W. Tracy Parnell

Well Wilcott did, but I can see why you would say that.

I mentioned in a previous post how I came to make that change. I reviewed Wilcott's testimony with the HSCA bullet points and found that one assertion was not fully supported so I removed it. As far as Wilcott protecting anyone, he named several persons that he may have spoken to about LHO. The HSCA interviewed 18 employees from Tokyo and not one would confirm any of his allegations.

I am a LNer regarding the JFK case but I might hold conspiracy theories on other topics-you never know.

His is a private forum so they get a little wild sometimes.

No character assassination, all based on facts. From the CIA's perspective considering the time period, Wilcott's association with anti-war or left-wing types which started before he even left the agency would not be considered a good thing. And he was a conspiracy theorist, that is, he believed in a JFK conspiracy no doubt due to books he had read. All facts.

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1389-hargrove-s-20-alternative-facts-for-those-who-prefer-their-conspiracies-devoid-of-any-reality BTW, I am working on the Fonzi-Veciana-Bishop-Phillips story. It will be a blockbuster multi-part series using new documents. Look for the first part shortly.

I'll be looking forward to that Jim since I work very hard to verify any assertions I make, unlike Armstrong, and I just rechecked everything. The page has been updated with new information about Wilcott, namely that he became an antiwar activist and conspiracy theorist after he left the CIA. He was also under investigation by the CIA during his employment for associating with left-wing types. All of this undoubtedly had an effect on his beliefs as related to LHO. I did remove one assertion made by the HSCA from my article because I did not feel it was properly supported. They said that Wilcott said the reason he did not go back and check disbursement records for evidence of an Oswald project was because he viewed the information he had received from other employees (about LHO being CIA) was shop talk and that he gave it little credence. While Wilcott did say that he understood some of the information he heard about LHO was of a speculative nature, he did not, in my reading of his testimony, say that was the reason he did not check disbursement records. So that has been removed. http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/james-wilcott.html

I have no objection to anyone visiting your website. In fact, if you check the "resources" section of my site you will see your site listed there.

For those who are interested, Parker has a large thread on this: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t87-the-mrs-jack-d-tippit-phone-call

Sandy, I think you should get off the fence now and just say you are in the Armstrong camp. They would appreciate it I am sure as their numbers are dwindling.

That sums up the Armstrong/Hargrove mindset very well. An anonymous phone call trumps the testimony of dozens of people who actually knew the one and only LHO. Lee Harvey Oswald learned the Russian language by speaking it every day in the Soviet Union for nearly three years as the record clearly shows. His proficiency was an evolution as the testimony of those who knew him proves. When he arrived in the Soviet Union, he spoke Russian very poorly, but by the time he made the acquaintance of the Russian community in the US, he was reasonably proficient. Nothing mysterious and nothing that requires "Harvey" to refrain from speaking his native language as Armstrong maintains and as we know did not happen: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/lho-spoke-no-russian-in-russia.html

Tommy, Wilcott couldn’t remember who first told him that LHO was CIA. From everything I have learned about him, I think he definitely would have told if he could remember. From his testimony: Goldstein: And who made these references to Oswald being an agent of the CIA? Wilcott: I can’t remember the exact persons. There was talk about it going on at the station and several months following at the station. Wilcott did prepare a list of people he worked with and he might have discussed the LHO allegations with. The HSCA interviewed several employees and none confirmed his story.

Well said.

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

As most members here know, I am not a conspiracy believer. Jim Hargrove may think I am a disinformation agent employed by the CIA (as Armstrong mentor Jack White did) and therefore I should not be listened to. But many conspiracy believers likewise do not buy into the H&L theory. Three prominent examples are: David Lifton Lifton does not believe the H&L theory and has criticized it here at EF. He interviewed Palmer McBride before Armstrong got a hold of him and McBride recanted his beliefs about when his experiences with LHO occurred: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/palmer-mcbride.html Jeremy Bojczuk Jeremy has also criticized H&L here at the EF. He has an excellent overview of the subject here: http://22november1963.org.uk/john-armstrong-harvey-and-lee-theory Greg Parker Parker is one of the most vocal critics of H&L. See his archive which is critical of the theory here: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/f13-the-harvey-lee-evidence

For the tenth time, Greg Parker has offered an explanation-you simply disagree with it. I offer no explanation beyond what he has except the records are wrong, or being misread. The fact that you don't agree with me doesn't prove 2 Oswalds, in fact, the totality of the evidence proves their weren't.

Jim Hargrove has offered examples of spy craft that he believes are similar to H&L. But in this piece, Greg Parker disputes that claim: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1381-jimbo-others-did-it-so-we-did-too

Most of the members here believe in conspiracy. Here is an explanation of H&L from that perspective: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/18558-the-two-oswald-phenomena-explained/

Great points made here Tommy, but I would add that when they were about 14, Armstrong tells us that they looked very different. "Harvey" was 4'8" and scrawny, almost like a concentration camp survivor, while "Lee" was husky and 5'4". But the CIA somehow knew these boys were eventually going to grow up to look enough alike for their nefarious future plans. Now seriously, who can believe that nonsense?

There was no involvement of the federal government, the exhumation was done at the behest of a private individual. The 4 forensic physicians worked for various government entities, but the vast majority of forensic people do. It takes a leap of logic to believe that these individuals could be controlled by the CIA or whoever. The mysterious 27 month "delay" in the publication of the report has been addressed by DiMaio, even though what the delay was supposed to achieve from the point of the conspiracy is unclear. Anyway, DiMaio stated: “The critics are unfamiliar with medical publications ... It usually takes a year or two from submission to publication. It often takes months to write the article such that everyone is in agreement with the manuscript.”

Michael, I believe that mistaken witnesses may account for all of the unexplained LHO sightings, most of which are dismissible on close examination. Such sightings after a publicized event are common. In 2015 in New York State, authorities put out an alert for the public’s help in finding two prison escapees. There were over 2000 sightings of which 2 had merit. This article discusses the subject of false sightings in general: http://www.seeker.com/ny-fugitive-sightings-highlight-eyewitness-errors-1769962422.html Here is a piece I did several years ago-scroll down to “Eyewitness Testimony Questionable”: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/parnell/h%26l1.htm Unfortunately, theorists like John Armstrong use these sightings to their advantage.

Greg Parker weighs in on the LHO height debate: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1380-the-great-oswald-height-debate

David, Fortunately for the H&L people discrepancies exist in the official record of Oswald. Professional investigators (as opposed to amateur speculators) understand this fact. The best evidence (photos against a height chart, exhumation etc.) is LHO was 5'9" tall. Occam's razor says the simplest explanation is likely correct and that is the times that show him at a height we know he was not are incorrect for whatever reason. John Armstrong's razor states exactly the opposite in this case and regarding the theory as a whole-the most complex explanation is the best.

That's a fair point, but footwear could also account for variances in height as could a simple mistake.

Parker responds here: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1378-the-fez-and-reality-get-an-introduction