Thomas Graves

Chris, Do you think Carlos Eduardo Hernandez Sanchez had anything to do with the assassination? --Tommy

Not true, Mr. Josephs. I found at least one individual who has written more than a single word about Volume 1: "Of note is Greg Parker's account of the 1948 assassination in Bogota of Gaitan by a hypnotized patsy as John Foster Dulles attended a Panamerican conference in that city. "The assassination was. . .blamed on communists." http://forum.assassinationofjfk.net/index.php/topic/283-alliance-for-progress-alianza-para-el-progreso/ "Greg Parker in his first of a trilogy, The Cold War of Lee Harvey Oswald, treats the 1948 assassination of Colombian leader Gaitlan as the archetypal lone nut architecture so common in subsequent years. Foster was in Bogota when it went down." http://forum.assassinationofjfk.net/index.php/topic/122-jfk-assassination-cia-and-new-york-times-are-still-lying-to-us-by-david-talbot/ Randy, Take it easy on David Josephs. We all know how prone to hyperbole he is. --Tommy

Who are you to say that, Josephs? Do you actually think you speak for everybody "here" ? Or is Greg Parker just getting under your skin a little and frustrating you because you can't rationally counter the excellent points he brings up regarding the subject of this thread? --Tommy lmao! Surely you jest Tom? If Greg wants topic feedback, just publish then defend if warranted. What's the problem? Self-publish, turn the research community on its head like John's H&L did, and quite frankly could afford to do. We'll weigh the goods and take notice if the anti WCR goods are there... When published I doubt Greg will be put on PR trial--whether his project pans out or not. What is YOUR goal concerning this subject matter? Do you have a dog in these anti H&L attack? David G. Healy, Do you think that Josephs rightfully speaks for everyone "here" when he says that "nobody here" cares about what Greg says? My goal concerning this subject, David, should be self evident by now -- to help expose Harvey and Lee for what it is: an all-to-comfortable, paranoiac paradigm based on the logical fallacy known as the "Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy" (q.v.), and on its psychological counterpart, the "Clustering Illusion" (q.v.) syndrome. BTW, do you think that only members who believe in the Harvey and Lee "theory" should post on this thread? --Tommy

Chris, You mean there was more than one? "Snitch," I mean. OMG What a tangled web. More tangled than them bayous, even ! Who where the other "snitches"? --Tommy PS Hemming suspected that MM-T1 was INTERPEN member Justin Joseph "Steve" Wilson. What do you think?

I know why [sic?] you wrote... It was as stupid the first time as the second. Sounds like you're casting aspersions, David. You [sic] question reads like a Parker post... Complete nonsense. How ironic! One thing I wouldn't do is spend a year debating how right/wrong Green Cheese was... I couldn't care less about it so why spend time on it? My point exactly regarding Harvey and Lee! As opposed to you and the amazing trifecta here who admittedly don't care, did not read or learn the material and keep telling me the cheese ain't green as if you knew any better. Is that even a complete sentence? Regardless, and just speaking for myself here, the reason I don't care is because just looking at the three bogus H & L premises (q.v.) I mentioned in a recent post, it's obviously a fraud. Ironically, perhaps, I do believe that Oswald was impersonated from time to time by other people, but not by some other mythological "Lee" or "Harvey" who was "chosen" many years earlier by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate, very long lasting double-doppelganger project involving not only "Harvey" and "Lee," but their mothers as well! As for your assumptions. Shove em. Shove 'em where, Josephs? You remainone [sic] of the least prepared people on this forum... Ignorance must surely be bliss How ironic! (part II), and... Casting aspersions again are you, Josephs? --Tommy

Who are you to say that, Josephs? Do you actually think you speak for everybody "here" ? Or is Greg Parker just getting under your skin a little and frustrating you because you can't rationally counter the excellent points he brings up regarding the subject of this thread? --Tommy

Yo, genius... how would you know if you are not familiar with the information? How can you even begin to entertain any thoughts based on your preconcieved [sic] conclusions which are, in turn, not based on the material... Imagine you know nothing about the JFK murder and I tell you that Oswald wasn't at the window, never owned the rifle or pistol and that the films and photos have been altered to cover up a government conspiracy... And the proof is in this book. In 1964 that sounded pretty crazy. but lo and behold... if you read the work that shows this to be true you can actually form an educated opinion. Are you normally in the habit of providing others your completely uninformed opinions and expect them to be given any credibility? When JVB claimed to do what she did, she offered proof which at every turn, at every look - FELL APART. When JA points to and goes the extra mile to acquire the info our gov't wouldn't, and over and over again the conflicts rear their head... you, Bernie and Greg... ....might consider not repeatedly looking the fool and read up on it. Or at least admit you're so out of your league related to the info and evidence that you CAN'T come to an opinion - that you'd reserve it until you did some work. Is this how you approach other subjects tommy? Decide BEFORE you do the research what you're going to think and then stubbornly refuse to consider the source materials which are easily available. Then stand on a soap box and proclaim your ignorance? Sure looks that way to everyone here... and your attempts to cover this ignorance with "wittiness" are almost as bad as your dedication to NOT learning the subject. I now know a great deal about H&L. I studied it and continue to discover new things all the time, just like the JFK assassination. What do YOU know a great deal about Tommy? Dear david, If somebody wrote a 1000 page book which was on the Podunk Times Best Seller's List and the author's conclusion was, as proclaimed on the back cover and inside in the 2-page "introduction," (both of which you read at the store while trying to decide whether or not to buy the book) that "The Moon Is Made Out Of Green Cheese !!!," and the author claimed to have absolutely proved it with 1000 pages of documents, photographs, and his or her "analysis," would you read the book? Would you spend half a lifetime "fact checking" the documents (to make sure he hadn't forged or altered them, mis-dated them, or simply analysed them incorrectly), etc? Why would you do that, david? Because it was on the Podunk Times Best Seller's List? --Tommy PS Hilarious photo of the monkeys BTW! LOL bumped for david josephs PS It's interesting how you kinda "fudged" my quote in your post by deleting most of it but not indicating with a "[...]" or something similar that you had done so. Here's a rhetorical question for you -- Do you kinda "fudge" stuff, often, Joseph? Leave things out a lot? Here's the part you left out from between the two sentences of mine that you did quote: [...] Why the heck would I want to waste my time doing given [H&L's] patently ridiculous premises -- 1 ) that two young boys (and their mothers!) were chosen by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate double-doppelganger project, and that the bad guys somehow knew that the two boys would grow up to look very similar (when necessary) and very different (when necessary); ditto their mothers after they were already adults, 2 ) that "Lee" was (evidently) moved around and hidden in "safe" houses for two-and-one-half years so that he wouldn't bump into any of his friends and acquaintances while "Harvey" was in the USSR, and 3 ) that both "Lee's" and "Harvey's" families were "in on" the project all the way, and have miraculously been able to keep from "spilling the beans" / "letting the cat out of the bag" on it, both before and after the assassination, for about 60 years now. Seems to me the bad guys would have killed them all a long time ago to prevent that from happening. But then again maybe that wasn't necessary because the bad guys just MKULTRA-ed all of them 60 years ago to exhibit zombie-like silence and programmed ..... obfuscation. You know, with occasional "limited hangouts." That's it, isn't it, Jim. (Speaking of pinto beans, I think Armstrong must have eaten a 55-gallon drum of them and the resultant gas caused him to come up with these weirdo ideas. Or was it ... mushrooms???) [...] And of course, david, you left out the most important part of all, the finale: [...] For now, Jim, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm gonna assume that you're just suffering from the effects of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy and its psychological corollary,the Clustering Illusion Syndrome. Add a liberal dash of paranoia and what do you have? The Harvey and Lee Cult. https://en.wikipedia...shooter_fallacy https://en.wikipedia...tering_illusion --Tommy Shame on you, david josephs. edited and bumped for David Josephs

And whose professed main interest is "putting our U.S. Constitution back in worthy hands." You know, bein' from a form-ah Confederacy State and awlllll...

whether he answers or not, I'm thinkin' the answer is pretty clear... but that's just me... -- Nall Glenn, Hargrove asked me whether or not I had read Harvey and Lee. I answered his question. Before you made your inane statement in post # 1420. Did you read my answer five posts before yours? I'm thinkin' the answer's real clear -- No you didn't, otherwise you wouldn't have posted your inane, vaguely insulting, chicken-you-know-what statement. Here's the pertinent part, Glenn, so you can read it and get over it. [from post # 1415 1413] Now, to answer your question, [Jim Hargrove], heck no, I haven't read Harvey and Lee! Why the heck would I want to waste my time doing given its patently ridiculous premises -- 1 ) that two young boys (and their mothers!) were chosen by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate double-doppelganger project, and that the bad guys somehow knew that the two boys would grow up to look very similar (when necessary) and very different (when necessary); ditto their mothers after they were already adults, 2 ) that "Lee" was (evidently) moved around and hidden in "safe" houses for two-and-one-half years so that he wouldn't bump into any of his friends and acquaintances while "Harvey" was in the USSR, and 3 ) that both "Lee's" and "Harvey's" families were "in on" the project all the way, and have miraculously been able to keep from "spilling the beans" / "letting the cat out of the bag" on it, both before and after the assassination, for about 60 years now. Seems to me the bad guys would have killed them all a long time ago to prevent that from happening. But then again maybe that wasn't necessary because the bad guys just MKULTRA-ed all of them 60 years ago to exhibit zombie-like silence and programmed ..... obfuscation. You know, with occasional "limited hangouts." That's it, isn't it, Jim. (Speaking of pinto beans, I think Armstrong must have eaten a 55-gallon drum of them and the resultant gas caused him to come up with these weirdo ideas. Or was it ... mushrooms???) To tell you the truth, Jim, I'm starting to entertain the idea that H&L is nothing but an elaborate CIA "disinfo project," designed to divide and confuse the JFK assassination research community. For now, Jim, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm gonna assume that you're just suffering from the effects of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy and its psychological corollary,the Clustering Illusion Syndrome. Add a liberal dash of paranoia and what do you hav? The Harvey and Lee Cult. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion --Tommy I'm starting to realize that your name could easily mis-spelled by anybody as ""Null" (almost did it myself --LOL), which would be ironic and perfect because, well, although you post often, you don't seem to have much of value to say on this forum. You seem to be kind of a .... dilettante? A gadfly, ... if you will? "No offense," Glenn. --Tommy nothing chicken xxxx about it, Thomas. I implied that i don't think you've read it, and then you admitted you haven't, then i said i don't know how someone can be such an authority as to so summarily dismiss such a complex theory without having read a book by its proponent. it's simple. to defeat an enemy you have to know the enemy. what's chicken xxxx is attacking me when i've given you no reason to. and before you go saying i'm being a baby, i'll refer any of the instigators to the fact that the admin here have already posted a warning against such agitation. I'm remiss in responding to it, but I'm damn sure not guilty of instigating it. if you don't like the fact that my opinion differs from yours, then there has to be some means of peace within yourself to overcome it. therapy, something. but attacking me isn't going to help your situation at all. and believe me, it's not going to hurt mine. You got it backwards, Glenn. First, in post # 1413, I "admitted" that I hadn't read it. And I explained why. Then, seven posts later, in post #1420, you oh-so-subtly "implied" that you thought I hadn't read it. Your subtle grasp of the obvious is amazing. Your laziness is astounding. Your willingness to improperly "jump" on somebody oh-so-subtly is rather depressing, actually. Why are you here? Are you just a dil-la-taunt? The hypocrisy you evidence is ironic: You obviously hadn't read my "admission" that I hadn't read H&L, but oh-so-subtly attacked me for allegedly not saying whether or not I had read it! What a hypocrite. No offense. --Tommy

Yo, genius... how would you know if you are not familiar with the information? How can you even begin to entertain any thoughts based on your preconcieved [sic] conclusions which are, in turn, not based on the material... Imagine you know nothing about the JFK murder and I tell you that Oswald wasn't at the window, never owned the rifle or pistol and that the films and photos have been altered to cover up a government conspiracy... And the proof is in this book. In 1964 that sounded pretty crazy. but lo and behold... if you read the work that shows this to be true you can actually form an educated opinion. Are you normally in the habit of providing others your completely uninformed opinions and expect them to be given any credibility? When JVB claimed to do what she did, she offered proof which at every turn, at every look - FELL APART. When JA points to and goes the extra mile to acquire the info our gov't wouldn't, and over and over again the conflicts rear their head... you, Bernie and Greg... ....might consider not repeatedly looking the fool and read up on it. Or at least admit you're so out of your league related to the info and evidence that you CAN'T come to an opinion - that you'd reserve it until you did some work. Is this how you approach other subjects tommy? Decide BEFORE you do the research what you're going to think and then stubbornly refuse to consider the source materials which are easily available. Then stand on a soap box and proclaim your ignorance? Sure looks that way to everyone here... and your attempts to cover this ignorance with "wittiness" are almost as bad as your dedication to NOT learning the subject. I now know a great deal about H&L. I studied it and continue to discover new things all the time, just like the JFK assassination. What do YOU know a great deal about Tommy? Dear joseph, If somebody wrote a 1000 page book which was on the Podunk Times Best Seller's List and the author's conclusion was, as proclaimed on the back cover and inside in the 2-page "introduction," (both of which you read at the store while trying to decide whether or not to buy the book) that "The Moon Is Made Out Of Green Cheese !!!," and the author claimed to have absolutely proved it with 1000 pages of documents, photographs, and his or her "analysis," would you read the book? Would you spend half a lifetime "fact checking" the documents (to make sure he hadn't forged or altered them, mis-dated them, or simply analysed them incorrectly), etc? Why would you do that, joseph? Because it was on the Podunk Times Best Seller's List? --tommy PS Hilarious photo of the monkeys BTW! LOL bumped for joseph PS It's interesting how you kinda "fudged" my quote in your post by deleting most of it but not indicating with a "[...]" or something similar that you had done so. Here's a rhetorical question for you -- Do you kinda "fudge" stuff, often, Joseph? Leave things out a lot? Here's the part you left out from between the two sentences of mine that you did quote: [...] Why the heck would I want to waste my time doing given [H&L's] patently ridiculous premises -- 1 ) that two young boys (and their mothers!) were chosen by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate double-doppelganger project, and that the bad guys somehow knew that the two boys would grow up to look very similar (when necessary) and very different (when necessary); ditto their mothers after they were already adults, 2 ) that "Lee" was (evidently) moved around and hidden in "safe" houses for two-and-one-half years so that he wouldn't bump into any of his friends and acquaintances while "Harvey" was in the USSR, and 3 ) that both "Lee's" and "Harvey's" families were "in on" the project all the way, and have miraculously been able to keep from "spilling the beans" / "letting the cat out of the bag" on it, both before and after the assassination, for about 60 years now. Seems to me the bad guys would have killed them all a long time ago to prevent that from happening. But then again maybe that wasn't necessary because the bad guys just MKULTRA-ed all of them 60 years ago to exhibit zombie-like silence and programmed ..... obfuscation. You know, with occasional "limited hangouts." That's it, isn't it, Jim. (Speaking of pinto beans, I think Armstrong must have eaten a 55-gallon drum of them and the resultant gas caused him to come up with these weirdo ideas. Or was it ... mushrooms???) [...] And of course, joseph, you left out the most important part of all, the finale: [...] For now, Jim, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm gonna assume that you're just suffering from the effects of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy and its psychological corollary,the Clustering Illusion Syndrome. Add a liberal dash of paranoia and what do you hav? The Harvey and Lee Cult. https://en.wikipedia...shooter_fallacy https://en.wikipedia...tering_illusion --Tommy Shame on you, joseph.

Yo, genius... how would you know if you are not familiar with the information? How can you even begin to entertain any thoughts based on your preconcieved conclusions which are, in turn, not based on the material... Imagine you know nothing about the JFK murder and I tell you that Oswald wasn't at the window, never owned the rifle or pistol and that the films and photos have been altered to cover up a government conspiracy... And the proof is in this book. In 1964 that sounded pretty crazy. but lo and behold... if you read the work that shows this to be true you can actually form an educated opinion. Are you normally in the habit of providing others your completely uninformed opinions and expect them to be given any credibility? When JVB claimed to do what she did, she offered proof which at every turn, at every look - FELL APART. When JA points to and goes the extra mile to acquire the info our gov't wouldn't, and over and over again the conflicts rear their head... you, Bernie and Greg... ....might consider not repeatedly looking the fool and read up on it. Or at least admit you're so out of your league related to the info and evidence that you CAN'T come to an opinion - that you'd reserve it until you did some work. Is this how you approach other subjects tommy? Decide BEFORE you do the research what you're going to think and then stubbornly refuse to consider the source materials which are easily available. then stand on a soap box and proclaim your ignorance? Sure looks that way to everyone here... and your attempts to cover this ignorance with "wittiness" are almost as bad as your dedication to NOT learning the subject. I now know a great deal about H&L. I studied it and continue to discover new things all the time, just like the JFK assassination. What do YOU know a great deal about Tommy? joseph, If somebody wrote a 1000 page book and the author's conclusion, as proclaimed on the back cover and inside in the 2-page "introduction," (both of which you read at the store while trying to decide whether or not to buy the book) that "The Moon Is Made Out Of Green Cheese," and the author claimed to have proved it with 1000 pages of documents, photographs, and his or her "analysis," would you read the book? Why? --tommy

I know, Jon. It's like you said, ... somebody who wanted JFK dead probably did it. Or like somebody else said a long time ago -- "It was you and me!" --Tommy PS I'm trying to think of another "project" for you. Too bad Fermat's Last Theorem has already been solved...

whether he answers or not, I'm thinkin' the answer is pretty clear... but that's just me... -- Nall Glenn, Hargrove asked me whether or not I had read Harvey and Lee. I answered his question. Before you made your inane statement in post # 1420. Did you read my answer five posts before yours? I'm thinkin' the answer's real clear -- No you didn't, otherwise you wouldn't have posted your inane, vaguely insulting, chicken-you-know-what statement. Here's the pertinent part, Glenn, so you can read it and get over it. [from post # 1415 # 1413] Now, to answer your question, [Jim Hargrove], heck no, I haven't read Harvey and Lee! Why the heck would I want to waste my time doing given its patently ridiculous premises -- 1 ) that two young boys (and their mothers!) were chosen by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate double-doppelganger project, and that the bad guys somehow knew that the two boys would grow up to look very similar (when necessary) and very different (when necessary); ditto their mothers after they were already adults, 2 ) that "Lee" was (evidently) moved around and hidden in "safe" houses for two-and-one-half years so that he wouldn't bump into any of his friends and acquaintances while "Harvey" was in the USSR, and 3 ) that both "Lee's" and "Harvey's" families were "in on" the project all the way, and have miraculously been able to keep from "spilling the beans" / "letting the cat out of the bag" on it, both before and after the assassination, for about 60 years now. Seems to me the bad guys would have killed them all a long time ago to prevent that from happening. But then again maybe that wasn't necessary because the bad guys just MKULTRA-ed all of them 60 years ago to exhibit zombie-like silence and programmed ..... obfuscation. You know, with occasional "limited hangouts." That's it, isn't it, Jim. (Speaking of pinto beans, I think Armstrong must have eaten a 55-gallon drum of them and the resultant gas caused him to come up with these weirdo ideas. Or was it ... mushrooms???) To tell you the truth, Jim, I'm starting to entertain the idea that H&L is nothing but an elaborate CIA "disinfo project," designed to divide and confuse the JFK assassination research community. For now, Jim, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm gonna assume that you're just suffering from the effects of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy and its psychological corollary,the Clustering Illusion Syndrome. Add a liberal dash of paranoia and what do you hav? The Harvey and Lee Cult. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion --Tommy I'm starting to realize that your name could easily mis-spelled by anybody as ""Null" (almost did it myself --LOL), which would be ironic and perfect because, well, although you post often, you don't seem to have much of value to say on this forum. You seem to be kind of a .... dilettante? A gadfly, ... if you will? "No offense," Glenn. --Tommy

Chris, I'm thinking whoever "snitched them out" did so because he wanted them to turn violently, as in "with extreme prejudice," against JFK. Sanjenis? Morales? Banister? Quiroga? Marcello? Some doctor in Miami? --Tommy

Chris, I finally got around to reading the Weisberg material at the links you posted. Fascinating stuff, indeed. Fifteen minutes of dirt road / roads? Hmm. Really? About using the lookout tower for sniper practice, as regards Dallas it would have been nice to have a curving, downhill street like Elm below the tower to make the kill zone more comparable to Dealey Plaza. They were supposedly originally training at that camp for another attempted hit on Castro. Does anyone know the details of that operation? Shoot Fidel from a tall building while he's travelling in a car, etc? --Tommy

Chris, I realize that the so-called Guatemalan Lumber and Mineral Company was the financial conduit and the "cover" for the camp, but it is interesting that the nephew of one of the owners intimated that they had been led to believe that the money was going to be used to build some houses for some homeless Cuban refugees. Question: Why didn't he say the camp training Cuban exiles to be lumberjacks? Answer (IMHO) : Because from all appearances the "Big 7 Road" Camp wasn't being used as a "timber yard," but its rundown house was being (or had recently been) rebuilt / remodeled, ergo the "homes for refugees" story. The nephew knew that the "timber camp" cover for "Big 7" was physically implausible, and went with the "homes for refugees" story because it was a little less implausible. Also, the "timber yard" story would have entailed revealing the company's plans to send the anti-Castro Cuban "lumberjacks" to Guatemala or some other South American country after they had received some "training." Another possible reason the nephew shied away from the "timber yard" story is that they were worried about having to pay insurance for the "lumber trainees" or even a fine for not having done so -- a legitimate concern even though the exiles were not being trained to be lumbermen. --Tommy edited and bumped

Further proof that she was remembering the wrong kid. The kid she remembers was indeed a little skinny kid. It just wasn't Oswald. It was the same skinny kid who was only 4' 6" to 4' 8" was Bobby Newman. It was Bobby [Newman] who hung out at the library. The librarian was interviewed by the FBI. She stated that Oswald never went there on his own - only with his class. [emphasis added by T. Graves] Excellent work, Greg. And another Harvey and Lee fallacy goes down the porcelain fixture. --Tommy

Relax Jim. Take some deep breaths. In through the nose, out through the mouth. That's right. Good. Feel better already, don't you. The reason I didn't see your increasingly frantic posts is because I was busy doing some actual research for another thread. (Have you ever done any actual research, Jim?) What I was trying to do is locate and determine how far away the Monterey Motel (where ten Cuban exiles driving into New Orleans from Miami on 7/24/63 allegedly spent the night because both cars "broke down") was from the "Big 7 Road" camp near Lacombe. Any of that mean anything to you, Jim? (Hint: log in to eBay and type in Monterey Motel New Orleans to get the address off of a couple of old postcards -- the motel no longer exists -- it's now the location of a Fuel Zone convenience store.) In case you're interested, you can read all about it on Chris Newton's excellent thread "Lacombe Training Camp Location part duex [sic]". Now, to answer your question, heck no, I haven't read Harvey and Lee! Why the heck would I want to waste my time doing given its patently ridiculous premises -- 1 ) that two young boys (and their mothers!) were chosen by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate double-doppelganger project, and that the bad guys somehow knew that the two boys would grow up to look very similar (when necessary) and very different (when necessary); ditto their mothers after they were already adults, 2 ) that "Lee" was (evidently) moved around and hidden in "safe" houses for two-and-one-half years so that he wouldn't bump into any of his friends and acquaintances while "Harvey" was in the USSR, and 3 ) that both "Lee's" and "Harvey's" families were "in on" the project all the way, and have miraculously been able to keep from "spilling the beans" / "letting the cat out of the bag" on it, both before and after the assassination, for about 60 years now. Seems to me the bad guys would have killed them all a long time ago to prevent that from happening. But then again maybe that wasn't necessary because the bad guys just MKULTRed all of them into obedient, zombie-like silence and obfuscation. That's it, isn't it, Jim. (Speaking of beans, I think Armstrong must have eaten a 55-gallon drum of them and the resultant gas caused him to come up with these weirdo ideas. Or maybe it was... mushrooms?) But to tell you the truth, Jim, I'm starting to entertain the idea that H&L is nothing but an elaborate CIA "disinfo project," designed to divide and confuse the JFK research community. But for now, Jim, I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt, and I'm gonna assume that you're just suffering from the effects of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy and its psychological corollary,the Clustering Illusion syndrome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion --Tommy Bumped for Jim Hargrove.

Relax Jim. Take some deep breaths. In through the nose, out through the mouth. That's right. Good. Feel better already, don't you. The reason I didn't see your increasingly frantic posts is because I was busy doing some actual research for another thread. (Have you ever done any actual research, Jim?) What I was trying to do is locate and determine how far away the Monterrey Motel (where ten Cuban exiles driving into New Orleans from Miami on 7/24/63 allegedly spent the night because both cars "broke down") was from the "Big 7 Road" camp near Lacombe. Any of that mean anything to you, Jim? In case you're interested, you can read all about it on Chris Newton's excellent thread "Lacombe Training Camp Location part duex [sic]". Now, to answer your question, heck no, I haven't read Harvey and Lee! Why the heck would I want to waste my time doing given its patently ridiculous premises -- 1 ) that two young boys (and their mothers!) were chosen by the bad guys to participate in an elaborate doppelganger project, and that the bad guys somehow knew that the two boys would grow up to look very similar (when necessary) and / or very different (when necessary), 2 ) that "Lee" was (evidently) moved around and hidden in "safe" houses for two-and-one-half years so that he wouldn't bump into any of his friends and acquaintances while "Harvey" was in the USSR, and 3 ) that both "Lee's" and "Harvey's" families were "in on" the project all the way, and have miraculously been able to keep from "spilling the beans" / "letting the cat out of the bag" on it, both before and after the assassination, for about 60 years now. Seems to me the bad guys would have killed them all a long time ago to prevent that from happening. But then again maybe that wasn't necessary because the bad guys just MKULTRed all of them into obedient, zombie-like silence and obfuscation. (Speaking of beans, I think Armstrong must have eaten a full plate of them and the gas caused him to come up with these weird ideas. Or maybe it was mushrooms.) But to tell you the truth, Jim, I'm starting to entertain the idea that H&L is nothing but an elaborate CIA "disinfo project," designed to divide and confuse the JFK research community. --Tommy

Chris, I realize that the so-called Guatemalan Lumber and Mineral Company was the financial conduit and the "cover" for the camp, but it is interesting that the nephew of one of the owners intimated that they had been led to believe that the money was going to be used to build some houses for some homeless Cuban refugees. Question: Why didn't he say it was to train them to be lumberjacks? The answer (IMHO) : Because the "Big 7 Road" Camp obviously wasn't being used as a "timber yard," but its rundown house was being rebuilt / remodeled. The nephew knew that the "timber camp" cover for "Big 7" was physically implausible, and that the "homes for refugees" was a little less so. Also, the "timber yard" story would have entailed revealing the company's plans to send the anti-Castro Cuban "lumberjacks" to Guatemala or some other South American country after they had received "training." --Tommy

Jim, The reason gullible people like you swallow the H & L Dogma "hook, line, and sinker" is twofold: 1 ) It's a perfect example of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, and 2 ) as such it facilitates and encourages your continuing application of The Clustering Illusion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_sharpshooter_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion --Tommy

For those who have at least two firing brain cells... you need to be on some some heavy duty mind-altering drugs for it to be "correct". Really, Greg? You write about "two firing brain cells" ... "mind-altering drugs".... "to be 'correct''? Are you going to edit the above quote so those offending words are gone? Allow me, then, to re-post below what you just typed above before you wisely edit it out: ================ GREG PARKER QUOTE ON ================= "For those who have at least two firing brain cells... you need to be on some some heavy duty mind-altering drugs for it to be "correct". ================ GREG PARKER QUOTE OFF ================ You simply have to work MUCH HARDER, Greg! These one-line attacks made against John's obvious and genuine scholarship are going to look bad forever. You are, however, inspiring me to quote MUCH more from Harvey and Lee. So far, the author has given me carte blanche. We all expect MUCH better from you!!! Jim, Let me rephrase it. "Anyone with two working brain cells would have to be on very strong hallucinogens indeed to realize that the Harvey and Lee theory is ... beautiful, man. Like..... Wow." --Tommy

More excellent work from Linda! It's good that we're finally figuring out who was who in Wiegman, Darnell-Couch, etc., and that the Tom Alyea footage of Truly and Baker conferring with some other men (one of whom only looked like Senator Cooper) inside the TSBD really was filmed on 11/22/63, etc, etc., etc. I would like to know who the two guys dressed in khaki work clothes were, standing to the left of Stetson Hat Man in Wiegman. At least we now know that they weren't Truly and Campbell as was widely believed just a couple of years ago. LOL Keep up the good work, Linda! --Tommy

To his friends and family "Lee" was in Russia played by a small eastern European man When Anna Lewis says repeatedly she met Lee Oswald in New Orleans in Feb 1962 - the same month Harvey is with Marina while giving birth to June in Russia. She says this twice with Baker sitting right behind her. The film stops a number of times yet not once in that interview does Judy's cooroboration place her with Oswald in the summer of 1963. Any ideas? LEE entered the Marines ahead of Harvey LEE left the Marines in March 1959. The last photo we have of Lee Oswald is his 1959 Passport photo. When Harvey came back from Russia - NONE of his relatives recognized him and could not believe it was the same man. Good thing it was 1960 when the speed of news and info traveled slowly. So where was he? What address did 'Lee' live at during the time 'Harvey' was in Russia? Can you prove that 'Lee' was definitely somewhere in the USA during that period? And the onus is on you to do that, not the other way round. You're the one trying to sell this dud, so let's see some proof for once. Presumably 'Lee' would have been ordered underground because the very fact of his existence would blow the whole scheme wouldn't it? So let's see your chops, and quit with the tittle-tattle already... Golly gosh, this H&L lingo is contagious Bernie, You gotta realize the bad guys moved "Lee" around under the cover of darkness and in disguise, to different safe houses, so none of his friends, family, or acquaintances would see him while "Harvey" was in Russia. --Tommy

Chris, I can't remember reading anything about their actually doing any lumber work at the camp (except the possible remodeling of the rundown house on Big 7 Road), just that the anti-Castro Cubans from Miami were sorely disappointed "when they realized they weren't going to get any military training there." Or so Ricardo Davis said. Sounds like an impromptu excuse for sending them home when Bill McLaney's cottage was busted in town. What's interesting to me is that the owner's nephew visited the place (probably on Big 7 Road), heard guns being fired on the property, and realized that they had been duped into thinking they were providing housing to homeless Cuban exiles. Wasn't it Richard Davis who said that ten exiles had arrived from Miami on Wednesday night, July 24, 1963, in two cars, and that both cars broke down when they arrived in New Orleans and that that was why they had to ask the local Catholic Cuban Refugee Center for financial help in putting the Cubans up for four or five nights in a motel? http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/C%20Disk/Camps%20Cuban%20New%20Orleans/Item%2002.pdf I'm just wondering -- What are the chances that both cars broke down at the same time? And what happened to those cars? Was one of them a Rambler Station Wagon? And doesn't the "two broke down cars" story contradict the story that the exiles left because they were disappointed? FWIW, the motel that they stayed at, the Monterrey Motel at 4500 Gentilly Highway (now called Gentilly Boulevard which is the same thing as Hwy. 90 / Chef Menteur Highway), is on the south side of Lake P. and about 35 driving miles from the "Big 7 Road" Camp. http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Orleans-Louisiana-The-Monterey-Motel-1955-/400969728343?hash=item5d5ba88157 https://www.google.com/maps/place/4500+Gentilly+Blvd,+New+Orleans,+LA+70126/@30.0291004,-90.02885 41,11z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x8620a8f1589b9091:0xbf8e0d097f976f6a --Tommy