on 161.

Looks to me that the limo moved forward a bit more than a tire width... more than .9ft yet no where near 4.5 feet.... Maybe 1.5 feet? about 4mph?

So Craig here is right, somewhat, there will be slight variations to the measurements and the actual film... they did the best they could...

Yet it still begs the question why the speeds were able to vary so greatly from frame to frame... from point to point?

As I illustrated above... the AVERAGE is a culmination of speeds... to increase from 3mph to AVERAGE 12mph over 20 frames requires movement MUCH FASTER than was seen on the film, much faster than 12mph for a number of those frames... regardless of whether it was in the recreation or not.

Craig would have us believe that the recreation has no relationship to the Zfilm... that the information provided was not use to determine the distances and angles within the Zfilm as close as possible.

If the RECREATION ultimately produced data that could not be matched back to the film they were recreating - why would they offer the information as such?

Does the WCR tell us that they considered these measurements to be an accurate representation of what we see on the Zfilm?

http://www.history-m.../WR_3_Shots.pdf

The pictures or frames in the Zapruder film were marked

by the agents, with the number “1” given to the first frame where the

motorcycles leading the motorcade came into view on Houston Street.273

The numbers continue in sequence as Zapruder filmed the Presidential

limousine as it came around the corner and proceeded down Elm.

The President was in clear view of the assassin as he rode up Houston

Street and for 100 feet as he proceeded down Elm Street, until he

came to a point denoted as frame 166 on the Zapruder film.274

These facts were determined in the test by placing the car and men on Elm

Street in the exact spot where they were when each frame of the

Zapruder film was photographed. To pinpoint their locations, a man

stood at Zapruder’s position and directed the automobile and both

models to the positions shown on each frame, after which a Bureau photographer

crouched at the sixth-floor window and looked through a

camera whose lens recorded the view through the telescopic sight of

the C2’766 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.275 (See Commission Exhibit No.

887, p. 99.) Each position was measured to determine how far President

Kennedy had gone down Elm from a point, which was designated

as station C, on a line drawn along the west curbline of Houston

Street.276

Based on these calculations, the agents concluded that at frame 166

of the Zapruder film the President passed beneath the foliage of the

large oak tree and the point of impact on the President’s back disappeared

from the gunman’s view as seen through the telescopic lens?”

(See Commission Exhibit No. 889, p. 100.)

So we see that while Craig would have you believe the data offered by the WCR related to the frames and distances seen in the Zfilm are simple GIGO... they were still presented as FACTS... they were still used to determine conclusions about the shots... WITH THE ZFILM... not on some island all alone. In fact, the WCR uses this recreation and its FACTS to support the SBT...

Are you now saying that since this information was such absolute GARBAGE, the basis for the SBT is also GARBAGE?

Based on his observations during the reenactment and the position

of Governor Connally shown in the Zapruder film after the car

emerged from behind the sign, Frazier testified that Governor Connally

was in a position during the span from frame 207 to frame 225

to receive a bullet which would have caused the wounds he actually

suffered.

Governor Connally viewed the film and testified that he

was hit between frames 231 and 234. According to Frazier, between

frames 235 and 240 the Governor turned sharply to his right, so that

by frame 240 he was too far to the right to have received his injuries

at that time

At some point between frames 235 and 240, therefore,

is the last occasion when Governor Connally could have received his

injuries, since in the frames following 240 he remained turned too far

to his right. If Governor Connally was hit by a separate shot between

frames 235 and 240 which followed the shot which hit the President’s

neck, it would follow that : (1) the assassin’s first, shot, assuming

a minimum firing time of 2.3 seconds (or 42 frames), was fired between

frames 193 and 198 when his view was obscured by the oak tree; (2)

President Kennedy continued waving to the crowd after he was hit

and did not begin to react for about 11/2 seconds ; and (3) the first shot,

although hitting no bones in the President’s body, was deflected after

its exit from the President’s neck in such a way that it failed to hit

either the automobile or any of the other occupants.

The one thing not said? That more than one person was firing at the limo...

GIGO Craig... nicely done.

September 20, 2012

My replies in RED, quotes in Blue, I've tried again to illustrate why I believe what I do... and to deal with you and your closed attitude.

YOU don't believe H&L to be real. Fine. I am looking at the evidence... YOU do not believe H&L are real, PERIOD... does not matter what I offer or show or explain....

I remember a while back you had convinced me that the Oswald at Jiffy Mart MAY have been just some kid... it was a reasonable explanation that made some sense. Could you be wrong? of course. Could I... yes again.

But I'm not here saying your position is impossible, I am asking that you take a fresh look at the BJHS record for 1953/54 and address what I've written over and over again, even in this post -

how does a school record show 179 TOTAL DAYS of attendance if the child only started the school in January?

how does a school record show grades for 2 classes IN THE FALL, that go on to become 5 classes in the SPRING, if the child was not there?

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

Then let's try it again Greg... if you still believe this is not suspicious, so be it...

I understand the difference between CY and School Year...

You’re showing no signs of understanding the difference, David.

and your repeated inferences about my memory, thought process and intelligence is once again the NEW Greg... the condescending A$$hole who no one would recognize if they read your posts from this thread ...

Because you keep going off on tangents without addressing the actual document in question. Reading your replies is painful: akin to listening to the incoherent fulminations of a Southern Baptist who has no answer to evolution, so simply ignores the arguments as presented and repeats his Bible quotes, chapter and verse ad infinitum.

WTF are you jabbering on about? You having a tough time with God now too?

I'm terribly sorry you can't follow a few simple paragraphs with links and exhibits.

You haven't even taken the time to read and study the book, look at the supporting documents and images, yet you can pronounce judgment and conclusions as if you had.

One last time Greg... and maybe this time you'll answer the question instead of pulling a LNer on us.

=====================

A school year has two semesters, FALL and SPRING

When added together they make up a SCHOOL YEAR

When a child attends classes his school record reflects how often he attended and the days absent

It will also include his grades

The FIRST LINE for the 1953/54 BJHS school year shows WHAT Greg?

- it shows that this student took two classes, General Science and PE and got a 70 in each - a passing grade

- it shows this student attended 89 days and missed 1

- it shows that in the SPRING SEMESTER this student now took a full complement of classes

- it shows this student attending 90 days with 4 absences

- it shows that FOR THE SCHOOL YEAR this student attended 179 days and missed 5

AT THE SAME TIME IN NYC, a 5'4" 115lb student in NYC named LEE HARVEY OSWALD attends PS44..

The Greg I've been reading over the years was NEVER like the one posting on this thread - seems to me you have other, much greater concerns going on to cause this violent and uncharacteristic posting... in any case, I will try yet again to illustrate my position - although if you read my reply to DSL you'd know what I was talking about.

The David I’ve been reading is completely AWOL. He had some ability at parsing the evidence. This may give rise to a David and Dee doppelganger theory. Have you ever lived in North Dalota? How tall is your mother?

I tried to read your response to Mr Lifton, but honestly couldn’t finish it. I merely noted that once again, you could not specifically address the Beauregard records, which is why I bumped the post showing what they say.

Again, WTF are you jabbering on about? I’ve even highlighted the BJHS record for you and you STILL cannot grasp the concept that BJHS shows a LEE OSWALD at 809 French, taking two classes and attending 89 days in the SPRING semester….

Prove that record means something else please.

...we need to go back to 1952 for a moment... after they moved to NYC Oswald supposedly attended 2 weeks at a Lutheran school

On 9/30/52 he enters PS117 and is truant 3/4 of the time (Greg - does the FBI speak to anyone from PS117 who remembers Oswald?)

Why would it matter? You don’t believe FBI reports, anyway – unless they can be used to support this goofiness.

You make such a big deal of who Armstrong spoke to and when, yet people like Myra, or anyone from PS117 – the FBI is not so interested.. and all you have is “you don’t believe anyway…” this is the extent of your intellectual curiosity? Let’s see, the FBI steers clear of anything OSWALD in 1953 in NOLA… the witnesses YOU offer in the FBI records also steer clear of 1953 at BJHS… but to you that’s SOP, nothing to see here, move along… whatever.

As for his truancy – you’ll find it can be further pinned down to starting very shortly after he turned 13.

"One teacher at PS #117, Mrs. Dorrit E. Woolf (who now resides in Boynton

Beach, Florida), wrote a letter to a local newspaper in 1999 and claimed that she was

Oswald's art teacher.11 Mrs. Woolf taught eight art classes per day, each lasting 42 minutes.

She remembered Lee Harvey Oswald as a very intelligent young boy who was a

very small, isolated individual, and was "slightly deaf."

Is that what she said in the original (i.e. pre-Armstrong contact) interview, or did all those details emerge only after Armstrong came along? All I could find was a news article from 2010 in which she merely noted Oswald was one of the “quiet ones”. In any case, “small” is a relative term – and quite often the “quiet ones” will be remembered as “small” whether they are or not, because of a psychological perception that equates “quiet” with “small”. He was certainly not BIG – whatever that also may mean to any given individual. “Big” and “small” are relative – and therefore – meaningless terms. He did have a hearing problem caused by his recurring otitis media. It is one of the key indicators that this was one individual throughout the records because the otitis media follows him from NO to NY and into the school system, into the courts and into Youth House, followed by the Marines and onto the Soviet Union. But you won’t address this because you can’t without putting forward that either ( A ) the records have (yet again) been tampered with, or ( B ) they both had hearing problems caused by otitis media. In either case, you’d be venturing into the Theater of the Absurd (yet again).

Look at the entire paragraph of DANCING AROUND THE SUBJECT… Like Clinton telling us he did not have Sex with that women… based on how “sex” is defined and the context, the phases of the moon and whatever other BS you threw into that paragraph to convince us the SMALL HARVEY and the LARGE LEE are the same person… even though we have direct testimony and photographs that prove otherwise… that you cannot see the difference between LEE in class and HARVEY at the Zoo (when his brother had no problem) simply shows your bias toward anything not H&L.

How again is my saying the records have been changed/altered and you saying all these discrepancies are “mistakes” any different? I am sure you’ve read about the history of the FBI and/or the CIA – are you really saying it is more likely all these people are mistaken as opposed to the FBI altering records? Really? If so, it appears you are not paying attention to what has been discovered these past 50 years.

NOTE: Mrs. Woolfs observation that Oswald was "slightly deaf' is corroborated by anotation in the PS #44 school file, dated May 18, 1953, which states, "Teacher will arrange for exam at PS #47 (school for the deaf) for hearing. "

Good. You’ve established that the kid who was at PS # 117 also attended PS # 44 a year later.

1952 Greg…. Maybe take a second and explain how the boy started PS44 on March 23, 1953, (while remanded to YOUTH HOUSE from April 15 on - with reports/examinations made on May 1, 1953 WHILE HE IS SUPPOSEDLY AT PS44 - after being truant since leaving PS117 in January) yet he attended 109 school days which brings us to the END of August 1953. ??

(hmmm, that 109 days leaves off right about when HARVEY and mom head back to NOLA)

“Young Oswald spent his days on the 4th floor of the Youth House with other boys his age. A special behavior report stated, "He is a non-participant in any activity on the floor. He has made no attempts at developing a relationship with any member of the group .... He appears content just to sit and read whatever is available. He has reacted favorable to supervision. Every evening at 8:00 pm he asks to be allowed to go to bed."

On May 1, 1953 Youth House Psychiatrist Renatus Hartogs, a colleague of Dr. Kurians, examined Lee Harvey OswaMaybe you can explain how he is both at Youth House and at PS44 at the same time.

If you look at my response to DSL you can pick it up from there thru the "transformation"

this SMALL BOY who finally gets back into school in March 1953, becomes a 5'2" 114lbs by the time he is measured in MAY 1953.

The BRONX ZOO photo is NOT the same person... a child does not GROW then SHRINK then GROW again...

Who said he did shrink and grow? That’s an unwarranted assumption. How can you even tell how tall he is in the zoo photo?

The “I don’t Know”, “I can’t tell” defense is pretty weak Greg… When shown to those who KNEW LEE, the boy at the Zoo was NOT KNOWN TO THEM… while at the same time picking out LEE and/or stating that the boy presented as LEE was not the Oswald they remembered.

He does not go from constant Truancy, loner, quiet, kept to himself to CLASS PRESIDENT (please read my reply to DSL)

Again – how do you KNOW? Suppose I was to tell you that I knew a kid with Asperger’s who was regarded as quiet, a loner, even a black sheep within his own family, who also truanted but on moving to a new school, was nominated for class captain? Can’t happen according to you. No. According to you, the only way to explain this is to postulate that it was two different boys, of different height, build, eye color and intelligence levels.

Asperger’s and Mistakes again… what’s not possible Greg, is your opening up your mind to possibilities OTHER than Asperger’s and Mistakes…. I NEVER SAID it could not happen… while you on the other hand has repeated stated H&L is impossible, absurd and any other attack you can place on the theory. There is repeated evidence of two children described completely differently, behaving differently, recognized as DIFFERENT PEOPLE… yet you are holding onto your HATE OF THE IDEA OF H&L that only a disease and repeated mistakes can explain the record. Again Greg… it is YOU who are locked in without even reading it… and YOU who are trying to look at a mountain of evidence one independent pebble at a time.

file:///C:\Users\Greg\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif Lee and Harvey - 1953.jpg195.9K 0 downloads

in June 1953 this boy was mentally unstable, lived in a fantasy world, etc... and need psychiatric help - BADLY according to NY State.

Hartogs diagnosed a "personality pattern disturbance with schizoid features and passive - aggressive tendencies."

It was the nearest thing to a correct diagnosis he could make because the option of diagnosing Asperger’s was simply not open to him in the US in the 1950s. Dr Asperger himself, referred to the syndrome as a personality disorder, and even now, it can be misdiagnosed as a personality or schizoid disorder:

http://www.mastersonkongresi.com/en/masterson-days/5masterson/presentation-papers/65-differential-diagnosis-schizoid-disorder-vs-aspergers-syndrome.html

Could HARVEY have had Asperger’s? sure

What does that have to do with the first line of the BJHS 1953 school record showing Oswald attending 89 out of 90 days in the FALL?

On 9/8/53 his PO report states the Salvation Army wouldn't even try to deal with the boy - that he is "severely disturbed"

Which is a crock. You know, I know and everyone here knows that the Salvation Army deals daily with far more “disturbed” individuals than Oswald was – and always has done. I think that the Salvation Army over-reacted to the word “schizoid” and took it to mean he was a danger to himself and others – a common misconception now, let alone then. If he actually had been a danger, then their suggestion that he needed “direct psychiatric treatment” would have been a correct one.

My point here was that as late as 9/8/53 HARVEY was still being dealt with… HARVEY was having these problems. LEE, beginning in March 1953, is who the PS44 records are referring to…. HARVEY had moved on. That you are willing to accept this AMAZING TRANSFORMATION from Truant problem to a cooperative, contributing, flag saluting LEE as a mental condition that what, simply went away, is your right… I simply do not agree with your conclusion.

On 9/24/53 the report VIA PHONE from his mom is that he has been attending school, that he was elected class president and that he was now in the 9th grade - skipping a grade even after the grades and truancies? http://www.maryferre...61&relPageId=26 (this was obviously MO doing what she could to keep HARVEY away from court... this was also when LEE and HARVEY's records become one person instead of two.)

More fanciful nonsense. He stopped truanting as soon as his brother ceased his anti-subversive work for the Port Security Unit. Or is that a coincidence?

How is it, btw, that Armstrong, with all his resources, and assistance from all those researchers, failed, even after interviewing him, to understand, detect, find out or otherwise divine what Pic was doing during the time his kid brother lived with him?

But let’s ignore a real life brother of Oswald who was a real life hunter of subversives, and instead, concentrate on a figment of someone’s imagination. That’ll be much more fun because when we can say the FBI lied about any evidence we don’t like (they COULD, therefore they MUST have); when we can recruit witnesses and misconstrue school records and say things like "because the government is capable of what I’m proposing, they therefore MUST have done what I’m proposing" – then the sky is the limit!

And furthermore, let’s not only ignore the brother he lived with – let’s concentrate on the OTHER brother. Why? Because his memory is fallible, so we’ll just pretend he made some slip-ups (instead of just having had a memory lapse) and let the cat out of the bag. Except no one but Armstrongites can detect these things.

While on the subject, can I ask if Armstrong is among those who claim LHO looked up to Robert; that Robert was his biggest influence as a kid?

IDK Greg, why not read the book or ask him yourself? I do know that John felt that it was ROBERT in some of the photos attributed to Lee. And that Robert lied about his visit to NYC in 1952…

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.

(this is the famous missing tooth photo where Myra DeRouse names most everyone in the photo yet does not recognize LEE as HARVEY, the boy in her class, the boy she drives home after a piano falls on him)

Really? She doesn’t recognize Lee as Harvey? Now there’s a line worth remembering!

Why must you be such a yahoo Greg… The line worth remembering is YOU stating that Oswald was flown back from Taiwan to treat his STD when you link to a page where the DoD tells us he never went… and the Unit Diaries are all MISTAKEN… “mistaken” – I really need to remember that one… they were all just “mistakes”… perfect.

Mr. JENNER - There is a young fellow in the foreground-everybody else is facing the other way. He is in a pantomime, or grimace. Do you recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. PIC - No, sir; looking at that picture and I have looked at it several times--that looks more like Robert than it does Lee, to my recollection.

LEE Oswald moved to NOLA in January 1954.

LEE Oswald moved into 1454 St Marys, Myrtle Evans' place after staying with Lillian Murret, MO's sister in JANUARY 1954

HARVEY was already in NOLA, living on Exchange St and attending BJHS

See… this is one area in which I agree with Lifton. How can anyone have a serious discussion about this with you guys when you keep making definitive statements about a person no one believes actually existed, except you guys. Put yourself in my place. How can I say, 'no “Harvey” did not live there'? What that does is actually give you affirmation of the existence of this mythical critter. I’m not doing it. Not playing that game. It’s more productive to beat my head against a brick wall. I am drawn once again, to the religious analogy and arguing about the existence of god with a Southern Baptist.

I am presenting the conclusion of the analysis Greg. YOU want to place semantic games… we can talk about the THEORY of H&L without you having to admit H&L are real, if that’s you’re big worry. We talk about LEE and HARVEY to differentiate who we are tracking and why…. DON’T play the game Greg… I give a sh!t, but do better than ASPERGER’S and MISTAKES… that’s LNer SOP.

The RECORDS speak for themselves… in Jan 1954 LEE and MO go to live with Lillian Murret (you supposed she would know her own sister?) and then on to Myrtle Evans’ apartment. In 1953/54 we have evidence that HARVEY lived at 126 Exchange…

Why not take a second and show how these two things are NOT happening simultaneously… (Note: in both Lillian and Myrtle’s testimony the year “1953” does not come up at all… 1954 is the first they are asked about, the year JENNER insisted on staying with… Jenner also questioned Robert, John Pic,

Again from Armstrong's book.. Louise Robertson was hired by MO while in NYC to be a MAID... she worked about 6 weeks thru the summer of 1953 when the Oswald's simply up and left BEFORE the beginning of the 1953/54 school year (Stanley ND, NOLA)

That is an ASSUMPTION based on Robertson saying she worked for MO for 6 weeks through the Summer. Robertson was in error on this, just as she was with her mention of Jacobi Hospital. Jacobi didn’t open until 1955. Does that mean LHO lived in the Bronx until 1955? Of course not. She was wrong about the hospital and she was wrong about what time of year she work for MO. In the REAL world, people have fallible memories.

Does Armstrong hypothesise at all about how MO could afford a house-keeper?

Read the flipping book yourself Greg…. That you continue to argue DETAILS when you don’t even bother looking at the book is actually very surprising to me. SHE WAS MISTAKEN – is once again your only argument… pretty weak Greg. And believe it or not, people also have GOOD MEMORIES and CAN OFFER DETAILS yet only if it suits YOUR cause… and not the H&L one… Hmmm selective evidence – sounds like the WCR.

(as a side note - MO sold her car in NYC in 1952... HOW did they get from NYC to NOLA... either pair of mother and son??)

If she did, it might answer my question above. Can I get a cite for it? I could find nothing about it in her testimony.

It’s just one of those mysteries Greg… Maybe try Lillian’s testimony.

Mr. JENNER - All right. Now, this boy was about 14 years of age at that time; is that right, after they returned from New York and stayed at your place?

Mrs. MURRET - Yes; and then the next I heard was when he came here, and he didn't want to go to school because he thought he already knew all that they had to teach him, so she must have allowed him to go to work for Tujague's, because he had a job as a runner, going from building to building, delivering messages and things like that.

Mr. JENNER - That was in 1955, would that be about right?

No, that would NOT be right… in October 1953 Oswald turns 14…

Now, one again, look at the BJHS records...

Do you understand that there are 90 days or so in each semester? That 90 school days from Sept brings us to Dec 31, 1963.... (if the semester starts at the end of August there is even time for the winter break...

that 90 days again from 1/13/54 is the end of May early June.... the END of the 53/54 school year?

That the first line of records from 53-54 tells us the a Lee Oswald transfered from PS44 (yet has the wrong name for the school listed) moved into 809 French Street (Lillian Murret)... and kept that address since it was in the BJHS zone (my assumption). HARVEY and MO never moved in with Lillian... LEE did, and then LEE and MO moved to 1454 St Marys - the Evans' place.

HARVEY and MO moved from Stanley ND to 126 Exchange from which the photos of MO are taken... again, as mentioned in my reply to DSL... Exchange is 3 miles down Canal Street from BJHS.. According to Myra, HARVEY arrives to school very early and is waiting for her... He rides his bike to and from

Also according to Myra, HARVEY tells her that his mom works at a BAR after being dropped off at 126 Exchange Apt 201.

According to each and every FBI witness you offered and others you didn't... not a single soul is asked about Oswald at BJHS in 53/54... not one.

Why? Cause he couldn't be both in NYC and NOLA at the same time... so nobody asks.

He couldn’t. He wasn’t. You continue to make a mess of understanding the Beauregard records.

That’s quite the scathing rebuttal Greg… not once do you address the FACT that the 1953 FALL SEMESTER records show a Lee Oswald taking 2 classes and attending 89/90 days. Why do you continue to AVOID that one line, the one line that establishes SOMEONE attended BJHS and rec’d a 70 in both classes before starting the SPRING SEMESTER?

file:///C:\Users\Greg\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif alt="Attached File" v:shapes="_x0000_i1026">54-22 - highlighted.jpg228.27K 0 downloads

The only known FBI report of an interview of Myra DaRouse is a half-page report,

dated April 2, 1964, by SA Donald C. Steinmeyer. The report stated that Myra was

interviewed at 3116 Prytania, Apt 29, and not behind a locked door in her office in the basement

of Beauregard.

When I told Myra about the half-page report she laughed and said,

"I was never interviewed in my apartment. I talked to that FBI man in my office for two

hours about Oswald, with the door locked, and everything I said about Oswald was good.

The things in this report are not what I told that agent." I ended my conversation with

Myra by asking if I could interview her in New Orleans, and she agreed.

Good thing there is nothing suspicious about any of this...

Ya. That really seals the deal.

Once again Greg… excellent, insightful response. Did or did not Carolyn Arnold state that what was written as her statement WAS NOT… and how many other FBI interviews in the final product do not match what was originally said? How many pages of testimony were crossed out and re-written ala Cadigan?

That there are no original records from BJHS is NOTHING SUSPICIOUS?

That there are no original records ANYWHERE for these years is again, nothing suspicious....

That the FBI specifically excludes discussions of 1953, nothing suspicious...

Why would they? They knew Oswald left New York in January ’54 and had no information to the contrary.

Unbelievably Naïve Greg…. They knew he HAD to leave in Jan 1954. Any ideas WHY they needed to leave so quickly in the middle of the year? Or how he can be at both Youth House and PS44 at the same time in the Spring of 1953? Or how he attends 109 days ending on Aug 31, 1953?

They had no contrary info cause they chose not to concern themselves with FALL 1953… the BJHS showing the FALL 1953 attendance SLIPPED THRU… even the FBI misses some things…

That the WC does not call ANYONE who might have known HARVEY up to 1954, not suspicious...

That his own brother does not recognize HARVEY's photos but easily recognizes LEE from that time period

That Robert LIES about when and where he sees his younger brother - especially the NYC visit in late fall 1952...

NOT SUSPICIOUS GREG... so please, don't bother investigating or reading anything more about it....

Mr. PIC - So they moved out in about September 1952, maybe it was late September, early October, somewhere around there, so from aboutsomewhere between September of 1952 and January 1953, my brother Robert came to New York on leave, and we were all invited up to the Bronx.

Mr. PIC - No, sir; he may have stayed with my mother also. I don't think so. Maybe for a night or two. We went out, my wife fixed him up with a date with one of her girl friends and we went out together a couple of times. So, we were invited up there for this Sunday dinner. So it was my mother, Lee, Robert, my wife, myself, and my son.

Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; we were corresponding infrequently, I would say--not very many letters between I and Lee direct when I was in the service, especially the first part of my tour in the service.

In 1952, after traveling from Camp Pendleton, Calif., to Jacksonville, Fla. I did have a 10-day leave. They were in New York City at that time.

Mr. JENNER. This was then some time in 1953, I take it?

Mr. OSWALD. No, sir--1952.

Mr. JENNER. 1952?

Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. This was----

Mr. JENNER. You mean your mother and Lee that is the period of time they were in New York City?

Mr. OSWALD. That's correct.

Mr. JENNER. Living there.

Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. Did you see them?

Mr. OSWALD. No, sir; not at that time. I spent my leave in Fort Worth, because I did not feel I had enough time to travel to New York and down to Jacksonville, Fla. After completing metalsmith school at Millington, Tenn., I took a 10-day leave.

Greg - I can't help that you don't see it. Anyone looking at the records without YOUR preconceived conclusions... see a Lee Oswald attending 179 days of school in the 53/54 year at BJHS... 89 in the FALL and 90 in the SPRING that is what the transcript says. That you think the 1/13/54 has significance is interesting in that it illustrates the combining of records... HARVEY never lived with Lillian, LEE did. LEE comes from NYC to NOLA in January 1954 (again - how did they make that trip Greg? in the middle of winter) HARVEY never lived at 809 French, LEE does. Myra does not take HARVEY to French or St Marys but 126 EXCHANGE... straight down Canal...

Conveniently, the records for 126 Eschange were destroyed in 1956... http://www.maryferre...56&relPageId=84

So let's stay on task here Greg... what about the BJHS records from the FALL 1953 showing Oswald taking and getting GRADES in 2 classes while attending 89 out of 90 school days do you not understand?

It is you who is lacking in understanding. All the document indicates is that Oswald commenced at the school on 13/1/54 and that this was during the school year commencing in (Aug) 1953, he attended for 89 days. Most school years run from Aug to May. If you cannot comprehend that the mention of 1953 has nothing to do with when he commenced there and merely connotes the beginning of the particular school year in which he enrolled, I can’t help you any further. The records have nothing to do with calendar years, nor semesters and do not show him taking classes in the fall of ’53.

Do children normally get grades and attendance records from schools they do not attend?

Do you finally understand that this document represents evidence that the two boys' histories were blended together?

.... LEE lived at 809 French

LEE moved into 1454 St Marys in the spring of 1954

The FBI reports of Oswald "acquaintences" that YOU linked us to from that period do not discuss 1953... EVER, and give the appearance of a boilerplate statement with simply the names changed... SOP for the FBI.

I think I've done more than my share explaining this to you... the school records alone establish SUSPICION... when you add in ROBERT, JOHN, MYRA, the PHOTOS, the testimony of those who dealt with the SMALL HARVEY in NYC versus the larger LEE, MO's horrible memory (she even states she married Eckdahl 7 years after she actually did), and on and on... at the very least we have SUSPICION...

SUSPICION that ONLY Armstrong and his supporters can divine, and then only via the most tortuous reading of the records as would be humanly possible.

Why do you not address the #$@^% records Greg? You have yet to explain what the first 1953 Semester grades and attendance is in reference to…. How does Oswald attend 89/90 days IF HE WAS NOT THERE?

And please stop calling up Armstrong and your religious analogies, nobody cares. You offer no explanation for the records, no explanation beyond a MISTAKE for the Unit Diaries and DoD letter, and you call the most simply reading of the record “tortureous” when any moron can understand that there are TWO SEMESTERS, each with grades and attendance, that both PS44 and BJHS show records for the FALL SEMESTER 1953 (and that PS44 records have this boy finishing the SPRING 1953 semester 15 days before the next one begins…)

DEAL with the records, not your bias.

Now maybe you can explain, as I mention above, how grades and attendance are recorded for a child NOT attending the school offering these records? When you look at BJHS as the continuation of the H&L saga, the NYC and BJHS records - along with the truancies, missed court dates, and verbal descriptions of HARVEY... it actually all makes sense.

Only after you add the eleven secret herbs and spices… and a dash of fairy dust…

Cause you CAN’T Greg. You’re playing the LNer game of laugh and redirect since you have NOTHING TO OFFER to rebutt the BJHS records.

Can you even read Greg? How do we have a total of 179 ATTENDANCE days in the 7^th grade at BJHS in 1953, If there was no one to record attendance for? No one to provide a grade?.

Does the General Science Grade of 70 in the FALL SEMESTER and the 74 he got in the SPRING SEMESTER with a final grade of 74 (with the same thing shown for PE) not get thru to you.

Have you shown this record to anyone unfamiliar with the case and simply ask, “what does this tell you about this child’s 1953/54 school year”? Cause if you did, like I did, you’d find that NO ONE assumes this child was anywhere else but in two classes for 89/90 days and rec’d two 70’s for the effort.

Or you can just believe the FBI - did you give Swearingen's book on the FBI a read? Would you trust ANYTHING coming out of the FBI after that ?

file:///C:\Users\Greg\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif 54-22 - highlighted.jpg228.27K 0 downloads

You can’t trust the FBI, therefore you can legitimately and without a scintilla of evidence, accuse them of whatever suits your purposes.

No Greg, you can’t trust the FBI… not when in case after case the words THEY WRITE are not the words the WITNESS SAYS. When they TAKE ALL THE EVIDENCE, with Dulles trying to cover the fact, and play the charade of first ACCEPTING THE EVIDENCE after they’ve had it, unsupervised, unaccounted for, for 3-4 days.

No Greg… when over and over ex-FBI tell all books remind us of the extreme CYA the FBI did to itself let alone what they hid from the US people and its representative.

Tell you what Greg… you point us in the direction of a reliable, trustworthy source of FBI information related to the JFK case…. Then authenticate it for us….

Anything come to mind, right off the top of your head?

That you would choose to believe the FBI over citizen witnesses and direct authenticated evidence is your problem, not mine. It boggles my mind that you are presenting yourself like this… The man who helped prove the FBI was dead wrong about Oswald on the bus which in turn changes most everything about the post-assassination timeline and suggests that Roger Craig was accurate in his recollection… that Worrell and Carr were NOT lying about the men running from the back of the TSBD, that Rowland is not lying about who he sees where, that Boone and Weitzman actually do find a Mauser and Baker/Truly L-I-E their butts off about the 2^nd floor lunchroom.

There is not one bit of evidence in the USG’s hands that can be relied upon as authentic and accurate… NOT ONE.

Mistakes Greg? I call BS… the records reflect EXACTLY what was needed… it is much more likely the FBI missed a few “loose ends” than for everyone to be forever MISTAKEN about the innocence of the Oswalds.

September 20, 2012

1.

Look at the survey

look at the lane markers for z161 at 3+29

look at where the thin blue lines intersect

2.

now look at z161 below

you will notice the FRONT of the limo is past the lane markers and past where the concrete on the south side of Elm ends

you will also notice where JFK is in relation to the concrete and lane markers

the measurement at z161 is taken to the FRONT of the limo

when this changes to where JFK is AFTER 161, we remove 30 feet from the calculations

DJ

One and Two above I understand and agree.

What does this mean? I do not see the removal of 30 feet.

when this changes to where JFK is AFTER 161, we remove 30 feet from the calculations

Since JFK is a fixed 15 feet behind the front of the limo we always know where JFK is if we know where the front of the limo is.

For instance,

if the FRONT of the limo is at station 3+29 then JFK is at station 3+(29-15) = station 3+14.

if the FRONT of the limo is at station 3+44 then JFK is at station 3+(44-15) = station 3+29

if the FRONT of the limo is at station 4+30 then JFK is at station 4+(30-15) = station 4+15

I used the frame and station data from exhibit 884 to calculate the instantaneous speed.

The average speed from frame 161 to frame 166 was 2.25 mph.

The average speed from frame 166 to frame 185 was 12.61 mph.

...

It does look like the limo slowed down going around the corner...

The red box shows the average speed from frame 161 to frame 313 was 11.17 mph.

I think the above data is some very good data. It may be the best data we have for the location and speed of the limo during the murder, even if there is some error in it that Chris is going to reveal.

Mike,

I believe you are missing the point of that table...

It is not possible, physically, to accellerate from 2.25 to 12mph in a single second without it being noticed...

to get from 2.25mph and to AVERAGE 12.61 for the next 19 frames, the limo has to accellerate thru 3, 4, 5, 6 mph which LOWERS the average speed..

To average 12.61mph the limo must spend some time ABOVE 12.61 mph to conter the time spent at LESS than 12.61.

Now, to AVERAGE 18.72mph in one frame, the NEXT frame, the speed of the limo at frame 184 had to be very close to 18mph since in the next 21 frames the limo is back down to 12... (which again requires the limo to spend some of these frames at LESS than 12...

Now look at the zfilm... would you say the limo DRASTICALLY SPED UP from 161 thru 184... then slowed drastically from 18 back down to 9.57 in just over 20 frames to get us to 210? When everyone who testified said it mainted a steady and average speed of 8-12mph.

AS an exercise, try to pinpoint the speed of the limo IN EACH FRAME from 161 thru 210 so the averages work.

I believe you will be in for a very interesting surprise... the speeds at which this table tells us the limo traveled cannot be matched back to the existing Zfilm...

As this table was used to explain the shooting - one can see how morally corrupt the WC, SS and FBI were.

DJ

September 20, 2012

1.

Look at the survey

look at the lane markers for z161 at 3+29

look at where the thin blue lines intersect

2.

now look at z161 below

you will notice the FRONT of the limo is past the lane markers and past where the concrete on the south side of Elm ends

you will also notice where JFK is in relation to the concrete and lane markers

the measurement at z161 is taken to the FRONT of the limo

when this changes to where JFK is AFTER 161, we remove 30 feet from the calculations

DJ

September 19, 2012

Mike, I explain it quite clearly...

The limo moves at 15ft per second at 10mph

JFK is 15 feet from the front of the limo

At z161, the FRONT of the limo crosses 3+29

At z161, JFK is where the FRONT of the limo WAS at z143

At z179, JFK is where the FRONT of the limo WAS at z161

If you measured the distance at z161 from the FRONT of the limo, to the FRONT of the limo in z179 it SHOULD BE 15 feet @ 10mph

Compare that to the distance from JFK at z161 (15 feet BEHIND the front of the limo) to the FRONT of the limo when JFK reaches the front of the limo from z179 - you have a 30 foot difference.

Again... if I have this wrong - which is more than possible - Chris will correct me

It's all about where the locations relate to the limo... pre 161 it's the front, post it's JFK

and 30 feet disappear

DJ

September 19, 2012

Bottom line that people are still trying to understand Chris...

Intermixing the position of 1) JFK seated, 2) the front of the limo and 3) the back of the limo one can easily hide 30+ feet of CALCULATED movement..

The limo was about 21.25 feet long (a normal lincoln is 17.75ft long)...

Ford Motor Company assembled the car at its Lincoln plant in Wixom, Michigan in January 1961. Hess & Eisenhardt of Cincinnati, Ohio was responsible for customizing the car to function as a presidential parade limousine, literally cutting it in half, reinforcing it, extending it 3 ½feet in length, and making numerous other modifications.

Chris, you wrote:

"Distance between "JFK in the limo" and the "front of the limo" is 15ft."

This seems more than a reaonable estimation.

By measuring to the FRONT of the limo before 161 and JFK's position after, we lose 30 feet. (Chris - correct?)

ie... at 161 the FRONT of the limo is 15 feet in front of JFK

as JFK moves thru those 15 feet we can measure again and find JFK at the exact same DISTANCE FROM A FIXED POINT as the first measurement, yet 15 frames higher in the Zframe count (10mph = 14.667 feet/second)

So depending on what you are measuring... JFK, at z161 is approximately 1 second or 15 feet or 18 frames behind...

It is not until z179 that JFK is at the same place the FRONT OF THE LIMO IS at z161. at 10mph

If we now begin again with the calculations by placing JFK's position at z161... he is actually 15 feet/18 frames behind, or z143

JFK is first moved BACK 15 feet prior to z161, and then moved forward 15 feet from z161 forward

Total = 30 feet....

Let me know if I am understanding this correctly.... if one looks at Z161 and the plat, it is obvious that the FRONT of the limo is at 3+29.2 and JFK is 15 feet and 18 frames behind and will not reach that spot until z179... addtionally, at z179 JFK does not reach the location for the FRONT of the limo until z197...

If you measure from the FRONT of the LIMO at z161 and where JFK is in Z197, and subtract... you've lost 30 feet.

Yes?

DJ

September 19, 2012

On 9/18/2012 at 8:13 PM, Greg Parker said:

On 9/10/2012 at 6:16 PM, Greg Parker said:

Quote

There are 2 classes and 89 days of attendance you seem to be forgetting on the first line of 53-54. Along with Myra DeRouse. The third line is a TOTAL of the two semesters... 89 in one 90 in another.
It SAYS he attended 179 days with 5 absences. How do you not see that? the 1954-1-13 written there could be ANYTHING Greg... as it would be impossible for him to go to 89 days of school unless he was there from September on...

Impossible? David, please - step back a bit and put your brain into gear.

We are talking about SCHOOL years - not CALENDAR years.

I previously said this - reposted now because you seem to have missed it, forgotten it, or not understood it the first time:

I'm beginning to finally understand how you've got yourself so confused about this. What it shows is a commencement date of 1/13/54. I would assume that date falls within the 53/54 school year. A quick check tells me that that school years vary from state to state and county to county. IN Alabama for instance, most counties start the school year in August and end it the following May.

If Oswald was enrolled on 13/1/54 and we count forward 89 school days, we end up in the middle of May - a common end date for school years.

There is NOTHING -- I repeat NOTHING suspicious or out of the ordinary in Oswald's school records.

bump

Then let's try it again Greg... if you still believe this is not suspicious, so be it...

I understand the difference between CY and School Year... and your repeated inferences about my memory, thought process and intelligence is once again the NEW Greg... the condescending A$$hole who no one would recognize if they read your posts from this thread ...