Michael Walton

Andrej - the photo of Baby June is with Marina, not Lee.

Where are these photos Sandy? Talking about them and describing them vs actually showing them are two different things. If you have a program that can do frame by frame of a GIF surely you can grab the photos and post them here too.

I agree with you Mathias. I was watching the movie TRUTH recently, about the Dan Rather being fired incident. In it, the guy who made the fake "Bush shirked his Guard duties" memos didn't like Bush. The point being, it's very hard for a human to sometimes be honest about someone they don't like or have it in for.

Agreed, Jim HARGROVES. Just as he was most probably telling the truth when he said he didn't remember what the LHO case code name was.

Yes, it is hard to know who to believe. But knowing all that we know up to this point about Oswald, why would he even have a Minox LIGHT METER if that's what the FBI is claiming it was? My father was similar to Oswald - a nobody in this vast world of nobodies. He was a blue-collar dock worker. He'd have the usual stuff among his possessions expected from a nobody dock worker. But a Minox LIGHT METER? In other words, the WC has always claimed Oswald to be an angry run-of-the-mill kind of guy who just decided one day to go up to his place of work and kill the president, and he just so happens to have a spy camera LIGHT METER among his possessions... Uh-huh...

Tom Little, JFKAU is a good book but IMO I don't think it's aged too well. I agree the author did go a little overboard with it. Also, the C Day thing is kind of silly and far-fetched because if JFK was really trying to reach out to Castro before he was killed, would he really have had a C Day plan in place like this? Of course, the same C Day could have been planned by others on the event of JFK's death (the so-called revenge invasion). As for the shooters and so forth, you may want to take an opposite tack. Instead of focusing on the mechanics of the shooting, just look at the evidence, which will tell you what happened: The unaltered Z film shows his head going violently backward; this same item in the film was covered up on live TV by Dan Rather as he described the film; and this SAME film was suppressed from the public until 1975. Why was that? Here is a film of shooting comparisons. You be the judge: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxU0V1ck1GZFN6TWM And here too: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxNm9MNTY3UHVrR1k The mystery photo (so-called) shows a beveled outshoot on the skull. Here's a photo illustration: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxdm9ZalJTSWU3cms Could one marksman, who supposedly was adequate when rated in the USMC, and standing or kneeling in an awkward position really have pulled off all of those shots in 6 seconds? Using a piece of junk gun that was supposedly brought in that morning, hidden, reassembled, but according to gun users never sighted nor test fired before 12.30? Is there any evidence or testimony at all from anyone in that building stating that LHO did all of these things before 12.30? Here's a video showing the shot sequence: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc NOTE - at the above video, take note of the FBI reenactment image on the left. Look at the little white patch on the stand in's back then look at where a bullet - which would have come out in a straight line from that patch - have went on to. Do you see what I mean? So without realizing it, the FBI pretty much nullified the one shot seven wounds theory that the WC claimed. LOL. JFK's back wound terminates in the back - in other words there is no exit of it. How could the SBT happen if that shot terminates? Here's a comparison photo: Of course there is more, but you get the gist of it here. As for Files, Bev Oliver and the other fakers, you have to take their words with a grain of salt. Unfortunately there are many many fakers and charlatans in this case trying to make a buck. It's as simple as that and there are plenty of suckers out there who fall for it as well. So don't take their collective words for it - follow stuff like the above and other stuff written by Pat Speer, Dave Josephs and so on. And the absolute deal breaker could be the Prayer Man theory. That, for me, could be the ultimate proof of conspiracy if the TV station who owns the rights to the film ever releases the original film for analysis.

Jim HARGROVES - as Tracy mentions the Wilcott testimony states that he doesn't remember. So he passed a stress test - great. It doesn't suddenly make everything he says gold and still, he states he doesn't remember. Personally, I find it hard to believe that one person - only one - within the agency would make that "Oswald earned a salary" statement. *** As for putting people on ignore on this forum, I think that's sad to be honest with you. This is a FORUM. In other words it's like a bunch of people sitting around in an open room discussing things. Ignoring people is like someone going over into the corner of the room and talking only what they believe in. Is that really what a FORUM should be? As irritating as Paul Trejo's posts are with his funny "the right wingers did it" shtick, he still has a right to post. But the key is if you do not believe in it and have some type of evidence to back it up, then rebut him. Sometimes to no end. But don't ignore him just because you don't believe in his theories.

John Butler - it may be important to keep in mind that coercison played a big role in people's testimony. By that I mean, Baker's testimony is a result of getting him to change his testimony so they could blame it on LHO. Also, in your video, I'm not seeing PM in there. Can you point out where he is? Robin and Andrej - nice work on PM having one step down while he was up there. I used to think that wasn't the case, that because he was standing back further into the alcove it made his perspective look smaller. But the one step down seems to make more sense. My only issue with it now is - when was that film frame shot - how much time since the last shot elapsed? I'm asking because would someone have just stood there frozen with one step down for that long of a time?

Sandy - not at all but I do go there. Greg Parker is one of the more lucid, clear researchers of the case. He's very good at putting one and one together and making a good, tight narrative to prove Hardly Lee is a fantastical story. I did laugh my xxx off when I read his "Hardly Lee" title for some of his posts and I'm adopting (stealing) it here. There are others here of course who do that very well too - Speer, Jeremy, Laverick and even our Lone Nutter Tracy Parnell. I know you strongly believe in this fantasy story but you and others have a lot of work ahead if you want the story to be a case breaker. Bill Simpich's outstanding work has a very convincing narrative of how LHO was a low level asset. He was probably recruited and used while in Japan and then they sent him on to Russia for a mole hunt. When he returned they probably didn't quite know what to do with him until the plan to murder Kennedy was hatched. Because of that fake defection, the wheels started turning for him to take the blame, as in "angry defector murders beloved president." But there is not a shred of evidence - despite what all who believe in the Hardly Lee story - proving with 100% certainty that there was a clone walking, almost in Oswald's shadows, as he wandered through the military and his life in LA and TX. And to think they found a clone 10 years BEFORE is just Stephen King territory LOL. But as always you and others are free to think or believe in what you want, just like my brother-in-law who believed there was a magic motor that comes on when you throw the REC switch in an automobile LOL.

This is a very good point, Mathias. You'd think that if they were planning activities for their agents (both Hardly and Lee) that they'd both need code names. So it's interesting that we've never, ever - not in any document to date - have seen them with a code name for Hardly and Lee. The most we've ever read in the current record is "Lee Harvey Oswald" as "...he's defecting..." or something like that. I think this is still more clear and decisive evidence that the one and only Lee H. Oswald existed like Bill Simpich explains, and Hardly never existed in the first place. Good work, Mathias.

Yes, Paul. A very accurate statement above. And don't forget his followers as well.

So Jim. How is all of this going to fit into the HardlyLee story (OK, OK, I'm stealing Greg Parker's hilarious name for the Harvey and Lee fairy tale)? I've not seen this guy's report that JD mentions above - that he names names and says "...deposition of people who he talked to about Oswald being a CIA agent." So if Witten's report is true and he says all of this, it's going to be very, very difficult to fit the HardlyLee round peg into the real-life square hole that is the Oswald story. You and all believers of HardlyLee will then have to ask yourself "How could this guy Witten - saying all that he is saying in this report and not a one time mentioning that another CIA agent - the clone called Harvey - was also involved?" At this point, it's going to be extremely far-fetched that no one would mention it and he (Witten) would then hear from someone about it.

Oh Jim you just had to slip that "Harvey Oswald" in there LOL. The thread was moving along nicely and quite a few have finally come around to seeing the light on Bill Simpich's great work...and then HARVEY. LOL

Yes Jim, anyone who really studies the case with an open mind will find the so-called "fitting of the narrative" to blame the murder on Oswald. And yes, media manipulation started that very weekend to push that lone nut narrative.

Jim didn't you admit in that thread that you had it wrong about the composite photo? I don't recall you retracting your error.

David, I think that's a leap. I know that Tracy is a LNer which is fine - it's his right to believe that. I'm not. As I've said, I'm a CT-er. But to think that everything in this case has been altered or manipulated is quite a stretch. So yes, there ARE innocent explanations that can explain what happened to that photo. But obviously the entire CASE is not one big innocent explanation, as you've shown with your MC article, as Bill Simpich has shown in SS, as J Thompson has shown in his book, and and Meagher, and so on. Plus Greg Parker did an excellent job of showing how that photo was altered by Jack White in this thread. I personally believe the photo was touched up, not to cover up anything, but to clean it up for the wire service. But then White - as Parker has shown - revealed that it was manipulated by White. I do wish you would sometimes show just a little bit of humility in your writings like Simpich does. He wrote an outstanding, incisive piece in SS but he also knows that even a very good narrative has some weaknesses and he admits to it. I've never seen you show a one ounce of humility in your writings. It's all in for you like a wild-eyed, crazed preacher LOL One other thing - elsewhere on here I clicked on a link about the fraud Judy Baker. You had posted it and for a second I thought "OMG - don't tell me Josephs believes even in the ridiculous Baker story." But you don't - your story is called "Poking Holes." So you see. Not everything is a conspiracy in this case, even for you. If anything, you seem to now buy into the SS story, as you've been mentioning it quite a bit elsewhere on EF. So you may want to ask yourself "Self - if SS is a solid, plausible story, how in the world does the funny clone story fit in?" You're obviously a smart guy and if you really did this, did some good self-reflection, you might discover that the Harvey and Lee story really is a ridiculous fraud but it in no way impacts all of the other work you've done in the case. Think about it...

Bumping this because no one said anything about it but it basically explains the Frankenstein photo of LHO. And also take a look at this. A wirephoto in two different publications. The kid in one looks like his eyes are closed, other it does not. The jagged looking pattern on the player's arm. The kid himself looks like he's painted onto the ball player. The point is - there was nothing sinister about the Frankenstein photo. It was not edited by the government or some such silliness.

Thanks Kathy.

Thanks and will look at it though I'm a little leery now with this problem that's being reported.

Who runs that forum? Is there anything good there?

David you could very well be right. I tend to err on the side of caution with this case. Yes there was a conspiracy, yes LHO didn't do it, yes the intelligence community is a most likely culprit. And yes, possibly military. We all know Kennedy was despised thinking he was Joe the appeaser all over again. So yes there's a motive there as well. As for your diagram I can't make heads or tails of it. I've worked in the multimedia field for 31 years and I'd suggest you redo it so it's easier to read. Otherwise new folks here will take it as the scribblings of a madman.

The only thing that bothers me about the info I'm seeing here is it would help readers a lot if researchers like Jim and David J would show just a little bit of humility. Bill Simpich in SS does this very well. He presents his case very well but when he knows there's a weakness he admits as much. Others here do not. The impression I get is they think their theory is 100% accurate when we know, like life, none are perfect. And of course if anyone presents a rebuttal it tends to fall into insults. So it'd be very helpful if folks would honestly admit weak spots in their narrative. Otherwise they look like they've swallowed the Koolaid whole without a blink.

Brendan did you read what Josephs just posted? Another key he mentions is why is the record keeping so messy? I believe I read somewhere that LHO kept everything. Yet look at the records of MC and the gun purchases.

At the end of Paul's reply he switched gears again so the real culprits were the RADICAL RIGHT. Right, Paul?

David Lifton wow you're giving the planners absolutely no credit at all and are making them sound like a bunch of bumble xxxxs. Do you really think they would have gone through all of this planning only to remember "ah der....the cameras....der...?" In the grand scheme of things there was no reason at all for them to have sent LHO down there. The idea of his being there was mere window dressing for the plot, all part of the "communist assassin cavorts with communists mere months before he murders US president" narrative to stir up xxxx for the Cuban invasion that never came.