W. Tracy Parnell

9 hours ago, Tom Hume said:

Hi Tracy,

I might have caused us to drift into the realm of rumors here, and maybe someone else will clear this up. I exchanged emails with David today, on a completely different topic, and he said that he had been “...booted from the EF....” But maybe that was just a figure of speech on David’s part, I don’t know. The term "economical" could be used to describe some of David's discourse, and it's certainly possible that David's current forum problem is more nuanced than I understand. 

At any rate, one might want to re-read the entire thread and notice the tone of the responses to David’s apparent mistake. 

There are some sterling people on this forum, and some no longer here, that, had they caught the apparent fact that the thread’s signature photo depicted a relatively obscure and unexpected measuring stick, a surveyor’s stick divided into tenths of a foot as opposed to inches, would have come up with a better, more helpful response:

Fill in the blank....

But "good catch", Lance.

I'll bow out of this discussion.

Happy Holidays all.

Tom

 

Thanks Tom for the reply. I have had my battles with David, but he has contributed a great deal of research here and would undoubtedly be missed by many. 

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Why do you continue to argue against only a small part of the Stripling evidence?

My argument is simple. Kudlaty only came forward after talking to Jack White and hearing the H&L theory. The witnesses, including Robert, were wrong about LHO attending Stripling as shown by other "better" evidence and they have no confirming proof. As Michael said, Lance has some interesting information about witnesses from his experience with other controversial subjects. You should check that out.

1 hour ago, Tom Hume said:

For your information, David has been booted and can’t respond.

Booted for what?

2 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Jim and Team Hardly,

Over on another thread:

...another EF member wrote what I think are several outstanding posts about about the current state of the conspiracy community. I think it would be well worth it for you to read them. Just to give you some insight and food for thought.  Thanks.

Opps! David Josephs blew that one! Thanks, I hadn't read that thread. Lance Payette is a breath of fresh air and common sense and I wish he would post more often on the H&L threads. He helped me with the Oswald birth certificate issue.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-truth-about-oswalds-birth.html

We have already discussed Kudlaty. If he had come forward on his own, his recollections could be given more weight. However, he did not do so until contacted by his friend Jack White, Armstrong's mentor. In any case, we only have Kudlaty's word for what happened and there is a great deal of evidence that shows LHO did not attend Stripling.

Robert believed his brother attended Stripling as he did and he would have if he and Marguerite had not moved to NYC. As for other statements, "common knowledge" is not proof. Records, photographs and so forth are better evidence than human memory which is unreliable, especially after 40 years.

53 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Of the people active in this thread, it appears that only D.J., Sandy, and me have any interest whatsoever in exploring endless anomalies in the school records of “Lee Harvey Oswald.”

Not only school records, but anomalies in general. The reason for that is the H&L theory is based purely on such anomalies which, rather than an indication of something sinister, are a natural occurrence in any large body of data.

55 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlaty in 1963 met FBI agent at the school and gave them “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” Stripling records.

The problem with Kudlaty is he only came forward with his story after speaking with his good friend Jack White and hearing the H&L theory. What probably happened is the FBI came to check on some records and 40 years later Kudlaty, armed with White's information, "remembered" the "confiscation" of the records. After all, who doesn't demand a receipt if original records are taken? And why did Kudlaty never mention the missing records before?

59 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

H&L critics have no explanation why a Forth Worth Star-Telegram article from November 2017 would indicate that Oswald’s “teachers and classmates remember him at Stripling, though there is no official record.”

I certainly do. First, the article you link to provides no details of who remembered LHO at Stripling. However, we can assume the reports are similar to those presented on Armstrong. These are simply anecdotal with no other proof besides the individuals memory after years and years. No documents, photographs (which we have from schools LHO actually attended) or anything else. The witnesses are probably misremembering Robert who did attend Stripling. And as I have pointed out, it is not newsworthy to have seen Robert Oswald but would be to have seen LHO.

1 hour ago, David G. Healy said:

Come on Parnell, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know Walton is hooked to your hip and .john's. Same old storied lone nut, LHO did it all by his lonesome nonsense whiners have been foisting on the research community for 25 years.

I'll let Mr. Walton defend himself, but he says he believes in conspiracy and I accept him at his word.

8 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Oh, sure, and the Harvey and Lee Menace® has spread to last month’s Fort Worth Star Telegram, which reports that Oswald’s “teachers and classmates remember him at Stripling, though there is no official record.”  Your denials are approaching the bizarre.

Read the article HERE.

 

And that is all it says with no other detail. Again, the likelihood is they are misremembering Robert. Their motive? It is not significant to say that you remember Robert Oswald but it would be to say you remember LHO. That is just human nature.

11 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Still doing the same as reported before, regardless of what browser I use.  I've downloaded other things from Mega successfully, so I don't know why.

There is an alternate link to a download at Greg Parker's site for anyone having trouble:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1656-pdf-harvey-and-lee-cd-john-armstrong-2003

1. Greg Parker has come up with an alternate explanation for the school records which the H&L people "misinterpret" to their advantage. This can be viewed at his site and the H&L people can debate him there if they disagree.

2. John Pic and Robert Oswald provided much important information, but everything they said is not necessarily correct. Robert was right that LHO WOULD HAVE attended Stripling. However, he left for NYC so that did not happen.

3. Greg Parker has demonstrated the problem with Frank Kudlaty. He was a friend of Jack White and only "remembered" his alleged experiences after White got a hold of him. Same thing with Joe Nick Patowski-he was acquainted with Kudkaty and tended to believe him because of that.

4. People Armstrong interviewed must be viewed with extreme skepticism for a couple of reasons. First, 40 years had gone by. Second, Armstrong's method if "interviewing" is highly suspect. He asks leading questions rather than objective ones as a journalist would do. The individuals are told they are important witnesses to a secret history. A more reasonable explanation for all of these witnesses is they are thinking of Robert.

Jim, David and Sandy,

I would like to see any or all of you go over to Greg's site and debate him on this issue. Maybe with a moderated debate, you could get to the bottom of it. I don't have the time or interest to debate it. But Greg is interested and has an alternate theory-why not debate him?

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

And there we have it. During the first semester of the 1953/54 school year, Oswald attended two school simultaneously. And although he attended only part time at Beauregard, this contradiction cannot be explained away by saying the boy was attending one school early in the day and the other school later in the day, because the two schools are located in different states.

And if there were no alternative explanations this might be powerful evidence for the H&L theory. But of course, there are other explanations such as this one provided by Greg Parker:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records

If you disagree, get over to his site and debate him. It would be a moderated debate with the very fair Vanessa Loney as moderator.

53 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

We look for evidence that cuts through the cover-up and we try to figure out what really happened.

Pardon me for changing the subject Jim, but it appears the Dr. Norwood/Greg Parker debate is over for now anyway as Norwood has dropped out. I think it would be great if you would go over to ROKC and debate Greg. Vanessa Loney served as moderator and did a very good job I think. Parker got slightly out of line at one point (according to Norwood) but he apologized and the debate continued until Norwood dropped out. Anyway, here is your chance Jim to debate some of the issues you mention here frequently.

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Following the evidence makes more sense to me.

But the H&L crowd chooses what evidence to follow and ignores the rest.

15 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Why do you continue to invoke Mr. Parker

In this case, I thought that he raised a good point and that is why I mentioned it. It is apparent that you are preoccupied with his work against the H&L theory. The fact is that despite your attempts to paint anyone who disagrees with the H&L theory as a WC apologist, there are many CTs who don't believe the H&L theory. Since you are so concerned with Parker, perhaps you should go over to his forum and debate him as Dr. Norwood has done. As far as his being banned here and what tactics he and his followers use, that is his business.

6 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

You don't want to think about the fact that Wilcott clearly wanted to take a lie detector test, in addition to the fact that a "Cuban stress analysis verified Wilcott validity," in addition to the fact that he and his attorney clearly told the HSCA far more than he was allowed to say in open testimony.

First, since we don't know what type of voice analysis he underwent and when, it diminishes the significance of it. Secondly, Wilcott testified in executive session and I am not aware of any limitations on what he could say. In fact, at the end of his testimony this exchange occurred indicating he had said all he wanted to:

Mr. Preyer. Under our committee rules, Mr. Wilcott, a
witness is entitled, at the conclusion of the questioning, to
make a five-minute statement if he wishes or to give a fuller
explanation of any of his answers; so that at this time we
make that five minutes available to you if you care to
elaborate or say anything further.

Mr. Wilcott. I don't really have anything and maybe I
would just like to say I think it is time we got this thing
cleared up; and I think for the good of the country and for
good of the people I think it is really time that all of
the facts were brought out and the people really get the facts.

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Mr. Wilcott passed a voice stress analysis test apparently called a "Cuban stress analysis,

As Greg Parker pointed out at his forum, what is a "Cuban stress analysis" anyway? I originally thought that it might refer to a test that Wilcott may have submitted to while he was in  Cuba. But that happened in August, 1978 and his HSCA testimony was earlier in the year. So what is this analysis that we are supposed to be impressed with?

4 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Thanks Paul very well said. And the comedy continues with DJ posting a smiling LHO to an unsmiling one and asking in all seriousness  why we've  not seen any more smiling teeth photos! It reminds me of the other funny bit - that one LHO's mom was thin and smiled a lot where the other was dumpy and never smiled. OMG!

Give them credit for one thing in that they know how to be consistent in their comedic routine LOL

Read about the Marguerite who never smiled here:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/marguerite-never-smiled.html

20 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

In the absence of further information, we must regard the reported "Texas driver's license" of Lee Harvey Oswald as a case of "mistaken identity."

Absolutely right Paul.

3 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

You mean that you have spent all this time and effort in debunking Armstrong's book, and you never had a copy! That's crazy. To be sure, I hold you to a different standard than Michael Walton. Tracy, I am shocked and disappointed.

There is a nother link that requires no key for the download. I'll post it here when I find it. 

I have the book, but the point is all that exists is an application. The license that they claim to have seen is nowhere to be found. BTW, I was one of the first people to get the book back in the day for $30 or $35. I got greedy and sold it for $60 later. I now use the PDF.

9 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Tracy... did you not see the description of this tattered license?

But a "tattered" license suggests that it was in use for some time. This is an additional indication that the witnesses were just mistaken since LHO having a license for an extended period is especially unsupported.

He certainly had applied for a license. But that is a different thing than him actually possessing one and using it to drive. We know from the people who actually knew him (as opposed to those who think they encountered him) that LHO was learning to drive but did not do so except when taking lessons from Ruth.

58 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Uh... Tracy... the answer can be found in this book called Harvey and Lee.

No it can't because the alleged license is nowhere-it doesn't exist. However, it fits in perfectly with the other elements of the H&L theory-mistaken witnesses, misinterpreted documents and so on.

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

That license was turned into the Department of Public Safety License Records Department in Austin soon after the assassination.

Where is it?

12 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Oh, puh-leeze!  Your endless misrepresentations of John’s work and my “comments” could fill a book.  You have no idea what typos are in the print version of Harvey and Lee because you only have a pirated PDF version of the book.  Although the three unofficial PDF versions of Harvey and Lee that I’ve seen were all prepared with great care, many OCR errors were introduced during the scanning process in all of them.  

The bound book was researched, written, and set by a man with no previous publishing experience.  It is remarkable how few typos or other errors of any sort can be found in a book that is nearly half a million words long.  There are thousands of footnotes and document citations in Harvey and Lee.  All of them, as well as the full text, available to anyone without cost.

John has even made all of the documents he used to write Harvey and Lee available to everyone without charge at the online John Armstrong Collection at Baylor University.  The database is fully searchable without restrictions of any kind and is available here:

John Armstrong Collection at Baylor University

Let me ask you this. Were the severe misrepresentations I presented evidence of earlier in this thread (Armstrong's misuse of citations) the result of OCR errors as well? Now you are a professional writer and I doubt you would resort to that type of misinformation and still get any work. But every time you guys are called out you just ignore it. Do you agree or not that Armstrong's citations were not always correct and/or non existent?