Thomas Graves

I believe it is very germane. In any murder case, the background of the victim and main suspect are of supreme importance. In this case, it leads not just to the frame, but to the real plotters of the assassination and some of the players in it. I agree that the FBI and CIA were pretty much snookered by the use of Oswald as the patsy. The party you refer to at the end is a highly placed insider with lots of intel connections. Most of the answers are not in the box we've been told we can play in. Most are outside that box. There were no shortage of potential false sponsors - and no shortage of some willing to push those false sponsors... and here I include both pro-Castroites and anti-Castro exiles among others, not least being the "mob". LBJ either knew what was happening and did nothing to stop it, or found out after, and quickly jumped on board the cover-up. His "millions will die" pleadings to Warren is the give-away... it was a line used to produce another cover-up in an earlier historical event... and this case is filled with such historical borrowings by the cover-up artists. I think parts of the CIA and FBI snookered the rest of both organizations, and made it look like they themselves had been snookered, too. --Tommy

Good one, Mark. It seems to be part of human nature to always take things to extremes. While I can accept the idea that Oswald was impersonated from time to time, I don't take it to the extreme and say that a Russian-speaking boy of Hungarian ancestry was chosen many years before the assassination to act as somebody's doppelganger and vice versa, and that one of them killed JFK after helping to set up the other one to take the blame. Too neat. Too tidy. Too implausible. I don't know how else to put it. Thanks, --Tommy

Thanks for the feedback, Greg. (I grew 14 inches one year around the age of 13 or 14. Talk about growth spurts. Course I did end up bein' 6' 5", but still...) Armstrong and Jo Jo tickle my funny bone. Great entertainment! --Tommy Tommy, I wonder how long he'll stay away this time before coming back and changing the subject? I think (should he return any time soon) he'll switch to the USMC records. His problem is, he is too used to dealing with unquestioning zombies over at the DeepFooFoo forum - under the protection of his fellow cultists on the moderation team, should one of them accidentally ask a pertinent question. He is out of his depth on neutral territory. I rarely go over there myself, Greg. Although I agree with most of what P. D. Scot says in DP and the Death of JFK, I find that concentrating on one "conspiracy" at a time works best for me. I have a low tolerance for grand schemes and paranoia in my life whereas it appears that some people need it like a drug. I'm not much of a True Believer -- I'm too skeptical and critical-minded, I guess. And I'll be the first to admit to getting carried away sometimes by my own misconceptions and perceptions -- Tan Jacket Man in the Hughes film, for example. Although it sure looked to me as though he was handing something off to the guy in the blue jacket... lol I really wanted him to be the guy that Baker said he had encountered on the fourth floor or the stairway near the fourth floor... --Tommy

Thanks for the feedback, Greg. (I grew 14 inches one year around the age of 13 or 14. Talk about growth spurts. Course I did end up bein' 6' 5", but still...) Armstrong and Jo Jo tickle my funny bone. Great entertainment! --Tommy

I edited it. Read it again.

Jon, James Jesus Angelton was a real intel pro with real carte blanche. --Tommy

In response to the above, Greg Parker wrote: "But of course [Jo Jo], you're not going to post the originals which might confirm your maths... The whole premise that the FBI forged the New York City school records is a completely screwed-up premise to try and sell. If my 11 year olds bought it, they'd get detention for a year. The FBI had to beg the courts to release the records which was eventually done through the mayor's office. So you've got the FBI altering records supplied to them through official legal channels and then having the chutzpah to not only alter them, but to allow the WC to publish the altered versions. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10765&relPageId=2 PS Thanks for finding and passing on the link, Tommy. I appreciate it." Greg, So Josephs is alleging that the FBI altered records that they had had to beg for through legal channels, and then actually allowed the Warren Commission to publish those altered records? Sounds like a very serious allegation. Just wondering -- If Josephs posted "the originals," would they "confirm his maths"? I suppose not. Otherwise he would have posted them, right? --Tommy PS You're welcome Greg. BTW, which link are you referring to? LOL But seriously, thank YOU for posting the newspaper picture of Lee Harvey Oswald that Jack White altered it almost beyond recognition. And thank you for what you do in general. What about Oswald's measurements while in school, Jo Jo? Didn't Armstrong and you confuse 5' 4' with 54 inches, or something like that, which was a significant mistake because, after all, 54 inches = 4' 8" and is considerably shorter than 5' 4". I'm going from memory here, so I might have the actual numbers wrong, but I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. Ring any bells, ? --Tommy

Could that be Aristotle Onassis sitting next to her? --Tommy

In response to the above, Greg Parker wrote: "But of course [Jo Jo], you're not going to post the originals which might confirm your maths... The whole premise that the FBI forged the New York City school records is a completely screwed-up premise to try and sell. If my 11 year olds bought it, they'd get detention for a year. The FBI had to beg the courts to release the records which was eventually done through the mayor's office. So you've got the FBI altering records supplied to them through official legal channels and then having the chutzpah to not only alter them, but to allow the WC to publish the altered versions. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10765&relPageId=2 PS Thanks for finding and passing on the link, Tommy. I appreciate it." Greg, So Jo Jo is alleging that the FBI altered records that they had had to beg for through legal channels, and then actually allowed the Warren Commission to publish those altered records? Sounds like a very serious allegation. Just wondering -- If Jo Jo posted "the originals," would they "confirm his maths"? I suppose not. Otherwise he would have posted them, right? --Tommy PS You're welcome Greg. BTW, which link are you referring to? LOL But seriously, thank YOU for posting the newspaper picture of Lee Harvey Oswald that Jack White altered it almost beyond recognition. And thank you for what you do in general.

The above is a perfect example of yours (and by extension, Armstrong's) flawed methodology. Pic doesn't know about an address so that automatically means his family didn't live there - the delightful family known as the Dopplegangers did. There is a simpler explanation, but why look for it? We already know you can't count. 12 weeks looks like 5 to you, but according to you, should have actually been 13 or more. Here is the real reason Pic had no memory of San Saba... "Mrs Oswald purchased a small home in Benbrook on what is now San Saba Street..." http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=74098 In other words, it had a different name when they lived there. John did recall it, as the link above confirms... but under the original name. I know I know... this is all Armstrong's doing not yours... and you had nothing to do with pushing any of it here... must have been your evil twin. Your continual reference to my lack of evidence and sources is just another tactic. You think by talking it up, people may actually start to believe it -- well, maybe -- if they are only reading one side of this. Just for the record, here is what the last reviewer of my book says about it. "A well written, superbly researched and sourced volume." That was by Rob Clark. You know... the guy who interviewed you recently for his pod cast. Now, exactly when are you going to admit you got it wrong about my posts all those years ago, and when are you going to address Jack White's Frankenstein Oswald? Avoidance is all well and good, but you're above that, surely? Greg, Can't you get it through your head that neither Jo Jo nor his mentor Armstrong would ever even consider cherry-picking, on speculation, inaccurate, out-of-context information, and pounding the heck out of it (like a square peg into a round hole) in a vain attempt to buttress their Genetically-Engineered Harvey and Lee and Henry, Too! theory. Please lighten-up on them, Greg. It's not their fault that their theory is riddled with inaccuracies and outright blunders, like the late Jack White's crude attempt to distort the facial characteristics of Lee Harvey Oswald as they really did appear in that newspaper photograph, and their obvious misinterpreting (to their advantage, of course) of the numbers on Lee Harvey Oswald's school attendance records, to mention just two examples. --Tommy

The assassins in Prague were very close to the car. In Dallas they were much farther away. --Tommy

If Lovelady was found guilty of selling or trying to sell a gun stolen from the military, it seems to me that he should have been hit with more than just a fine. Was it just a misdemeanor type crime, or even less? Why did Campbell or whomever hire him if they knew about his criminal background? Why did Campbell pay his fine for him instead of fire him? Were they desperate for workers at the TSBD? --Tommy

How does any of this help us figure out who killed JFK? --Tommy

Interestingly, when Billy Lovelady was in the military (forget which branch) he and another guy were convicted of selling or trying to sell a gun which they had apparently stolen from the military. Going from memory here, but I think that's right. --Tommy

OK, Paul B., I just read that short thread. It's a good one. I'm very comfortable speculating on this aspect of the JFK murder with you, Paul B., because this appears to be the one aspect that we can agree upon -- that the Dallas Police Department played a far larger role in the JFK murder than the Warren Commission ever hinted. IMHO, the keynote in the narrative in the OSWALD - FROM OUT OF THE COSMOS thread, is that the 112th INTC Military had a case file on Lee Harvey OSWALD that consisted largely in newspaper clippings from New Orleans during OSWALD's summer of 1963 -- the Sheep-dipping episode -- starting in April 1963, but reaching a climax in August 1963, with countless newspaper reports of OSWALD's arrest in NOLA, his scuffle with Carlos Bringuier, his radio appearance and his TV appearance. In other words, virtually all of the material that OSWALD took with him to Mexico City (and revealed in the Lopez Report) was in the possession of the 112th INTC Military Unit in Texas. WHY? It is my belief that the OSWALD Framers in New Orleans and the JFK Killers in Dallas carefully coordinated these records, since the PATSY was not merely selected in mid-October, when OSWALD took a job at the TSBD building, but was selected during the New Orleans period -- when he was *deliberately* Sheep-dipped to be the Patsy. This is supported by Harry Dean's claim that the Patsy selection was finalized near the middle of September 1963 when Edwin Walker told Harry Dean, along with Guy Gabaldon, John Rousselot and other JBS stalwarts, that OSWALD, an FPCC Communist in New Orleans, was going to be their Patsy. The right-wing connections between the DPD, Edwin Walker, Minutemen, JBS, along with confederates inside the 112th INTC -- this all adds up to a plot that involves New Orleans and Dallas going back for months in Dallas. It still remains possible (remotely) that David Atlee Phillips BELIEVED he was grooming OSWALD for a hit on Fidel Castro, while Ex-General Edwin Walker and his ground-crew in Dallas *stole* OSWALD from that plot and used him as a Patsy in Dallas for the JFK murder. I find it harder to believe that Guy Banister, Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Jack S. Martin, Fred Crisman and Thomas Beckham were surprised at the JFK outcome. It is equally hard to believe that Frank Sturgis, David Morales, Howard Hunt, Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Gerry Patrick Hemming were surprised at the JFK outcome. With so many confederates in the South, it seems to me logical to suppose that Edwin WALKER had confederates inside the DPD, as well as the Dallas County offices, as well as the 112th INTC Military Unit. As for JD Tippit -- his participation the framing of OSWALD suggests to me that Tippit also participated in the murder of JFK -- and according to at least one photographic expert, Tippit might have been BADGE-MAN himself. I accept Ricky White's claim that his dad, Roscoe White, was also a shooter that day. I accept Mike Robinson's claim that Roscoe White killed JD Tippit. My guess is that Tippit became over-excited, and had started to boast about his famous head-shot -- which was a breach of the rules amongst the JFK Killers. That's why JD Tippit had to die -- and this was simply good luck for the JFK Killers, because they would add Cop-killer to the charges against Lee Harvey OSWALD, and further prejudice the public (and the DPD) against OSWALD. Regards, --Paul Trejo Dear "Professor" Trejo, Have you ever considered starting your own website? You could call it "By the Numbers -- How Edwin Walker Masterminded the JFK Assassination". --Tommy

They chose very well Tommy. Evidently, Jo Jo. Evidently. That would explain why Lee Harvey Oswald looked so similar yet so "different" in all those photographs, huh. Maybe they had one of them really good crystal ball thingies way back there around 1955. --Tommy PS Looks like Jack White did a little extra-curricular creative "touch up" on that newspaper photo of Lee Harvey Oswald. Thanks for posting the original newspaper article in post # 94, Greg Parker. That's the photo of Lee Harvey Oswald that has bothered me the most over the years, and now I understand why. Jack White changed the way Oswald's mouth and chin looked in his version...

Jo Jo, Gee Thanks, but unfortunately that wasn't the question I asked you most recently. Just to freshen your memory, the question I asked you most recently was -- "How did the bad guys go about choosing two young boys they hoped would grow up looking sufficiently familiar to be able to fool so many witnesses several years later?" or words to that effect. Thank you in advance, --Tommy

Jon, The only difference between you and I on this is that you are more of a generalist, whereas I'm a bit more specific. --Tommy PS Of course when I said the Vietnam War, I didn't mean just Texas-based Bell Helicopter and General Dynamics, but the CIA's involvement in the heroin trafficking that was taking place there, too.

Dear Jo Jo, Why would I want to read a disorganized, inaccurate 600+ page book that even some of its avowed believers are hesitant to dive into. If I did, I would spend the rest of my life "fact checking" its dubious claims and arguing with you and the other true believers out there. BTW-- As far as I know, you've never answered my question: How did the bad guys go about choosing your "Harvey" and "Lee" in the first place? Just any old Russian-speaking boy the same age as Lee would have sufficed? Or was it vice versa? (We'll leave marked-card "Henry" out of the mix for now.) --Tommy

I suggest that they were separate phases of the same project (a coup 'd etat), masterminded by the same small group of people and not comprehended in toto by the participants because everything was done on a "need to know" basis. --Tommy

There are many possible and plausible reasons he was killed. He had many enemies and for many different reasons. Whichever one you choose to focus on will, IMHO, be strictly a matter of personal preference. But the Vietnam War makes the most sense to me. --Tommy

I explain it by stating the one man the WC found who spent time with HARVEY gives us a completely different timeline. I explain it by reiterating the premise - there were two men using the name Lee Oswald yet the records of these men were combined to create one record. The records and information we find in the WCR and HSCA reports is designed to do one thing, implicate Oswald. And yet you are incredulous and suprised to find out that some of these FBI sourced reports were either fabricated, altered, and/or combined as needed. Or, instead of the highly motivated FBI creating a document to help tell the Oswald story, an un-motivated Marine associate of HARVEY's tells his story and must be what, lying? mistaken? Sorry Tommy but the FBI and their data has proven themselves untrustworthy, has Felde somehow done that to you? (I found the FBI took a Sept 1964 report and back-dated it to December 1963 so that there would be a bus for OSwald to leave New Orleans upon. So please Tommy - if you don't know of what you speak, better to keep it to yourself) The information in the WCR's CE1961 is a composite - and is why the FBI went out of its way not to investigate the men who would contradict this information. Felde was only found out due to a May article in LIFE magazine. Like Tague, they simply did not care to be concerned with any evidence which could contradict their investigation. Sadly you seem to have stopped short of reading CE1962 or haven't the time or desire to go to the Baylor site and look it up. http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/tabs/collection/po-arm LHO: 1957, Military, Jan. – Aug. - Felde, Allen is a 60 page notebook trying to make sense of the FBI's wrong FELDE reports. Felde's dates and the FBI exhibit conflict. What you do from here is up to you. My position is clear and the H&L work is available for all to see. Thanks for your condescension though... me and my ilk will proceed accordingly DJ "you aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know" Wow. It's all interconnected and oh so complicated, huh Jo Jo. So darn many alterations and forgeries, photographic as well as textual! One must cherry pick like crazy, mustn't one, to arrive at THE TRUTH. So please tell us once again how the bad guys were able to choose two young boys who they knew would grow up looking sufficiently alike each other to be able to fool lots and lots of witnesses many years later. Genetic Engineering, wasn't it? LOL --Tommy

Tommy - You havent' read the book - like GP You haven't read the notebooks - like GP You haven't bothered to speak with John Armstrong - like GP You haven't bothered to actually study the info - like GP You don't bother to actually look at and consider the real evidence provided here - like GP (how can the WCR state Felde was with the man yet nothing Felde says matches the MILITARY record as to where he was and when..?) Did you even bother looking at CE1961 versus 1962? Do you know what the Ping Tung situation was and how the DoD messes it up again via Blakey? Does it not bother you that none of the people who were LEE in the Marines are ever asked a question? Does it not bother you that when GP posts evidence on a question about the '53-'54 school years he gives me 7 links to unsigned, unsourced boiler plate FBI reports about 1954-55? And then claims I'm playing games. Yes, Tommy, I'm sure your time is oh so valuable, no one has asked that you read or comment upon my posts or the threads I start - amazingly enough, you make those decisions all on your own and now have to inform me that your decisions are beyond your own control? You have "fish to fry" (whatever that means) and don't have the self control to leave me alone and go fry them? Your disdain and lack of respect for Armstrong's work is most unfortunate - you seem able to do your own thinking and not rely on me or GP... but that takes a little work that you dont seem interested or willing to commit. Fine. that I spent all that time and effort to understand the theories and then created tools to help others falls on your deaf ears. Those who are interested in the subject and have done more than just give it lip service understand what I've done and continue to share and grow that understanding. Here's a thought: Don't read my threads, Don't read my posts and Don't pretend to care about what is written about H&L... cover your eyes, ears and mouth and go your merry way - I'm not taking it personnally or having to go start my own Board so I can post whatever I want without worry of rebuttal. I post here from time to time and anyone can offer up whatever they can in discussion. Expecting that these discussions include more than opinion and speculation is just too much I guess. I happen to think you offer a good mind and good questions that lead threads in positive directions. You sound more like VonPein accepting the WCR when you defend Mr. P's POV here... all faith and very little understanding. Dear Jo Jo, How do you explain the part of Warren Commission Exhibit 1961 that Greg Parker posted which shows that Lee Harvey Oswald was at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego (basic training aka "boot camp") for twelve weeks? Do you claim that it is "a forgery", or that it was somehow "altered"? If Armstrong and your ilk can be so wrong about such a basic issue as how long LHO was at boot camp, your credibility is destroyed IMHO. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=1139&relPageId=828 --Tommy

Mr. P, don't credit your words, thoughts or ideas as anyone elses's - especially mine... You use unsigned and unsourced FBI documents that describe the wrong years, wrong situations and wrong people to rebutt the H&L points - and then can't even admit you got it wrong - while offering up nothing but speculation and accusations. All the way down to accusing the doctor who performed the tonsillectomy of not being qualified or able to perform said operation and that MO made the entire thing up - again, wrong speculation without a speck of proof and when proven to you you can't even have the class to admit your errors... If you can't tell the difference between the two men I posted side by side - so be it Greg... your "acceptance" of these arguments or lack thereof is nothing I give much thought to... Someday, when you are actually qualified to discuss H&L we can pick it up again... until then maybe it's best if you just stick to your own work... (or at least bring some corroborated facts to the table so we're doing more than dealing with your opinions) Josephs, Now that Greg Parker has left, feel free to push your religion on us. Hopefully, Greg opened some eyes to the fallacies of your "Genetically-Engineered Harvey and Lee and Henry, Too" theory during the brief time he was here. For example, he showed us all that Lee Harvey Oswald was at Marine Corp boot camp for the standard twelve weeks, not your alleged five weeks or whatever. He also showed us how the face and neck of a Marine Recruit can "fill out" during the boot camp "experience." BTW: Do not mistake my refusal to reply to your future posts on your implausible theory as any inability on my part to do the requisite research. It's just that I value my time, and I, like many, "have bigger fish to fry." --Tommy

Hello Greg, I hope you continue to post here. There are MANY who want to hear what you have to say. Do you know the identity of the individual who is the "recruiter" or "spotter"? Will you be releasing any additional information in the near future, or saving it for a book? Thanks for any thoughts/info, Tom Tom, thanks for the thumbs up. I did only come here to straighten out an individual who was messing with the truth about old posts of mine. Have stayed longer than intended because there are a couple of threads of interests. Yes, I know who the recruiter was. It will all be in volume two of my book, hopefully out later this year. That part is already written, though more players and background to get to. I know it may seem like a strange statement, but the same program that sent him to the Soviet Union, also got him into the TSBD. Except it was a pretext to lure him in there in the latter case. The whole thing with the recruitment and the trip (which had a dual purpose) won't be anything like you might expect. Jon Tidd said the planners had a great knowledge of politicians... that shows keen insight, tho it goes beyond a good knowledge of politicians. Anyone wanting to know why Oswald was in the TT for example, and what his alleged pocket litter was all about, need only brush up on history. Same goes for other, older aspects of the legend. There just happened to be someone holed up in DPD HQ all day of Nov 22 who had a keen knowledge of all the right history - that is - the history that was borrowed and overlaid on Oswald. He also had the right connections... We have been going around in circles for 50+ years because we have accepted far too much on face value. In court, it is common practice to have an agreed set of facts between defense and prosecution as a starting point. We are under no such obligation to accept any of the facts as given by the government, it's agencies, or by Texas officials. Here's one recent and very basic example dug up by a guy named Mick Purdy... The accepted dogma - Wes Frazier took LHO to work every Monday from the time Oswald started at the TSBD. Fact: That's not a certainty by any means. Mick's contention is that Frazier did not take LHO to work on Nov 22, either. There are no witnesses to Oswald walking to the Randle house (though such witnesses were sought), no witnesses to Oswald being in the car except Wes, no witnesses to Oswald walking from the car park. In fact, there are witnesses to Oswald's absence from the car park because Edward Shields told the HSCA investigator sent to interview him that Charles Givens had called out from the other building asking Wes where his rider was. According to Shields, Wes replied that he had dropped Lee at the front entrance. The point is, the whole case needs stripping back and rewriting without any allegiance except to approximate the facts as closely as possible. Hi Greg, Thanks for the reply. A tantalizing post to say the very least. I'm eager to see what you have come up! Tom Greg, Tom, David, et al. Not trying to divert this thread, but I just noticed how darn good Marina's English was when she gave this testimony to the Warren Commission in 1964, two years after she had moved to the U.S. with her husband who, by all accounts, made her speak Russian at home because he didn't want her to learn English. She uses two grammatical tenses correctly which even many educated Americans have a hard time with -- the past perfect tense, and the present perfect tense. I nearly drove myself crazy trying to teach these two tenses to my students in the Czech Republic. Just sayin' Greg, I'm looking forward to your second book. Keep up the good work. --Tommy