W. Tracy Parnell

8 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear George,

Tracy is a so-called LNer, whereas I'm a CTer.  The only thing we have in common is that we both think the theory involving a long-term doppelganger project popularly called called Harvey and Lee is ridiculous.

--  Tommy

Yes, I hereby absolve Tommy of any guilt by association with me.

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Tracy, I don't know what kind of tricks you are trying to play, but like with DiMaio and with your Church Committee Report mislabeled as an HSCA report, it won't fly.

I was referring to the fact that the people you mention don't back the Kudlaty story of the FBI taking the records. They do think LHO went to Stripling. But all of these people are probably just remembering Robert and there is no hard evidence to say otherwise.

4 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

They knew that Lee didn't do it. They had an obligation to investigate, gather facts, and persecute perps.

I think you and George are missing the point. he is saying they should have tried Oswald even though he was dead and I am saying that is not possible. This has nothing to do with your opinion of the WC and their findings. Suppose for the sake of argument that they had found evidence that someone other than LHO did it. They still could not have "prosecuted" those individuals. They would have referred evidence to the Justice Department or whoever had jurisdiction because they themselves were not a judicial body but simply a fact finding commission.

20 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

The US government had no jurisdiction.

The US government did not put him on trial-the WC was NOT a trial, it was a fact finding Presidential commission that had very right to do what they did. You may disagree with their findings and that is fine. You can say it was a de facto trial and that is fine. But LHO was dead and could not be tried by anyone and was not tried.

1 hour ago, George Sawtelle said:

Tracy P

Oswald was a suspect not the killer. Oswald had not been convicted of anything. 

The investigation was the task of the DPD and if a grand jury indicated that a trial was necessary it should have been convened in Texas.

George,

This is from legal zoom website:

Criminal cases are brought by the state or government and, as such, present a different and more clear-cut resolution [than civil cases]. In criminal cases, if the person charged with the crime dies, there is no defendant to prosecute and any charges pending against him will be automatically dismissed.

Sorry George, you can't put a dead person on trial. If LHO had lived, he would have indeed been tried in Texas.

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The reliable Tom Scully comes through again on Holland:

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/H Disk/Holland Max/Item 01.pdf

 

Should have known Weisberg would dig it up.

OK, now you have some background on Holland. Not sure what this is supposed to prove.

1 minute ago, Thomas Graves said:

Tracy,

Seein' as how Oswald was charged with murdering JFK, I guess you're right -- the Dallas Police Department was not obligated to continue gathering evidence against Oswald after he was killed.

--  Tommy

I'm not a lawyer, but the only instance that I can think of would be in the case of a serial killer. Authorities might continue investigating in some form to help the families. But they don't put the man on trial after he's dead that I ever heard of. Too bad Lance P. isn't here right now.

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

There is Robert Galindo, the principal at that time, there is teacher Mark Summers, and there are early statements from Robert Oswald

BTW, I checked this and they do not confirm Kudlaty's story, they simply think LHO went to Stripling.

2 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

Tracy P

Because Oswald was innocent until proven guilty, the murder of JFK should be investigated by the entity which had jurisdiction. Back in 1963 there was no distinction between the murder of a US president or the murder of a private citizen. Murders were to be investigated and tried in the jurisdiction where the murder occurred. Therefore the murder of JFK should have been investigated and tried in Dallas by the attorney general of Texas. 

The death of Oswald was lost evidence. Sometimes evidence is lost but that does not stop a trail. The authorities in Washington, including the president, broke the law. They had no authority to convene the Warren Commission to investigate the murder of JFK. So in that respect Norwood is correct.

George,

Can you cite me one time in US history when an individual who is dead has been tried for murder in a court of law? Once LHO was dead why in the world would Dallas PD continue to investigate the case? The President certainly did have the authority to form a presidential commission to investigate the circumstances of the assassination. The Texas people were going to have their own commission but yielded to the WC-that was their choice as I remember although they were probably encouraged to do so.

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

So if you read the HSCA critique of Wilcott, Blakey could have only gotten some of that info from the CIA.  And I won't even go into what the CIA ended up doing to Wilcott personally.  But this is what I expect from Parnell, since that is his bag.

As per Kudlaty, I mean please. This proves that none of you read the book. John writes about the whole Stripling issue for 5 pages.  The idea that Kudlaty has no corroboration is simply false, although again, I expect this from Parnell.  There is Robert Galindo, the principal at that time, there is teacher Mark Summers, and there are early statements from Robert Oswald.  And I mean, how do you get a better witness than Kudlaty who ascended up the education establishment to be a superintendent.  Or didn't you know that either?

I would be interested to know what Blakey got "from the CIA" on Wilcott and what the CIA "did to" him. The bottom line is that Wilcott could not provide any proof for his allegations.

Kudlaty and his supporters also have only their statements and nothing else. Who doesn't get a receipt when someone takes something-especially records? And why did they say nothing until Armstrong spoke to them? How concerned could they have been? Armstrong finds someone and conducts his "witness recruitment program" on them telling them they are a part of history and so on. As for McBride, he is fully debunked and Parker debunked the opera thing, it is here on EF somewhere.

But I have a question for you Jim. Do you believe in 2 Oswalds? If so, why do you write this on the Deep Politics Forum on March 3, 2014?

"I don't agree with everything in the book. And I wish John had let me look at it first."

What don't you agree with and why?

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Tracy,

Well written debunk of the "Harvey and Lee" silliness.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Thanks Paul!

4 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Kudos to you, Tracy!

Notwithstanding two minor typos in the form of a missing comma in the sentence "Nothing was 'suspended', and a professor should know better." ,

and the minor boo-boo in the sentence, "However, Kudlaty apparently didn’t think anything sinister was going before speaking to Armstrong on since he never reported the alleged 'confiscation,'”

you, sir, have written a decisive and definitive disputation of the Harvey-and-Lee-and-the-Two-Marguerites beliefs of the (soon to be non-tenured?) Professor and his Deep State-believing coreligionists.

--  Tommy

Thanks Tommy, I put that together quickly so that explains the errors. I'll fix it after dinner.

I discuss Norwood's article here:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/james-norwood-on-harvey-lee.html

15 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Regarding the medical papers - how do we know that Oswald's folder didn't just move with him as he moved? Or how do we know that they didn't radioed things in to the medical office, where things were recorded in a master file?

We don't know and your explanation may be the solution to the whole thing. But since we don't know for sure and it is hard to get the truth at this point, the H&L gang can continue on.

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Because, Wilting Walton, it has already been established that “NAS NAVY 3835,” clearly stamped on the medical records, was the Navy Hospital at Atsugi, Japan, NOT a ship at sea or a medical facility in North Taiwan.

No, it was the NAS at Atsugi, not specifically the Hospital:

https://www.archives.gov/san-francisco/finding-aids/holdings-guide-08.html

13 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Read the LHO Legend article here:

A couple quick points. Now I know why Jim was so adamant in criticizing my Wilcott article since Norwood's piece starts off with it. Bad timing for them for sure. Most of these points have already been addressed. Can all of them be to the satisfaction of Armstrong/Hargrove/Norwood? No, as I have said many times and that allows them to do what they do. Professional investigators, attorneys etc. understand this. In fact, if there were not discrepancies in a case this large with this many documents, especially considering LHO's mother lived in over 50 different places, I would consider THAT to be proof of something funny. Finally, it is amazing that a "professor" is pushing this type of nonsense, but I hear he is friendly with Fetzer so it figures. I will work up a brief rebuttal on some of these, but in the meantime:

Wilcott:

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

The Truth About H&L:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-truth-about-harvey-lee.html

EDIT: Parker has rebutted a few of these:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1397-armstrong-asks

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

NAS 3835 designates the Naval Air Station at Atsugi.

You are correct. I contacted the National Archives some time ago and they said the same thing. The question becomes, is this fact by itself proof of 2 Oswalds when so much other evidence indicates otherwise?

As I've said many times, I can't explain every discrepancy in the record and despite what they tell you, neither can Armstrong/Hargrove. However, we know from the complete body of evidence that there was only one Oswald. Therefore, the code 3835, which is the basis for the whole thing is wrong or being misinterpreted. This is how the H&L theory is able to exist. They find a discrepancy and despite all of the evidence to the contrary they run with it as proof of 2 Oswalds. And they have people who want this to be true and are able to suspend disbelief and accept it.

If you guys believe you have proof of 2 Oswalds and it solves the JFK case, take it to Morley. He operates in the real world and has published many articles on the case. If you can convince him of your theory and get him to do an article, you may have something. Good luck. But until that happens, you are going nowhere.

I am working on a chronology but don’t have this period detailed as well as it should be yet. However, Greg Parker offers a little more detail on this period which seems to jibe with what I have so far. This is from his book Lee Harvey Oswald’s Cold War Vol. 2.

September 14, 1958: LHO is on the USS Skagit bound for the South China Sea.

September 19: Arrives at Taiwan.

September 24: Arrives in Hong Kong.

October 5: LHO is sent to Atsugi following the guard duty incident from Epstein’s book.

October 6: LHO is hospitalized (for VD).

October 13: LHO is released.

November 2: LHO departs Yokosuka for San Francisco arriving November 15.

So, the HSCA was wrong that LHO was not in Taiwan. And no 2 Oswalds required.

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

How short your memory is Tracy.

American-born Lee Oswald's own half-brother, John Pic, shown two different pictures of Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald, told the Warren Commission, under oath, that the image was not of his brother.

Real Marguerite's two best friends for two decades told the Warren Commission they did not recognize phony Marguerite and wouldn't have known who she was if they hadn't been told.

There are other examples.

Pic said he did not recognize that photo. He had every opportunity to tell the WC of a plot involving 2 Oswalds. He did not. I assume you are referring to Mr. and Mrs. Evans. They knew Marguerite and said so. From my blog:

One of the most egregious misrepresentations of evidence by Armstrong concerns the testimony of Myrtle Evans. Armstrong says that Evans knew the “real” Marguerite and not the impostor. To make his case Armstrong states on page 118 of his book:

Following the assassination Myrtle and Julian Evans saw this woman on television. When deposed on April 7, 1964 by Warren Commission Attorney Albert Jenner, Myrtle Evans said, "When I saw her on TV, after all that had happened," Myrtle Evans told the Warren Commission, "she looked so old and haggard, and I said that couldn't be Margie." …

But Armstrong left out what she said next:

but of course it was ...

Bottom line-the Evans' recognized Marguerite and said so. Read all about it here, including a list of those who could have come forward to say the Marguerite they saw on TV was not the Marguerite they knew.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-two-marguerites-part-2.html

Thanks Tommy!

Wilcott remembered the names of the CIA Tokyo employees all right. He just could not name one person who would confirm his allegations or who he originally learned them from. He wasn't even sure if his best friend at the station, George Breen, would confirm them and apparently he didn't. As the SF Chronicle reported, Wilcott heard the allegations at drinking sessions. He was a naïve person who apparently believed everything he heard at these late-night drunken sessions:

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/A Disk/Agent Oswald Office Files/Agent Oswald 4-78/Item 01.pdf

15 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

You should know better than that, Tracy.

My point still stands. It would only take one person to notice the two men or their two mothers at any point in time over the years from 1947 up to the present day and come foreword and report it to an investigative journalist. Even setting aside the scientific evidence that refutes the theory, It is simply not believable  that the CIA or any entity could pull off such a deception with no one the wiser or that they could kill all these people or pay them all off.

42 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

But Tracy, the two men don't look alike. Side-by-side they look like two different men.

That's my point-it depends. They look enough alike that two photos are put together to make one ID. But circa 1953, one is 5'4" and husky and the other is 4'8" and looks like a concentration camp survivor. But somehow the plotters knew they would look alike when grown, enough so to make an ID. Either they look alike or they don't and that characteristic changes as the H&L theory needs it to change.

Jim Hargrove said:

Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald was placed briefly in several USMC training facilities but spent much of the time living in the Hotel Senator in New Orleans and later in Fort Worth.

You are either in the military or you are not. It’s like being a little pregnant-not possible.

But in September 1958, Harvey Oswald traveled from the mainland U.S. to the large Marine base at Atsugi, Japan, where Lee Oswald was also stationed.

And nobody wondered why these two men, who looked almost exactly alike except when they didn’t, were in the same place using the same name and the same military ID. Hargrove tries to get around this by saying “Harvey” went in the brig (based predictably on a witness). But like so many other facets of this theory, it would only take one person to see both men to foil the plot. If I remember correctly, there were other times that the two men were at the same facility during their military service and the same problem could have occurred at any time.

Before Hargrove makes too much of this, no I cannot answer every discrepancy in the record. Armstrong/Hargrove try to tell people that the H&L theory can do that if they only believe. I tell people the truth-there are discrepancies in life that can and do come up especially when your mother lives in 50 different places. None of these require 2 Oswalds to understand. I believe LHO was probably in Taiwan but the WC and HSCA couldn’t even agree on this point. But these problems allow the H&L people to do what they do.