Bernie Laverick

The above novel is in response to a simple question. Do you even know what a twin is?

Do you even know what the word TWIN actually means? So now we're being told that Harvey and Lee were 'manufactured' by the Nazis? What a waste of good oxygen...

Exactly what new evidence for a doppelganger programme has David unearthed that can't be found in Armstrong's work? Please list these "new findings". Should you not ne able to do so and hurl insults instead we can all conclude, as I said earlier, that he has provided a big fat zero to the theory he spends nearly all his life promoting. Just like you Jim... Bump

Exactly what new evidence for a doppelganger programme has David unearthed that can't be found in Armstrong's work? Please list these "new findings". Should you not ne able to do so and hurl insults instead we can all conclude, as I said earlier, that he has provided a big fat zero to the theory he spends nearly all his life promoting. Just like you Jim...

And once again we see David Josephs palpably seething with jealousy... It must be awful seeing your nemesis with his own ideas and his own research making exciting new inroads into this puzzle while your role is reduced to delivery boy for someone else's. You Dawn and Jim used to go on about "minions" but you just cannot see the irony can you? None of what you promote is your own work David. You do know that don't you? Just because you are being used as a conduit does not therefore make it YOUR research. As I said, you are merely the delivery boy. With that in mind maybe a more humble and less aggressive approach would more befit your small time status in the promotion of H&L. I'm not holding my breath...

Grow up little man...!

No. Goodbye!

Gee! Golly! Gosh!

Barking mad...! WHO IS (GREG PARKER????) He's an entity Steven. A COINTELPRO op and he's under your bed! He's in your wardrobe and he's in your shed. We all are. Watching you. Making sure you don't tell the world about the secrets that only you and the CIA know. The future of corporate America is totally dependent on making sure Steven Gaal is silenced. This is us trying to do that. But... You've rumbled us! Not for the first time we all have to ask Steven Gaal...What on earth are you talking about? This cult, note that its main proponents are religious fanatics, will go to any lengths to divert and slither away from anyone who challenges their guru. Btw, in the five years these interviews have been on You Tube none have had more than 2,000 hits, (that's about one a day!). Jeez, even my crappy songs are more popular than that! Can we just let this silliness go now and start addressing the real issue?

--Tommy PS I should have become a lawyer. I would have loved facing you in court. Because you don't like what someone else posted and I copied here you'd like to face me in court. That's funny. I will have you know I do very well in court. So I'd relish going against you in court. Alas, have you even taken your LSAT? Get back to me when you're licensed in TX. Have a good one. Dawn's a lawyer? Wow! I thought Dawn was an English teacher given her dressing down of someone else's poor grammar the other day. A lawyer? This could only ever happen in Texas!

Maybe someone can. Of note with photoshop Canadian Ulric Collette has created high internet interest with blended relatives. ========== Just mixing photos, Look Alikes: Grandmother And Granddaughter Are Mirror Images Of Each Other (PHOTO) = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/07/look-alikes-grandmother-granddaughter-at-20_n_3225886.html also see https://www.behance.net/gallery/16737099/Concept-of-Two-Two-Minds-Think-Alike Barking mad...! They are related! They share an almost identical genetic make up! Are you saying that 'Harvey' and 'Lee' were in some way related? Or are you saying that they were a result of a scientific technique that accurately predicts which two adolescents from different families can grow into adulthood with almost identical facial features? Ok... But then you'll say, when the argument suits, that they don't look that much alike at all. One has "sloping shoulders" for instance. Maybe, but they still have almost identical facial features. If not, then how can we be confident that all those who said they saw 'Lee' when 'Harvey' was in the USSR were accurate sightings? So when they were actually with 'Lee', such was the powerful 'likeness', they obviously thought they were with 'Harvey'. I notice no one will answer Tommy's poignant question. What did 'Lee' tell his friends and family whilst 'Harvey' was in the USSR? No wonder John Armstrong is having to cook up a few new menus. His commis chefs have made a right mess of the sauce for his elaborate signature dish, Way too much pepper, not enough depth and whisked far too vigorously. They spit it out onto the customers' plate and then insult them for their culinary ignorance when the customer justifiably complains. It really is an awful restaurant. Just like 'Kitchen Cinque' and 'Carlier's Carvery'...

People change. Surely you have experienced that. They put on weight. Lose their hair. Develop wrinkles. Live a hard life. Experience grief or divorce. Worry stress and poor diet ages people. Ageing brings on changes. It is not proof that there was a doppelganger parent supervising a doppelganger patsy. She just aged. For goodness sake...

Tracy, let's assume for this point it's the same woman. Isn't it as obvious to you as it is me that something happened to her that drastically changed her appearance over a space of a few years? Whether it was a period of ill health or an accident that left her house bound, a change of diet and exercise, something seems to have changed her, it's nothing to do with poor images. Surely you see that too? Now, could you answer your own question for me please regarding the photo you chose: "Why not use this photo, which according to the book is also the “imposter” Marguerite?" Other than the quality of the image, why would you Tracy use that one specifically? "Isn't it as obvious to you as it is me that something happened to her that drastically changed her appearance over a space of a few years? Whether it was a period of ill health or an accident that left her house bound, a change of diet and exercise..." I wonder what that could have been? Let's think... Maybe it was seeing her son accused of the murder of the century and then seeing that same son being gunned down on live TV!! Do you have kids Clive? Imagine seeing one of them being shot and killed in front of you and the entire world media as it happened. If I saw MY daughter gunned down on live TV after being accused of a heinous crime I dare say my demeanour, along with the normal aging process, would alter significantly to reflect that unique and very public tragedy. Wouldn't you? In H&L world even a mother's grief is ruthlessly used to add more 'glitter' to the fantasy. Shameful.

"My main problem with the whole premise is that if it were Oswald, wouldn't someone have remembered him there and said something?" The fact is that nobody said they saw ANYONE there. Even BWF who is looking right at him! Clearly someone was there. If not Oswald I throw the question back to you. How come nobody mentions this guy? Of course, if it is Oswald then the whole conspiracy comes crashing down. Consequently no one reports seeing Oswald. And anyway he is stood right at the back against a wall at the exact moment the President is driving past who would have seen him?

Aren't we all one 'COINTELPRO entity' anyway? It is pointless arguing with Gaal. At least the others can all string a sentence together. Steven, if English isn't your first language then accept my apologies. But if it is then seriously...book a night course in English! But to make a typo on the very date in question, (that is 4/62 not of 4/22 as you wrote), in a post where you rule out a typo as being an explanation is, once again, premium quality irony. You and Dawn will be on the subs bench next week at this rate. I do wonder (after 50 odd pages) whether those who oppose H&L should now let this thread stand as its nemesis and allow readers, lurkers, researchers and members to make up their own minds on the rebuttal of this silly nonsense. Though they've pretty much rebutted it themselves! Readers will contrast the sober minded objections to H&L against the aggressive and fanatical zeal of its well organised and well funded campaign. Most will smell an agenda to divert and distract. They will see this thread as proof of its success. Because for all of their fantasy dual reality world of spooks under everyone's beds, and doppelgangers, with doppelganger parents embroiled in some elaborate Cold War espionage plot etc....they tell us nothing, absolutely nothing, about who killed JFK, or how it may have been done. That issue gets overlooked every time this subject gets raised. I sometimes think we are feeding the beast. Our intervention is probably giving the whole theory a prominence it doesn't deserve. After ten years banging away on this forum they have found only 8 who believe it has merit, and half of those have major issues with one or more aspects of the theory. No doubt the MSM will crawl all over H&L come 2017; they'll be knocking on Fetzer's door too, and they'll be getting Cinque to recreate his manic Lovelady pose on the TSBD doorway. They'll all be out in force whatever we do or say on here. The only hope is new fresh research, with sharper angles and fact-filled fleshed out narratives; that ditches the 'theory first - facts later' approach and starts again, from the bottom, with no slavish adherence to any preconceived ideas, and no taking anything for granted. It needs researchers to say "Whoops, I got that wrong there" every now and then when presented with more credible evidence and it needs to reject, in its entirety, the WC account of anything whatsoever to do with LHO This approach has achieved massive results at ROKC particularly over the dismantling of both the Baker encounter and new research highlighting BWF's damning involvement. Greg, how many people have you seen come on here because they were inspired by what they had learned about H&L? Where are they? We've been arguing with the same tiny little group for years. They have not progressed this theory by one inch and nor have they won any converts, other than the eight mentioned, in the TEN YEARS this thread has been active. Doesn't that say something? Personally, I think your work here is done. It's distracting you from your 'proper job'!

The only case being made here by Steve is this: there is no such thing as human error. If someone writes 4/62 then that is irrefutably correct. He simply repeated the tests during June. Anyone can see that two different dates indicates two lots of tests at FW. What you need to understand, Tommy, is that you are not dealing with reality as we know it, This reality exists in a completely different dimension. It's the duality thing again. The same, but different. Depending on the viewer's needs. It's a wonderful world to visit, Tommy. But you wouldn't want to live there. Well then that's really ironic, isn't it, Greg. Because he makes so many of them himself. Like writing "4/22" instead of "4/62" recently, for example. And he missed it (twice?) when I tried to point it out to him. How wonderfully ironic. --Tommy That's exactly that the sort of deep warping that can occur when you're stuck between these alternate dimensions. I know that that wasn't a grammar mistake you made. It's an evil, secret, hidden code. --Tommy Did Steven make a typo on the numbers 4/22 instead of 4/62? But that's impossible isn't it? If he wrote 4/22 he MUST mean, and there can be no other alternative explanation to this, he must mean that he is talking about April 1922. That's what he put so that's what it MUST be! He didn't simply make a mistake and put the wrong numbers though did he? No, of course not. Because no one ever does that do they?

I have irrefutable evidence that Bernie was not even here! Admit it. You were the 6th floor bumper and you had no confederates! Bob and Bernie (aka... B & B ) have been manipulated since childhood, guided by unseen hands, grew up to be almost identical (except Bob's sloping shoulders and Bernie's film idol looks!) and then cleverly used to have Bob frame Bernie for a bump he never even knew of. Must dash, I'm busy collecting some garbage...

Dawn, please be assured that it most certainly isn't your job that causes the playful mirth, but your constant need to remind everyone what that job is on every other post you make! We get it. Your an attorney. A busy one. And therefore much much better than "garbage collectors" so we should all be impressed, in awe even, and listen to what you say. Your intellectual credentials are neither here nor there; you beat your chest as much as you like, no one is really that impressed. Neither does your occupation give you some puffed up superiority over the "garbage collectors" at ROKC. Or anyone else for that matter. I'm afraid you lost your credibility by admitting, only two years ago, that you still hadn't read H&L. You actually boasted about it. I'll find the link. I took offence to that because only months before you had admonished me as a xxxxx for making objections to a book I "hadn't even read". If only I had known then that you hadn't either! Then, embarrassingly, you take a massive derogatory swipe at your colleagues over at DPF by stating that serious researchers don't participate in forums. I wonder what our Brian thinks to that? With friends like you eh?

As silly as I think this is, please add my name to the pro side, also Mike Hogan, who no longer posts here. I received a lovely email from him yesterday to this effect, as well as several others he for whom he bought the book and are pro H and L. So this really is just a poll of who posts here. Most of the serious researchers I know do not post on forums, and are pro H and L. So this poll is really meaningless in the long run. Dawn Why have you bothered then? And no, I don't take your word that someone else has asked you to vote on their behalf. Doesn't count. Sorry. I'm surprised you even have the time to vote Dawn; after all, you never did find the time to actually read H&L did you? Didn't JA playfully scold you about that just recently. That must have been quite embarrassing.

"You accuse others of being irresponsible, yet you continue to accuse Jack White of chicanery that you can't possibly prove..." Do you not ever read these posts Don? Did you not read the link PROVING that White back-tracked on his admission of knowing Kudlaty for over 50 years? Why do you refuse to do this? Covering your eyes and ears whilst screaming at Greg for highlighting the link where he admitted it is just bizarre behaviour (...and thus, perfectly par for the course here!) Keep calling Greg out on this Don but please, whatever you do, don't ever check out if there's any truth in it. We wouldn't want to spoil your day... insist that Oswald's tonsil issue was the result of a very, very improbable regrowth Oh please Don, pay attention. Your boy Josephs has already admitted that regrowth occurs in 6% of tonsillectomies, (though he originally provided research that suggested it could even be as high as 15%). Again, do you not read these posts? Look, if it's as low as 1% it still provides a far more credible explanation than the ridiculous complexities you guys weave to make one Harvey and one Lee. You dismiss 6% odds as being "improbably" low, so low they aren't worth mentioning and those that do are COINTELPRO trolls and minions who can't see the real picture. No irony there then. And you guys have the gall to talk about improbabilities?

Yes you were: David has already tried to pull that little stunt. You guys just can't be trusted with the evidence, any evidence, without first trying to manipulate it can you? It's interesting that you both thought your vote should count twice. Everything in your world is duplicated isn't it?

Nailed!

Has anyone who was previously agnostic on H&L now been persuaded by the 'arguments' their supporters have put forward? My guess is...not one! 11 - 4

Maybe you haven't noticed David...but nobody actually cares! No one needs to ask you anything; they can read the full idiocy right here on these threads. So how many people have you 'converted' to H&L then David? Six? Seven? Anyone? If you three keep at it for another twenty years, at this rate you should have nearly 100 followers...

The FBI and/or WC apparently disagreed with you, because all the Stripling records disappeared. Excellent! Non-existent records disappeared from a place they could not have been stored at. I smell a Nobel Prize in Quantum Physics. The Copenhagen InterpretationThe Many-Worlds theory of quantum mechanics supposes that for each pos­sible outcome of any given action, the universe splits to accommodate each on­e. This theory takes the observer out of the equation. No longer are we able to influence the outcome of an event simply by observing it, as is stated by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.