Jonathan Cohen

That is what Hosty's notes appear to reflect Oswald having said. It still doesn't make any sense why Oswald HIMSELF did not repeat this information any of the umpteen times he was in earshot of reporters and journalists in the Dallas jail after his arrest. This information would have been disseminated around the world in a matter of moments and would have instantly changed the narrative about the suspect and the shooting. Further, why didn't he tell his family members this when they came to visit him?

Believe me, Andrej.. I would LOVE for it to be him. It would clear up SO MUCH confusion (and BTW, I admire the work you are doing with these images). But it defies logic that A) not one single person said they saw Oswald watching the motorcade from that spot and B) that he did not scream from the heavens at every possible opportunity that he was, in fact, watching the motorcade from that spot and as such could not have shot JFK.

"Probably similar" ? If you can't be more definitive than that, why bother using it as an example here? But just for the sake of argument, why is it so hard to believe that Oswald used something like this to help teach himself the language? Why is it any different than just opening a book in another language and attempting to learn individual words, sentences, etc?

No, actually, you can't make those things out on a 25 X 25 pixel image. For one, you can't make ANYTHING out on an image of that size. For another, you certainly can't "make out Ozzie's hairline, his right ear, his neck and unbuttoned shirt," because... it's not him.

Were the two Marguerite Oswalds also twins separated at birth by the Office of Naval Intelligence?

For crying out loud. The actual human being whose autopsy report you are referencing is the one and only historical Lee Harvey Oswald.

Right - the upcoming intel mission is so secret that he just sits in his barracks openly reading Russian materials for all to see? Another masterstroke by the long-term doppelganger plotters!

And it would have to be in Fantasy Land™.

Same person in all photos.

You can expect whatever you like. But your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. I have never once said I believe "LHO did it all by his lonesome." In fact, I don't believe that at all. Indeed, a person can -- and many people on this forum do -- believe in Oswald's innocence of the assassination without subscribing to the absolutely idiotic theory espoused in H&L.

I know this question was directed to RCD, but regarding photos that do not look alike, what if it's actually not attributable to... anything, other than the simple fact that one's appearance changes often, sometimes dramatically, over the course of a lifetime? To my eyes, there is one and only one person depicted in these photos: the one and only historical Lee Harvey Oswald.

Dude, you LITERALLY post the same thing every day. You wrote nearly the identical sentence in this thread barely 24 hours ago. Should I have t-shirts made?

You guys sure like to start the same thread over and over again, don't ya? Here are plenty of perfectly logical, alternative explanations for how Oswald developed his Russian skills, in a thread Sandy created and in which you posted repeatedly, back in ... 2017. Now then. In plain English, can you address how H&L adherents rationalize the fact that the body in Oswald's grave had undergone a mastoidectomy operation?

Uh huh. So when challenged on the cornerstone of the entire H&L theory -- the fact that the body in Oswald's grave had undergone a mastoidectomy operation -- Jim Hargrove instead rattles off a dozen-plus statements that have nothing to do with the specific question at hand? That is evidence of.. what exactly?

No. Let's not. How about, for once, actually addressing the mountain of evidence Jeremy has posted in this thread which completely destroys the entire H&L theory, instead of posting the same list of totally irrelevant talking points OVER and OVER again? Even simply saying, "I am not sure how to reconcile the mastoidectomy evidence" would at least be intellectually honest and grist for actual debate and discussion.

A false photo that combines Lee and Harvey? Huh? Falsified by who? Why? And then forcibly included in Robert Oswald's 1967 book? Why is it that H&L believers fail to accept that human beings sometimes get dates and times wrong, years after the fact? Is it so impossible to believe that Robert was simply incorrect about the date he put in the caption?

So, according to you, the conspirators massively altered Altgens 6 during the precious few minutes before it went out over the AP wire but managed to leave in evidence of a sniper in a window of the Dal-Tex building?

That's what YOU say. That isn't what Voebel says. Please show me specific evidence from Voebel's testimony where he clearly articulates that he was friends with TWO different and distinct boys both with the last name of Oswald during this time period.

So are you telling us that Ed Voebel had no idea he had befriended two different people?

This would mean that between 12:30 and 5:35, of course the plotters also altered other films and photographs of the TSBD doorway -- which they didn't even yet have in their possession or know existed -- so that they could bring them into alignment with the newly faked Altgens 6. You've got to be kidding, right?

Yes, I can offer a simple explanation that does not require her to be an impostor and/or part of some doppelganger plot. She had a poor memory, made honest/simple mistakes, was nervous and under stress, some of her responses were recorded incorrectly, etc. etc. Haven't you ever made a mistake when recalling details about your own life? Can you remember the exact address of every place you've ever lived? As with every single piece of evidence that you claim supports the doppelganger theory, there are perfectly logical alternatives to the contrary.

Jeremy, don't forget that the overseers of the top-secret long-term doppelganger scheme also allowed the "fake" Marguerite Oswald to give an interview to a local journalist!

There is nothing mysterious or conspiratorial about this document whatsoever. As usual, simple mistakes take on needly sinister meanings in the H&L world.

Riiiiiight. The "Marguerite Oswald impostor" gives interviews to local journalists. Great thinking by the plotters, huh?

And here, finally, is an important distinction. Was Oswald impersonated in some form at some point during his lifetime? There is credible evidence to suggest he was, although there is just as much credible evidence indicating some of these witnesses were mistaken. It is absolutely possible to believe Oswald was impersonated on a handful of occasions WITHOUT having to believe in the preposterous and nonsensical notion that there were TWO different versions of him (and TWO of his mothers, let's not forget..) galavanting around the world for a decade.