Michael Walton

Really Jim? I mean...you're serious? To say that secret agents found a near look a like of Lee Oswald in Hungary and as an extra bonus the look a like's mother even looks like the US born Oswald's Mom EXCEPT this one is frumpy and never smiles. And this all happened in 1953. And the secret agents had these two mothers and sons practically living in each other's shadows in Texas, NO, Japan, and NYC. That's what you and other members of Team Hardly believe? We all know the sky is blue and the grass is green. But according to Team Hardly, the sky's really yellow and the grass is magenta. They know this because, you know, the evidence... And if you're so 100% sure of this, why haven't you at least taken this to present your case to Consortium News. Jim DiEugenio has been published over there and if they could verify beyond a doubt * the Hardly story, that'd be an earth-shattering revelation. * Oh that's right. None of this has been confirmed and verified except by Team Hardly. LOL

Wow, Sandy. What a huge leap of faith. I guess the next time I see another Mike Walton on Facebook I'll be sure to remember that's my CIA manufactured clone LOL And oh my look at this! https://www.facebook.com/sandy.larsen.566

Speak for yourself LOL

Not just me but many others. And I believe Tracy said that based on a poll even the uninitiated don't believe the Hardly story ever happened. So there's that as well.

Sandy to the contrary on the GEMS thread many many excellent rebuttals were posted. Team Hardly is just too committed to admitting they're right LOL

Hi Sandy according to Team Hardly it's actually you guys who think Lee O had special powers LOL And maybe they were concocted by the CIAs version of a super secret DR X lab? LOL!!!

Yes you can too Sandy. But we know better

Sandy the entire Hardly story is fictional so it's important for us who rebut it to do so. There are many people here like Team Hardly who fall too easily for fictional stories. It's similar to the old carnival days and tent shows where they had the Snake Lady. Team Hardly is like the ones who go into the tent eyes wide and mouths agape. They'll be talking about all night on the drive home. Those who rebut Hardly are those who would never even bother stepping into the tent. We know better LOL. Like Barnum said there's a sucker a minute and never has this proven true with Team Hardly.

Sandy if you believe truth and rebuttals to fantasy stories like the Hardly caper are insults from me, then that's your interpretation of it. It is important to remember that all far-fetched stories like Hardly must be rebutted vigorously by those with a good dose of plausibility. Otherwise the Kennedy case will be overrun with misinformation like the Hardly story has always been.

In my opinion, and I don't know if they included this in the mock trial, but all they'd have to do is show the FBI reenactment film to show that the shot supposedly hit Kennedy in the back could NOT have gone through the back, out the throat, and into JC for two reasons: The FBI accurately marked on the stand in's back where the back wound appears in the autopsy photo. You can clearly see the white mark on his back. Simply follow the track of that mark and look where the bullet would have come out. Not through his throat and far from hitting JC. And according to the autopsy report, Humes clearly said that back wound terminated in the back.

Jim, Hunt was an author of fictional secret agent capers. He had been a bonafide CIA agent for many years, learning at the feet of Angleton. I'm sorry to say but it'd be very difficult to believe *anything* this man said, especially to his son on his deathbed. How do we not know that he said the things he did simply for his son, so he could then write a book about revealing the "shocking" revelation that JFK was murdered as part of a conspiracy? They were all professional liars and connivers - it was part of their daily job LOL I mean have you not seen liars and crooks lie and fudge the truth even after swearing to telling the truth, even after having 50 notarizations stamped on the papers?

Hmm, I don't know if it's a good idea to make that assumption, Chris. We're talking the blink of an eye * and it's an awfully big leap to say that he "...reacted to a headshot before it occurred." People were yelling and clapping, the previous shots has already gone off, the motorcycles were right there - a lot was going on. He could have twitched, he could have jerked a little trying to pivot to follow the car. Just my IMO... * The average time it takes for a complete human blink is about 300 to 400 milliseconds or 3/10ths to 4/10ths of a second. Of course this is an average only and can differ from person to person.

Chris - nice job on that clip. The moving sprockets are because when the person who stabilized this clip, they did so on the head or people in the car. When you do that, something will not be as stabilized and in this case it's the sprocket holes. If you take those frames and unstable and just put them together as they came out of the camera, then the footage would be much jerkier. As for brain matter, this is also simple to explain. We cannot expect to see too much detail in this footage. The BH camera and its lenses were not super high res equipment filming at 1,000 FPS - if it had been then, yes, we would have seen a lot more detail including the matter ejection. As a matter of fact, there is a demo video I made on here that shows a gunshot wound to the head * and it was actually filmed at a high frame rate and you can see all of the horrible results of it. One bit of good news though to confirm the rear matter ejection is Jackie herself, in shock, climbed onto the trunk to grab a piece of Kennedy's head. So the proof is in Jackie's reaction. * I'm not posting it here because one of the more sensitive members of the forum reported me for posting it a while back, even though I posted it not for the thrill of it but for educational purposes. Ironically, this same member fails to understand that if he's so concerned about the dead people in these films and how their families would react to it, what do the Kennedy and Oswald families think about the endless posting of the autopsy photos and Z film.

So what Jim? There are many, many people with the same names, born on the same dates, and so on. It doesn't mean there was a clone discovered back in 1953 in Hungary and has been shadowing the US born Oswald for 10 years. It also doesn't mean the clone had a Mom who looked exactly like the US born LHO's Mom but was dumpy and never smiled LOL As for the Wilcott story yes, maybe there was a SINGLE LHO working for the government. That suspicion has always been there and because of State Secret, the possibility of LHO being a low-level agent is certainly viable. But it DOES NOT mean there was a LHO CLONE for goodness sake discovered back in 1953 in Hungary and has been shadowing the US born Oswald for 10 years. It also doesn't mean the clone had a Mom who looked exactly like the US born LHO's Mom but was dumpy and never smiled LOL You can keep arguing this all you want but the plausibility and ring of truth factors - and State Secret - completely demolishes this fantasy story.

Admitting mistakes goes both ways, Mike. There are many, many, many mistakes in the Hardly Lee story. Many. Yet, when we point them out, the Hardly crowd just ignores them and switches to another topic. As in, "Well what about this? See!" A perfect example or two - I made the point of photo touch ups. There's just no reasoning with Hardly crowd - they won't admit that the whole ugly LHO photo could be just a matter of a botched touch up with no sinister implications. Another - I made a face transition and an ear comparison. Josephs says it's all in the CONTRAST of the photos, if you can believe or comprehend that. I then made another facial comparison showing that the faces are one and the same. Josephs then says it's all in the shoulders - one LHO had non-sloping shoulders and the other had drooping shoulders. I then pointed out that there's another photo showing LHO with both kinds of shoulders. They quickly changed tactics. Others have done this as well. I could go on, but there's not a one iota of fessing up that maybe, just maybe the rock-solid case has some flaws in it.

Debate it, Mike. Go ahead and mention what you want to say about it,. Jim and the other Hardly people keep posting. Myself and others who do not support it continue to do so as well. But to call people names just because people can't buy into fantasy stories is not the way to go. So go ahead and mention it - it's a "debate" here after all.

Paul that's one of the slipperest of slopes of the Hardly Lee team. Elsewhere they actually believe now after I stressed over and over again the importance of State Secret which pretty much nullifies the entire Hardly Lee fiction. They've now bought into SS yet tongue cheek and when it suits them will dive back into the comedic Hardly Lee story. Ironically Larsen believes Hardly yet also say he'll read SS when he gets around to it LOL X 2 LOL

Paul, I don't know if you know this but just an FYI - Sandy Larsen claims to be agnostic about this whole case. In other words, he claims that he still has not decided if there was a conspiracy to murder Kennedy or not. He claims he's still "studying" the evidence if you can believe that. But to give you an idea of how he weighs the evidence he reads here and elsewhere, a long while back, he actually claimed that one of the bystanders down on the knoll was holding a "black object," meaning a pistol. He claimed to see this in one of the films (either Muchmore or Nix...can't remember which one). So to summarize, he actually believed that one of the old guys may have been involved in shooting Kennedy. When I called him out on it, he actually said he was joking ("heh heh") which I'm assuming after giving it more thought, knew that his outrageous claim was a complete out in left field bogus theory. Of course Sandy is also a 100% supporter of the Hardly Lee story too. So I just wanted to let you know what kind of "researcher" you're working with here. Regards - Michael Walton

It is one of the worst touch up jobs I've ever seen. But that's all it is Jim just a horrible touch up job. But ask yourself - the original photo was taken with LHO standing in front of a clapboard building of some kind, right? Why in the world would they remove that from the touch up? What sinister implication or reason would that be? It's simple - most probably the clapboards' thin lines probably would not print well so they made it a solid background. That's all it was. I've shown the Elvis in Coffin and Kid on Dad's Shoulder examples and now the Kennedys one above. Touch ups were a normal part of publishing. The LHO one is no different though I'd love to actually meet the guy who did the touch up on that mangled photo. But that's all it is. The Hardly Lee crowd is just once again like they love to do, speculate and twist and turn perfectly normal reasons for things into the Hardly fairy tale. UPDATE - links to my other post about touch up jobs: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=363519 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=364317

Haha - very funny Cliff. I'm delusional but all you have to do is look at your two comments above. You're arguing whether the items you mention are real or not. With that said, is there anything else you think is fake?

Thanks Ray. Look at the autopsy photo. The left side of the face has no damage to it even though Josephs is making a huge leap by drawing an arrow from JFK's cheek to the x-ray. The priest clearly got his vs my left mixed up. Look at the funeral guy's notes - very consistent right this and right that.

The problem with that position obviously is the exit wound would have gone right through and out the left side of the head. There's nothing in the record stating that.

It's easy to find - just look it up on YTV...

This goes back to that ridiculous claim on the GEMS thread about how the large nosed LHO's picture that appeared in the paper was altered because - well, it was for some scary sinister reason. I pointed out a more plausible and much more practical reason. Back in the days before digital printing they did this for a variety of reasons. So I watching a show about the Kennedys and came across this scene showing the three Kennedys as their photo appeared in the newspaper. Touch ups like this happened all the time as it was a regular part of publishing back then. But of course the Hardly Lee crowd thinks that one single photo of LHO was something mysterious and sinister. Not so.

David, compare the notes of Robinson and the priest. The old guy was probably dozing in the rectory when he was suddenly jerked out of his sleep and sent on down to the hospital. There, he sees Kennedy dead and wounded grieviously. So I think it'd be very easy for him to get the "left" mixed up with "his left" vs. "Kennedy's left" meaning the *right* side of Kennedy's face. Huber probably meant Kennedy's right because that photo you posted shows no damage at all. Plus, Huber had no time to closely inspect the wounds - he was probably in and out after waving his hands around over the corpse. Then look how detailed Robinson's notes are - right this and right that. It's obvious the guy knows what he's talking about having been involved in the mortuary business for years.