Michael Walton

Paul, thanks I'll read his testimony.

Sandy - that's not the point. The point is the basic premise of the Hardly story is there was a clone from Hungary who secret agents found and because he looked exactly like LHO, they brought him over to the US to live in LHO's shadows ten who years before 11/22/63. That's the whole basic foundation of this house-of-cards story. If you or other Team Hardly members can prove this basic premise, then the house-of-cards story is true. But you can't. So therefore, all of the school records in the world is still not going to make the Hardly Lee story come true. Because it's not.

So it looks like Team Hardly is possibly/maybe taking a step back from the precipice? You'll probably say "well, it says 'possibly' as we don't know for sure..." but if Team Hardly says that, then that will certainly put some doubt in the entire Hardly fantasy story. In other words, if you have doubt where the Russian speaking boy is from, then you really don't know enough to even make the house-of-cards story ring true. From the home page of Team Hardly's site: JFK researcher John Armstrong has shown how the the Federal Bureau of Investigation handed the Warren Commission a fable for public consumption about the Central Intelligence Agency's "Oswald Project." The fictional portrait of "Lee Harvey Oswald" that finally appeared in the Warren Commission Report combined the biographies of two young people, Russian-speaking HARVEY Oswald and American-born LEE Oswald. The Russian speaking youth, possibly of Hungarian parents, was brought to the U.S. following World War II and given the name HARVEY Oswald. HARVEY was of small stature, quiet, slightly malnourished, and lived with a short, heavy-set Marguerite Oswald impostor who never smiled. New Orleans born LEE Oswald was tall, husky, and athletic. As a youth LEE lived with half-brother John Pic, brother Robert Oswald, and his tall, nice-looking mother, Marguerite Claverie Oswald. A program created by US intelligence merged the identities of Russian-speaking HARVEY and American-born LEE Oswald. The result, ten years later, was that young Russian-speaking HARVEY had an American background and birth certificate. HARVEY was an ideal candidate to “defect” to the Soviet Union and work as an undercover agent who secretly understood Russian. HARVEY “defected” and two years later returned to America with a Russian wife and child. A year later this former “defector” was handing out literature in support of Castro and Cuba. Unknown to HARVEY, he had become the ideal candidate to frame for the assassination of President Kennedy. And also unknown to HARVEY were the activities of LEE Oswald in the summer and fall of 1963, when LEE was impersonating HARVEY and helping to set up HARVEY as the accused assassin of President Kennedy.

I'll get you started. The above card of the house of cards Hardly story is the genesis of the Hardly story. And no one in Team Hardly has anything to prove this ever happened. Ever. So with that said, you can't even build your house of cards Hardly story...because it doesn't even exist. And please don't post snatches of "testimony" from people who made their claims 40 years after the fact. That'd be about as factual as you stating you saw what appeared to be a gun in one of the old guys' hand in the Nix film - remember that one?

Ray - care to comment on the substance of this thread - that there was a Hungarian clone found by secret agents who looked like Oswald?

Jim DiEugenio, We need to get this back to the Hardly Lee story. I asked you way up above if you believe in this story or not. Now you're trying to prove to Lance how Jean was so wrong with your critique of her work. So what is it - based on my summary of the story to Sandy above, do you really believe or think this story happened like Team Hardly claims?

That's a particularly rich reply to me, Sandy. "Making stuff up" - LOL. This is actually a good example, Sandy, of how you pick and choose things to make the Hardly Lee case. You think that just because you've "solved" the school records that the entire Hardly Lee case has been proven. As a matter of fact, this is how the ENTIRE Hardly Lee story has been concocted. Obviously you don't want to actually debate the clearly farcical story that is Hardly Lee. So I'll put this summary of the tale here again and then feel free to address all of the points I've made here: That a boy was snatched off the streets of Hungary because secret agents thought he looked exactly like Oswald That this boy's mother, also from Hungary, looked exactly like LHO's Mom, except she was frumpy and never smiled and had a unibrow That when LHO had his mastoid, the secret agents hurriedly also did a mastoid on the Hungarian boy because, you know, they're clones That for 10 whole years before 11/22/63, these two clones were practically living in each other's shadows for some as yet unknown secret mission That matching pictures of the one and only LHO do NOT match per Team Hardly because, you know, CONTRAST That LHO had shoulders that did not slope while the clone LHO had sloping shoulders That the clone was murdered by Ruby on Sunday and the other one escaped never to be heard from again That when the body was exhumed, they switched skulls because, you know, they had the other skull on ice waiting for the exhumation to take place 20 years after the fact So we await that you address everything here. And I mean everything - even perhaps, as mentioned above, how the secret agents totally lucked out and found, among millions of refugees in Hungary, the exact clone of the US born Oswald. And whose Mother also looked exactly like the US born Oswald's Mom. And by the way, your "buddy" Tom Graves who seems to have been either booted off here or just got tired of EF, also knew the whole Hardly story is a fairy tale. Simply go to the "Gems" thread (which he started) for more.

The school records as well as all the rest have all been debunked Sandy. The whole HL story holds about as much water as the body alteration story and the JVB one. The people who come up with these stories give the government way too much credit for being all-seeing and all-knowing. And like Jim HARGROVE pointed out unintentionally on another thread, those who believe in them are the same folks who take these stories like gospel.

Jim DiEugenio - I don't know what else Lance believes in with the JFK case. But here, he's discussing the Hardly Lee story. And please tell me you don't believe in the Hardly Lee story. In order to do so, you'd have to believe: That a boy was snatched off the streets of Hungary because secret agents thought he looked exactly like Oswald That this boy's mother, also from Hungary, looked exactly like LHO's Mom, except she was frumpy and never smiled and had a unibrow That when LHO had his mastoid, the secret agents hurriedly also did a mastoid on the Hungarian boy because, you know, they're clones That for 10 whole years before 11/22/63, these two clones were practically living in each other's shadows for some as yet unknown secret mission That matching pictures of the one and only LHO do NOT match per Team Hardly because, you know, CONTRAST That LHO had shoulders that did not slope while the clone LHO had sloping shoulders That the clone was murdered by Ruby on Sunday and the other one escaped never to be heard from again That when the body was exhumed, they switched skulls because, you know, they had the other skull on ice waiting for the exhumation to take place 20 years after the fact ...and many, many more.

One thing that's on my mind about this and Ron Bulman did a nice job of bringing up is - if Baker was way back in the parade, it would have taken him a little bit more time to have arrived where he stopped, dismounted, and run over to go into the building as seen in the film. Also, Truly seems to be just standing there as Baker runs by him so it's not like Truly suddenly starts galloping behind him. With Ron's "30 seconds here and 20 seconds there" post above, could more time have elapsed than what the witnesses are stating? Another thing too is people do misrememeber things. For example, Truly said that he thought the car slowed down considerably at the corner to avoid the curb but if you watch the Towner and Bell films, both films prove him wrong (I know Chris D will disagree with me but that's on another thread to discuss). I'm genuinely interested in this and am not agreeing nor disagreeing with anyone here.

More blather from Team Hardly. Lance I don't proclaim to be an expert on the school records (but I think I did a decent job on other aspects of the Hardly Lee fantasy) but there are pretty good debunks on Parker's site... https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/f13-the-harvey-lee-evidence ...and Google Tracy Parnells blog as well. IMO I think it's shameful that Team Hardly works so hard to keep this going yet they won't take it to a respectable alt news site to let them see if it's a viable story.

Chris I can only go by what I see in the film and also the Bell film. Although Bell is not as clear as Towner it does not appear that he slows down. It looks like he just glides along at a consistent speed. I understand that that's what Truly said. All I can say is perhaps he misremembered what he saw because the film does show it differently.

I've always thought that breaks in the film or whatever is just way too short for anything to be of significance. When you watch Towner, the car is moving at a regular speed so it hardly looks like the driver was literally back-pedaling to avoid the curb. Second, I think Truly simply got it wrong - people do describe things in the weirdest way sometimes and it can simply be a matter of how Truly was seeing the car when it came upon him. There's nothing sinister in it.

I said pretty much the same thing above elsewhere on this forum. It goes beyond reason that a gun with many parts in it would be "rattling around" that morning. I'm no gun expert but after assembly you're supposed to also test fire the gun and sight the scope before actually using it. We obviously know that that was never done. Also, this cinches it for me as well. This is from the FBI's own reenactment film they shot from the so-called sniper's nest: Note the white patch of the Kennedy stand-in's back, which is pretty accurate when you note where the hole is on JFK in the autopsy photo. How would the bullet be able to exit the throat that low on the back and even if it did exit, it wouldn't have even hit Connally. And we all know JFK is reacting to the so-called single bullet ans JBC doesn't react until seconds later. But we all know that that back hole terminated right there where it went in - Humes said as much in the autopsy.

It is what it is, Steve. Maybe he just didn't feel comfortable with that bright light shining on him for the movie camera (notice the harsh shadows). Note, too, everyone is just pretty much sitting around smiling and staring. A film camera and harsh lights can do that to folks.

Have you ever visited Consortium News? They've published DiEugenio over there. If the Hardly story really truly is the Rosetta Stone of the case like you and Team Hardly believe, and if all your ducks are truly in a row with it like you claim, I have no doubt that CN would at least take a serious look at it.

And there it is Jim. Gospel is the key and as you know when believers believe in other gospel like Christ walking on water, it's an all or nothing proposition. Life doesn't work that way. Meanwhile the biggest test to the Hardly Lee story is to take it to sane professional reporters and let them gauge once and for all how much water the Hardly Lee story holds.

David whether it's a statement by the accused, a shell with a dent lip or photos of the accused holding a weapon it's all part of the evidentiary chain. If statements from the accused were deemed unimportant, then why is every alleged criminal always allowed to give a statement?

Yes, Dave, the man never got his day in court. I know you'll now say something along the lines of "Yes he did because the WR proves his guilt." But because Ruby hushed him forever, the whole case is slanted toward his guilt. Even McVeigh and Simpson got their respective days in court with legal representation and the option to testify on their own behalf if they chose to. And though I don't agree with everything that other CTers say was fixed against him, there's certainly enough to go around that a good lawyer would have presented to cause reasonable doubt.

It's all one big reading of the minutiae that adds up to zero Sandy. And by the way about an hour ago you were saying "so what if Dave was wrong." So are you now going to be Dave's mouthpiece without really understanding what's going on? This is actually an outstanding example of what Lance said earlier about zealots blindly sticking to a fake theory without thinking for yourself. You told me recently that you're still analyzing the evidence which I thought was encouraging. But now it appears you're just going along with Dave because he's a member of Team Hardly.

I disagree Sandy. Go to my very first post in this thread where I mention the various heights in State Secret. But the more relevant point here is this all ties back to the Hardly story, how the height discrepancy is "proof" that two Oswald clones we were running around in each other's shadows. There weren't. It's as simple as that.

That's the whole point Sandy. Researchers need to be honest about their theories and qualify them by keeping an open mind that they could be wrong. Yes we've all made mistakes obviously.

Jim did you take the time to read Lances post I pointed out to you? And it's funny you argue about how Tracy argues about one portion of Kudlatty when the entire Hardly story is based on many portions of items woven together to create the Hardly whole.

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.

Sandy - for what it's worth, you may want to read Lance's post above. I honestly could not have written a better one in describing the current state of the JFK conspiracy community. I've always know there were some interesting people out there and how they believe in the most interesting things (including for example, how some don't believe we landed on the moon) but naively thought it wasn't that bad. According to Lance, it's actually worst. And by the way, do you care to comment on how Lance debunked the yard stick thing?