Michael Walton

Tom Of course. It was old guy with the pistol in the plaza.

This entire thread is merely a figment of John Butler's overactive imagination. There is nothing to see John. And I'm not the only one as a respected researcher said he actually thinks you're just trolling this forum.

Tom keep in mind SL actually used his keen analytical powers to try to convince me that one of the guys standing on the steps down in Dealey as Kennedy got his head blown off that he actually was holding a pistol. These are the kind of keen researchers we're dealing with here.

Has anyone noticed on Parnell's blog the number of times the Oswalds moved around? From 63-75 my family moved 6 times and I used to think that was a lot. But it's amazing how many times she moved. I think this should be factored into why LHO missed a lot of school and why he was in and out of truant school. The kid was probably rudderless and without any stability in his home life. Meanwhile the postings here continue with "is that Harvey or Lee?" And all real debate from them is gone as they flail away blindly. I think it's sad because it makes serious researchers get lumped together with the movie studio moon walking believers, the man on the steps holding the invisible pistol believers and other kooks.

This theory is just too far fetched and unrealistic. Why would the government fudge a kid's school records? It doesn't make sense. And Parnell revealed something for me on his blog about Hargrove saying years ago that if this theory is wrong then so what? I mean wow. Just wow. This tells me this whole Oswald and his mom clone story was concocted to sell books to suckers. It also tells me that the conspiracy is everywhere crowd is just too lazy to do serious analysis with a heavy dose of skepticism thrown in for good measure.

Andrej A beautifully written and very accurate description of the entire Kennedy case. Now if only we can convince the "conspiracy is everywhere" researchers that not everything is a conspiracy, we'd bring a lot more respect to the CT community.

What is the point of this thread? Seriously, I want to know so I can tear it apar....er, I mean contribute to it.

I happen to believe he was not even there. I think it was a ruse to embellish the false legend to make him look like a crazed communist killer.

Sandy is now trying a new tactic. Instead of ranting to my replies, he's simply ignoring them. Which makes sense. Because when you post stuff that flies in the face of all reason and common sense, the well will dry up quite quickly.

This is a legit comment and any replies are appreciated. What I've never understood is if Oswald had done the shooting all by himself don't you think he'd have been glued to the window not really knowing when the parade was going to go by? And yet we're expected to believe that a man hell-bent on killing Kennedy was seen on the first floor, on the second floor, and possibly "out front with Shelley...?"

PS If the schools' records weren't altered or fabricated in the first place, but simply reflect sloppy record-keeping in conjunction with hooky-playing Lee's (singular) and his devious Mommy's (singular) moving around so gosh-darned much, then your question / point becomes moot, doesn't it. PPS Therefore, my answer to your question is "NO." Touche, Tom.

The only conceivable way this could have happened (other than nefariously, e.g. by an intelligence agency), is if there were two Lee Harvey Oswalds. I mean, let's be reasonable and honest about this! Oh, come on, Sandy, that's a really big leap of faith. Why in the world would the government be falsifying records of a 15 year old kid? It's beyond comprehension and reason, just like it is when you said one of the guys standing on the steps in Dealey was holding a pistol. Like Tracy said, John Armstrong is pushing a story to make his story relevant to people like you and Jim Hargrove. That's all that's happening here. I mean really. You actually think that way back in the mid 50's the government had two clones of a kid running around and they even had two clones of his mother also running around...and for what? And they'd go through all of this complexity, falsifying his school records, faking other pictures and records for this grand unknown plan they had for both of them...eight long years before it was time to assassinate Kennedy. I mean, do you not see how insane and ridiculous this all sounds?

Sandy says: Jim - I don't know how Tracy and Greg Parker could use their misinterpretations to argue against you... Sandy, you may want to be careful with starting a post with an "us vs them" mentality like above. It's not as if you're always right on your posts. Remember the post when you actually said you saw one of the three men standing on the steps and one of them was holding a pistol? When I pointed out that where are the police reports stating one of of them was holding one, you caved. Also, remember when you actually challenged me to an IQ contest (and you later deleted that post) because, as your thinking goes, you have to have a high IQ to figure out the Kennedy case? I mean, really? I put far more value in plausibility and reasonable thinking than I do with analyzing a teenager's school report line by line and drawing a conclusion from it. Anyone can do that but it takes real thinking to ask yourself "Yes, that's what the line by line analysis says. But is it the way it actually happened? Could it have really happened? Is there some perfectly innocent reason for why it's that way?" David Josephs - you've done great work on the Mexico City caper and I agree with everything you've said up to this. I believe, too, that he was never down there as it was just one more way to paint Oswald as some wild-eyed, president murdering psycho. I also agree with you because, when thinking this through, yes, this could definitely and plausibly have happened, that the government could have fudged papers to make it look like he was there. As we all know, the government was out to prove any way it could that Oswald was a chronic wife beater as well as in Mexico City because he supposedly was there to talk to that Russian assassin. Thus, bad guy beats his wife and was mixing it up with America's arch enemy and an assassin to boot. But with that said, I know you've done extensive work matching up Oswald's school records but I just can't buy into this being sinister. Mainly because Oswald was a 15 year old nobody during that time and what possible reason (there I go again with the plausibility again) would they need to falsify and fudge his school records? The school systems had hundreds of kids going through the system back then during the days of paper and pencil and with a kid like Oswald moving from city to city and school to school and well, there were probably some other kids like this in the system who's records probably wouldn't match up neither. Now I know you're probably going to post more images of the records with arrows pointing there and circles circling there and that's fine. All of the green highlights of the records in the world does not mean that school records of a nobody 15 year old back in the 1950's were altered or fudged for a sinister reason. And to return to the title of this thread - the double or triple Oswald mom is very far-fetched and hard to believe as well.

Tracy Parnell absolutely great post earlier about mistaken identities misinterpreted testimony and so on. My thoughts exactly. And as it happens one of the replies to your post was "you have nothing," a reply rich in irony and self unawareness. Kudos.

Tom you actually clarified something for me and that is the indian gal was not calvery. someone else id'd her in the photo as calvery. To answer this thread's question I do not believe that it was calvery running in the newsreel footage. the body type seems skinnier than the real calvery. it's not that I'm uninterested in this thread. it's just that they seem to go on and on in an infinite loop and the main point of it gets lost in the shuffle. meanwhile when i start a new thread about what I think is an interesting topic nobody cares and it dies on the proverbial EF vine. and then others keep posting about a 4 second newsreel clip that's not going to bring us any closer to closure and it goes on forever. BTW i like the way you quote folks here and put your replies underneath their quotes. for folks who quote a 1000 word quote and then type 5 words in reply i don't think they realize how annoying that can be.

George, so you're saying that out of the thousands, nay millions, of rounds of ammunition fired throughout history, and as the JFK back bullet was coming out of wherever the gun was located, and because all gun barrels are rifled to create a spin as the bullet comes out, you're saying that this particular bullet came out and started tumbling end over end through the air where it hits JFK's upper back, and the bullet's point of contact as it hit was the ass-end of the bullet. Is that what you're saying?

Tom - I guess I can only go by what I see. The "sad" Calvary standing on the left of the three ladies in Dealey looks dark skinned and does not have Caucasian features IMO. This same dark-skinned lady seems to be the one standing down on Elm, the one with the pouffy hair as seen in your video clip in the Z film. As for the glasses wearing Gloria Little - the one in the tire ad and the one in the school book and the one in the wedding announcement - she does not look like the dark-skinned Gloria Little (Calvary) mentioned above. The dark-skinned Gloria has some of the same features as a young Diahann Carroll. Now, whether that makes her a Native American or an African American, I don't know. She certainly does not look like the yearbook-tire-marriage Gloria, who seems more white-skinned, is stocky, and may even have blue or light-colored eyes. Confused? Confusing? Yes, it does seem confusing. I can only go by what I see though. If you put the yearbook version and the Dealey version side by side, I doubt there'd be any resemblance between the two. BTW - this happened many months ago when I posted a photo of an Oswald look a like who was hanging out in Ruby's nightclub. Like the Calvary issue, some members here said they saw no resemblance in Oswald. I replied that what did you expect - it's not like the government can clone people. But to find someone who vaguely resembles Oswald and he'd go around in the early part of 63 claiming he was going to come into a great deal of money blah blah, well, even the government wouldn't have been dumb enough to have a black person going around claiming he was Oswald. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxVGRwcXdiTjc0Y28

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the native American lady with pouffy hair is Calvery. You can see her looking sad in that one black and white freeze frame. You can also see her backside in the Z film. The hair matches in both. So the woman running toward the two guys in the newsreel footage looks skinny like Calvary. The stocky and full figured lady seen in the tire ad cannot be this skinny native American lady. I'm guessing it's simply a case of mistaken identity.

I just got done watching a murder investigation show. The defense claimed spousal abuse as to why the wife shot the husband six times, including a coup de grace. However, the prosecution brought in several family members saying the dead husband was not violent, nor was abuse ever reported to them. This, IMO, is the essence of this thread. Because Oswald had no representation during the WC hearings, and because they wanted to paint him in a negative light, the wife beating testimony was one more way to put the nails down ever more tightly so to speak.

George - did you carefully read John's posts on that thread? He's actually bringing in the theory of "separate realities" like the Ed Dick novel. I mean, really? You said up above that some of my posts are "spot on" with reality and that would hold true IF the films were real. So here were my conclusions from another post on the alteration of the film Z film, which was not altered. If you or anyone cannot conclusively prove alteration based on the questions below, then it wasn't altered: But don't take my word for it. Here's the Zavada report proving no film alteration: http://www.jfk-info.com/zreport.htm

The comments posted on this article are even better than the article itself. Here are two: All this seems plausible but where does it get one? Thieu ended on top of a hopelessly corrupt unsustainable puppet regime whose sole selling point was that it was anti-communist. Nixon undermined the Paris Peace Talks in 1968 by offering Thieu a better deal than Johnson was going to give. The level of violence increased and Nixon with Watergate hanging over his head cut the same deal that Johnson offered the North. Of course with hidden strings attached that the US would lend air support the South if North violated the treaty. By 1975 the North crushed the South and the US Congress washed its hands of Thieu's regime. --------------------- Two thirds of the South Vietnamese could not have cared less about either one of these guys. They were focuses on preparing and transporting the rice crop to market each year without getting caught in the crossfire between the Viet Cong/NVA and the Saigon government. I'll give you an example: In the second half of my tour, in 1969, Thieu paid a visit to Cao Lanh, which was (and remains, albeit under a different name) the provincial capital. We were at first puzzled by the number deuce-and-a-half army trucks thundering into the countryside and into the hamlets. Then we realized they were loading the villagers onto the trucks (not voluntarily) and transporting them into town. They were handed national flags, and then martialed into lines along the city streets by officers in shades screaming into bullhorns. Thieu arrived by chopper and they waved their flags as he proceeded to the province chief's palace. They disbursed after he left a couple,of hours later. We watched this entire charade from our jeep, shaking our heads. Later on I asked a young woman who worked in our compound what she thought of President Thieu. I don't know who that is, she said. Your president? You don't know your president? I then asked, what about Nguyen Cao Ky? Oh yes, she said, and she produced a comic book from her satchel. It was a story about the dashing Ky and his glamorous wife, fighting the Commies and making Vietnam safe for democracy. So much for the Saigon government.

Yeah, John, and I just reported you as well just now for your most recent post. We'll see how that goes though I don't have my hopes up with the people who run this forum. George - hijack? Why don't you read what I posted and post a rebuttal to convince them otherwise?

What are you exactly trying to prove here, John? If you're talking about people missing in one movie sequence and appearing in another (hence your Lady in the High Castle thread title) and, thus, the films have been altered, why does it seem so difficult for you to understand that angles play a huge role in how film or video is perceived? And notice I did not use the word "see" above. Because as often happens in this case, different people perceive different things. The Dorman film is one of the more interesting angles - from way up on top looking down from the TSBD - so this angle is going to show how wide open or close together people were standing when the car went by. The Z film angle is much more flat and parallel with a street view, which is going to make people up in that corner area look schrunched together. I've sent posts in other threads to you about photo techniques and that kind of thing and I'm guessing nothing has really taken with you, that you still want to see what you *want* to see vs what was really there. In other words: John: "Oh, look. There seem to be fewer people standing around on the corner in the Z film vs the Dorman film so therefore, there just has to be some shenanigans going on. The Bad Guys altered one or the other films to make it so..." And then you have to ask yourself - which film was altered? The Z film? But how do you know that? What about the Dorman film? If your theory is to prove alteration, why would the Dorman film be altered? Why would they remove people standing around in Dorman way up on the corner? But anyway, here's yet another link about photos from different angles: http://themetapicture.com/famous-photos-from-a-different-angle/ Look at the pyramids photos on the above link. They look very close together in the on-the-ground photo but they're very far away from looking down. Further, if a smaller pyramid was behind one of the large ones in the on-the-ground photo, it'd be very easy to miss simply because the larger one is hiding it. There's no Man in the Castle mystery though. It's still there and you'd see it from the from looking down photo. Here's a "fake" Z film I made a while back showing genuine forgery in it (a huge irony of term usage here). Can you find what's fake about it? The more experienced and eagle-eyed researchers will definitely find it. Can you? https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxRDVUT3ROS2psbTg I don't think you're thinking out of the box here at all, John. I've said numerous times on this forum that not everything about the assassination was a conspiracy. The Bad Guys were NOT omnipotent - they couldn't just wave a magic wand and magically make film frames disappear. It would have taken an enormously coordinated effort to have done so. The only thing that I will say about this coordinated effort about people who were there on the ground that day is what happened to the film taken of the so-called Babushka lady? She was right there filming the entire sequence looking out onto the knoll area and possibly beyond. I find it very hard to believe that that film has, to this day, not surfaced for all to see and like Cecil Stoughton said when he saw Al Thomas winking at LBJ after the swearing in, I do consider it "sinister" that that film has gone missing.

Chris Scally, I agree with you 100% about the gap. Z started filming, realized it was too soon, didn't want to unwind his camera, stopped filming, then started when the car was already coming down Elm. There's no mysterious "missing gap"between those two sequences of film. Thanks for being a good voice of reason on this thread.

George, here's a video I made a while back on another topic but it mentions the head bobbing. https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc Note too before Kennedy disappears behind the sign, nothing is happening. The ladies over on the right yelled out to him (this was mentioned in witness statements) and he hurried to look and then wave there before disappearing. Here's an animated GIF of it too: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxMW9DWWg0RllUUjQ This photo comparison earlier in the parade comparing it with Z225 shows his position right before the throat shot hits: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxYXR5WWxkZ05QRkU I'm going to disagree with you on the Z film alteration but don't want to get into it. Instead, you may want to look up the thread Swan Song (which I nicknamed The 67% Solution). There at the end you'll see my thoughts on the Z film.