Evan Burton Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (Posted on behalf of JVB) I can't wait to learn more about "the false defector program". Excuse my interruption, but I find that comment a little strange. I wouldn't pretend to know even one hundredth of the JFK assassination details that Prof Fetzer, Jack White and others know but even I am aware that both the US and the USSR "planted" defectors (e.g. TOP HAT, FEDORA, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 The "key" to the statement is the quotation marks. Nobody is denying the existence of a false defector program (on both sides of the Cold War), but the "description" of the program's dynamics as referred to in that post is being scrutinized, with a touch of sarcasm. GO_SECURE monk (Posted on behalf of JVB) I can't wait to learn more about "the false defector program". Excuse my interruption, but I find that comment a little strange. I wouldn't pretend to know even one hundredth of the JFK assassination details that Prof Fetzer, Jack White and others know but even I am aware that both the US and the USSR "planted" defectors (e.g. TOP HAT, FEDORA, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Ah! Thanks for that Greg - I misunderstood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Ah! Thanks for that Greg - I misunderstood. No worries. It's a very long thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) Kathy; here are two links, one to Allan Grant of Life magazine...his photographs of Marina and...family and anoth er to his story of finding them the weekend of the assassination, when she they were interviewed by authorities, in the hotel, there are a few other hotel photos with Robert in them, which i do not see in this link but if followed they will probably be found, i post what i have of robert in thehOTEL ROOM, YOU WILL SEE I BELIEVE THE RESEMBLANCE WITH HIS BROTHER LEE.that's robert at the table.....PLEASE excuse the caps...thanks...b http://www.allangrant.com/newsevents7.htm story http://www.allangrant.com/oswaldstory.htm. . Edited March 28, 2010 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Minor Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) ...........Harvey had a NEW YORK (BROOKLYN) type of accent, not Cajun. He was raised in New York, not Louisiana. Brooklyn accents are often mistaken for Cajun. Cajun is a corruption of Arcadian, as many Louisiana residents were Arcadians (from Canada) who spoke French. As they learned English, it was with a French accent, which is close to Brooklynese. As for hating the name Harvey, JVB is unfamiliar with the teacher at Beauregard Junior High interviewed by John, Myra LaRouse, who remembered LHO well, and insisted that she call him Harvey.[/b] .... Jack There was a Myra S. DaRouse who was born in Louisiana in 1922 and went into the Women's Air Corps in 1943 as a teacher, according to documents at Ancestry.com: Name: Myra S DarouseBirth: abt 1922 Residence: 1930 - Hammond, Tangipahoa, Louisiana (census) Name Age Fritz Darouse 38 Mary S Darouse 32 James W Darouse 12 Emmet J Darouse 9 Myra S Darouse 8 Mary E Darouse 6 Fritz Darouse 3 Edward C Darouse 3/12 U.S. World War II Army Enlistment Records, 1938-1946about Myra S Darouse Name: Myra S Darouse Birth Year: 1922 Race: White, citizen (White) Nativity State or Country: Louisiana State of Residence: Louisiana County or City: Tangipahoa Enlistment Date: 10 Apr 1943 Enlistment State: Louisiana Enlistment City: New Orleans Branch: Air Corps Branch Code: Quartermaster Corps Grade Code: Private Term of Enlistment: Enlistment for Alaska Component: Womens Army Corps Source: Enlisted Reserve or Medical Administrative Corps (MAC) Officer Education: 4 years of college Civil Occupation: Teachers and instructors, n.e.c. Marital Status: Single, without dependents Height: 88 Weight: 110 In 1956 Myra (unmarried) was a bridesmaid for Geraldine LeBlanc from New Orleans, who married Sanford John Hodge, Jr. of Midland, Texas. Geraldine's parents were referred to as Dr. and Mrs. Joseph E. LeBlanc of Paincourtville and New Orleans. Ancestry records show that in 1929 33-year-old Joseph E. LeBlanc of Paincourtville returned on a Honduran Cuyamel Fruit Co. ship (S.S. Nicarao) from Honduras to New Orleans. The LeBlanc family of Paincourtville, La. have long been associated with sugar planting. (Dugas & LeBlanc, Ltd - http://files.usgwarchives.org/la/assumptio...s/leblanre.txt) ...Dugas & LeBlanc, Ltd., sugar planters and manufacturers. This corporation operates the Westfield Plantation, which is a tract of 1,834 acres, situated ten miles south of Donaldsonville, on Bayou Lafourche; the Whitmel Plantation, a tract of 700 acres, situated adjoining the Westfield on the west, also comprising 1,000 acres of timber land; and the Magnolia Plantation, nine miles south of Donaldsonville, comprising 1,000 acres under cultivation and 1,600 acres of timber land. The company operates its own sugar refinery and a general store at Paincourtville. Mr. LeBlanc is also president of the Bank of Paincourtville, which was opened for business in 1907, and of which he has been the chief executive since 1909, having been the second man elected to that post. A democrat in politics, during the past fifteen years he has served as a member of the School Board of the Parish of Assumption. His religious connection is with St. Elizabeth's Roman Catholic Church, of which he is one of the trustees, and as a fraternalist he is a past grand knight of Assumption Council No. 1099, K. of C., of Napoleonville. Mr. Le Blanc resides at the old home residence on the Armelise Plantation, Paincourtville, of which the Dugas & LeBlanc, Ltd., are directors and stockholders.... To Mr. and Mrs. LeBlanc there have been born the following children: Joseph E., manager of a sugar plantation in Spanish Honduras owned by Vacarro Brothers, who was in the veterinary division of the United States Army for one year during the World war, having trained at Chattanooga, Tennessee, and in California, with the commission of second lieutenant; Robert E., a druggist of New Orleans; George, a clerk in the Marine Bank & Trust Company, New Orleans; Marie Therese, a student at the Louisiana State Normal College, Natchitoches; Yvonne, a student at Mount Carmel Convent, Paincourtville; Noelie, a student at St. Michael Convent, St. James Parish; and Durand and Eliza. A History of Louisiana, (vol. 2), pp. 346-347, by Henry E. Chambers. Published by The American Historical Society, Inc., Chicago and New York, 1925. According to the 1955 write-up in the Abilene, Texas newspaper: The bride was honored with a personal gift party given by Myra Darouse of New Orleans. A combinationluncheon and miscellaneous gift party was hosted in New Orleans by Mrs. Yvonne S. Massicot. The mother of the bridegroom hosted the rehearsal dinner. Following the wedding the couple moved to Midland, Texas where a son was subsequently born to them. http://whiteout.blog.ca/2007/03/17/king_ke...a_repu~1923288/ In 1906 United Fruit purchased 50% of a Honduran banana company, the Vaccaro Brothers Company—then in 1908 it was forced to resell by anti-trust rulings in the US. In 1914 United Fruit took over its competition in Costa Rica, the Atlantic Fruit Company, after winning a crippling price war. And finally in 1929, the year of [Minor Cooper] Keith's death, his company bought-out the single biggest competing banana firm, the Cuyamel Fruit Company—which United Fruit had been warring with since it became “United Fruit's biggest competition” in 1915. With such monopoly of the tropical banana industry, and their known connections in American political circles, United Fruit was fully capable of doing business by the cheapest possible means, affording no regard for national sovereignty or workers' rights. By the manipulation, placement, and domination of successions of dictators in newfangled 'Latin' nations, and the overthrow of democracy where it reared its head, the United Fruit Company as much as owned the nations of Central America, and its ancient peoples, from 1890 well into the late 1960's. Even today, with the emergence of vast coca and coffee demand in the 20th century, many of the nations once domineered by the Fruit Company are now under the finger of criminal drug-lords and Wall Street CEO's. Though perhaps the banana industry has been forced to reform, its legacy-of-hell is alive and well in South and Central America, under new ownership. Edited March 28, 2010 by Linda Minor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Linda is correct. I was writing from memory. The teacher's name was Myra DaRouse, not LaRouse. See page 110 and others in Harvey & Lee. Jack ...........Harvey had a NEW YORK (BROOKLYN) type of accent, not Cajun. He was raised in New York, not Louisiana. Brooklyn accents are often mistaken for Cajun. Cajun is a corruption of Arcadian, as many Louisiana residents were Arcadians (from Canada) who spoke French. As they learned English, it was with a French accent, which is close to Brooklynese. As for hating the name Harvey, JVB is unfamiliar with the teacher at Beauregard Junior High interviewed by John, Myra LaRouse, who remembered LHO well, and insisted that she call him Harvey.[/b] .... Jack There was a Myra S. DaRouse who was born in Louisiana in 1922 and went into the Women's Air Corps in 1943 as a teacher, according to documents at Ancestry.com: Name: Myra S DarouseBirth: abt 1922 Residence: 1930 - Hammond, Tangipahoa, Louisiana (census) Name Age Fritz Darouse 38 Mary S Darouse 32 James W Darouse 12 Emmet J Darouse 9 Myra S Darouse 8 Mary E Darouse 6 Fritz Darouse 3 Edward C Darouse 3/12 U.S. World War II Army Enlistment Records, 1938-1946about Myra S Darouse Name: Myra S Darouse Birth Year: 1922 Race: White, citizen (White) Nativity State or Country: Louisiana State of Residence: Louisiana County or City: Tangipahoa Enlistment Date: 10 Apr 1943 Enlistment State: Louisiana Enlistment City: New Orleans Branch: Air Corps Branch Code: Quartermaster Corps Grade Code: Private Term of Enlistment: Enlistment for Alaska Component: Womens Army Corps Source: Enlisted Reserve or Medical Administrative Corps (MAC) Officer Education: 4 years of college Civil Occupation: Teachers and instructors, n.e.c. Marital Status: Single, without dependents Height: 88 Weight: 110 In 1956 Myra (unmarried) was a bridesmaid for Geraldine LeBlanc from New Orleans, who married Sanford John Hodge, Jr. of Midland, Texas. Geraldine's parents were referred to as Dr. and Mrs. Joseph E. LeBlanc of Paincourtville and New Orleans. Ancestry records show that in 1929 33-year-old Joseph E. LeBlanc of Paincourtville returned on a Honduran Cuyamel Fruit Co. ship (S.S. Nicarao) from Honduras to New Orleans. The LeBlanc family of Paincourtville, La. have long been associated with sugar planting. (Dugas & LeBlanc, Ltd - http://files.usgwarchives.org/la/assumptio...s/leblanre.txt) ...Dugas & LeBlanc, Ltd., sugar planters and manufacturers. This corporation operates the Westfield Plantation, which is a tract of 1,834 acres, situated ten miles south of Donaldsonville, on Bayou Lafourche; the Whitmel Plantation, a tract of 700 acres, situated adjoining the Westfield on the west, also comprising 1,000 acres of timber land; and the Magnolia Plantation, nine miles south of Donaldsonville, comprising 1,000 acres under cultivation and 1,600 acres of timber land. The company operates its own sugar refinery and a general store at Paincourtville. Mr. LeBlanc is also president of the Bank of Paincourtville, which was opened for business in 1907, and of which he has been the chief executive since 1909, having been the second man elected to that post. A democrat in politics, during the past fifteen years he has served as a member of the School Board of the Parish of Assumption. His religious connection is with St. Elizabeth's Roman Catholic Church, of which he is one of the trustees, and as a fraternalist he is a past grand knight of Assumption Council No. 1099, K. of C., of Napoleonville. Mr. Le Blanc resides at the old home residence on the Armelise Plantation, Paincourtville, of which the Dugas & LeBlanc, Ltd., are directors and stockholders.... To Mr. and Mrs. LeBlanc there have been born the following children: Joseph E., manager of a sugar plantation in Spanish Honduras owned by Vacarro Brothers, who was in the veterinary division of the United States Army for one year during the World war, having trained at Chattanooga, Tennessee, and in California, with the commission of second lieutenant; Robert E., a druggist of New Orleans; George, a clerk in the Marine Bank & Trust Company, New Orleans; Marie Therese, a student at the Louisiana State Normal College, Natchitoches; Yvonne, a student at Mount Carmel Convent, Paincourtville; Noelie, a student at St. Michael Convent, St. James Parish; and Durand and Eliza. A History of Louisiana, (vol. 2), pp. 346-347, by Henry E. Chambers. Published by The American Historical Society, Inc., Chicago and New York, 1925. According to the 1955 write-up in the Abilene, Texas newspaper: The bride was honored with a personal gift party given by Myra Darouse of New Orleans. A combinationluncheon and miscellaneous gift party was hosted in New Orleans by Mrs. Yvonne S. Massicot. The mother of the bridegroom hosted the rehearsal dinner. Following the wedding the couple moved to Midland, Texas where a son was subsequently born to them. http://whiteout.blog.ca/2007/03/17/king_ke...a_repu~1923288/ In 1906 United Fruit purchased 50% of a Honduran banana company, the Vaccaro Brothers Company—then in 1908 it was forced to resell by anti-trust rulings in the US. In 1914 United Fruit took over its competition in Costa Rica, the Atlantic Fruit Company, after winning a crippling price war. And finally in 1929, the year of [Minor Cooper] Keith's death, his company bought-out the single biggest competing banana firm, the Cuyamel Fruit Company—which United Fruit had been warring with since it became “United Fruit's biggest competition” in 1915. With such monopoly of the tropical banana industry, and their known connections in American political circles, United Fruit was fully capable of doing business by the cheapest possible means, affording no regard for national sovereignty or workers' rights. By the manipulation, placement, and domination of successions of dictators in newfangled 'Latin' nations, and the overthrow of democracy where it reared its head, the United Fruit Company as much as owned the nations of Central America, and its ancient peoples, from 1890 well into the late 1960's. Even today, with the emergence of vast coca and coffee demand in the 20th century, many of the nations once domineered by the Fruit Company are now under the finger of criminal drug-lords and Wall Street CEO's. Though perhaps the banana industry has been forced to reform, its legacy-of-hell is alive and well in South and Central America, under new ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) DAVID LIFTON/JIM FETZER EXCHANGE ABOUT JUDYTH NOTE: This is such an illuminating exchange with David Lifton that I wanted to share it with the members of the forum. Based upon a phone conversation with Judyth on 4 March 2000, David concluded that she was a fake, a "fantasist", if you will, who has concocted an elaborate fantasy in order to inject herself onto the pages of history regarding the alleged assassin of JFK. This is a strong stance to take, for which he believes he is fully justified. The elements of his conversation with Judyth that led him to be uncharitable in his estimation of her truthfulness and integrity included (i) her description of how Lee was dressed on the day that they met, (ii) her claim that she and Lee had known the name of Lee's handler (David Atlee Phillips) (iii) and her claim to have suggested that Lee take laxatives to excuse himself from even being present on the day of the assassination. Another claim that she made that he could not believe was the story of them meeting for a rendevous at a hotel in the middle of the jungle in Mexico in the resort of Cancun, which he found incredible, especially since Cancun did not exist at the time. As Judyth has explained in post #665 on page 45, the hotel was not situated in the city of Cancun but in the village called Kan Kun, where it has existed since the 1930s. Lifton made a mistake over the phone, because they are both pronounced the same. HE ONLY TELLS YOU TO FOCUS ON "CANCUN" AS HE HEARD IT OVER THE PHONE. I WAS CRUCIFIED OVER THAT ISSUE UNTIL DEB BERT AND OTHERS NOTED THAT MAYALAND WAS BUILT RIGHT THERE AT CHICHEN-IZA, WHERE I SAID LEE AND I WOULD MEET. LOOK AT A MAP AND POINT YOUR FINGER HERE -- THE OLD MAPS WE LOOKED AT SAID "KANKUN", THE NEW ONES SAY THE CITY "CANCUN". And she's right! In that same post, she has explained that David Lifton made a second mistake in assuming that Lee had arrived in New Orleans on the same day he went for an interview. As she corrects the record, Lee arrived on April 25th, they met the morning of the 26th, and he arrived in presentable clothing for his interview that afternoon. This is the second blunder that David Lifton has made in dismissing Judyth's account. With regard to knowing the name of Lee's handler, which, as we know today, was David Atlee Phillips, Judyth has also explained--in that post but also others--that they overheard the name "Phillips" being mentioned by Boatner's secretary and Bill Monaghanm which they used as data in fashioning a conjecture about his identity. It was less certain that we often associate with knowing but not without supporting evidence. I would refer to it today as "an educated guess". What Judyth has to say in response to David's rejection is completely reasonable to me, especially when she has her own supporting evidence about the existence of the hotel in the middle of the jungle. She even explained to him at the time of their telephone conversation--which is quoted in part in post #408 on page 28--so David should have known that he was imposing too strong an interpretation upon what Judyth had said to him about figuring it out. He also debunks the laxative story, which is his right. But think about it. He faulted Judyth on three counts, where in each case she appears to have been right and Lifton was wrong. If we used a "three strikes" rule, then it would follow that Lifton has "struck out"! What is most important about all of this, however, is that the points he took to be false about Judyth's story were implausible. In other words, they sounded "far-fetched", beyond the realm of plausibility in his mind. And they were highly implausible--but they turned out to be true! And there is more than one aspect to this. Not only are they true, but they are so implausible that only someone who knew they were true would offer them as elements of a story about their relationship with Lee on any other grounds! The situation, from a logical point of view, means that these implausible but true elements of Judyth's story demonstrate (a) that she is not "a fantasist" making this stuff up--I mean, ask yourself, if you were making up a story would you included elements like these?-- and ( that her credibility is dramatically enhanced each time one of the implausible elements turns out to be true. That is the case here but also elsewhere. The story about the laxatives strikes me as fascinating on several counts, because with her knowledge about medicine and physiology--wanting to have Lee out of the picture on the day of the assassination but without raising alarm among his associates--she came up with a very practical and easily implemented solution to the dilemma: create the simulation of a physical illness. I can't imagine how anyone could fantasize about ExLax! David tells me that he is "sorry to see you taken in by all this malarky." But it's only "malarky" if it isn't true. So far as I can see, the efforts to debunk Judyth have backfired again and again. Even the most implausible elements of her story have turned out to be true. And each time that happens, it enhances her credibility. So, as I explained to him, I am very comfortable being in my position--standing with Judyth, in whom I believe. Here is our email exchange and David's attachments: Third Email from me to David Lifton: Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 09:00:44 -0500 [09:00:44 AM CDT] From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu To: "David S. Lifton" <dlifton@earthlink.net> Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu Subject: Re: Your Judyth phone call transcript . . . David, Thank you for this very appropriate letter, which I appreciate. I will discuss the matter with Judyth and find out if she would be willing to sign a release. Debra is a flyweight and her conduct does not surprise me. The three points you make about meeting Lee, Cancun, and laxative have been rebutted by Judyth on the Simkin forum. Many of her replies are also appearing on the Deep Politics Forum. While I understand your concern--given your beliefs about her, based upon your interpretation of the facts of the matter--I remain convinced that she is "the real deal" and serves as a enormous reservoir of information about the man accused of the crime. The very initial implausibility of what she said to you, in light of "the rest of the story", only reinforces my belief in her. I am not about to abandon her. Not only does she know more about Lee than anyone else in the world but she is far better at research than 95% of those who have ever studied the case. You may find this rather ironic, but as I became more and more convinced of her authenticity, I contemplated suggesting that you collaborate with her in producing the definitive study of Lee! That of course is not about to occur, but I am proud to stand with her and do all I can to bring her story to the public for the light that it sheds on the murkiest aspect of the case. I presume you have no objection to my sharing this letter with Judyth and I do appreciate having the attachments. Thank you for all of this. Warm regards, my friend! Jim P.S. I hope you will contribute to discussion of "the two Oswalds", which I am coming to believe is the greatest scam perpetrated in the history of the study of JFK--apart from accusing Lee! Second Email from David Lifton to me: Quoting "David S. Lifton" <dlifton@earthlink.net>: Jim, There was a time, years ago--and specifically, 10 years ago--when the cassette tape of Judyth (and some copies) sat nearby. This was in the aftermath of that March 2000 phone call, when I reviewed it multiple times, with a good friend, and with Robert Chapman, and formed the opinions I did. As you know, I concluded she was a very smart (but deluded) woman who was a fantast, and who was methodically inserting herself into the record, wherever she could. The proper medical word for this was "pseudologia fantastica" and it has also been referred to as "mythomania." As I have already said, I am very sorry to see you taken in by all this, because there's little question in my mind that this will impact negatively on your work in other areas--and I am very interested in those "other areas," especially those involving the falsification of the medical evidence in this case, and the Zapruder film. But back to Judyth: It was very obvious what she was doing, and how she was going about doing it, and rather early on, I decided to opt out, because I did not want to engage in further debate on the matter. But I watched as Paul Hoch, Reitzes, and others, systematically destroyed just about every claim she was making. As to my phone call with her on March 4, 2000: I offered to have the phone call transferred to an MP-3 file and posted on the internet--IF Judyth would sign a proper release, so there would be no legal issues. At the time, Shackelford, et al, were screaming this was unfair, that she would certainly NOT sign a release, etc. And so there the matter rested. But with this one footnote, or postscript, and that concerns the only transcript that was ever made of the conversation. THE DEBRA CONWAY TRANSCRIPT The only transcript that was ever made was one created by Debra Conway. She offered to make a transcript, but the experience was very disappointing. At the time (as I recall) Debra was going through a phase where she thought Judyth was authentic, and so she was protective of her. After she heard the tape, Debra behaved peculiarly. She refused to send me the transcript, or return my tape, unless I agreed never to post it on the internet. Since, by that time, I had had enough of this nonsense, and really had no interest in posting it, I agreed. Shortly thereafter, the transcript was sent to me, and the tape returned. Then, the fun and games started. THE DEBRA CONWAY INTERLUDE Some two years later, the matter of Cancun came up, and I dug up the transcript to verify something. To my surprise,there was no mention of "Cancun" on the transcript. For a few days, I was confused. I consulted with Paul Hoch and Robert Chapman. Had we all imagined this? Was Cancun mentioned only in the manuscript, but not in the phone call? Then I had to dig up the tape, which I did, and set aside time to check the tape. Within minutes, I had verified that the Cancun statement was there, and then --checking the transcript--confronted the fact that Debra Conway had omitted the Cancun statement from the transcript. Let me say that again: Debra Conway prepared a transcript which OMITTED the Cancun statement, which was on the tape. As far as I was concerned, that was the end of the line for me, as far as Debra Conway was concerned. I could not believe that this omission was anything but deliberate. I spent a few minutes checking other parts of the transcript, and found other errors, and decided it was an unreliable document. So I never relied on it, never posted it anywhere, and simply filed it away. As I said, I put the whole Judyth episode behind me, some eight years ago (at least). As to your request: First of all: I never made a word-for-word transcript. Second: The only transcript that was ever made, to my knowledge, is the inaccurate one that Debra Conway made, and which omits the Cancun reference, an omission I believe to have been deliberate. As I have said before: if Judyth will sign a proper legal release, I will be willing to have the entire conversation, from beginning to end, transferred to an MP3 or a WAV file, and post it on the Internet. Then there will be a level playing field, and everyone can hear her the manner in which she conducted herself in that conversation, and what she said. Everyone can then hear, among other things, the following: * Judyth's reference to that last conversation with LHO, in which she talked of intending to meet him in Cancun. *Judyth's statements in which she suggested to Lee that he take a laxative and pretend to be sick, so that he would not have to show up and fire shots, etc. €My careful questioning of her as to what Lee was wearing at that very first meeting at the U.S. Post Office, where she claimed--repeatedly (and with considerable emphasis, as I recall) -that he was dressed in workman's clothes, looked somewhat grubby etc., whereas I very well know otherwise. Specifically, from my own research and careful study of the chronological data in the 26 Volumes (and specifically, the Rachal exhibits, and the Rachal affidavit) that she was supposedly dressed in a suite and tie. Specifically, and now quoting the Warren Report (which quotes that record): "Neat. Suit.Tie. Polite." (Rachel Exhibit No. 1) And, in the June, 1964 Rachal affidavit: "I reacll that Oswald was neatly dressed with a suit, dress shirt, and tie on the occasion of our initial interview." (11 WCH 475). When Judyth signs a release, I'll post the entire conversation on the Internet. Meanwhile, attached find 3 items that may be of interest. --the Rachal exhibit, an affidavit, which offers evidence contradicting the way Judyth says LHO was dressed on 4/26/63, the day she first met him --Her statements about knowing both the name Bishop and Phillips, when she worked at Reily --The laxative story Again, I'm sorry to see you taken in by all this malarky. DSL First Email from me to David Lifton: David, Judyth has asked me to request a copy of the transcript (which I am sure you have created) of your phone call with Judyth. I would be most appreciative if you would provide a copy to me so that I can verify its contents with Judyth. She is actually very good at this, as I discovered when we verified the transcript of my first YouTube interview with her. Thanks for sending it. Warm regards, Jim Edited March 28, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) THIS IS A CORRECTED REPOSTING OF POST #658 ON PAGE 44. AS INDICATED, I WAS GOING TO VERIFY WITH JUDYTH THAT I HAD IT RIGHT, AND IT TURNS OUT THAT I HAS MISSED A CRUCIAL PHOTO. I HAVE CORRECTED A COMMENT ON THE PHOTOS OF MARGUERITES AND AN ADDITIONAL PHOTO OF MARGUERITE NEEDS TO BE ADDED. JUDYTH COMMENTS ON KATHY'S CATCH ON TWO PHOTOGRAPHS [NOTE: I am going to verify with Judyth that I have this post right.] WHAT HAPPENED HERE? KATHY C. MADE SOME GOOD REMARKS ABOUT THE PHOTO TO THE LEFT OF LEE OSWALD OF NOV. 22 –TAKEN WHEN HE WAS YOUNGER. I DECIDED TO COPY A MORE PRISTINE PHOTO ON THE INTERNET. IN FACT, IT IS FROM JACK WHITE’S COLLECTION – A PASTICHE THAT INCLUDES A COUPLE OF PHOTOS, SOME OF WHICH I DO NOT ACCEPT AND WANT TO KNOW THEIR TRUE PROVENANCE. THE PHOTO SHOWN ON THE LEFT IS THE ONE JACK WHITE POSTED AT THE EDUCATION FORUM. 1) IT HAS BEEN COPIED SO MUCH THAT MANY DETAILS THAT ARE ON THE PHOTO TO LEFT ARE MISSING. MANY OF THESE DETAILS (WASHED OUT) WOULD HAVE MATCHED TO THE NOV. 22 PHOTO OF LEE H. OSWALD. THAT WAS SHOWN NEXT TO IT. THE DETAILS CAN BE SEEN JUST FINE IN THE MORE PRISTINE PHOTO. 2) THIS PHOTO, OF ‘LEE’ TOO, IS TOO WIDE, AGAIN BY ABOUT 10% -- BUT CURIOUSLY, THIS TIME THE EXTRA WIDTH BEGINS JUST WHERE THE ‘LINE’ IS SHOWN (MUCH MORE CLEARLY, FOR SOME REASON, IN PHOTO TO THE LEFT)…WHERE THIS LINE, IN FACT, SHOULD HAVE FADED OUT MORE, AS DID OTHER DETAILS. INSTEAD, THIS LINE IS STRONGER. AND NOT ONE BUT TWO LINES ARE VISIBLE. 3) THE TRULY DISTURBING THING IS THAT ONLY A SECTION OF THIS PHOTO HAS BEEN WIDENED — AN AREA EXTENDING APPROXIMATELY AT THE JUNCTION WHERE EARS ATTACH AT THE TOP OF THE EARS TO THE HEAD, AND JUST BELOW THE LINE OF THE LOWER LIP, CENTER. THE DISTORTION ENHANCES THE WIDTH OF THE FACE IN JUST THIS AREA, MAKING ONLY HIS PART OF THE FACE MARKEDLY WIDER THAN THE ORIGINAL PRISTINE PHOTO. THE DIFFERENCE CAN BE SEEN BY THE UNAIDED EYE. THE HUMAN EYE SCANS THIS LENGTH DIFFERENCE AUTOMATICALLY. A LONGER DISTANCE RADICALLY CHANGES IDENTIFICATION FACTORS FOR PEOPLE. 4) TAKE A RULER AND SEE FOR YOURSELF. IT’S AMAZING, ACTUALLY. 5) THIS KIND OF DISTORTION COULD NOT BE MADE UNDER A SCANNER, OR BY PHOTOS REPHOTOGRAPHED TOO MANY TIMES. THE DISORTION IS ACROSS ONLY A CERTAIN AREA — NOT THE WHOLE PHOTO — WHICH IS A PHOTOSHOP EFFECT. THE CHANGES FROM THE PRISTINE PHOTO ARE SO EXTREME THAT THE PHOTO JACK SUPPLIED SHOULD BE DISCARDED AS HOPELESSLY DISTORTED FOR ID PURPOSES. 6) I HAVE NOW SEEN THREE INSTANCES OF DISTORTED OR MISREPRESENTED PHOTOS: 1) THE FEET OF MARGUERITE NOT LINED UP PROPERLY TO ACCOUNT FOR WEARING HEELS IN ONE PHOTO AND FLOPPY SLIPPERS IN THE OTHER… IN ADDITION, THE STATEMENT SAYING BOTH PHOTOS WERE TAKEN IN 1947 IS NOT CORRECT. THE WOMAN ON THE LEFT ON THE ORIGINAL DUAL PASTICHE WAS MARGUERITE WHEN LEE WAS IN THE SERVICE. CLEARLY, HOWEVER, IT WAS NOT TAKEN IN 1947 WHEN LEE WAS ONLY 8 YEARS OLD AND COULD NOT YET HAVE BEEN IN THE MARINES. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG... 2) THE NOV. 22 PHOTO OF LEE WAS DISTORTED 10% -- WHICH MADE HIS FACE LOOK TOO FAT AND THUS DID NOT MATCH THE PHOTO HERE AT UPPER RIGHT. WHEN CORRECTED, THERE WAS A BETTER MATCH…THEN KATHY POINTED OUT THE ODDITIES OF THE PHOTO ON THE UPPER LEFT. 3) SURE ENOUGH, SHE WAS RIGHT. THE LINE SHOLD HAVE BEEN FADED OUT. IT’S ALMOST AS IF SOMEBODY CUT THE PHOTO THERE AND BLEW THAT PART UP AND THEN CONNECED IT AGAIN, USING PHOTOSHOP OR A LITERAL PRINTOUT THAT WAS CUT. THAT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED, BUT SOMETHING HAPPENED TO IT. THE PHOTO AT THE UPPER LEFT, HERE, HAS BEEN DISORTED IN A VERY PARTICULAR SECTION. WHEN CORRECTED (BY REMOVING THE EXTRA WIDTH OF THE DISTORTED SECTION), HOWEVER, IT THEN MATCHES THE PRISTINE PHOTO’S SECTION. 7) PRINT THIS OUT 3 TIMES, CUT OUT THE PHOTOS, REMOVE THE EXTRA LIP AMOUNT (USE RULER) AND THEN THE FEAURES OF BOTH PHOTOS LINE UP JUST FINE. 8) WHAT HAPPENED TO THE FADED-OUT EDUCATION FORUM PHOTO THAT IT HAS SIGNIFICANT DISTORTION IN A KEY FACIAL I.D. AREA, FORENSICALLY SPEAKING? NOW I HAVE RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE PROVENANCE AND HANDLING OF THESE PHOTOS. WHERE DID THEY COME FROM? WHY ARE THEY DIFFERENT FROM EARLIER, CLEARER PHOTOS? WHO GAVE THEM TO JACK WHITE, OR TO JOHN ARMSTRONG? JVB Edited April 6, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) JUDYTH REPLIES TO JACK ABOUT HIS ACCOUNT OF THE FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM: The above reply indicates a lack of understanding of the FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. Here is the probable scenario. ==NOTE JACK CANNOT SAY THIS IS "THE SCENARIO". I HAVE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ACCOUNT FROM LEE H. OSWALD, AND I WILL EVENTUALLY BRING OUT DETAILS.== 1. With her family's knowledge, Marguerite took Lee to New York for "mental testing". 'FAMILY KNOWLEDGE'? WE HAVE JOHN PIC'S SHOCK THAT MARGUERITE SHOWS UP WITH LEE AND SEEMS TO WANT TO STAY. MARGUERITE ELSEWHERE GIVES A MULTITUDE OF REASONS WHY THEY WENT TO NEW YORK, ESPECIALLY WANTING LEE TO BE NEAR HIS BROTHER. 2. The mental testing turned out to be a CIA operation to look for candidates to LEND THEIR IDENTITY TO THE CIA for a FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. ==THE "MENTAL TESTING" OCCURRED AT A YOUTH HOUSE, WHERE LEE WENT ONLY AFTER MANY MONTHS OF TRUANCY. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT LEE DIDN'T ORIGINALLY GO TO NEW YORK FOR TESTING.== 3. Marguerite, Robert and John Pic all considered this PATRIOTIC. WHERE DO THEY SAY THAT TESTING LEE OSWALD IN A FACILITY FOR JUVENILE DELINQUENTS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH PATRIOTISM? QUOTES, PLEASE. 4. There was NO RISK to Lee; all he was doing was allowing his identity to be used. CITATIONS, PLEASE. FROM ANY SOURCE BUT WHITE AND ARMSTRONG. 5. This happened when Lee was 12 or 13 years old; he probably liked the intrigue of it... his name being used by a spy being trained. WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO LEE IS ALMOST AS EXCITING AS WHAT HAS BEEN MADE UP HERE. HOW DID JOHN ARMSTRONG MISS CHARLES THOMAS? PERHAPS BECAUSE HE DIDN'T SPEND NEARLY THREE YEARS SEARCHING FOR A GERMAN-ACCENT CUSTOMS AGENT FROM NEW YORK WHO HAD ONCE LIVED IN MIAMI, HAD TATTOOS ON HIS FINGERS, SPOKE FLUENT SPANISH, AND WAS MARRIED TO A CHITIMACHA INDIAN WOMAN. WHO HAD PLENTY OF GOOD INFORMATION ABOUT LEE IN NEW YORK, SOME OF WHICH I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROVE OCCURRED. 6. Marguerite likely received much needed compensation for doing this. HOW LIKELY IS THAT? ARMSTRONG ALSO SAYS SHE SOLD HER HOUSE IN 1952. 7. Armstrong documents how when Marguerite returns to Fort Worth, she began buying real estate, though said to be destitute. SHE SOLD HER HOME IN 1952 AND OTHER THINGS OCCURRED, WHICH I CAN EXPLAIN. 8. John Pic was first to say that there was a substitute for his half brother. A photo of Harvey playing hookey at the Bronx Zoo during the New York stay Pic said was not anyone he recognized. I HAVE ALREADY DEMONSTRATED THAT HE PHENOTYPE IS OSWALD. THE STRONG FAMILY RESEMBLANCE IS UNMISTAKABLE. IF PIC COULD NOT RECOGNIZE THE PHOTO, WE MUST NOTE THAT THE PHOTO ITSELF HAS BLACK SPOTS ON IT AROUND THE NOSE AND EYES, WHICH DO NOT BELONG THERE. 9. Robert knew of the operation from the beginning, but did not meet HARVEY until the Thanksgiving Reunion. WHO TOLD HIM TO STAY MUM ABOUT 'HARVEY' WHEN 'HARVEY' SHOWED UP FROM RUSSIA? T THE US GOVERNMENT? WHEN? BEFORE 'HARVEY' ARRIVED? WHAT ABOUT THE PHOTOS ON THE WALL SHOWING BOTH 'LEE' AND 'HARVEY'? WHEN WAS ROBERT TOLD? WHO GAVE ROBERT THE IMPERIAL REFLEX CAMERA BEFORE 'LEE' WENT TO RUSSIA? IT'S TIME FOR A DNA TEST, PEOPLE. THIS IS TOO MUCH. WE HAVE TO HAVE TWO MARGUERITES -- ONE OF WHOM VANISHES FOREVER. ARMSTRONG IS RELYING ON RECORDS WHEN LEE TOLD ME PLAINLY THAT SOME RECORDS ABOUT HIM HAD BEEN FAKED. YOU MUST NEVER BELIEVE EVERY RECORD YOU FIND ABOUT A FAKE DEFECTOR. LEE SAID HE HAD A WAY TO 'SLIP BACK INTO SOCIETY' AS IF HE HAD NEVER LEFT DUE TO ALTERED RECORDS, SO HE COULD HAVE A NORMAL LIFE AFTER HE LEFT THE AGENCY. HE TRIED TO LEAVE--THEY SAID HE COULD LEAVE AFTER CHRISTMAS, 1963. THEY KEPT HIM HOPING. YOU CAN EVEN SEE [HIS OPTIMISM IN] THAT IN THE THANKSGIVING MOVIE PHOTOS -- OR CORRECT ME, IF I AM WRONG, PLEASE. 10. Lee and Harvey clearly knew each other according to Armstrong's time lines. OF COURSE THEY DID. THEY WERE ONE AND THE SAME PERSON. 11. Ruth Paine was clearly the handler for both Lee and Harvey, and both of them were involved in the JFK plot, though not witting that Harvey was to be the PATSY. RUTH PAINE'S HOSTILITY TOWARD LEE COULD NOT BE MORE OBVIOUS. WHEN HE CALLED FROM JAIL ASKING HER TO CONTACT A LAWYER -- JOHN ABT OF NEW YORK -- FOR HIM, SHE FAILED TO DO SO. SHE HAS CIA WRITTEN ALL OVER HER. WHAT SHE DID THE NIGHT OF NOV. 21 IS TRULY SUSPICIOUS AND I HOPE TO ALERT EVERYONE TO READ HER ACCOUNT OF THAT NIGHT VERY CAREFULLY. SHE ALSO FOOLED LEE INTO THINKING SHE WAS GOING TO STAY WITH HIS WIFE WHEN MARINA HAD HER SECOND CHILD, THEN JUST DROPPED POOR MARINA AT THE HOSPITAL AND RETURNED. INFURIATING LEE WHO HAD STAYED BEHIND TO WATCH HER CHILDREN AND HIS DAUGHTER. HE REFUSED TO SPEAK TO HER AND PRETENDED HE WAS ASLEEP WHEN HE HEARD HER CALL AND FOUND OUT MARINA WAS OK AND HAD DELIVERED HER BABY ONLY AN HOUR OR SO AFTER BEING DROPPED OFF TO HAVE THE BABY WITHOUT ANY RUSSIAN-SPEAKING PERSON PRESENT. THE PAINES DID NOT CARE ONE HOOT ABOUT LEE, EITHER. HE WAS THEIR ASSIGNMENT. PERIOD. 12. It was arranged that Harvey lived in a rooming house during the week, while Lee lived at the Paine house. THIS IS THE MOST ABSURD OF ALL, AS LEE LOVED TO PLAY WITH THE KIDS THERE AND NEXT DOOR AND THEY LOOKED FORWARD TO HIS VISITS. SO THEY BOTH SHARE MARINA, RIGHT? 13. Lee lived at the Paine house on weekends only; it is not known where Lee lived on weekends. BECAUSE HE WAS LEE H. OSWALD. 14. It should be remembered that Marina said: I HAD TWO HUSBANDS, HARVEY AND LEE. ==SHE MEANT THAT THE WAY RUSSIANS ALWAYS SPEAK. A STUDY OF LINGUISTICS AND CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY WOULD HELP A GREAT DEAL HERE. ONE MAN WAS A SPY, THE OTHER HER "WORKMAN HUSBAND" WHO WAS A 'BOOKWORM' (HER WORDS). THE BAD JOB DONE ON LEE BY THE MORTICIAN INCLUDED NOT INJECTING ENOUGH EMBALMING FLUID IN THE FACE, PUTTING ON TOO MUCH MAKEUP, AND SEWING HIS LIPS TOO TIGHT. THE AUTOPSY PHOTOS ARE CLEARLY LEE. POOR MARINA WAS IMPOSED UPON TO OPEN THE GRAVE AND HAVE HIM EXHUMED BECAUSE THE SCAR LEE HAD HIDDEN UNDER HIS EAR TO HIDE HIS MASTOID OPERATION WAS NOT IN HE AUTOPSY. SURE ENOUGH, THEY FOUND THE MASTOID BONE PROCESS BLUNTED BY HE OPERATION AND THE INFECTIONS. THERE'S MORE, BUT THAT'S ENOUGH FOR NOW.== (“I had two husbands: Lee, the father of my children, an affectionate and kind man; and Harvey Oswald, the assassin of President Kennedy.”) BECAUSE LEE'S ENEMIES PRESENTED TO HER A DICHOTOMOUS IMAGE. SHE KNEW THAT LEE WAS AN AFFECTIONATE AND KIND MAN -- HE HAD STOPPED MISTREATING HER AND WAS DECENT TO HER, EVEN THOUGH HE ULTIMATELY PLANNED TO DIVORCE HER. HE LEFT HIS WEDDING RING BEHIND -- FOR GOOD REASON, IF HE GOT OUT ALIVE, WE WOULD HAVE MET IN MEXICO.... MARINA SAID YEARS LATER SHE HAD BEEN PRESENTED MUCH FALSE INFORMATION AND HAD BEEN PERSUADED THAT HER HUSBAND WAS THE ASSASSIN. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT MARINA OSWALD WAS SLEEPING WITH TWO SEPARATE MEN. LET'S SEE THE LIST [ACCORDING TO JOHN ARMSTRONG]: 1) TWO MARGUERITES -- ONE VANISHES 2) TWO OSWALDS -- ONE VANISHES 3) ROBERT OSWALD KNOWS BUT NEVER TELLS 4) RUTH PAINE KNOWS BUT NEVER TELLS HER SHE HATES ALL THAT LAUNDRY IN HER SMALL HOME WHERE 'LEE' MUST SLEEP ON THE COUCH OR WITH MARINA ALL WEEK! 5) MICHAEL PAINE ALSO KNOWS BUT DOESN'T TELL 7) DO WE EVER HAVE ANOTHER CASE OF A SPY "DUAL PAIR" IDENTITY FROM CHILDHOOD KNOWN IN THE RECORDS LATER THAN LEE OSWALD "LEE" AND "HARVEY"? 8) WHY HASN'T A SINGLE PERSON INVOLVED IN THIS COMPLEX SCENARIO EVER LEAKED A WORD? THEY'RE STILL ALIVE, TOO. DID ARMSTRONG EVER ASK ANY OF THEM, FACE TO FACE? CAN WE SEE THOSE INTERVIEWS WHERE HE ASKED THEM? AND, 9) FINALLY, JAMES OLMSTEAD TELLS US: From: James K. Olmstead Subject: Re: Harvey & Lee by John Armstrong Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk Date: 2003-11-12 14:31:11 PST Harvey: You seem to be well versed in Armstrong's work so I would like to ask you a question concerning the need to provide the "youth" with a new identity (Oswald's). >From your first post "HARVEY & LEE: HOW THE CIA FRAMED OSWALD" by John Armstrong Two young boys, AMERICAN-BORN Lee Oswald and an eastern European refugee who spoke Russian and was given the name "Harvey Oswald," were selected by the CIA for inclusion in a super-secret project known as MK/ULTRA in the early 1950s. The plan was to merge the identity of the two over a period of years and then, if successful, to place the Russian-speaking refugee with an American identity into the Soviet Union as a spy. Several years ago.....when Jack White was pushing the work of Armstrong I asked this same question with no answer..... perhaps you can address the issue. OLMSTEAD REPLIES: First, there was no need to adopt the identity of Lee Harvey Oswald to provide a "new cover" for the "refugee". Under Title 10 USC Subtitle C-Navy and Marine Corps Chapter 537, sec 5532 and 5533, once the "refugee" was 14 years of age, he could enlist in the service under Sec 5533. If there was no birth certificate for the young boy...the enlisting officer only had to "confirm" that this individual was who he said he was. It was quite simple to give somebody a new name and a new life...without involvement of "another". This law was changed after 1964......but was in effect during the 1948-1964 period. Why go through all the "trouble"...when things could be done quickly and legally as well as "deep undercover"? jko Jack JVB The above reply indicates a lack of understanding of the FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. Here is the probable scenario. 1. With her family's knowledge, Marguerite took Lee to New York for "mental testing". 2. The mental testing turned out to be a CIA operation to look for candidates to LEND THEIR IDENTITY TO THE CIA for a FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. 3. Marguerite, Robert and John Pic all considered this PATRIOTIC. 4. There was NO RISK to Lee; all he was doing was allowing his identity to be used. 5. This happened when Lee was 12 or 13 years old; he probably liked the intrigue of it... his name being used by a spy being trained. 6. Marguerite likely received much needed compensation for doing this. 7. Armstrong documents how when Marguerite returns to Fort Worth, she began buying real estate, though said to be destitute. 8. John Pic was first to say that there was a substitute for his half brother. A photo of Harvey playing hookey at the Bronx Zoo during the New York stay Pic said was not anyone he recognized. 9. Robert knew of the operation from the beginning, but did not meet HARVEY until the Thanksgiving Reunion. 10. Lee and Harvey clearly knew each other according to Armstrong's timelines. 11. Ruth Paine was clearly the handler for both Lee and Harvey, and both of them were involved in the JFK plot, though not witting that Harvey was to be the PATSY. 12. It was arranged that Harvey lived in a rooming house during the week, while Lee lived at the Paine house. 13. Lee lived at the Paine house on weekends only; it is not known where Lee lived on weekends. 14. It should be remembered that Marina said: I HAD TWO HUSBANDS, HARVEY AND LEE. (“I had two husbands: Lee, the father of my children, an affectionate and kind man; and Harvey Oswald, the assassin of President Kennedy.”) Jack Edited March 28, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb Junkkarinen Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 (edited) Another claim that she made that he could not believe was thestory of them meeting for a rendevous at a hotel in the middle of the jungle in Mexico in the resort of Cancun, which he found incredible, especially since Cancun did not exist at the time. As Judyth has explained in post #665 on page 45, the hotel was not situated in the city of Cancun but in the village called Kan Kun, where it has existed since the 1930s. Lifton made a mistake over the phone, because they are both pronounced the same. HE ONLY TELLS YOU TO FOCUS ON "CANCUN" AS HE HEARD IT OVER THE PHONE. I WAS CRUCIFIED OVER THAT ISSUE UNTIL DEB BERT AND OTHERS NOTED THAT MAYALAND WAS BUILT RIGHT THERE AT CHICHEN-IZA, WHERE I SAID LEE AND I WOULD MEET. LOOK AT A MAP AND POINT YOUR FINGER HERE -- THE OLD MAPS WE LOOKED AT SAID "KANKUN", THE NEW ONES SAY THE CITY "CANCUN". And she's right! Just a little geographic orientation regarding Cancun ...kan-kun ... and the Mayaland hotel. The above reads as if the Mayaland is in close proximity to Quintana Roo where Cancun is located. It is not. Chichen Itza and the Mayaland hotel are not in Cancun, or Kan-kun ... nowhere near. Chichen Itza and the Mayaland Hotel are located in the middle of the jungle in the state of Yucatan. Cancun is located in the state of Quintana Roo. Quintana Roo did not become a state until 1974, but it was an officially named territory as of 1902. Who cares about Quintana Roo? Judyth, who wrote: I began to fantasize about my hoped-for escape to Quintana Roo. In my dreams, I climbed Mayan pyramids with hinds´ feet in high places, Lee laughing by my side, the wind blowing our hair awry, and colorful birds flying in great processioned wheels around us, their cries of joy mingled with ours. I would feel Lee´s touch, that certain way he had of tracing just so across my hip, and I would wake smiling -- to a void. Martin Shackelford posted the above in June 2004, noting: Here is the reference from the original manuscript from 1998--BEFORE the agent began fooling with it: No Mayaland hotel or Chichen Itza in Quintana Roo. I posted this in that same 2004 thread: "State of Quintana Roo Quintana Roo's Coat of Arms In this day and age, the state of Quintana Roo, home to Cancun, is synonymous with tourism. It is impossible to believe that just 40 years ago Quintana Roo was "the most savage and wild coast of the American continent." It was a territory with no local government and no roads, accessible only by sea or on foot." http://www.akumalrental.com/about_akumal/quin_roo.html I just tried the link at it no longer goes anywhere. It is an 111 mile, 2-1/2 to 3 hr drive from Cancun to Chitzen Itza/Mayaland *today* on the highway. There were no roads in 1963 as noted in the cite above. People going to the Mayaland Hotel used to be taken from where they got off their ship in the little port of Progress, through the jungle, to the Mayaland. Here is a map that shows where all of these places are: http://www.mayaland.com/History.php This is the map the Mayaland Hotel has on its site. One can also read their history on this site as well. When the Cancun thing became an issue, and the "kan-kun" explanation did not fly, their intended destination became, Tulum, Merida, Chichen Itza ... and somewhere down the line, even Cozumel and the Cayman Islands (where Judyth said Oswald had sent money ahead for them) ... they all became,, in turn, the correct place. The story about the laxatives strikes me as fascinatingon several counts, because with her knowledge about medicine and physiology--wanting to have Lee out of the picture on the day of the assassination but without raising alarm among his associates--she came up with a very practical and easily implemented solution to the dilemma: create the simulation of a physical illness. One has to wonder why it didn't occur to her that LHO didn't need to "similate illness" by actually giving himself diarrhea. No potty police. And the bottom line of all this laxative business is that, by Judyth's own account, she knew that shots were going to be fired at JFK in Dallas on November 22nd. She did nothing. Not even an anonymous phone call to the police, the FBI or the Secret Service. And a quick question ... does Judyth still claim to have been at the leafletting in New Orleans? There were claims about the dress one of the women were wearing, then it became a different woman, then it was found that the women were identified by someone who worked in the building. But since Johann Rush, the cameraman who actually filmed the incident for the news came forward and refuted her details about what people were wearing, the kind of TV camera used, etc ... does she still say she was there? Thanks, Barb :-) Edited March 29, 2010 by Barb Junkkarinen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathleen Collins Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Kathy; here are two links, one to Allan Grant of Life magazine...his photographs of Marina and...family and anoth er to his story of finding them the weekend of the assassination, when she they were interviewed by authorities, in the hotel, there are a few other hotel photos with Robert in them, which i do not see in this link but if followed they will probably be found, i post what i have of robert in thehOTEL ROOM, YOU WILL SEE I BELIEVE THE RESEMBLANCE WITH HIS BROTHER LEE.that's robert at the table.....PLEASE excuse the caps...thanks...b http://www.allangrant.com/newsevents7.htm story http://www.allangrant.com/oswaldstory.htm. . Thanks, Bernice. I am using a relatively new computer, but I seem to have lost a lot of photos from my old drive. I am trying to find the picture of Robert, Lee and John Pic as children. Lee is in the middle, the real Lee. Yes, there is some resemblance to LHO. But they're all so dorky looking. Where do they get these people? I take it you don't believe in John Armstrong's work? Kathy C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 It is spring and I mow the grass because it needs mowing. It has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance. I also watched the NCAA basketball tournament all day because I am a rabid basketball fan. It has nothing to do with JVB's imagined cognitive dissonance. I did not say I do not read her postings... only the repetitive ones. I spend only a tiny fraction of my time on JFK forums or research. The vast majority of my time is spent on this pet historical project... http://www.fortwortharchitecture.com/oldftw/oldftw.htm I have very little time to waste reading the massive JVB postings. Why she continues to attack me is baffling, since for more than 40 years I have been trying to prove the innocence of LHO...which she says is HER goal. Jack JUDYTH OFFERS OBSERVATIONS ABOUT JACK'S POSTS:Jim, Jack's reply is a classic example of cognitive dissonance behavior. He says he isn't reading my posts but then says that he "seldom read(s) them carefully because they are repetitive and predictable." As anyone knows who has been following this thread, this is a false characterization of the nature of these posts. I have been presenting new information all along, or little-known information. Jack prefers to mow the grass because that is a different behavior--it is avoidance behavior. When pigeons are frustrated and cannot reach grain behind a plate of glass, in cognitive dissonance frustration, they peck at something they can reach instead! Jack cuts grass and decides not to read the posts, like the fox and the grapes, which the fox calls "sour" because he cannot reach them -- Jack is saying my posts are repetitive and predicable, when they are no such thing, and he would rather mow grass. And at time like this!== Jack can choose to: (1) attack, (2) apologize and join wholeheartedly into trying to find out the whole truth, in a good spirit of cooperation -- hard on the ego but wonderful as to having his great skills available in the matter -- or (3) he can ignore, and peck a something else besides the glass -- in this case, at his grass== I have not evaded anything. I have been busy with doctor and dental appointments and mowing my grass. I spend little time on the computer now that the weather is nice. The long ALL CAPS ==because of vision problems--I apologize wish I could do better== and abusive ramblings of JVB ==Not ramblings. Not abusive. Trying to speak kindly and with respect, despite the way I am being described by Jack. Now you see what Jack 'means' when he said I was 'abusive' at the DellaRosa forum....Am I being abusive, or just pointing out what should not be ignored or even proclaimed without careful inspection?== are very difficult to wade thru, and I seldom read them carefully because they are repetitive and predictable. ==Sorry -- he's 'seldom' reading my posts, but yet he expects me to read his posts and answer him and, if not, I am being evasive.== JVB I have not evaded anything. I have been busy withdoctor and dental appointments and mowing my grass. I spend little time on the computer now that the weather is nice. The long ALL CAPS and abusive ramblings of JVB are very difficult to wade thru, and I seldom read them carefully because they are repetitive and predictable. To learn John Armstrong's methodology, read the book. He footnotes extensively and tells about every source. If you can find a questionable documentation, please let us know about it. He depended VERY LARGELY on interviews of people who knew the Oswald family. He and Robert Groden videotaped many of these interviews. He specifically quotes interviews as sources. Interviews cannot be faked. If there are fake documents, the WC was taken in by them because most assassination documents he uses were also used by the WC. There is no way other public record documents can be faked, because he made extensive use of city directories, phone books, court records, real estate transactions, etc...none of which can be fabricated because they pre-existed 1963. Fabrication of a telephone book that was a print run of 200,000 is obviously impossible. I am not aware of anything I have purposely evaded if I know the answer. Please rephrase (brief one sentence questions) any thing you want me to answer. I may have missed them in the mass of ALL CAPS TYPING used by JVB. The reason the previous posting seemed a combination of writing by you and JVB was the ALL CAPS TYPING that is her trademark. Some of the remarks seemed to be hers. I do not understand your questioning of the authenticity of certain publicly published photos. The funeral photo of Marina, Robert and Marguerite, for instance, was taken and published by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram the next day. There was no reason for the newspaper or anyone else to "fake" it, yet you question whether it is authentic. As for his uncle Murret tying LHO to the mafia, that is undocumented and undocumentable. LHO's association with Uncle Dutz was under the age of 5 and around the age of 14. It is most dubious that these childhood associations with a relative would have made either LHO a mafioso. I am growing very tired of unwarranted accusations about me, my intelligence, my motives and my research. I have nothing but pity for this poor quixotic person who has abandoned a potentially productive life for a person of her obvious intelligence in order to promote her illicit affair with a married man. Jack JIM DIRECTS SOME QUESTIONS TO JACK ABOUT ROBERT: WHEN I ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES OF SELECTION THAT JOHN ARMSTRONG USED TO DETERMINE WHICH RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS WERE GENUINE AND WHICH NOT, YOU OFFER NO RESPONSE. THAT SUGGESTS HE VACUUMED ALL OF THEM UP. I AM ALSO CONCERNED WITH THE PROVENANCE OF THE PHOTOS OF THE SECOND MARGUERITE. MY FATHER'S SECOND WIFE WAS ALSO NAMED "MARGUERITE". I COULD OFFER PHOTOGRAPHS OF HER AND IDENTIFY HER AS A "SECOND MARGUERITE" AS WELL. THE POINT I AM MAKING, JACK, IS THAT IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO FIND PHOTOS AND MAKE CLAIMS ABOUT THE IDENTITY OF THOSE SHOWN. IF JOHN HAD NO PRINCIPLES FOR SORTING DOCUMENTS, WHAT DID HE DO TO DETERMINE THE PROVENANCE OF PHOTOS? AND IT APPEARS RATHER OBVIOUS AT THIS POINT IN TIME THAT SOME OF THE IMAGES OF "THE TWO OSWALDS" ARE PHONY OR FAKED. KATHY SPOTTED IT AND JUDYTH AGREES AS DO I THAT ONE ON WHICH YOU HEAVILY DEPEND APPEARS TO BE ALTERED. I THINK YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES. MORE AND MORE, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHILD'S PLAY TO CREATE A PARALLEL IMPERSONATION. I HAVE HIS BOOK, BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE HAVING SOME ANSWERS. AND HASN'T ROBERT BEEN DISPOSED TO SUPPORT THE THEORY THAT HIS BROTHER WAS THE ASSASSIN? SINCE THAT IS PURE FANTASY, DOESN'T THAT SUGGEST THAT HE (ROBERT) MAY HAVE BEEN DEEPLY INVOLVED? WHO BETTER TO IMPERSONATE LEE? IF YOU AND JOHN DON'T HAVE DIRECT, CONVINCING ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS, THEN I AM GOING TO HAVE A HARD TIME TAKING ALL OF THIS SERIOUSLY. YOU HAD AN OBVIOUS DOUBLE AT HAND. HOW MUCH TIME HAVE YOU SPENT IN STUDYING HIM? IS IT POSSIBLE ROBERT COULD HAVE BEEN A "SECOND OSWALD"? DID YOU AND JOHN ATTEMPT TO TRACK ROBERT'S WHEREABOUTS ON CRUCIAL DATES? THE PHOTO ABOVE ON THE LEFT DOES NOT LOOK TO ME REMOTELY LIKE LEE OSWALD. I DOUBT THAT IT IS. Lee and Robert were almost as interchangeable as twins. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 The "hunting photo" is NOT my photo, but was a personal photo allegedly taken by Robert when he took Lee hunting just before Lee "departed for New Orleans" for his defection. I copied the photo from LEE, written by Robert Oswald. The way a Marine handles a rifle is not necessarily indicative of what he would do when out hunting. Not everyone behaves according to any preconceived notion. I have no opinion on the veracity of the photo. It may be genuine, it may be faked. But it does not resemble the LHO of Dealey Plaza. Jack JIM COMMENTS ON THE ALLEGED "HUNTING PHOTO OF LEE"Let me state that his "hunting photo of Lee" categorically falsifies your theory. "Lee", of course, on your scenario, was in the Marine Corps. I can assure you that no one who had ever served in the Marine Corps would hold a rifle or shotgun in the manner shown here. They would have the weapon across their arms, cradled with the end pointed up- ward. They would never display the casual, grab-ass behavior that is displayed by the "Lee" of your photograph, which, as I have observed before, looks like a completely phony photo in any case. But once a man has served in the Marine Corps and acquired a minimal degree of competence with a rifle, they would not handle a long gun as shown. Either the man in the photo is not your "Lee" or the photo is a phony. I will reply to your questions in segments, because the forum format isnot good for a "mass reply". Segments to follow. Jack Jack,OK. Let's see if we can sort some of it out together. By "you guys", I am referring to you, John Armstrong, and David Lifton, whom I have taken to be the leading experts on Lee Harvey Oswald. I know that John and you believe there were two, one "Lee", the other "Harvey", and that the one Judyth knew in New Orleans was the one to whom you refer to as "Harvey". According to Dawn Mededith, the one you call "Lee" (not the one whom Judyth knew) was short-tempered, non-intellectual and could not speak Russian, while the one you call "Harvey" was mild-mannered, intellectual and fluent in Russian. You say the one called "Harvey" was born in Hungary and liked the name "Harvey", while Judyth's says that he was born in Louisiana, had a slight Cajun accent, and hated the name "Harvey". So we know that at least some of this has to be wrong. OK? I do not know if Lifton believes there were "two Oswalds", but I rather suspect he does not. So what we know about "Oswald" is very obscure. Now, in this new post you say that you have been suggesting for years that Robert was involved in framing "Harvey", the man Judyth knew in New Orleans as "Lee", who, according to you, was not his brother, even though they looked enough alike that they were virtually "dead ringers" for one another. In addition, in a recent post, you make this observation: Today, 05:23 PM Post #674 Super Member **** Group: Members Posts: 7127 Joined: 26-April 04 Member No.: 667 Robert Oswald, of course, knew that Harvey was not his brother, and to this day he "cooperates" with the perpetrators, as does Marina...for safety reasons. Robert, Marina and Ruth Paine are the only remaining living persons who knew both Harvey and Lee. If they were to tell what they know, the case would be solved. Robert likely was an unwitting participant. Because both he and Lee were Marines, and they looked very much alike, the military had photos and records of both to use in creating confusion in the official record. I am fairly certain that photos of Robert were in some cases used to portray Lee. Of course Robert was ASTOUNDED when the assassination happened and Harvey was named the assassin. What he had assumed was a rather benign assignment of Lee took a very terrible turn. Read his testimony for his reaction to the event. Jack So here are my questions: (1) The man who died, according to you, was "Harvey", whom Judyth knew as "Lee" and who was shot to death by Jack Ruby on 24 November. (2) Although Robert was the brother of the one you call "Lee" and not of the one Judyth knew and Ruby shot, they were "dead ringers" of each other. (3) According to your latest, #678, you have always insisted that Robert was involved in framing the man that Judyth knew and that Ruby shot. (4) In your earlier, #674, however, you state (a) that Robert likely was an unwitting participant and ( was astounded when "Harvey" was fingered. (5) Now, if Robert was helping to frame "Harvey", how could he possibly have been astounded when "Harvey" was blamed for the the assassination? (6) Reading his testimony for his reaction to the event sounds like a waste of time when we know that (a) he "found" the Imperial Reflex camera no one had been able to locate in the Paine's garage; ( he had an affair with Marina following her husband's death; and, © he move into a nice, new brick home, which he previously could not have afforded. What speaks louder to you? (7) Moreover, Judyth has shown that, when you correct for distortion, the images of "Lee" and of "Harvey" tend to converge, which suggests to me that, while there may have been "two Oswalds", they are not adequately identified as "Harvey & Lee" but instead more plausibly as "Robert & Lee": So my question for you, my friend, is how can you reconcile what I have just presented, especially your claims (i) that Robert was involved in the framing of "Harvey" and (ii) that he was an unwitting participant who was "astounded" when "Harvey" was fingered as the assassin? I don't get it. It is plausible to me that Robert was impersonating Lee on some occasions. And I hope you are not going to suggest that Robert "found" the Imperial Reflex camera, had an affair with Marina, and purchased a new brick home because he had to "play along" with the perpetrators "for safety reasons"! Jim Who are the YOU GUYS you refer to?What are your questions? I have always said that Robert Oswald participated in the framing of Harvey. Harvey was not his brother, so he cooperated in framing him. Now what is your question about this opinion? Are you saying I am wrong about Robert? I have long said that some photos of "Lee" are really of Robert. Are you disputing this? Your questions are not clear. It is clear to me that Robert helped frame "LHO". I have said this for about thirty years. Are you disputing this? I do not understand your accusation. Jack JIM HAS MORE QUESTIONS FOR JACK ABOUT ROBERT OSWALD: In post #469 on page 32, Judyth made the following observations: I knew that Lee was aware of and even wanted impersonations. We covered up our tracks very well and after Lee left Reily, I could never dare meet him outside there anymore. Just trying to say, when you know the man, you know some things simply aren’t true. Then it's easy to find what is true and present it. Lee told me he even had a relative there. In New Orleans, two of his relatives were working for Reily when he was, and one worker describes a relative as smoking who was actually Lee, as Lee mentioned his male relative smoked. People should notice that the boy is leaning back...the photo itself has been altered slightly around the nose ...as many other photos, as well...also, though this is supposed to be the Bronx Zoo, Robert Oswald has a fuzzy memory on a lot of stuff, and remember, Lee was visiting John Pic's home, not Robert's, in New York. Robert has committed various errors and told lies as well, due to his affair with Marina shortly after Lee's death. He 'found' the damning Imperial Reflex camera in the PAINE garage that had been so thoroughly searched... Right after being caught with Marina.... Robert then moved into a nice new brick house that he could not have afforded before then. Then catch what Robert has to say about his brother Lee as the assassin of JFK during a PBS "Frontline" interview: (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...ews/oswald.html) Robert Oswald: In your mind, are there questions about whether Lee shot President Kennedy? There is no question in my mind that Lee was responsible for the three shots fired, two of the shots hitting the president and killing him. There is no question in my mind that he also shot Officer Tippit. How can you explain one without the other? I think they're inseparable. I'm talking about the police officer being shot and the president. You look at the factual data, you look at the rifle, you look at the pistol ownership, you look at his note about the Walker shooting. You look at the general opportunity -- he was present. He wasn't present when they took a head count [at the Texas School Book Depository]. I watched the deterioration of a human being. You look at that last year -- his work, his family, trying to go to Cuba, trying to go back to Russia. His wife is wanting to go back to Russia. Everything is deteriorating. You look at all the data there, and it comes up to one conclusion as far as I'm concerned -- the Warren Commission was correct. JIM'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE ALLEGED "EXPERTS" ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD: These observations suggest to me that Robert was a key player in framing Lee. This is quite outrageous. You guys are supposed to be the "experts" on Lee Harvey Oswald and I have to learn about Robert having what appears to be motive, means, and opportunity to frame him from Judyth? And you guys have the nerve to challenge her background and her competence and her qualifications? The situation here is entirely outrageous. This woman appears to me to be doing more to solve the case in relation to Lee Harvey Oswald than you and John Armstrong and David S. Lifton put together. Lee and Robert were almost as interchangeable as twins.Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 Armstrong INTERVIEWED hundreds of witnesses who knew either Lee or Harvey, videotaping many of them. For his documentation, read the book. Jack JUDYTH REPLIES TO JACK ABOUT HIS ACCOUNT OF THE FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM:The above reply indicates a lack of understanding of the FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. Here is the probable scenario. ==NOTE JACK CANNOT SAY THIS IS "THE SCENARIO". I HAVE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ACCOUNT FROM LEE H. OSWALD, AND I WILL EVENTUALLY BRING OUT DETAILS.== 1. With her family's knowledge, Marguerite took Lee to New York for "mental testing". 'FAMILY KNOWLEDGE'? WE HAVE JOHN PIC'S SHOCK THAT MARGUERITE SHOWS UP WITH LEE AND SEEMS TO WANT TO STAY. MARGUERITE ELSEWHERE GIVES A MULTITUDE OF REASONS WHY THEY WENT TO NEW YORK, ESPECIALLY WANTING LEE TO BE NEAR HIS BROTHER. 2. The mental testing turned out to be a CIA operation to look for candidates to LEND THEIR IDENTITY TO THE CIA for a FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. ==THE "MENTAL TESTING" OCCURRED AT A YOUTH HOUSE, WHERE LEE WENT ONLY AFTER MANY MONTHS OF TRUANCY. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT LEE DIDN'T ORIGINALLY GO TO NEW YORK FOR TESTING.== 3. Marguerite, Robert and John Pic all considered this PATRIOTIC. WHERE DO THEY SAY THAT TESTING LEE OSWALD IN A FACILITY FOR JUVENILE DELINQUENTS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH PATRIOTISM? QUOTES, PLEASE. 4. There was NO RISK to Lee; all he was doing was allowing his identity to be used. CITATIONS, PLEASE. FROM ANY SOURCE BUT WHITE AND ARMSTRONG. 5. This happened when Lee was 12 or 13 years old; he probably liked the intrigue of it... his name being used by a spy being trained. WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO LEE IS ALMOST AS EXCITING AS WHAT HAS BEEN MADE UP HERE. HOW DID JOHN ARMSTRONG MISS CHARLES THOMAS? PERHAPS BECAUSE HE DIDN'T SPEND NEARLY THREE YEARS SEARCHING FOR A GERMAN-ACCENT CUSTOMS AGENT FROM NEW YORK WHO HAD ONCE LIVED IN MIAMI, HAD TATTOOS ON HIS FINGERS, SPOKE FLUENT SPANISH, AND WAS MARRIED TO A CHITIMACHA INDIAN WOMAN. WHO HAD PLENTY OF GOOD INFORMATION ABOUT LEE IN NEW YORK, SOME OF WHICH I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROVE OCCURRED. 6. Marguerite likely received much needed compensation for doing this. HOW LIKELY IS THAT? ARMSTRONG ALSO SAYS SHE SOLD HER HOUSE IN 1952. 7. Armstrong documents how when Marguerite returns to Fort Worth, she began buying real estate, though said to be destitute. SHE SOLD HER HOME IN 1952 AND OTHER THINGS OCCURRED, WHICH I CAN EXPLAIN. 8. John Pic was first to say that there was a substitute for his half brother. A photo of Harvey playing hookey at the Bronx Zoo during the New York stay Pic said was not anyone he recognized. I HAVE ALREADY DEMONSTRATED THAT HE PHENOTYPE IS OSWALD. THE STRONG FAMILY RESEMBLANCE IS UNMISTAKABLE. IF PIC COULD NOT RECOGNIZE THE PHOTO, WE MUST NOTE THAT THE PHOTO ITSELF HAS BLACK SPOTS ON IT AROUND THE NOSE AND EYES, WHICH DO NOT BELONG THERE. 9. Robert knew of the operation from the beginning, but did not meet HARVEY until the Thanksgiving Reunion. WHO TOLD HIM TO STAY MUM ABOUT 'HARVEY' WHEN 'HARVEY' SHOWED UP FROM RUSSIA? T THE US GOVERNMENT? WHEN? BEFORE 'HARVEY' ARRIVED? WHAT ABOUT THE PHOTOS ON THE WALL SHOWING BOTH 'LEE' AND 'HARVEY'? WHEN WAS ROBERT TOLD? WHO GAVE ROBERT THE IMPERIAL REFLEX CAMERA BEFORE 'LEE' WENT TO RUSSIA? IT'S TIME FOR A DNA TEST, PEOPLE. THIS IS TOO MUCH. WE HAVE TO HAVE TWO MARGUERITES -- ONE OF WHOM VANISHES FOREVER. ARMSTRONG IS RELYING ON RECORDS WHEN LEE TOLD ME PLAINLY THAT SOME RECORDS ABOUT HIM HAD BEEN FAKED. YOU MUST NEVER BELIEVE EVERY RECORD YOU FIND ABOUT A FAKE DEFECTOR. LEE SAID HE HAD A WAY TO 'SLIP BACK INTO SOCIETY' AS IF HE HAD NEVER LEFT DUE TO ALTERED RECORDS, SO HE COULD HAVE A NORMAL LIFE AFTER HE LEFT THE AGENCY. HE TRIED TO LEAVE--THEY SAID HE COULD LEAVE AFTER CHRISTMAS, 1963. THEY KEPT HIM HOPING. YOU CAN EVEN SEE [HIS OPTIMISM IN] THAT IN THE THANKSGIVING MOVIE PHOTOS -- OR CORRECT ME, IF I AM WRONG, PLEASE. 10. Lee and Harvey clearly knew each other according to Armstrong's time lines. OF COURSE THEY DID. THEY WERE ONE AND THE SAME PERSON. 11. Ruth Paine was clearly the handler for both Lee and Harvey, and both of them were involved in the JFK plot, though not witting that Harvey was to be the PATSY. RUTH PAINE'S HOSTILITY TOWARD LEE COULD NOT BE MORE OBVIOUS. WHEN HE CALLED FROM JAIL ASKING HER TO CONTACT A LAWYER -- JOHN ABT OF NEW YORK -- FOR HIM, SHE FAILED TO DO SO. SHE HAS CIA WRITTEN ALL OVER HER. WHAT SHE DID THE NIGHT OF NOV. 21 IS TRULY SUSPICIOUS AND I HOPE TO ALERT EVERYONE TO READ HER ACCOUNT OF THAT NIGHT VERY CAREFULLY. SHE ALSO FOOLED LEE INTO THINKING SHE WAS GOING TO STAY WITH HIS WIFE WHEN MARINA HAD HER SECOND CHILD, THEN JUST DROPPED POOR MARINA AT THE HOSPITAL AND RETURNED. INFURIATING LEE WHO HAD STAYED BEHIND TO WATCH HER CHILDREN AND HIS DAUGHTER. HE REFUSED TO SPEAK TO HER AND PRETENDED HE WAS ASLEEP WHEN HE HEARD HER CALL AND FOUND OUT MARINA WAS OK AND HAD DELIVERED HER BABY ONLY AN HOUR OR SO AFTER BEING DROPPED OFF TO HAVE THE BABY WITHOUT ANY RUSSIAN-SPEAKING PERSON PRESENT. THE PAINES DID NOT CARE ONE HOOT ABOUT LEE, EITHER. HE WAS THEIR ASSIGNMENT. PERIOD. 12. It was arranged that Harvey lived in a rooming house during the week, while Lee lived at the Paine house. THIS IS THE MOST ABSURD OF ALL, AS LEE LOVED TO PLAY WITH THE KIDS THERE AND NEXT DOOR AND THEY LOOKED FORWARD TO HIS VISITS. SO THEY BOTH SHARE MARINA, RIGHT? 13. Lee lived at the Paine house on weekends only; it is not known where Lee lived on weekends. BECAUSE HE WAS LEE H. OSWALD. 14. It should be remembered that Marina said: I HAD TWO HUSBANDS, HARVEY AND LEE. ==SHE MEANT THAT THE WAY RUSSIANS ALWAYS SPEAK. A STUDY OF LINGUISTICS AND CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY WOULD HELP A GREAT DEAL HERE. ONE MAN WAS A SPY, THE OTHER HER "WORKMAN HUSBAND" WHO WAS A 'BOOKWORM' (HER WORDS). THE BAD JOB DONE ON LEE BY THE MORTICIAN INCLUDED NOT INJECTING ENOUGH EMBALMING FLUID IN THE FACE, PUTTING ON TOO MUCH MAKEUP, AND SEWING HIS LIPS TOO TIGHT. THE AUTOPSY PHOTOS ARE CLEARLY LEE. POOR MARINA WAS IMPOSED UPON TO OPEN THE GRAVE AND HAVE HIM EXHUMED BECAUSE THE SCAR LEE HAD HIDDEN UNDER HIS EAR TO HIDE HIS MASTOID OPERATION WAS NOT IN HE AUTOPSY. SURE ENOUGH, THEY FOUND THE MASTOID BONE PROCESS BLUNTED BY HE OPERATION AND THE INFECTIONS. THERE'S MORE, BUT THAT'S ENOUGH FOR NOW.== (“I had two husbands: Lee, the father of my children, an affectionate and kind man; and Harvey Oswald, the assassin of President Kennedy.”) BECAUSE LEE'S ENEMIES PRESENTED TO HER A DICHOTOMOUS IMAGE. SHE KNEW THAT LEE WAS AN AFFECTIONATE AND KIND MAN -- HE HAD STOPPED MISTREATING HER AND WAS DECENT TO HER, EVEN THOUGH HE ULTIMATELY PLANNED TO DIVORCE HER. HE LEFT HIS WEDDING RING BEHIND -- FOR GOOD REASON, IF HE GOT OUT ALIVE, WE WOULD HAVE MET IN MEXICO.... MARINA SAID YEARS LATER SHE HAD BEEN PRESENTED MUCH FALSE INFORMATION AND HAD BEEN PERSUADED THAT HER HUSBAND WAS THE ASSASSIN. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT MARINA OSWALD WAS SLEEPING WITH TWO SEPARATE MEN. LET'S SEE THE LIST [ACCORDING TO JOHN ARMSTRONG]: 1) TWO MARGUERITES -- ONE VANISHES 2) TWO OSWALDS -- ONE VANISHES 3) ROBERT OSWALD KNOWS BUT NEVER TELLS 4) RUTH PAINE KNOWS BUT NEVER TELLS HER SHE HATES ALL THAT LAUNDRY IN HER SMALL HOME WHERE 'LEE' MUST SLEEP ON THE COUCH OR WITH MARINA ALL WEEK! 5) MICHAEL PAINE ALSO KNOWS BUT DOESN'T TELL 7) DO WE EVER HAVE ANOTHER CASE OF A SPY "DUAL PAIR" IDENTITY FROM CHILDHOOD KNOWN IN THE RECORDS LATER THAN LEE OSWALD "LEE" AND "HARVEY"? 8) WHY HASN'T A SINGLE PERSON INVOLVED IN THIS COMPLEX SCENARIO EVER LEAKED A WORD? THEY'RE STILL ALIVE, TOO. DID ARMSTRONG EVER ASK ANY OF THEM, FACE TO FACE? CAN WE SEE THOSE INTERVIEWS WHERE HE ASKED THEM? AND, 9) FINALLY, JAMES OLMSTEAD TELLS US: From: James K. Olmstead Subject: Re: Harvey & Lee by John Armstrong Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk Date: 2003-11-12 14:31:11 PST Harvey: You seem to be well versed in Armstrong's work so I would like to ask you a question concerning the need to provide the "youth" with a new identity (Oswald's). >From your first post "HARVEY & LEE: HOW THE CIA FRAMED OSWALD" by John Armstrong Two young boys, AMERICAN-BORN Lee Oswald and an eastern European refugee who spoke Russian and was given the name "Harvey Oswald," were selected by the CIA for inclusion in a super-secret project known as MK/ULTRA in the early 1950s. The plan was to merge the identity of the two over a period of years and then, if successful, to place the Russian-speaking refugee with an American identity into the Soviet Union as a spy. Several years ago.....when Jack White was pushing the work of Armstrong I asked this same question with no answer..... perhaps you can address the issue. OLMSTEAD REPLIES: First, there was no need to adopt the identity of Lee Harvey Oswald to provide a "new cover" for the "refugee". Under Title 10 USC Subtitle C-Navy and Marine Corps Chapter 537, sec 5532 and 5533, once the "refugee" was 14 years of age, he could enlist in the service under Sec 5533. If there was no birth certificate for the young boy...the enlisting officer only had to "confirm" that this individual was who he said he was. It was quite simple to give somebody a new name and a new life...without involvement of "another". This law was changed after 1964......but was in effect during the 1948-1964 period. Why go through all the "trouble"...when things could be done quickly and legally as well as "deep undercover"? jko Jack JVB The above reply indicates a lack of understanding of the FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. Here is the probable scenario. 1. With her family's knowledge, Marguerite took Lee to New York for "mental testing". 2. The mental testing turned out to be a CIA operation to look for candidates to LEND THEIR IDENTITY TO THE CIA for a FALSE DEFECTOR PROGRAM. 3. Marguerite, Robert and John Pic all considered this PATRIOTIC. 4. There was NO RISK to Lee; all he was doing was allowing his identity to be used. 5. This happened when Lee was 12 or 13 years old; he probably liked the intrigue of it... his name being used by a spy being trained. 6. Marguerite likely received much needed compensation for doing this. 7. Armstrong documents how when Marguerite returns to Fort Worth, she began buying real estate, though said to be destitute. 8. John Pic was first to say that there was a substitute for his half brother. A photo of Harvey playing hookey at the Bronx Zoo during the New York stay Pic said was not anyone he recognized. 9. Robert knew of the operation from the beginning, but did not meet HARVEY until the Thanksgiving Reunion. 10. Lee and Harvey clearly knew each other according to Armstrong's timelines. 11. Ruth Paine was clearly the handler for both Lee and Harvey, and both of them were involved in the JFK plot, though not witting that Harvey was to be the PATSY. 12. It was arranged that Harvey lived in a rooming house during the week, while Lee lived at the Paine house. 13. Lee lived at the Paine house on weekends only; it is not known where Lee lived on weekends. 14. It should be remembered that Marina said: I HAD TWO HUSBANDS, HARVEY AND LEE. (“I had two husbands: Lee, the father of my children, an affectionate and kind man; and Harvey Oswald, the assassin of President Kennedy.”) Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now