Michael Walton

Cliff...come on. You know that's not a bullet hole. The autopsy report says only one shot was found on the back region - the one in the upper back that you clearly see in the photo. That single shot was probed and terminated there. It'd be impossible for that shot to line up with the throat wound negating the SBT. Isn't that enough? You're now seriously going to say that a *second* hole is there, meaning yet another shot? And all because of a graphic that of all people "Ashton Gray" made? This is the same guy who on another thread on this forum says that the throat wound is not even one of entrance. This is why the CT wing of this case is so fractured. Everyone wants to be *the one* who breaks the case if anything is ever revealed someday and they all want to go off on their own tangents with their beliefs, which is how way-out-in-left-field theories get started without an ounce of plausibility. It's probably why there's so much sniggering and eye-rolling in the mainstream press about the CT wing and it's also why there's so much buggering between the different posters here.

This was posted back in 2007. Although I disagree with what the white is pointing out (seems like someone thinks it's a hole where as I think it's dried or clotted blood), based on this image there had to be some movement of the clothing compared to where the back hole appears in the autopsy photo:

I found a link to an article recently but lost it. The gist of the story though is that Richard Nixon was just as much part of the planning for VN. He did this in the early and mid 50's when he was VP, all under the guise of helping the French save their colonial power there. I then came across the Frost/Nixon interviews and one of the earliest questions asked by Frost was about VN. Nixon said something like "Now wait just a minute! I inherited VN..." or some such nonsense.

State Secret is the only narrative I've come across that even begins to address the LHO fake defection narrative eloquently and plausibly. The whole operation had the hands of intelligence all over it. Even the reporter Johnson, playing the role of the fake "inquiring mind" reporter, tried to get on with the secret agents and instead was used like she was, writing the stories about Webster and LHO. It's obvious that both Webster and LHO, two men who were probably loyal and thought they were doing things for the good of their country, were used as dangles in this so-called "defection" caper. Johnson, who had to have been fed info about either of them, simply got the easily switched out legends that were created for them as seen here: Peter Dale Scott then goes on to write eloquently about the shifting around of legends, including the legend on LHO for the molehunt: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=48692#relPageId=3 Meanwhile, if the plan is to argue apples and oranges, I saw this yesterday at a store: A 2-3 inch height difference is hardly something to base a theory on. Instead, it's not the height difference itself that is the issue - the real, underlying issue is why there is a discrepancy in the records and it's easy to figure out once you read SS. It's simply a matter of creating differing legends by the secret agents so they can easily be switched out depending on the type of intelligence operation that was being conducted. The entire key to this is what takes place two years later in Dallas. At 12.45 pm, with there being absolutely no witnesses to have seen or to have taken a measurement of anyone holding a gun and firing it, the broadcast 5-10 165 description goes out on the radio. Where did that come from? It comes from SS's article explaining this was all part of the legend started by the secret agents two years before. To this day, no one has been able to identify the person who gave the radio guy that description, yet it's broadcast three different times. As for the quote about me agreeing with Jim DiEugenio and him having an issue about SS, I can't speak for that. I do agree with Jim's write-ups but not everything and he told me that he agrees with what I've said in the past but not everything as well. So who we agree with on this forum or not pretty much cancels everything out because it seems like no one on here agrees with others 100% of the time. And that, too, is why I think the CT wing of this case is so fractured. Everyone wants to be *the one* who breaks the case if anything is ever revealed someday and they all want to go off on their own tangents with their beliefs. It's probably why there's so much sniggering and eye-rolling in the mainstream press about the CT wing and it's also why there's so much buggering between the different posters here.

http://www.vulture.com/2017/09/the-vietnam-war-pbs-review.html Another glowing review...

Here's that show. I was going to type something here about HK but a comment on the YTV page said it better. "Henry Kissinger critiquing a film about nuclear war is like John Gotti critiquing a film about mob violence. And did Stanley Kubrick and Peter Sellers somehow have Kissinger in mind when they created the character of Dr. Strangelove? I was just waiting for Kissinger to raise his right arm in a Nazi salute then quietly put it back down." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcCLZwU2t34

It is important to note the "spy in his own mind" quote that Bill Simpich wrote so eloquently about in State Secret. I think that many HL supporters are misinterpreting that statement, or not fully understanding, or do not *want* to understand and look at alternative stories based more on fact and documentation vs HL, which is based much more on supposition, taking statements out of context, assumptions, witness coercion and/or encouragement - the fitting the round peg in a square hole, if you will. There is a tremendous amount of well documented evidence in SS that proves the narrative to be correct and the HL story to be incorrect. That statement goes to the essence of understanding who LHO was. LHO was like any other low-income kid with a sense of adventure. He joined the Marines because, prospects were low but knowing he wanted to do something "more" with his life, he must have left an impression with the military enough that they moved him into intelligence areas like manning the radar for U2 flights. In other words, he was probably a crafty guy and the brass wanted to take advantage of his smarts. Though probably boring and mundane, LHO also felt good about doing this, once again feeling in-the-know with doing "secret agent" work. So it's important not to dismiss the "spy in his own mind" statement that Bill Simpich wrote so eloquently about in State Secret. It goes to the heart of the SS narrative. And it actually proves that the HL never happened. It's important too to remember the 5-10 165 announcement on the radio mere minutes after the assassination. How could anyone have known that? It's simple. It came from the different legends that the secret agents developed for both Webster and Oswald when they did their fake "defection" two years before Dallas. Those legends were carefully crafted and could be easily interchangeable, which is further proven by Simpich's outstanding section when he shows two different documents using this 5-10 legend, ones even published by the press. As for LHO and Webster's similar appearance, I think it's being disingenious to show a photo that they do not look a like. They actually do as shown here: The point though is not to have them be clones of each other. To the contrary, the point is for them to have a close resemblance; that, combined with their interchangeable legends set up by the secret agents, would allow either of them to move in and out at will during their fake "defections."

It may be a good idea for HL supporters here to start looking at how SS really hurts the HL story. One powerful reason is if the planners impersonated LHO and Duran they would have known about the HL clone since it involves secret agent work. To protect the plan they would have removed the clone BEFORE 11/22. Because there's absolutely nothing in the record this proves completely that the HL clone never existed in the first place. IMO cased closed for HL.

I'm trying to figure out which photo Sandy is saying I'll say is not faked and then will reply about that photo.

Bill Simpich and his outstanding State Secret is the only well documented story about Oswald. I'm sorry to say that it completely blows HL out of the water because it shows there is no way to fit its narrative into any part of SS. It further shows that it negates the Hungarian clone part of HL. The real Michael Walton

I cannot see any photos and only see a photo bucket warning. If you want to post photos start a free blog somewhere, add your photos to a blog page, then grab the URL of the image and put it into your EF post.

Sandy, I'm sorry to say but unless some people - nay many people - stop with the "everything is fake" prejudging of the photos and films, then we'll continue to have people coming up with funny stories like the HL story and others. Not everything was faked in this case and usually the simple narrative is the correct one.

Sandy, the basic thinking of this is if it didn't happen from 60 to 63 it didn't happen at all (prior to 60). For example, if a ball player played 3 years in the majors, all of his batting and fielding is recorded. Bill Simpich and SS has pretty much done the same thing from 60 to 63. But to go back to the ball player analogy, the HL supporters are also saying that this ball player's clone played 10 years before those three that have been duly documented. At the same time you're also saying that for the 3 years the ball player's clone was also playing. Now I know you're going to say that there is "evidence" to support the clone player playing those 3 years as well as the 10 years prior. The problem first is it'd be impossible for the clone to also have played during those 3 years. Someone - actually many people - would have come forward, photos would have been recorded, films would have been taken, stories would have been told. All we have is an interpretation of documents and records that were actually misinterpreted - a shoehorning of the evidence, if you will. An interpretation of evidence does not guarantee that it's right, unlike Bill did with SS. He's actually proving each and every step as he goes with no pre-conceived notions added in. This is one of the biggest fallacies of HL supporters. So because of this, if it couldn't possibly have happened from 60-63 then it also didn't happen prior.

Sandy the reason why I keep making that point is because if there's no room in the SS narrative to fit HL at the 1960 point, then it negates HL all the way back to 53.

Hi John. Are you seriously saying that the photo above is when the shooting started?

I am not sure why anyone would deny the obvious based on the available autopsy photo. The shot obviously did not hit anywhere near the neck so that negates this shot being caused by a through and through shot. If you watch the Z film, as soon as he appears from the sign, he starts reaching up then you can see a sudden push on his back, bobbing his head back and then forward from this back shot. As for the clothing and the hole, I'd be very worried if there was a hole or knick way out of whack from the autopsy wound but it's not - they are all pretty much in the same vicinity. With such obvious evidence, is it any wonder Ford scribbled into the final WR manuscript that this show was in the "back of of the neck" to nullify a true back shot?

Knowing what we know - especially from Bill Simpich's outstanding State Secret article with complete documention - pretty much negates the HL story. Bill's article clearly follows the path of Oswald from the time he returned from Russia until 11/22. It clearly demonstrates how the legend of Oswald was started there, especially the height discrepency that was broadcast - two years later and within minutes of the shooting. You have to ask yourself - if there were no witnesses to LHO pulling the trigger, where exactly did this 5-10 165 come from? It came from two years before. This story is very clear because it connects the dots from 11/22 backward. There is simply no room in the State Secret narrative to fit any of the puzzle pieces from HL into it. Another very big weakness of the HL story is readers are expected to believe pre-conceived notions of the available papers and documentation. For example, one HL apologist states that the official record cannot be trusted at all. To do an honest analysis of the papers and documention, you simply cannot do this because it will color one's judgement of the result.

David you might want to read on to later posts on here. I clearly post other items that show after your MC post and SS there's simply no way for the HL story to possibly work.

Ruby targeted Oswald, Leavelle explained, so he would have his own moment in history. Sure Jim sure. Keep the nonsense coming.

I'm finding it more and more hard to believe about the radical right being involved for one reason. And it goes back to the so-called Oswald visit to MC. As was written by others, I don't believe that Oswald was ever down there in the first place. Instead, he was impersonated during the fake calls to the embassy there. Someone made fake calls there claimning to be LHO and the woman named Duran. This had to have taken place by someone who was working in the intelligence business. As we know, the voice and photos proved that it was not LHO. Hoover said as much to Johnson. But for someone to have been able to go into the intelligence network to do this, I just cannot see a radical right person being able to do this.

Jim, I hardly think that 5-9 and 5-11 are a significant difference. You can hold your fingers up to measure two inches and it's really small. There is a weight difference on those documents as well so if you want to start measuring apples and oranges to "prove" that there was a clone, which is the right weight - 145 or 150? But much more importantly, if you really want to get into the proving game, though, I highly encourage you to read Bill Simpich's chapter 1 of State Secret. https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret_Chapter1.html There, you will find that both Robert Webster's and Oswald's legends were being developed as they both did their fake defections. To fast forward chapter 1 to 11/22/63, within 15 minutes of the assassination, someone gave a dispatcher in the DPD to broadcast that very same description of the suspect (5-11 160). You have to ask yourself - how could that happen? No one at the time knew the suspect was going to be LHO. This has far more plausibility and the ring of truth to it to the overall narrative because if we are to believe that LHO was set up to be the patsy, there is additional evidence showing that this same LHO was impersonated in MC. So to summarize, LHO's legend was being established when he "defected" and then he came back, was sheep dipped when they got him to to hand out leaflets and get into a fight in NO, was impersonated in MC, steered him into his job at the TSBD, took the fall as patsy, and then was gunned down by Ruby. Nowhere in this complex - yet quite simple - narrative is there any room whatsoever for the clone story to fit in from way back in 1953 until that November weekend. As I and others have said, the simplest narratives tend to be the correct ones. Sandy - I'm aware of that. I was making the point that there is a good evidence-based narrative to how LHO was set up to be the patsy. Further, my additional point that if you follow this tight narrative, there is simply no room for the HL story to fit it.

I simply cannot understand how anyone in the HL community can think these are two different people. The eyes match, the hairline, the eye brows. Even in black and white, you can even see the shading for his eye color is the same and both have that curled in ear shape. The signature in the book is even his. I'm assuming that the HL people cannot understand that people do change over time. Oswald obviously bulked up a little while in the military, probably eating three squares and working out while in the military. Fast forward to the day he was arrested in Dallas. He obviously slimmed down and aged as well. You can even tell how skinny he was in that morgue photo I posted up above. Also in that morgue photo with his mouth agape, he had that very narrow shaped inner mouth which tends to make people look like they have an overbite. In the GIF below - and because of that overbite - his mouth puckers out perfectly in both images. I really would find it very hard to believe that the secret agents would be able to find a clone with *this many* matching facial features. It seems that it'd have to be a 1 in a billion chance to get that many features that perfectly. NOTE ABOUT ANIMATED GIF BELOW. It's a large file and may take a little while to load before it displays, especially on mobile devices:

Paul - you may want to start here if you want to learn just about everything there is to know about the Nagell story: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nagell1.htm Disclaimer - I am definitely not a fan of John McAdams but am merely posting this for educational purposes.

1. I just described how I'm following the evidence like for example, DJ's "Oswald wasn't in MC" story. I took that info, which was well-written BTW, and looked at other evidence and decided that there's a preponderance that Oswald was set up to take the blame. But for the HL story, you're asking me to - as you said "why don't I just admit that it may be true" - believe in something that doesn't exist. That's the same thing as asking me to believe Santa Claus exists, or god, or the devil, or UFOs. 2. I think I'm about as well-versed with the evidence on this case as anyone else on this forum. Keep in mind too that I DO believe that there was a conspiracy to murder President Kennedy. I'm not a lone nut believer - far from it. If Oswald had lived and if there had been no interference at all from the powers that be - if he had truly been able to secure an all-star team of lawyers to defend him fairly - then based on what we know today I find it impossible that he'd have been found guilty of killing Kennedy and Tippit. Further, I believe that something happened along the way and he was NOT supposed to have lived until Sunday, 11/24. But those two additional days he was around revealed quite a bit - he denied the BYP's were fake (and even had the wits to describe how); he said he was a "patsy," a word that I'm guessing no one else who worked in the TSBD even knew the meaning of; he made quite a mysterious call to John Hurt; and so on. I'm sorry but I can't help it if my "ring of truth" bell goes off like a five-alarm bell does when it comes to this HL story. But if YOU think the evidence DOES prove in your mind's eye that there was a clone that looked like LHO and this went on from '53 until one of them was murdered in Dallas, then that's your right to do so.

Jim - why is the cover of the book using the same Oswald for the photos? They certainly look like the same person to me. Shouldn't one of the photos depict the clone?