Jump to content
The Education Forum

Don Jeffries

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Jeffries

  1. I confess to having a personal stake in this as well. A while back, I read a few posts on Greg's forum, from Lee Farley, that indicated he was going to trash my book on Amazon. He has indeed now posted a scathing, one star review on Amazon UK. Now he has every right to do this, of course. However, when such a strategy was discussed beforehand on a forum, to the approval of others who clearly have no intention of reading my book, it again becomes difficult to interact with these same people respectfully. I will not trash Greg Parker's book on Amazon, even if I actually read it. How would Greg
  2. Just for the edification of those who are unfamiliar with the way WE are vilified at Greg Parker's forum, here is their latest attempt to lampoon me: http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13171680-open-letter-to-the-fez-?page=2 I'm sorry, but you can't expect researchers to take you seriously, or any human being to respect you, when you permit this kind of thing on your forum.
  3. Vanessa, You, like Greg Parker, are confusing opinion, and interpretation of data, as "fact based research," and the opposition to that interpretation as irresponsible and something that shouldn't be tolerated on this forum. Some of us strongly object to the way Greg has interpreted the evidence regarding multiple Oswalds, and have debated him about it on this forum. That clearly wouldn't be permitted on Greg's forum. I certainly hope that such debate is always permitted here. While I think James has been more than accommodating to the ROKCers who have appeared on this forum, it's only huma
  4. I just want to clarify that what I said about Greg Parker on a DPF thread is no different from what I've said here directly to him. The inference is that I went to a comfortable setting and talked behind his back. I hope that anyone who has read our previous discussions realizes that this is simply not the case. I commend James for trying to keep civility here. We've battled over this issue many times in the past. It is a fine line between what Mark reasonably calls the give-and-take that is necessary for all good debate, and more heated discussions that turn ugly and aren't productive. We o
  5. Sorry, Greg, it's hard to keep up with you. After all, you've now apparently abandoned your previously passionate belief that the Bogard incident could be explained away with one Louis Oswalt. Now, you're even further out on the limb and are actually claiming it was LHO himself. Does it really seem credible to you that Oswald would incriminate himself by talking about "coming into some money" in the near future? Without some sort of anticipated assassination payoff, exactly where did Oswald think any money was coming from? His minimum wage job? And where does Bogard's alleged "depression"
  6. Your theory seems to be, the more unlikely something is to have happened, the greater the chance it did happen. You mean like someone's tonsils growing back?
  7. I'm glad you liked it, Brian. Like I tell everyone, Amazon reviews are always appreciated. Thanks for reading.
  8. Greg Parker wrote: Please show me the "numerous visits in between" to the medical clinic at Atsugi that you claim he had. Nothing indicating it in the evidence you provided. Once again... you simply don't seem to able to understand the records. The record shows that there were four dates "in between" to the clinic. We can quibble about what constitutes "numerous," but there were multiple visits. But you will surely suggest that I am also unable to "understand the records" like you can. After all, you explain away the tonsillectomy issue with a magic bullet-bunched up coat-like theory
  9. Thanks for sharing this, Brian. That's certainly one I missed in my book.
  10. Greg, Obviously, I feel that the "crazy" ex-Marine who visited Sylvia Odio was an impostor,a look-a-like designed to incriminate the patsy beforehand. This was a view that virtually all reputable researchers held until recent years. The reason Sylvia and her sister thought they recognized him was because..."Leon" looked a lot like Oswald. I imagine that was a primary requirement for the job. I don't think it's an out of the box situation here. The phone call about "Leon" Oswald calling the Cubans cowards for not killing Kennedy was either what it appears on the surface to be- an effort to p
  11. David, I've been over this before, but perhaps not with you. Steven Witt came along at a perfect moment, as the HSCA was concentrating on the more sensational aspects of critical research (for instance, the three tramps). The televised hearings with Witt were a circus. The most memorable moment came when the umbrella "accidentally" opened and Chairman Louis Stokes could joke about not pointing it at him, in a clear derisive reference to theories that had suggested the Umbrella Man had fired a dart-like weapon. Witt's rationale for being in Dealey Plaza with an open umbrella was about as bel
  12. David, I hope others appreciate your efforts here, but I suspect that Thomas will merely review old MASH reruns and the work of Groucho Marx, in the hopes it will inspire another of his endless short, sarcastic responses.
  13. Tommy, As I've said on any number of occasions, I haven't read Harvey and Lee. I do know enough of Armstrong's research to recognize its importance. Greg has taken his obsession over Armstrong into the possibly, but not necessarily, connected area of the seeming attempts to impersonate Oswald in an effort to frame him.
  14. Greg, So let me get this straight. Sylvia Odio was visited by three people. One of them was named "Leon," and never said his last name, even though she told the Warren Commission that he had said "Oswald." Whoever this guy was, his friend described him as a "crazy" ex-Marine who had called the Cuban people cowards for not killing Kennedy. But this had nothing to do with the ex-Marine Lee Harvey Oswald, who would in short order be blamed for killing the very same Kennedy. Or, alternatively, the "crazy" ex-Marine was the real Lee Harvey Oswald. Or Sylvia Odio was suffering from emotional prob
  15. Greg, You continue to attack the messenger and not address the bulk of the message, in the best tradition of Warren Commission apologists. I never said that Bogard was definitely beaten up- if you recall I stated that the source for this was apparently Penn Jones, and I recognize that his accuracy wasn't perfect. He still had a better track record than any mainstream journalist, and given what we know of other witnesses who were intimated, threatened, etc., it's perfectly believable to me that he was beaten up. You've also referred more than once to Bogard's alleged mental issues, in an iden
  16. Greg, I doubt that the irony was lost on Paul when your support for having serious exchanges without unnecessary put-downs was rationalized by calling those you disagree with "clowns." Believing that all those disparate encounters with a seeming Oswald impersonator indicated an effort to frame Oswald prior to the assassination isn't "disgraceful." It's based on a logical reading of testimony by credible witnesses. The incidents reported by Odio, Bogard and others only strengthen the case for conspiracy.
  17. It's instructive for all irresponsible "conspiracy theorists" to take note of Greg Parker's sane, reasonable style of debate. A particularly astute way of starting off a powerful response is to write, "Are you on meds?" You can finish by calling your opponent's argument "idiocy" and, secure in your own forum's safe haven, probably use more colorful language in proving your point. It's nice for those of us who have been "disgraceful" in our work to know that Greg Parker is out there, lending us credibility.
  18. Greg, It is exceedingly difficult to take you seriously. You ask me how I can know that the "Oswaldo" who visited Sylvia Odio with two others was trying to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination? I don't know- maybe the references to the "crazy marine," and the stuff about Cubans not having any guts, and how they should have killed Kennedy? Maybe the name of the "crazy marine?" You seriously ask why a witness offering unwanted information in this case would have been beaten up? You think it's "disgraceful" to say that a man who reported encountering a fake Oswald died suspicio
  19. Or, Greg, to be totally outrageous, maybe a completely credible witness like Sylvia Odio was telling the truth, and describing a situation where someone was obviously trying to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald in the assassination BEFORE the assassination. Maybe Ralph Yates was telling the truth, too. Maybe Albert Bogard and the others who saw someone purporting to be Oswald, acting in a manner sure to garner the right kind of "patsy" attention, were accurate in what they reported, too. If you don't think that someone who reported seeing a man who has been pretty universally seen as one of the mo
  20. Greg, The FBI claimed to have received a letter from the Salvation Army, which apparently cannot be located, to the effect that there was an individual named Louis Oswalt who looked like Lee Harvey Oswald? I admit that it is exceedingly curious that someone with that close a name would also be a supposed physical look-a-like, but such apparent coincidences are par for this case. The tip from Tanner to the FBI seems inconsistent with the Bogard incident, which took place just prior to the assassination, whereas the other tip investigated by the FBI obviously occurred much earlier, if the car
  21. John Toland was a well-respected establishment historian, a Pulitzer Prize winner. Then, late in life, he made the mistake of demonstrating how FDR had foreknowledge of the "sneak" attack on Pearl Harbor. Needless to say, his book about the subject, Infamy, won no prized establishment awards. For his sins, Toland was called a "Nazi" by Barbara Tuchman and shunned by "respectable" historians. This is the way the establishment inevitably responds to unwelcome information.
  22. Vanessa, The fact we can still be discussing shadowy figures on the doorstep of the TSBD, over fifty years later, is another indication of just how bad the "investigation" was. I'm not great at analyzing figures in photographs, which is why I think most film alteration threads inevitably become debates that are impossible to resolve one way or the other. I don't think Oswald's head, or Lovelady's head, was painted on anywhere. Obviously, Oswald can't be both the figure with his head poking out and "Prayer Man." If Oswald can be shown anywhere in that doorway, there is no more need to debate
  23. Vanessa, I don't believe Lovelady could be Prayer Man. What I meant is that I think there is still doubt about the figure in the Altgens photograph which is now generally accepted by most critics to be Lovelady. I think it could be Oswald, although I grant that it's more likely that "Prayer Man" is Oswald.
  24. I think it's naive to expect that, if Oswald had been on the steps and was indeed "Prayer Man," others would naturally have come forward and reported this to the authorities. Picture how frightened someone might have been, especially circa 1963, to possess such damning information, which would single-handedly have demolished the government's case against the alleged assassin. Oswald's supposed responses during those unrecorded interrogation sessions must be taken with a huge grain of salt, for the very fact that they were unrecorded. Whether we are trusting his "I was out front" comment, or
  • Create New...