David Josephs Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Sorry David, I was not trying to misrepresent you. I know you still cling to Harvey having been there in '53, but I thought you were conceding that the Beauregard record could no longer be used to support such a notion. It would help if you would state what you believe a bit more clearly. [...] [emphasis added by T. Graves] I agree, Greg. Perhaps David should start proof reading his posts before (and after) he posts them. I find some of them hard to follow. --Tommy I agree as well guys... I very rarely have uninterrupted JFK time... So I tend to compose, do a quick double check and go... I will be more aware of it and my need for clarity... I greatly appreciate the patience and conversation... I learned a few things for sure, yet I remain in contact with Armstrong and will hopefully get my own chance to visit with Palmer in the coming months... For the record - nothing about this os personal... Greg... it's gotten to be like siblings with us, those who like you enough to be brutally honest, yet caring enough to keep at it... so thanks... More to come.... DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lifton Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Can you just maybe give a simple "yes" or "no". Do you still believe that this exhibit is proof that "Harvey" attended Beauregard in 1953? Greg.... Looking again at CE1413 I am rethinking my position... I do not believe that THIS RECORD is proof of HARVEY... any longer. His grade cards Show the two 70's .... I believe this is solely LEE's records of BJHS and we must rely on other proof of HARVEY being in NOLA that FALL. Obviously there is nothing but memories of an Oswald there during that time.... FBi is more thorough than I give credit for.... DJ Just to clarify. . . : I take it that you now agree (i.e., understand) that Lee Oswald arrived in New Orleans (from New York City) with his mother --having left New York at the tail end of December, 1953--and then registered for school at Beauregard Junior High School on January 13, 1954, as the New Orleans school records indicate? I just want to understand what you now believe to be the case. Also, if you have changed your mind on this point, could you please explain just what it was that finally brought about this change? Thank you. DSL 9/24/12; 11:10 AM PDT Los Angeles, CA P.S. I still intend to answer your previous posting (to me). Again, thank you. DSL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lifton Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Photo of Louis Weinstock - the man Armstrong claims is the father of "Harvey" http://reopenkennedy...-phone-call#931 I was unaware that Armstrong claimed that Weinstock was the father of "Harvey". This photo makes the entire hypothesis all the more untenable. DSL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I do not think the faces look alike at all. In fact it was the photo discrepancies that got Jack white started on this, and in turn Armstrong on his ten year long investigation of the evidence of two different people. The book can be obtained via Andy at the Last Hurrah. 570-321-1155. I bought mine from him for $70.00. READ the damn book. Arguing the WC "evidence" is not even worth reading. (imho). Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 24, 2012 Author Share Posted September 24, 2012 I do not think the faces look alike at all. In fact it was the photo discrepancies that got Jack white started on this, and in turn Armstrong on his ten year long investigation of the evidence of two different people. The book can be obtained via Andy at the Last Hurrah. 570-321-1155. I bought mine from him for $70.00. READ the damn book. Arguing the WC "evidence" is not even worth reading. (imho). Dawn Dawn, Armstrong used the WC evidence in support of his work e.g Palmer McBride statement and school records. I'm not debating things in the book that I don't know about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 24, 2012 Author Share Posted September 24, 2012 Photo of Louis Weinstock - the man Armstrong claims is the father of "Harvey" http://reopenkennedy...-phone-call#931 I was unaware that Armstrong claimed that Weinstock was the father of "Harvey". This photo makes the entire hypothesis all the more untenable. DSL Armstrong relied upon the information given in the "Jack Tippit" phone call where a woman with a foreign accent claimed LHO's father and uncle were communists named "Weinstock" and "Kardos". This was undoubtedly a reference to Louis Weinstock and Emil Gardos. It is my belief her accent (believed to be German or Austrian) caused her to pronounce "G" like "K" - thus "Gardos" came out as "Kardos". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) Here is the document... and I agree... buy and read the book as a WHOLE... put the puzzle together before you decide the picture is not correct... DJ Edited March 24, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 24, 2012 Author Share Posted September 24, 2012 (edited) David, it's been said to me -- and I agree -- that with all the evidence collected by Armstrong, he could have written the defining book on the case. Unfortunately he seems to have very early on tied himself to a theory that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I've said to you, I've got a lot more than what I've posted here. When I finally release it all, I expect it to be scrutinized and tested against other evidence and I want to ensure it can withstand that before I put it out. I'm also aware of new research being done by others which is nothing short of brilliant and ground-breaking. Neither mine, nor the new research of these others leads to any "Harvey". I know it's a big book... but your dual Oswald's in NY and NO is now down to the memory of witnesses. And your Fort Worth - Atsugi dual Oswald's is likewise on its death-bed. The Weinstock - Gardos father/uncle allegation is no longer tenable. Those were the foundation stones on which this house of cards was built. His raw material is infinitely more valuable than the book will ever be, and his making it freely available is a decision he deserves much kudos for, whatever other misgivings I may have about his book and methodology in writing it. Edited September 24, 2012 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I do not think the faces look alike at all. In fact it was the photo discrepancies that got Jack white started on this, and in turn Armstrong on his ten year long investigation of the evidence of two different people. The book can be obtained via Andy at the Last Hurrah. 570-321-1155. I bought mine from him for $70.00. READ the damn book. Arguing the WC "evidence" is not even worth reading. (imho). Dawn Dawn, with respect, the fact that it needed a photo specialist to spot the discrepancies strongly suggests that they are, at the very least, similar. I would go much further than similar. Any two faces capable of being spliced together to form a composite image that could be safely used by either surely has to be more than just similar. I understand why both you and David are relegating the issue of resemblance. You would have to explain the huge coincidence of a project solely concerned with creating false documentation and manipulating records so as to switch Harvey for Lee prior to a defection, (or for any other such espionage activity), and by total chance they ended up looking almost identical! I guess we will have to disagree: you see two distinctly different people who don't look alike at all. I see an adolescent in all its awkward unsure stages... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) On 9/24/2012 at 3:03 PM, Greg Parker said: David, it's been said to me -- and I agree -- that with all the evidence collected by Armstrong, he could have written the defining book on the case. Unfortunately he seems to have very early on tied himself to a theory that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I've said to you, I've got a lot more than what I've posted here. When I finally release it all, I expect it to be scrutinized and tested against other evidence and I want to ensure it can withstand that before I put it out. I'm also aware of new research being done by others which is nothing short of brilliant and ground-breaking. Neither mine, nor the new research of these others leads to any "Harvey". I know it's a big book... but your dual Oswald's in NY and NO is now down to the memory of witnesses. And your Fort Worth - Atsugi dual Oswald's is likewise on its death-bed. The Weinstock - Gardos father/uncle allegation is no longer tenable. Those were the foundation stones on which this house of cards was built. His raw material is infinitely more valuable than the book will ever be, and his making it freely available is a decision he deserves much kudos for, whatever other misgivings I may have about his book and methodology in writing it. I'm nowhere near done either Greg.... but in all fairness, I will need to organize my thoughts into a post... I'm sorry but I do not remember you making any progress on the DoD, Unit Diaries and medical records from Sept/Oct 1958. Between those that remember Oswald from Taiwan, the DoD saying he never left, the Unit Diaries showing his leaving AND returning, his disappearance upon returning to Japan, & the supposed undocumented medical stay... I think we have more to discuss He is listed as in the Hospital from Oct 7 thru the 13th... they just didn't bother to keep any records of it? http://www.history-m...ian_Ex_1.pdfyet Yet recorded every other medical thing that occurs? (I believe he was sent 450 south for some purpose... I read in both Crossfire and in an Epstein book that he spent some time 450 miles south of Atsugi at (Inktani)sp? More soon DJ Edited March 24, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) Sources Armstrong; http://www.acorn.net...04-sources.html http://educationforu...?showtopic=7643 the many faces of harvey and lee....jack white thread..sorry i have not been able to come across Jack's thread that i am looking for..for now..b http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=696 fwiw..b Edited September 25, 2012 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted September 25, 2012 Author Share Posted September 25, 2012 Oswald FAQ pt 2A by Daeron where he makes the case that Oswald had BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder) http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace../07/Daeron/.2-2faq.txt Whilst I believe he got it wrong -- at least he is well inside the ball-park. Can someone refresh my memory on who "Daeron" is/was? For some reason I keep thinking "John Kelin" - but really don't know why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Greg Here is one thread to try, i am not having any luck this evening finding much...fwiw..take care...b https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/S2KDblgnyH0/NbT-ATOV6BkJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) Bernie wrote (in black no bold): No David I'm not just asking, what "the odds are of two boys from the late 30's growing up to look alike"?...I'm asking that about two boys who are also the subject of a long term intelligence plan that has had their identities manipulated to create one entity. WE say they looked alike from the images, but they don't... they look similiar But apparently similar enough to share a face on an ID card! There are differences in some of those photos above, no question. Especially the 1959 'Lee' who looks nothing like ANY of the others (but that one was taken by Robert who apparently knew 'both' so we shouldn't take that photo seriously anyway!). But all those others are either the same person or someone spookily like him, surely you must see that. Personally, I believe you are giving that phenomenon too much credibility… The “plan” would not involve these two being in the same place After a certain point in life I believe combining faces is not as hard as you think… and this was done in about 10 minutes… given some time and some skills… creating one composite image is really not hard…. My further skepticism is fuelled by the lack of 'legs' this theory has generated beyond what can be read from H/L. Where is the avalanche of further information corroborating the theory, above and beyond Armstrong's research? How many new people have come forward, say from BJHS or from his marines days further underlining and solidifying the H/L scenario? Funny thing, you can look at this two ways… the lack of “legs” may mean we are closer to a truth than not…. I have found, over the years, that the old saying (Never believe anything until it is officially denied) to be a sad truism… When listening to the analysis of the past, or the memories of those most deeply inside, I try the exercise of taking everything said and reverse every meaning… now what is being said? The other “Way” to look at this is the severe lack of interest and fear related to anything JFK and Oswald is innocent or something MORE than he appears to be. How many people do you think even have heard of H&L let alone read the book? Much of these interview were done just before the ARRB and just after the revised FOIA changes… Do you supposed Kleins will all of a sudden state they did not ship that weapon to HIDELL? There is little or no incentive to do so – THEY won, remember? The records of the US Marines seems to be a fairly reliable source of info on their soldiers… The DoD will try to tell us he never left Japan for Taiwan… yet between witnesses and records, the DoD is not being truthful… AS I just posted, the RECORDS state he was in the hospital from Oct 7 thru Oct 13… yet his medical records show no such thing… I cannot tell you the "plan" for how and why OSwald was created... CIA?? KBG?? other? I don't know Bernie... What I do know is the "plan" makes sense in the context of the times... the more I study the TIMES the more I appreciate the level of depravity in the planning and implementation of COUNTER intelligence and the attempts to uncover it. David, I have read your work on here for many years now...quite a fan I am. You never descend to the gutter and you passionately argue your case nearly always with well thought out, well researched reasoning. I have not made even a fraction of the contribution you have made to the ideas on this forum... but, the above statment I find quite amazing for a researcher of your standing. That something is possible is no proof that it has been done. That it is consistent with the type of subterfuge of the time also isn't proof that it was therefore done. How do you not know what the plan was for the how and the why...but know that it "makes sense"? No Bernie, possibility does not mean PROOF. Yet possibility coupled with opportunity, desire, capability and necessity… What “makes sense” is the use of any and all resources, plans and “possibilities” to counter-act what the KGB was doing. The specifics of the “plan” is unknown… Whether the “general” idea is infiltration, or some other subterfuge, creating a convoluted and difficult to trace background comes in handy… At the same token, why couldn’t HARVEY have been brought to America by a KGB plan with the desire to infiltrate the USA’s government, or gather whatever intelligence was possible after spending the necessary years generating and creating his cover…. AGAIN – I DON’T KNOW What I do know is there was a very real possibility along with the capability by either CIA or KGB to pull it off…. With this base, we then look at the WCR and how it and the witnesses it used, created the history that we know as Lee Harvey Oswald’s…. When I first came across the whole Harve/Lee a few years ago I thought it was "exciting". Exotic almost. I wanted to believe it. I wanted to believe it, if not to see illustrated the lengths and depths some intelligence agencies went in order to create an advantage during the Cold War. But the more I read the more I realise it's a diversion...like all the others. It's a red herring. It's an avenue that leads over a cliff. Like the extreme Zapruder claims. It's the same pattern as well. Evidence of some tampering is tarnished because of the extreme claims of total tampering. I believe it is the same with the impersonation of Oswald, the truth is being hidden by this extreme version of such impersonation. Disagree again Bernie… sorry. The SOP for CIA was to infuse some truth within the pile of lies… This formula is repeated ad nausea as you sift thru the “data” provided by these boys. Sad to say, but I feel that most if not every piece of evidence from the WCR, CIA, FBI and SS is suspect and should NOT be trusted until authenticated and corroborated. We have no real idea what happened to the Zfilm 1) 0184, copy #1 is ?? 2) between 11pm Friday and 8am Sat, there is no accounting for the film 3) Max Philips’ note to Rowley indicates there is a 4th copy of the film THAT DAY 4) the entire Life/NPIC fiasco… 5) finally – all the obvious contradiction between the non-governmental evidence and the government controlled stuff…. Talking of the depravity in the planning and implementation of COUNTER intelligence would that depravity extend to compiling a massive tome of facts, dates documents and records which teases out any anomolies that could then be glued to a Hollywood scripted premise? That would be a much cheaper way of covering tracks surely? Just a thought. Cheaper? You think the CIA cared about CHEAPER? As I mention above… each and every “fact” offered could be manufactured… but this last paragraph of yours shows me you have some research to do about the working of the CIA. Read the plans/reports versus the reality for the Bay of Pigs…. The story the CIA told the JCS and POTUS was all BS, almost… there would not be a popular uprising, there would not be a revolt, and Fidel knew about the plans before they even happened… The CIA (or counter CIA) tells the anti-Batista troops THEY are going in first to die while the pro-Batista refugees would follow behind, cleaning up the mess and running things from there… Created all sorts of problems with the forces… even sounded like a movie script (The Good Shepard). When it finally came down to it, Dulles/Bissell believe JFK would send in the troops... he didn't and the rest is history. Years ago I was exposed to the two Watergate laws of American Politics… The first and most important: “No matter how paranoid you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you can imagine”. The axiom has proven itself time and time again… There will always be other options, other possibilities and other directions things could have gone… but they went the way they did… And to be honest, unless you are in the life and have the background to comment intelligently on these types of matters, it’s all a guess, based on evidence that may or may not even be authentic. Based on what I’ve seen and read, H&L is more probably than not… one thing’s for sure LHO was neither Alone or a Nut. Peace DJ Best regards, Bernie Edited May 23, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 That you would choose to believe the FBI over citizen witnesses and direct authenticated evidence is your problem, not mine. It boggles my mind that you are presenting yourself like this; The man who helped prove the FBI was dead wrong about Oswald on the bus which in turn changes most everything about the post-assassination timeline and suggests that Roger Craig was accurate in his recollection; that Worrell and Carr were NOT lying about the men running from the back of the TSBD, that Rowland is not lying about who he sees where, that Boone and Weitzman actually do find a Mauser and Baker/Truly L-I-E their butts off about the 2nd floor lunchroom David, Quick one. Greg did help prove the FBI (and others) were wrong about Oswald being on the bus. So for me, you have a slight problem. Why? Well Armstrong's theory promotes the bus and taxi rides as factual and are necessary for his overall narrative. The two Oswalds, i.e. the Oswald leaving the TSBD in the car and the "other" Oswald on the bus and in the cab, were Harvey and Lee according to the book. In fact, Armstrong took great exception when Joseph Backes began trying to unlock the bus and taxi fabrications in the late 1990's. He really wasn't very happy with Joe and completely disregarded the evidence provided. Armstrong discounted elements of Roy Milton Jones' FBI statement (that he had a copy of and did not use in his book in the way it should have been used) when he was debating Backes because, according to Armstrong, Jones was a "seventh grade student." Not that it matters in relation to his eyesight but Jones was actually an 11th grade student and Armstrong cherry picked the FBI statement that Jones gave to help bolster his H&L narrative when it suited. He even changed the color of the jacket Jones said he saw on a male passenger to help his case. Jones says it was "light blue" but on page 830 of Harvey & Lee, Armstrong says Jones saw a "grey jacket." Small stuff, but very important. With the documents he collected any impartial person could have blown the bus and taxi rides out of the water. Armstrong either chose not to, or was far too wedded to his theory to see it. I personally lost faith in Armstrong's narrative a long time ago. The more one prods at the Harvey & Lee theory, the more it begins to disintegrate. Lee, it was while absorbing that thread on the bus journey, where for me, you totally demolished the official narrative and along with it any faith I may have had in Harvey & Lee. Greg has been meticulously, and successfully, teasing out lots of pieces rammed into Armstrong's 'jigsaw', but the exposed bus journey fiction just about topples it. However, I keep coming back to this. Witnesses who saw different Oswalds on different exit routes were mistaken on the actual identity because, apparently, both 'Oswalds' looked very very similar. I don't have a problem with there being someone very similar at times impersonating Oswald. My problem is that this project was supposedly started in 1952 to create a false record and therefore a false identity...it was a paper riddle to fool whoever it needed to fool, presumably Russia; so how unbelievably fortunate was it that co-incidentally they both ended up looking almost identical as well? 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