W. Tracy Parnell

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=uvddAAAAIBAJ&sjid=nV8NAAAAIBAJ&pg=2830%2C1936999 Quote: I could have overlooked the scar, possibly it was under the hairline... Should Rose have asked if LHO had any childhood operations he could check for? Probably. He didn't and just missed the scar.

I am not "trolling" for anything. I am a debunker and a watchdog. What Jim wants me to do is "debate" an issue that he feels he has an advantage on such as the school records. But if you have followed these threads for "years" then you know that many issues, including the school records have been debated endlessly. H&L critics have shown that the school records are simply being misread (in their opinion). The issue is a dead end since short of some person or government body that could clear up the anomalies in the records both sides will just continue to promote their views. I am still waiting for you or any H&L supporter to disprove the exhumation evidence. Short of that, the H&L theory is invalid.

Reported him for what daring to disagree with you? What utter nonsense.

No, as I said, the other "issues" are irrelevant until you show how the exhumation (and the handwriting analysis and other evidence) was faked or present a new theory that explains it.

You are going to have to show how it was rigged. And Earl Rose admitted they could have easily missed the mastoid scar. It was behind the ear and they weren't looking for it.

As has been pointed out, several issues have been debated here at EF repeatedly. The issue I would like Jim and David to debate is the exhumation of LHO and the fact that it completely negates the H&L theory, a fact that Armstrong has addressed by completely ignoring it. My contention is debates about the issues Jim mentions are pointless since the H&L theory was debunked before it was even created. So until a more meaningful explanation (more meaningful than the Louise Robertson thing) for the exhumation issues is presented, I see no need to debate anything further. So is a new explanation forthcoming?

Will Jim Hargrove debate a topic of my choosing that pertains to H&L?

Right Michael and most readers are aware of this despite what Jim says. You and me, Tommy Graves, Jeremy B., Bernie L., Greg Parker, David Lifton and others have debated the issues here at EF on and off since 2015-myself as far back as the late nineties on different forums. They want the pointless (because they refuse to quit even when proven wrong) debates to continue in order to promote the H&L theory. I will check in from time to time to comment on the most egregious nonsense. But for the most part I will let them have their fun.

Greg Parker has posted at his forum summarizing a few of the arguments rebutting the H&L theory on several issues mentioned here by Hargrove: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1571-hargrove-claiming-victory

First, I understand Jim Hargrove creates posts like this hoping to get a response from myself or other H&L critics. Such discussions are the best form of advertising for the H&L theory and Armstrong’s book and some time ago I realized I was the best thing that ever happened to them. As I have mentioned, I don’t intend to do too much more regarding the already discredited H&L theory. At my age, time is limited and I have a few things I would like to do that are much more important. I will briefly address a few things though. Hargrove continues to imply that because Greg Parker is no longer allowed to post at the EF that arguments he makes at his own website are somehow less valid. Parker has discussed several issues at his site, sometimes quoting directly from threads here at EF. Anyone can follow the links that have been posted repeatedly here and decide for themselves which argument they favor. And as anyone who has followed the debate knows, the issues have been discussed repeatedly right here at EF dating back at least as far as 2015. Hargrove simply prefers to have the issues debated here on his “home turf” to call attention to his and Armstrong’s work. Hargrove is touting the recent article by Dr. Norwood as the “definitive” work on the subject of LHO’s Russian language ability. It is no such thing. A definitive article would document all the witness reports on LHO’s ability and place them in context. It would explain that the witnesses are in general agreement and any anomalies are explainable and understandable. Instead, Norwood “cherry picks” the evidence and emphasizes anything that helps his theory while dismissing the overwhelming evidence provided by the people in Russia who lived and worked with LHO and by Marina. This evidence shows that LHO acquired the language gradually and became fluent simply because he spoke it every day. Of course, Norwood thinks LHO (Harvey) was a spy who was playing a game with his Russian hosts. Hargrove and Sandy Larsen also imply that the H&L critics “disappeared” at the same time. The implication is that the critics are being centrally controlled by some higher power (the CIA perhaps). This is nonsense of course as most of the critics are conspiracy believers themselves. It could simply be that the critics have better things to do than spend every day responding to people who continue to hold on to a belief that has been scientifically disproven. I won’t bother to repost links to the many rebuttals of the H&L theory. Those interested may refer to page 70 of this thread where I previously posted such links. Despite what Hargrove would have you believe, the links do lead to actual websites where there is in formation rebutting his arguments.

Yes, it is a joke. Here are some links to general H&L rebuttal sites and a couple of links to alternate explanations of the school records and Japan. You simply follow the links and read them. BTW, some of these links include rebuttals to points made here at EF by H&L supporters including Jim and Sandy. I would say that all the major issues raised by the H&L supporters are addressed by these three sites. Greg Parker's H&L Archive: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/f13-the-harvey-lee-evidence My own H&L archive (scroll down) http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/p/p.html Jeremy B.: http://22november1963.org.uk/john-armstrong-harvey-and-lee-theory School Records: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1361-creating-mayhem-with-historical-records Japan: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1399-the-skagit-according-to-a-former-crew-member When I get the time, I may try and put together a page that will serve as an index to the H&L rebuttals.

As is the case with the school records, the H&L supporters have been provided with alternate explanations again and again. They simply refuse to accept them and pretend that no explanation has ever been provided. But people like myself, Bernie, Greg Parker, Jeremy, Michael W., Tommy Graves, David Lifton and many others have continually done so going back several years. There is an explanation for EVERY issue they raise, even if it is simply that records are being misinterpreted and witnesses are mistaken.

Great that you are taking this task on Paul, look forward to reading it!

Nobody cares if the H&L "evidence" goes away or not. This information has been out there for years now. The H&L critics are simply providing alternatives to the discredited theory. We already know from an informal poll done here what the majority of the members at this conspiracy-oriented forum think. The majority say they appreciate the research efforts by Armstrong but don't believe the theory. I have other interests to keep me occupied, but I will continue to monitor this forum (as I am sure will others) to make sure the H&L supporters have an opposing voice.

The only evidence that the Stripling records "disappeared" is from Frank Kudlaty. He was speaking 30 + years after the fact and as I have pointed out many times, Armstrong has a way of getting witnesses to "remember" amazing facts that help the H&L cause. If Kudlaty was so concerned that the FBI had confiscated records why didn't he speak out at the time and/or demand a receipt? This is just another witness statement that has little credibility without supporting evidence. Yet the H&L people repeat this as a "fact."

Greg Parker has responded again to Sandy Larsen & Jim Hargrove: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records A reminder to the H&L crowd-in order to read an explanation you have to click on the link.

Your statement is not supported by the preponderance of the evidence. You believe that the school records show this, but even if they do there is a mountain of other evidence against 2 Oswalds. LHO never attended Stripling, the witnesses are mistaken. Kudlaty says records were taken but if they were they were records for Robert Oswald who did attend Stripling. But as is always the case, if someone says something that fits the H&L theory it becomes a fact regardless of any other evidence.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/james-wilcott.html

You said that the "powers" approached all of the witnesses at the exhumation and bribed them to keep quiet. But Groody wasn't keeping quiet at all. He went to the media and told his story to anyone who would listen. As for Einstein, he had science on his side. That is how his theory came to be accepted. On your side you have mistaken witnesses and misinterpreted records. You have no science to back you up.

See what I just posted for the tip of the iceberg regarding what we "have". On the mastoid operation, you are down to one possibility as I demonstrated before since Groody did speak out and said nothing about anyone pressuring anybody. I understand that Einstein's theory is currently accepted and it is on the basis of scientific proof not a belief in a holy book written by a man who hates the CIA.

Let's do a review of what you have to believe to accept the H&L theory: 1. The 1981 exhumation of LHO was somehow faked (which it wasn't). http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/xindex.htm 2. Or, "Harvey" was given a mastoid operation by the powers that be before the age of 10. If it wasn't done then, the exhumation doctors would have detected that it was not an "old" operation. The "evidence" for this? Louis Robertson's dubious statement which was based on what the known xxxx Marguerite said. 3. There were also two Marguerites, one of whom was a CIA agent. No one ever detected these 2 Marguerites and no one ever came forward who knew Marguerite early on to say that she was not the person they saw on TV. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-two-marguerites-part-1.html 4. The HSCA handwriting and photo evidence was somehow faked or controlled by the "powers." http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/h&l3.htm 5. All of these people were involved in the plot. Note that CTs here will believe some of these people were in on the plot, but virtually all of LHO's family? http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/harvey-lee-who-was-involved-in-plot.html 6. LHO spoke no Russian in Russia. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/lho-spoke-no-russian-in-russia.html 7. Dr. Milton Kurian saw "Harvey" when he could not have. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/dr-milton-kurian.html 8. Palmer McBride knew LHO in 1957 and 1958 when he could not have. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/palmer-mcbride.html 9. A photo shows "Harvey" was 4' 8" when he was measured at 5' 4". But the photo shows no such thing. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-bronx-zoo-photo.html 10. There is something "funny" about LHO's birth certificate. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-truth-about-oswalds-birth.html What trumps all of this evidence? Some misinterpreted school records and dubious witness statements.

And eventually Einstein was proven right by guess what? Scientific evidence-the same type of evidence the H&L crowd rejects in this instance.

Deal with the exhumation and the other scientific and common sense evidence.

The "reasonable explanation" is the records are being misread and misrepresented by the H&L folks. Another explanation is that they are simply mistaken. We have a mountain of evidence that shows that there was one and only one LHO. There is no reason to disregard all of that and accept your interpretation of school records as the definitive "proof." BTW, the records that you believe show 2 Oswalds show LHO enrolling in New Orleans on January 13 which fits the chronology of Marguerite and LHO's other activities perfectly. As for the bet, of course you can't lose because you are making the rules. Do a poll of the researchers right here on the Ed. Forum which is about 90% CT people. Let them be the judge. I hate to be the one to tell you this Sandy, but you have picked a lost cause with your support of H&L. There are not that many things I am certain of but I know there was one and only one Oswald.

Sure I understand it. He is saying that the school records were partially misread by Head and you guys are using that to make your case. Try this-get a group of unbiased scientists and have them review the evidence for and against H&L. See if they think school records trump the exhumation and other scientific evidence and the recollections of LHO's family and close associates. And as I said, put the $1000 thing up for a vote by the members here. But I will already tell you that you will lose which is why you won't do it. We did an informal poll a couple of years ago and H&L lost. H&L is one of the few things that brings CTs & LNs together in this case. That should tell you all you need to know-it is nonsense.