John Butler

Some one manipulated the gif showing Oswald had a broad chin. And, if you look closely they broadened the nose also.

Who was the author of the gif?

Thanks Jim, I haven't abandoned Harvey and Lee altogether. People often see things differently. But, what I read and look at in Harvey and Lee there is very little difference from what you see. Probably my thinking on the U2 differs from you. You may be correct and I may be wrong. I'll have to work that out. I first identified that photo as Lee Oswald, if you will recall, until later time when I changed my mind. What do you think of the strange appearance of the legs in the Oswald figure in the photo? But, for me things are pointing differently. I'll keep exploring this notion until I am convinced one way or the other.

Harvey and Lee was a high level counter espionage program designed for some major task. It became apparent that the U2 would eventually be shot down by the Russians. So, why not use that notion for American intelligence benefits by supplying the Russians with the means to that and prolong the Cold War. After the main part of the mission, the U2 downing and subsequent failure of a summit meeting, then it would be useful to have a Russian speaker switched in to begin spy work such as finding dissidents and setting up spy networks. Harvey and Lee had been practicing their game, which I call switch-em, since they were children. They looked close enough to each other to get away with it in most circumstances. They fooled almost everyone. Marina was exposed to both. This indicates she was a willing participant to get to the US. There were two Oswalds wandering around the TSBD on the day of the assassination. Neither were caught or identified as doubles. The two left by different routes.

If you are looking for purpose in Harvey and Lee, then think about what you just said.

It is only your opinion, and a few others, who think things are poorly thought out. Poorly thought out would suggest a fictional scheme like a novel rather than the facts that were gathered and analyzed over years of research and study. The facts tell the story rather than your so-called imagined fictional account.

How? The simple plan would have a Russian speaking infiltrator being sent into Russia. The Soviets, particularly the KGB and other intelligence branches were extremely paranoid about infiltrators/spies. They would have thoroughly questioned such a person using any technique including drugs and torture. They would have found the truth before releasing such a person into Soviet society.

That might be a bit of an overstatement. I don't know. From their appearance they appear to be the daughters of Harvey Oswald and Marina. This is what Marina said when she said she was married to two men. Or, any other place such as his last address before the JFKA. The Oswald driving a car to get a hair cut sounds more like Lee than Harvey. But, that is one of the stories that needs to be looked at closer. There are others that really are not coming back to memory but need to be looked up. I'll need to refresh my memory. Another thing that occurred to me is that it is said that Harvey Oswald abused Marina beating her up on occasion. I wonder if that had to do with jealousy of Lee and perhaps others. I am convinced by that photo with Marina and others that Lee Oswald was in Russia at one time or another. I think he may even have led the way. This differs from the Harvey and Lee account which I don't want to abandon, I may be wrong in what I am thinking. I have been thinking this for awhile and have not found convincing evidence to abandon the notion that Lee Oswald was not in Russia. But, I reserve the right to change my mind with new evidence. I'll hold these two versions in mind until I am absolutely convinced one way or the other. After Lee Oswald left the Marine Corps in March, 1959. He enters a black hole where there are few references to him during the rest of the year 1959 and most of 1960. They are not enough to account for his behavior during this time. These references after September, 1959 could apply to Harvey if the Steenberger incident is true. Others, such as the Robert Oswald's photo he eventually said occurred in September, 1959. The Harvey and Lee folks think this is Lee and the Sept., 1959 date is correct. But, on the photo from his book he said this photo was taken in February, 1958. I am going to take his word on Feb., 1958. This is Harvey as revealed by his hairline recession, earlobes, narrow nose, and chin. This can't be Lee in Feb., 1958 because he was on maneuvers in the South China Sea or near Subic Bay, Philippines at the time. If the Sept., 1959 date is correct it is still not Lee. Robert Oswald's statements are problematic. This photo is strange and might be altered. Here's a closer look at Harvey's legs. Does anyone know whether Oswald had Elephantiasis? Shin guards for soccer? Weird boots? See through pants cuffs? Oswald with pants cuffs? Can you find that in another photo?

Could be one of the reason folks are avoiding genetic testing of Marina's daughters and relatives of the original Lee Harvey Oswald. I don't know and I think nobody knows including Marina. The Oswald daughters appear to be different in appearance and perhaps not even sisters. But, I don't think so. They appear to have the characteristics of their parents Harvey and Marina. Rachel looks more like Harvey and June looks more like Marina. They have different facial structures, particularly the jaw width. But, so did their parents.

Tony, I could be a bit wrong on the 1962 date for Marina and Lee as seen in the photo above. The date could be 1961. Anyway, the answer is simple. Marina once informed us of her marital status. She said she was married to two men. I am not recalling exactly what she said, but it was something like I was married to two men. One kind and gentle and the father of her children, and the other not. Some folks think she was talking about the variable nature of Oswald. But, I don't. What I think is Marina was a Soviet spy. What we know of her history says she was a spy for the Soviets. And, in order to get to the US she doubled and went along with the game of Harvey and Lee. She cohabitated with both in Russia and then in the US. There are odd stories about Marina and Oswald while another Oswald was somewhere else. Once she was here she tripled and returned to her allegiance to the Soviets. Her behavior and testimony after the DPD incident and Harvey's death points toward that. There's not a lot of facts to base that on. It my speculation. But, I have noticed others think something similar.

Simpler is in this case is not better. Simpler is easier to expose. One needs to assume that any American defector to Russia would be heavily interrogated by the Soviets. The defector's story would need to be convincing. He would need to know the technical secrets he said he would give to Russian. A hidden ability to speak a language, Russian, would be exposed. Therefore the double man/spy. The one with language ability would be switched later. After the techno radar secrets were delivered to shoot down a U2.

That is so true. An evil fellow, Johnson actually does good through selfish actions. Strange indeed. His civil rights agenda was one of the things I admired about him. I remember all the doctors were against Medicare. Certainly changed their minds since then.

That's mostly a reaction from my sister and brother-in-law who made me read the Kennedy book, Profiles in Courage. Great book. They were big time Kennedy supporters and campaigned long and hard for Kennedy. The brother-in-law became a Kennedy delegate. My family is what you might call yellow dog democrats and still are.

I've never been a John Kennedy fan. I give him credit for a tax cut and a few other things. In that time Lyndon Johnson was my favorite president. I got to vote for him at age 17 illegally in 1964. But, over time that liking changed due to his perverted habits, criminal conduct, murders, and involvement in the JFKA.

The only thing I recall is Amos Euins father said something like you can't trust anything that boy says.

I wonder what was said about Kim Philby?

The teeth problem between the two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee, has been discussed many times on this forum. But, one has to keep discussing them for new people and the anti-Harvey and Lee warriors. To them everything we say is due to some misunderstanding, or some error, or some flight of fancy. Not true. The front tooth evidence is incontrovertible.

That is correct. Nail on the head correct. This departs from the traditional Harvey and Lee story by John Armstrong. Harvey is the only one who went to Russian while Lee stayed in the US. It is one of the things I use to say Lee Oswald also was in Russia. I like your CAP photo. I thought it was better than mine, but on mag and exam Lee's missing teeth don't show up as well. I used the one out of Groden's book to show the gap in Lee Oswald's teeth. Here's my interpretation of your earlier post: There are several differences that separate the two. 1. Harvey on the left hand has a different ear structure than Lee on the right hand. Harvey has a double bend in the upper rim of his left ear. This is missing in Lee. In the two photos this is the biggest difference. Harvey has earlobes and Lee's are missing or smaller. 2. Other differences are Harvey's nose is narrower and Lee's is broader. The chin of Harvey is narrower in Harvey than Lee. This doesn't show very well in these photos. PS Found this at a later time, but is more of the same.

Tony, I have identified these photos in the past on several occasions. Who do you think they are? Here's another to identify with Marina. Is this the original Lee Harvey Oswald or the double, Harvey Oswald, real name unknown.

Hi Jim, A lot of us old timers have insomnia. Mine is a gift from the government. I guess you can answer Tony's question best by talking about shirts. How many shirts would a teenager from a not well to do family have? Over what period of time would that teenager have to wear a particular shirt? And, are these shirts and teenagers the same? I would say yes. Do they look alike. Again, I would say yes. But, if one goes back to my list of facial characteristics to identify Lee from Harvey one immediately sees two things. First this teenager does not have the left ear characteristics of Harvey Oswald. The other is a sure identifier. That is Lee Oswald had a missing front tooth or teeth. Both photos have that image for the teenager Lee Oswald. For the "pen cap in the mouth" crowd, I would suggest that Lee Oswald kept a pen cap in his mouth on a continual basis. He sure looks like Harvey as I have said many times. Look a likes. To tell them apart one must use identifiable facial characteristics. Harvey did not have any missing front teeth.

William Weston's The Spider's Web says basically the same thing. Drugs, gun running, and intelligence operations at the TSBD.

Exactly. It points to the fact that his account of the shooting is imaginary. Another good point. 10 feet above them has the same sound, it might be just a tad reduced, but not significantly, for folks on the 4th and 3rd floors, at most 40 feet away. About 10 witnesses on the 4th and 3rd said shooting came from some place, generally to the west, and not from the building. According to their testimony, there was no shooting from the 6th floor. Read Bonny Williams testimony. He had to make 4 statements to get it right. Junior Jarman changed his testimony to shooting to below and to the left. Only Norman stuck to his testimony.

Windshield bullet strike on p limo I read Pamela Brown’s post on a “hole is a hole theory” piece. It certainly challenges the idea there was a hole, a through and through hole, in the windshield of the p. limo rear the rearview mirror. She establishes evidence to question the credibility of a hole in the windshield. If one looks at the windshield in Altgens 3 or 4 (I can never get this one right) then one doesn’t see a defect. This is a section of the photo saying there was preparation for film alteration by cutting this photo into sections. If you look at the reflections this tells you that this photo was not in the intersection of Main and Houston. Where are the streets and crowds? In this alleged Altgens photo there is no hole or defect in the windshield near the rear view mirror. Moving on to Altgens 5. There is no defect that can be seen in the windshield near the rearview mirror. This is a hard call since the photo is not that good. Altgens 6 is another story. There may be two defects in the windshield. One is certainly questionable. The other not. Number 1 appears to be something. It is two blurred and vague to tell what. Some said there was a bullet strike on the passenger’s side low on the windshield. This may be where the arrow points or not. Number 2. Is definitely a hole through the windshield. Altgens 6 has been altered. This may be an alteration, but I don’t think so. It is not there in earlier Altgens photos. The alteration on Altgens 6 was a rush job. And, the significance of the bullet hole was not considered at the time hours after the assassination. The alterers may not have seen the hole in the windshield. There is another confusing thing about this Altgens 6 photo. This is marked No. 3. No. 3 appears to be the p. limo’s side rear view mirror. SS agent Kellerman is seen in other media constantly watching the President through that rear view mirror. I believe at this point the mirror is showing John Connally. I will not defend that position. It just appears that way. Perhaps the angle is right to show John Connally. In conclusion, the bullet shot defect in the windshield at the least shows that there were more shots than 3.

This is also a Bell frame. It sequence is few seconds before the Bell gif frames. In this Bell frame there is no one on the bridge above Elm Street. You can not trust any media in Dealey Plaza dealing with the assassination.

Adam, Sorry to confuse, but that is Dealey Plaza. The Bell frames show the discrepancy between them and Altgens 7. The second frame just consists of blobs for people. The fourth photo, from the Martin film, shows there is no one on the railroad bridge. Here is another. This time from the Couch film. If I am recalling correctly on earlier work, there are 5 or 6 films or photos that show no one was on the railroad bridge. Another just popped into memory. The Hughes film is another. Which came first Officer Foster's testimony or the Altgens 7 photo. The Altgens 7 photo confirms Foster's testimony and his testimony confirms Altgens 7. Foster said he was over Elm Street the south side and not over Main Street. As shown here: Any testimony from J. W. Foster was after the Altgens 7 photo was published. His first testimony was on Dec. 4, 1963. He later recanted his story of a train not being on the tracks as Officer J. C. White said. Another officer, Officer Earle Brown, out on the Stemmons overpass said there was a train there also. That's part of the train argument. This is arguing about who was on the railroad bridge. Here's the Hughes image: The Hughes frame shows one exactly where Officer Foster and the railroad workers were.