Thomas Graves

Dear Bart, How can you say that with a straight face? You are making progress, though. At least you didn't "pull a Billy Miller" and say, "But, but, but ... it's way too fuzzy to say 'he has no hair on his forehead, and very little on the side, and he's wearing a boldly-patterned, dark-colored shirt with a white t-shirt under it, and that he's talking with that Big Girl In Black whom that idiot Tommy Graves and his occasionally-trusty but brilliant sidekick, Sandy Larsen, identified as Gloria Calvery down on Elm Street during the motorcade.'" There's hope for you yet. -- Tommy

Sandy, In my humble opinion, by changing it to "whomever" from your original, correct (imho) "whoever," you ended up sounding falsely intellectual, kinda like the-one-and-only Lee Harvey Oswald did from time to time. LOL But don't feel badly (or is it bad?), I've always had problems with pronouns, too. It would be so much easier, I suppose, if English were a more highly inflected (look it up) language like Czech, or Polish, or (gasp) Russian. But then, instead of having to struggle with pronouns, I'd have to struggle with figuring out which prefix or suffix to put on the root word, you know, depending on whether it was being used in a nominative, or a genitive, or a dative, or a locative, or an accusative, or an instrumental, or a vocative kind of way. And worst of all, I'd really have to struggle to figure out what people were saying to me in a social situation, given the fact that all those different prefixes and suffixes make the root word sound so different as to be unrecognizable (to me at least) when spoken at anything faster than a snail's pace. To sum it all up, my having to do that for seven years in the Czech Republic caused me to feel very badly, to the bone, indeed. -- Tommy PS If there is a large group of "undecided" "Harvey and Lee" photos, and many of them go back before 1956, it argues for three possible explanations, imho -- one kinda "normal", and two really, really paranoiac ones: 1 ) The vast majority of the photos that "could go either way" were actually all of the same "Oswald," be it "Harvey", or "Lee". As long as these photos don't go back before 1956 or so, they might support Jon G. Tidd's theory that the Oswald "Double Project" started only when "Harvey" (the guy who ended up being killed by Jack Ruby on 11/24/63) joined the Marines. 2 ) Many of the "undecided" photos were altered by the bad guys to make the two easy-to-differentiate guys look virtually identical. 3 ) [Relax! I'm working on it. I haven't had my coffee yet.] Oh yeah! HARVEY AND LEE AND THE TWO MARGUERITES REALLY DID GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO 1947 OR SO. [It's amazing what a little caffeine can do.]

Bill Kelly had written: "If the Mexico City Mystery Man is the guy [who is pointing to himself] in the USMC photo, his identity should be known." ................................................................................................................................................... Dear Bill, So you think I might be "really on to something," eh? Man oh man, if THAT isn't a vote of confidence from the great William Kelly, I guess I don't know what IS! Thanks, Bill! Mexico City Mystery Man -- Tommy

I agree with you, Mikey. -- Tommy

Sandy, Not sure I understand. (What else is new, right?) I may be right about what? -- Tommy I don't want to sound overly pedantic, but I think it should be "whoever" in that sentence. Yeah, yeah I know .. "Whatever".

Dear Mikey, Huh? Don't you see the difference between them, Mike "Grudge Holder" Walton? James Hargrove is close-minded (IMHO) and is therefore ... hopeless (IMHO). Sandy is more ... open-minded ... and smarter than Hargrove by far (IMHO). I mean, I mean, I mean. Which are you, anyway, -- envious, or jealous (hmm?) -- of my ... uh ... "relationship" with Sandy? Ever considered ... psychoanalysis? (lol) -- Tommy I just now realized that you remind me of Donald Trump. Feelings easily hurt, overly defensive, and it's all about "winning" isn't it. Sorry, but you did ask for it.

Yes, Mike, I'm full aware of that. But regardless, I still have significantly more hope for him than I do for the other acolytes of the Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites ... uh ... Church. Truth-be-told, I pray every night when I go to bed that Sandy will soon experience a severe crisis of "faith". Not unlike what Soren Kierkegaard must have gone through before he locked himself inside his room. But wait! Am I mistaken? Was that Gregor Samsa, instead? I do get SO confused, sometimes! -- Tommy Like I said, it depends on how far away that skyscraper is away from deep left field, doesn't it.

Edited and bumped for Mike "The Grudge Holder" Walton

Mikey, Sandy's a pretty sharp guy. And from time-to-time he's able to think critically and in an unbiased way about the JFK assassination. I'm sorry that he and I showed you to be way off in left field regarding Neck Scratcher and Gangly Man, that he made a "huge, crazy" boo-boo when he said a guy on those Grassy Knoll steps had what looked like a gun in his hand, and that he was basically right about the trajectory of a baseball when it's thrown (with sufficient force, of course) from deep left field to home plate. I still have great hopes for him, myself, and you should, too. IMHO. So, why don't you just swallow your pride-full-ness for once, and learn to get along with him? You know, let bygones be bygones and that sort of thing? It's too bad you don't realize advantages of collaborating from time-to-time with one's "ideological" or "personal" opponents/enemies on this forum, nor, as a case in point, the import of Sandy's and my collaborative effort in identifying "Big Girl" Gloria Calvery on Elm Street during the motorcade, and of her speaking with Lovelady on the TSBD steps about 30 seconds after the assassination, imho. Etc. -- Tommy

Tracy, Yeah. LOL That's the only way they can "do" it. "Well, I'm not sure which one this is, quite frankly, but since it was taken on such-and-such a date, and in such-and-such a place, it MUST be Harvey! (Or it must be Henry. Heck, it MIGHT EVEN BE that evil, evil, assassin, LEE! Wait, I know how we can tell! Was he with smiling Marguerite, or non-smiling Marguerite?") -- Tommy

That guy was identified as "Russian male LEON" by the CIA on the photographic contact sheet. LEON, as in Mexico City-based KGB officer Nikolai Leonov, whose cover job was "Third Secretary" at the Mexico City Soviet Embassy, and who claimed many years later to have met with Oswald at said embassy on Sunday, September 29, 1963, when Oswald, wouldn't you know, just "showed up unannounced!" and guess what? --- Yep! only Leonov was there, believe it or not. -- Tommy Edit: I just now found some stuff about about a CIA op against Leonov on the Mary Ferrell website: https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=LIGAFF

deleted by T. Graves

Dear Mikey, Please explicate! Modus operandi? What modus operandi? Why are you pussyfooting around here, Mikey? -- Tommy PS Can you name any of the "conspiracy is everywhere" researchers you allude to, so conveniently and ... uh .... ambiguously, above? And what, pray tell, does "all government bad" mean in the context of your wish-washy post? If you're talking about me, wouldn't be more accurate to accuse me of believing that "All fake news and witting misrepresentation of facts which intends to entrench "true believers" in even more divisive, counter-productive, paranoiac, conspiracy-minded thinking, be it on the Left or on the Right, is bad"? LOL

Mike, Please try to make it a little less ambiguous as to whom you're talking about here. "You talkin' 'bout me?" Or is the general paranoiac mindset of many of my "colleagues" finally affecting me, too? IMHO -- Tommy

Bart, In addition to Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites, I guess we're going to have to make room for The Two Loveladys, too! Note dressed-in-black "Big Girl" Gloria Calvery continuing to talk with Lovelady as Calvery's dressed-in-white colleague tries to pull her up the steps: -- Tommy

bumped

Dear Jim, Oh, regardless of the fact you have "no idea how to characterize many of those 'Harvey and Lee' photos" (but do have boundless faith in the 'highly-esteemed expert researchers' ARMSTRONG and JACK "We Never Went To The Moon" WHITE (R.I.P.) who created the poster, all of the photos on it must be correct, mustn't they. I see. Well, all I can say is hopefully Johnny and Jackie weren't advised by the group comprised of 'expert researchers' Thierry "Fake News" Speth, Don Roberdeau, and Robin Unger, which group incorrectly identified Stella Jacob, Gloria Holt, and Sharon Simmons as "Gloria Calvary" (in reality the "Big Girl" standing between "Peggy Burney" and John Templin, below), "Karan Hicks," and "Carol Reed" in the Z-Frame, below. Etc. Etc. Etc. Carry on, -- Tommy

Chuck Berry. Free outdoor concert in the medieval square by the Dominican Church in Brno, Czech Republic, 1996. On a slightly-raised stage. He did the Duck Walk. -- Tommy

Hey! Maybe you can cajole Bill into asking whichever museum he evidently gave the one-and-only-copy to ... to, uh ... give it back to him so that he can give it back to me so that I can lend it to you so that you, too, can mis-transcribe it and put it on your website (without giving me proper credit for having done the darned interview in the first place) and then you can give it to some museum without my... uh ... permission? Which has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject matter of this thread. Except, of course, that in the interview (or perhaps the unrecorded one I did with retired ONI special agent Robert D. Steel about one week earlier -- unrecorded because it was done one week before my friend, Dave "The Wave" Lawson, gave me his deceased father's tape recorder?), Steel implausibly told me that "for the life of" him he couldn't remember where he was when he heard JFK had been shot, and the fact that the photo, below, does happen to be of a bunch of Marines which "branch" of the military, iirc, does fall under the aegis of the ONI, intelligence-wise. I can't find a photo of KGB agent Yuri Moskalev at the moment, but here's Mario Tauler Sague:

Excellent point, Bill! -- Tommy

"Bishop" is the only name that is transcribed in quotes.... Interesting. Nice catch. Since the transcript doesn't say, "There is a name quote, Bishop, unquote written there," one can only wonder whether or not Griffin used "air quotes." If he didn't, how would the person writing down the testimony (like a court reporter) know to put that name and only that name in quotes? -- Tommy

Wow, you really do wanna believe in Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites don't you, Sandy? Does it fill some deep psychological need of yours to distrust governmental authority in a Libertarian-kind-of-way, and to truly believe that we live in a CIA-NSA-controlled "National Security State" (as Jimmy D likes to put it), or a George Soros / Hillery "Killery-Shillery" Clinton / Illuminati- controlled "Deep State" as the Alt-Right claim? And that's how you're able to suspend your critical-thinking abilities and swallow hook-line-and-sinker the theory that two boys were chosen by the evil, evil OSS in 1947, or so, and that they .... ? -- Tommy PS "I trust the authorities only when what they report is evidence against the official story they are trying to push." HUH? So, you've already decided that everything the Warren Report, the HSCA, etc, reported as being factual was actually a prevarication? "How do you filter your government-produced 'facts,' Tommy? Randomly? Or does it depend upon whether it fits in with your pet theories?" Do you think I had some kind of vested interest in proving that Stella Jacob had been mis-identified as Gloria Calvery on the north side of Elm Street? Etc? What makes you think I have any "Pet theories," anyway? The closest thing I have to "pet theories" are are little internally-consistent vignettes.

My challenge stands. -- Tommy

In other words, you only trust stuff that tends to support Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites, huh? And you call "fake" or "altered" any evidence that does not support it. LOL ! -- Tommy

"Well, let's see ... since this photo was taken on such-and-such date and in such-in-such place, it must be ... uh ....." LOL -- Tommy