Thomas Graves

Dennis Bartholomew said, "As an aside, I’m always astounded by the new information that John Armstrong keeps finding." James Hargrove replied, "Me too, and I’m his biggest fan. Amazing how many people (and groups) are gunning for him. I mean, if his conclusions about two Oswalds are wrong, which I doubt, so what?" RIGHT. So what if Armstrong, Hargrove, Josephs, et al., confused newbies, obfuscated the real facts of the case, and contributed to flaky "Deep State" thinking in the research community? Ain't no big deal. -- Tommy

That's the good ol' Ronnie Ecker I remember from ten years ago! -- Tommy

Nice insults, there, "Deep State" James. Therefore, using your "logic" and tendency to generalize, everyone who disagrees with you (even if they're a CTer, like me), must be CIA, right? I mean I mean I mean I mean. -- Tommy

Sandy, I don't know, either. Haven't looked into it. Just thought you might find it "interesting". Have you read the article yet? Or is the cognitive dissonance involved just too darn painful? -- Tommy

"This video is unavailable."

George. Dear. I don't mean to sound insulting, but you just don't seem to "get" it. There's a big difference between a really, really long term "doppelganger" project, and a short-term impersonation deal. Forum member and former Army counter-intelligence officer, Jon G. Tidd (who seems to have recused himself from posting on the forum due to a threatened lawsuit against him by another former contributor here who just happened to be a lawyer), has come up with an interesting compromise by opining that there was an "Oswald Double" project, but that it didn't start until "Harvey" (Marina's future husband) joined the Marines in October, 1956, not way back in 1947, or something, and that this four-year project artificially created the paperwork, etc., for the respective cover-story "childhoods" of Harvey and Lee. I am much more willing to accept this than the (imho) Paranoic, "Deep State"- Mindset -Engendering (and ultimately Obfuscating) very, very long term Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites cult-theory. Capiche? -- Tommy

And, after doing a little "research," it looks like his dad(?), also named James L. Norwood, might have been mayor of Burbank, California, home of Lockeed's "Skunk Works" and ... the Disney Studios ... , for a few years (1931 - 1933).

Doctor Larsen, I wonder if the following would have any bearing on the issue at hand (pardon the pun). " 13. Technically, there is no legal proof that Oswald had gonorrhea because the doctors took a smear rather than a culture. Dr. Donabedian testified (8H313-14) that normally the doctors would use the smear method and, if the results appeared to be gonorrhea, would just assume it was and treat it as such, regardless of whether it might actually have been a different bacteria involved." http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/vd.htm#N_13_ -- Tommy

He's some academic specialist, on the 19th Century French dramatist Jean Giraudoux. He's also a narrator of fantasy books. LOL -- Tommy Ahh, France. The home of Thierry "Fake News" Speth, who misidentified Gloria Calvery on Elm Street way back in the day, which mis-identification is still haunting serious JFK assassination students and true researchers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_20_hoax

Tracy, That's the "vibe" I've gotten from "Deep State" James over the years. -- Tommy

Tracy, Given what I said above, and given the large number of Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites types who are attracted to this forum, we have a tremendous amount in common. -- Tommy PS Another thing we have in common is that neither of us consciously support Paul Trejo's "CT" !

I'm probably wrong on this, but wasn't that trailer destined for Florida? Or am I thinking of a different one? -- Tommy

Sandy, Certainly? LOL Living in the Navy town of San Diego, I'll do some asking around, even if it means striking up a conversation with an old timer or two who are wearing their Navy "baseball caps" in the supermarket. I certainly ain't shy. -- Tommy

Dear George, Tracy is a so-called LNer, whereas I'm a CTer. The only thing we have in common is that we both think the theory involving a long-term doppelganger project popularly called called Harvey and Lee is ridiculous. -- Tommy

Sweet George, Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't disagree with you. I was just pointing out the legalistic reality of the situation. Once Oswald was charged with murdering JFK, he became what is known as a "Defendant." From about 15 minutes after the assassination until Jack Ruby snuffed him out on 11.24.63, the DPD collected evidence to be used in the suspect's, and then defendant Oswald's, upcoming case, but then he up and died, and, unfortunately, at that point the DPD was no longer required to collect said evidence, some of which might even have been used, through the "discovery" process, to help defend Oswald! When Oswald was shot by Ruby, he was neither a suspect nor a "perp," He was a DEFENDANT. Love and kisses, -- Tommy

Dear George, Was a grand jury convened before the Warren Commission began? Regardless, Oswald, having been charged with the murder of JFK, was no longer a suspect, he was the defendant. -- Tommy

edited and bumped

I'm saying maybe they should have been interested in finding out whether or not the assassination had been a collaborative effort.

Tracy, Seein' as how Oswald was charged with murdering JFK, I guess you're right -- the Dallas Police Department was not obligated to continue gathering evidence against Oswald after he was killed. Unless, of course, they or the DA suspected he might have had an accomplice or two. -- Tommy

Dear "Deep State" James, Well, gosh, one would think that that principal didn't routinely let the FBI take away the records of his students, and therefore he would have remembered and commented upon, way before Armstrong so effectively "jogged his memory," the subject of their coming to take Oswald's away, wouldn't one? -- Tommy

Dear "Deep State" James, You're the one who brought up the subject of my (supposedly non-existent) research. And now you want to change subjects, just like Donald Trump. LOL -- Tommy P.S. What about my interview of Robert D.Steel?

"Dear James" What's your theory as to where the photo originated? Cuban Intelligence? Mexican Intelligence? The Walt Disney Studio? Or the Mexico City CIA's LILYRIC camera, focused on the area near the front entrance of the Soviet Embassy, at 12:05 pm, October 2, 1963? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=4490&relPageId=3 -- Tommy PS Why are you calling the man in the photo (and the burly, balding guy aka Mexico City Mystery Man in the photo next to him, who, btw, was photographed by the same LILYRIC camera just eleven minutes later at 12:16 -- see the "contact sheet, above) Lee Harvey Oswald without quotation marks?

Bumped yet again for James. Because he keeps missing it. In more ways than one. -- Tommy

Dear "Deep State" James, Sounds like you could use a massage and some Pepto Bismol. -- Tommy