The Two Oswald Phenomena Explained

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

It is exceedingly difficult to take you seriously. You ask me how I can know that the "Oswaldo" who visited Sylvia Odio with two others was trying to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination? I don't know- maybe the references to the "crazy marine," and the stuff about Cubans not having any guts, and how they should have killed Kennedy? Maybe the name of the "crazy marine?"

You seriously ask why a witness offering unwanted information in this case would have been beaten up? You think it's "disgraceful" to say that a man who reported encountering a fake Oswald died suspiciously when he was found dead in a car parked in a cemetery, with a trunk full of JFK assassination-related newspapers?

Like every other "neo-con" I have encountered on these forums, you are far more concerned with the "conspiracy theorists" whom you think are obstructing sane, reasonable researchers like yourself from exposing the truth, than you are with the corrupt officials and "journalists" who never investigated the assassination, and continue to lie about it.

Are you accusing Greg of being a "neo-con"?

--Tommy

Sure looks like it, doesn't it, Tommy?

He certainly seems to think throwing mud might stick and distract from the fact that he has no real answers for my Bogard postings here.

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

It is exceedingly difficult to take you seriously. You ask me how I can know that the "Oswaldo" who visited Sylvia Odio with two others was trying to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination? I don't know- maybe the references to the "crazy marine," and the stuff about Cubans not having any guts, and how they should have killed Kennedy? Maybe the name of the "crazy marine?"

You seriously ask why a witness offering unwanted information in this case would have been beaten up? You think it's "disgraceful" to say that a man who reported encountering a fake Oswald died suspiciously when he was found dead in a car parked in a cemetery, with a trunk full of JFK assassination-related newspapers?

Like every other "neo-con" I have encountered on these forums, you are far more concerned with the "conspiracy theorists" whom you think are obstructing sane, reasonable researchers like yourself from exposing the truth, than you are with the corrupt officials and "journalists" who never investigated the assassination, and continue to lie about it.

Okay. Got it. He wasn't beaten up by the conspirators in your head - he was beaten up by a government goon even though said government had already neutralized him in it's report.

and here I was thinking the usual government method was to throw people like Bogard into asylums... especially when - as with Bogard, they had some actual history of mental illness, or history that could be construed as showing signs of mental illness.

No matter, no matter. Who am I to call into question government methods of dealing with people they have already successfully "killed off" - metaphorically speaking of course.

[Thomas Graves]

Greg,

It is exceedingly difficult to take you seriously. You ask me how I can know that the "Oswaldo" who visited Sylvia Odio with two others was trying to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination? I don't know- maybe the references to the "crazy marine," and the stuff about Cubans not having any guts, and how they should have killed Kennedy? Maybe the name of the "crazy marine?"

You seriously ask why a witness offering unwanted information in this case would have been beaten up? You think it's "disgraceful" to say that a man who reported encountering a fake Oswald died suspiciously when he was found dead in a car parked in a cemetery, with a trunk full of JFK assassination-related newspapers?

Like every other "neo-con" I have encountered on these forums, you are far more concerned with the "conspiracy theorists" whom you think are obstructing sane, reasonable researchers like yourself from exposing the truth, than you are with the corrupt officials and "journalists" who never investigated the assassination, and continue to lie about it.

Are you accusing Greg of being a "neo-con"?

--Tommy

Sure looks like it, doesn't it, Tommy?

He certainly seems to think throwing mud might stick and distract from the fact that he has no real answers for my Bogard postings here.

Please be gentle with him, Greg.

--Tommy

[Paul Brancato]

I'm with Don on this one, as far as I can make out the content from the extraneous.

[Paul Brancato]

Mockery is unpleasant. I like the exchange of serious thoughts. A of people posting here know a lot more than I do, and I have lost it a bit on occassion with one poster or another. But some of you, and I am sure you know who you are, make a habit of putting down the ideas of others.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Paul Brancato

[Greg Parker]

Mockery is unpleasant. I like the exchange of serious thoughts. A of people posting here know a lot more than I do, and I have lost it a bit on occassion with one poster or another. But some of you, and I am sure you know who you are, make a habit of putting down the ideas of others.

I too like the idea of the exchange of serious thoughts -- which is one reason I left. Hard to talk seriously with clowns who make a mockery of this case.

You side with Don on this? Can I ask why?

Is it really easier to believe someone used Oswald's name, was privy to what he (Oswald) said to Ofstein months earlier and repeated it here to incriminate him, than it is to believe it really was Oswald because he erroneously thought he needed a car for a learner driver test?

Really?????

Edited April 22, 2015 by Greg Parker

[Don Jeffries]

Greg,

I doubt that the irony was lost on Paul when your support for having serious exchanges without unnecessary put-downs was rationalized by calling those you disagree with "clowns."

Believing that all those disparate encounters with a seeming Oswald impersonator indicated an effort to frame Oswald prior to the assassination isn't "disgraceful." It's based on a logical reading of testimony by credible witnesses.

The incidents reported by Odio, Bogard and others only strengthen the case for conspiracy.

[Thomas Graves]

Greg,

I doubt that the irony was lost on Paul when your support for having serious exchanges without unnecessary put-downs was rationalized by calling those you disagree with "clowns."

Believing that all those disparate encounters with a seeming Oswald impersonator indicated an effort to frame Oswald prior to the assassination isn't "disgraceful." It's based on a logical reading of testimony by credible witnesses.

The incidents reported by Odio, Bogard and others only strengthen the case for conspiracy.

Isn't there a strong enough case for conspiracy already?

Why does it need to be strengthened?

--Tommy

[Don Jeffries]

Why does it unnecessarily need to be diminished?

[Thomas Graves]

Why does it unnecessarily need to be diminished?

Let's not quibble shall we.

I'm much too sensitive for all this roughhousing.

--Tommy

Edited April 22, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

I doubt that the irony was lost on Paul when your support for having serious exchanges without unnecessary put-downs was rationalized by calling those you disagree with "clowns."

Believing that all those disparate encounters with a seeming Oswald impersonator indicated an effort to frame Oswald prior to the assassination isn't "disgraceful." It's based on a logical reading of testimony by credible witnesses.

The incidents reported by Odio, Bogard and others only strengthen the case for conspiracy.

As usual, you got it wrong. Disagreements happen all the time. Mostly with sane people whose ideas may have merit, even if I disagree. Clowns otoh, put forward clownish solutions about doppelgangers, snipers in plastic trees and all sorts of other groovy grist for the National Inquirer. See the difference?

Now please try and stay focused and address how the conspirators knew Oswald had previously sarcastically said he would go back to Russia to get what he wanted.

Please try and address why Oswald, thinking however wrongly, that he needed a car for a license test wouldn't try his luck and try and buy one?

Please try and address why the government would arrange to bash a witness they have already nullified in their report?

Please try and address why you believe someone suffering depression because of his situation while taking a drug known to exacerbate depression, wouldn't kill themselves?

In short, stop trying to dance around the issues and trying to introduce other episodes and focus on addressing the particular evidence I have laid out relating to Bogard.

Will you try?

I think people will know why you won't if you choose not to.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Greg Parker

[Steven Gaal]

Ruth Paine ?? really ?? I'll take Jack Lawrence. Ruth IMHO has as much credibility as Marina .......zero.

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

Friday, March 10, 2006

OSWALD IN MONTREAL:

WAS OSWALD SENT TO CANADA TO INFILTRATE
THE COMMITTEE FOR NONVIOLENT ACTION (CNVA) ?

Even if most researchers of the JFK assassination may dismiss entirely the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald made a trip to Montreal in the Summer of 1963, some researchers invested lot of efforts to find out the truth about this rumor.

For one, researcher Gary Shaw who initiated many FOIA requests on the JFK assasination, went at length to obtain more files about the reported sighting of Oswald in Montreal. Shaw even went as far as filing court procedures against the FBI to obtain an album of photographs of the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo walk for peace, listed in Warren Commission exhibits listing. The photographs were annexed to a heavily redacted FBI memorandum dealing with allegations that Lee Harvey Oswald was in Montreal during the Summer of 1963.

Not small hearsay rumours, the allegations were in fact an official report from a US Customs senior representative to the effect that a Canadian Custom and Excise investigator (Jean-Paul Tremblay) saw Lee Harvey Oswald distributing Fair Play for Cuba Committee leaflets in Montreal. The report even stated that the investigator was able to identified two individuals that were distributing leaflets with Oswald from photographs taken during the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo Walk for peace.

After many court orders, appeals and reversals, in 1984 the FBI succeed to keep the photo album away from Gary Shaw and the public eye.

But 8 years later, in 1992, the JFK Records Act forced the FBI to open its files, and the album, with lot of other documents on Oswald’ Montreal sighting, were made available at the National Archives. I was able to consult and photocopy them during a short visit in 1996. To my knowledge, nobody ever published them.

In the present series of posts, I will put online the ten photographs that were in this album and new un-redacted memos that even specify the name of one man that was distributing FPCC leaflets with Oswald.
Photograph #1 and #2 of this album are reproduced below.

They are the most interesting of them all because, according to Jean-Paul Tremblay, characters #1 and #2 (the two at the left) were with Oswald in Montreal. In a memo that I will also reproduce in the next post, character #1 is identified as Fred Moore, an important figure of the USA non-violent movement of the sixties. Was Oswald sent in Montreal to infiltrate this movement? That’s what we will discuss in the next posts.

OSWALD IN MONTREAL: THE FBI REPORT THAT WAS HIDDEN FROM THE WARREN COMMISSION

Here is the full FBI report that contained all the details of the Jean-Paul Tremblay sighting of Lee Harvey Oswald in Montreal. This report have been hidden from the Warren Com, probably because its revealed that the Tremblay's account was given enough credential to justify further investigation from both the RCMP and the FBI.




For the present post, I'm just reproducing the pictures of this report. I will give more information on its content in the next posts. (Unfortunately, I'm a little too busy with some personal matters to spend all the time I should on this Blog.) But a word of caution: I made contact with people that were in the Quebec-Washington Guantanamo Walk for peace, and they disagree with the FBI on the identification of character #1 as being Fred Moore.

Sunday, April 23, 2006

OSWALD IN MONTREAL: A CONCLUSION

Is there any reality behind Jean-Paul Tremblay’s report? Why was the FBI report on Oswald’s apparition in Montreal suppressed for so many years?

At first view, when we know how much effort the Warren Commission and the FBI have investED to study Oswald every moves, we would think that the answer to Tremblay’s report would be: “We know as a fact that Oswald wasn’t in Montreal at this date, we had reports placing him in New Orleans.” But, even if the FBI tried to discredit Tremblay’s report with affirmation that Oswald, in June 1963, was working in N.O., at William Reily Coffee Co., the problem that still persist is that: 1) the FBI made, voluntarily or not, a poor job at determining the time of the Oswald in Montreal sighting; and 2) the FBI information about Oswald’s activity at the most probable time for his Montreal presence is quite weak. If we pay attention to those 2 points, we may find that there is indeed a possibility that Oswald’s known whereabouts doesn’t rule out the possibility that he might have traveled to Montreal in spring 1963.

Let see a few excerpts from the FBI report:
“(…) Jean Paul Tremblay, Investigator, Customs and Excise, Montreal said on November 27, 1963, that he, Tremblay, had received one of the above—mentioned pamphlets from a man St. Jacques Street in Montreal. He said he believed this incident occurred in August, 1963, and he, Tremblay, is positive this individual was LEE OSWALD. According to Mr. Chasse, Tremblay said OSWALD at the time was accompanied by a short, homely, heavy woman who took unusually long steps when walking and by two men about the same age and weight as OWALD.”

“Photographs of persons participating in the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo Walk for Peace in Montreal on June 7 and 8, 1963, were shown to Mr. Tremblay and he positively identified two of them as having been engaged in the distribution of leaflets on the day in question. One of the persons he positively identified was the woman referred to by Chasse in his letter to the Secret Service. The other person identified by Tremblay was believed by the agency making the above inquiry to be a Mr. Fred Moore of San Antonio, Texas.”

In the second excerpt there is a clever deception (or a embarrassing mistake) that you can detect only if you look at the photographs and if you have more background information on the QWG walk. The photos were not taken in Montreal, but in some countryside at an unspecified location. They may show persons that have participated at some events in Montreal, but the pictures were not taken during those events. The reality is that the pictures in the countryside were taken on June 7 and 8 but the QWG leaved town days earlier, around May 26. So inferring that Oswald was seen at the date the picture where shot is grossly deceptive.

So, even if Tremblay guessed he saw Oswald in August 1963, and even if the FBI placed this sighting in June, according to the chronology of the Québec-Washington-Guantanamo Peace Walk the only time when Tremblay could have seen Oswald leafleting with Fred Moore or Erika Enzer (the lady that Tremblay identified on picture) would be prior to the walk, thus before May 26, 1963.

The interesting thing is that this is one of the rare periods where Oswald whereabouts are poorly accounted for. In May, Oswald had left Dallas for New Orleans and had supposedly start to work for William B. Reily Coffee Co on May 15. But there is not a lot of witnesses and reports to corroborate Oswald was in New Orleans all of the time in May. John Newman, in Oswald and the CIA made a good case of showing that it is unclear exactly when the FBI knew of Oswald presence in N.O. at that time and that at least in one instance they were wrong on the date of his employment with Reily.

Newman wrote on page 288 of his book:
“Then something strange happened : the FBI lost track of Oswald for two months, from April 24, through June 26. These dates cover Oswald’s move to New Orleans and his first month of FPCC activity there.”
Newman also noted that there is at least one instance in which a FBI report about Oswald employment with Reily was giving a false date. At page 348, Newman wrote:
”On September 10, 1963, Special Agent Hosty sent a report to the Bureau and to New Orleans. (…) Hosty then said Oswald had been working at the William Reily Coffe Company on August 5. He apparently did not know that Oswald had been fired from his job at Reily Coffee on July 19.”

In addition of this foggy period in Oswald's chronology, another curious fact tends to give credibility to the possibility that Oswald took a trip to Montreal at this time. On May 29, just after his hypothetical return from Montreal, Oswald used the name “Osborne” when ordering FPCC handbill in New Orleans. The curious things are that: 1) Osborne was the name of Oswald’s companion on his us trip to Mexico, and 2) that Osborne was from Montreal. That opens many questions: Did Oswald knew Osborne during his spring trip to Montreal? Did Osborne travel to Montreal with Oswald just as he did when Oswald got to Mexico to visit the Cuban embassy? Was Osborne, in Montreal, an handler of Oswald in his FPCC penetration activities?

In conclusion, given Jean-Paul Tremblay’s credibility as a witness (he was a professional investigator); given Aurelien Chassé and Lawrence Fleshman’s endorsement of Tremblay’s account (they were U.S. treasury high officials); given the fact that both RCMP and FBI have not dismissed Tremblay’s account and had made investigative works on its basis; given the hole in Oswald’s whereabouts and his use of the Osborne name that seems to corroborate his contact with this Montrealer; I am on the opinion that Oswald was indeed the man seen by Tremblay in Montreal. Obviously, such a trip wasn’t initiate on his own and had intelligence purposes.

posted by youshouldknow @ 1:48 AM

Edited April 22, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Thomas Graves]

Friday, March 10, 2006

OSWALD IN MONTREAL:

WAS OSWALD SENT TO CANADA TO INFILTRATE

THE COMMITTEE FOR NONVIOLENT ACTION (CNVA) ?

Even if most researchers of the JFK assassination may dismiss entirely the possibility that Lee Harvey Oswald made a trip to Montreal in the Summer of 1963, some researchers invested lot of efforts to find out the truth about this rumor.

For one, researcher Gary Shaw who initiated many FOIA requests on the JFK assasination, went at length to obtain more files about the reported sighting of Oswald in Montreal. Shaw even went as far as filing court procedures against the FBI to obtain an album of photographs of the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo walk for peace, listed in Warren Commission exhibits listing. The photographs were annexed to a heavily redacted FBI memorandum dealing with allegations that Lee Harvey Oswald was in Montreal during the Summer of 1963.

Not small hearsay rumours, the allegations were in fact an official report from a US Customs senior representative to the effect that a Canadian Custom and Excise investigator (Jean-Paul Tremblay) saw Lee Harvey Oswald distributing Fair Play for Cuba Committee leaflets in Montreal. The report even stated that the investigator was able to identified two individuals that were distributing leaflets with Oswald from photographs taken during the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo Walk for peace.

After many court orders, appeals and reversals, in 1984 the FBI succeed to keep the photo album away from Gary Shaw and the public eye.

But 8 years later, in 1992, the JFK Records Act forced the FBI to open its files, and the album, with lot of other documents on Oswald’ Montreal sighting, were made available at the National Archives. I was able to consult and photocopy them during a short visit in 1996. To my knowledge, nobody ever published them.

In the present series of posts, I will put online the ten photographs that were in this album and new un-redacted memos that even specify the name of one man that was distributing FPCC leaflets with Oswald.

Photograph #1 and #2 of this album are reproduced below.

They are the most interesting of them all because, according to Jean-Paul Tremblay, characters #1 and #2 (the two at the left) were with Oswald in Montreal. In a memo that I will also reproduce in the next post, character #1 is identified as Fred Moore, an important figure of the USA non-violent movement of the sixties. Was Oswald sent in Montreal to infiltrate this movement? That’s what we will discuss in the next posts.

OSWALD IN MONTREAL: THE FBI REPORT THAT WAS HIDDEN FROM THE WARREN COMMISSION

Here is the full FBI report that contained all the details of the Jean-Paul Tremblay sighting of Lee Harvey Oswald in Montreal. This report have been hidden from the Warren Com, probably because its revealed that the Tremblay's account was given enough credential to justify further investigation from both the RCMP and the FBI.

For the present post, I'm just reproducing the pictures of this report. I will give more information on its content in the next posts. (Unfortunately, I'm a little too busy with some personal matters to spend all the time I should on this Blog.) But a word of caution: I made contact with people that were in the Quebec-Washington Guantanamo Walk for peace, and they disagree with the FBI on the identification of character #1 as being Fred Moore.

Sunday, April 23, 2006

OSWALD IN MONTREAL: A CONCLUSION

Is there any reality behind Jean-Paul Tremblay’s report? Why was the FBI report on Oswald’s apparition in Montreal suppressed for so many years?

At first view, when we know how much effort the Warren Commission and the FBI have investED to study Oswald every moves, we would think that the answer to Tremblay’s report would be: “We know as a fact that Oswald wasn’t in Montreal at this date, we had reports placing him in New Orleans.” But, even if the FBI tried to discredit Tremblay’s report with affirmation that Oswald, in June 1963, was working in N.O., at William Reily Coffee Co., the problem that still persist is that: 1) the FBI made, voluntarily or not, a poor job at determining the time of the Oswald in Montreal sighting; and 2) the FBI information about Oswald’s activity at the most probable time for his Montreal presence is quite weak. If we pay attention to those 2 points, we may find that there is indeed a possibility that Oswald’s known whereabouts doesn’t rule out the possibility that he might have traveled to Montreal in spring 1963.

Let see a few excerpts from the FBI report:

“(…) Jean Paul Tremblay, Investigator, Customs and Excise, Montreal said on November 27, 1963, that he, Tremblay, had received one of the above—mentioned pamphlets from a man St. Jacques Street in Montreal. He said he believed this incident occurred in August, 1963, and he, Tremblay, is positive this individual was LEE OSWALD. According to Mr. Chasse, Tremblay said OSWALD at the time was accompanied by a short, homely, heavy woman who took unusually long steps when walking and by two men about the same age and weight as OWALD.”

“Photographs of persons participating in the Quebec-Washington-Guantanamo Walk for Peace in Montreal on June 7 and 8, 1963, were shown to Mr. Tremblay and he positively identified two of them as having been engaged in the distribution of leaflets on the day in question. One of the persons he positively identified was the woman referred to by Chasse in his letter to the Secret Service. The other person identified by Tremblay was believed by the agency making the above inquiry to be a Mr. Fred Moore of San Antonio, Texas.”

In the second excerpt there is a clever deception (or a embarrassing mistake) that you can detect only if you look at the photographs and if you have more background information on the QWG walk. The photos were not taken in Montreal, but in some countryside at an unspecified location. They may show persons that have participated at some events in Montreal, but the pictures were not taken during those events. The reality is that the pictures in the countryside were taken on June 7 and 8 but the QWG leaved town days earlier, around May 26. So inferring that Oswald was seen at the date the picture where shot is grossly deceptive.

So, even if Tremblay guessed he saw Oswald in August 1963, and even if the FBI placed this sighting in June, according to the chronology of the Québec-Washington-Guantanamo Peace Walk the only time when Tremblay could have seen Oswald leafleting with Fred Moore or Erika Enzer (the lady that Tremblay identified on picture) would be prior to the walk, thus before May 26, 1963.

The interesting thing is that this is one of the rare periods where Oswald whereabouts are poorly accounted for. In May, Oswald had left Dallas for New Orleans and had supposedly start to work for William B. Reily Coffee Co on May 15. But there is not a lot of witnesses and reports to corroborate Oswald was in New Orleans all of the time in May. John Newman, in Oswald and the CIA made a good case of showing that it is unclear exactly when the FBI knew of Oswald presence in N.O. at that time and that at least in one instance they were wrong on the date of his employment with Reily.

Newman wrote on page 288 of his book:

“Then something strange happened : the FBI lost track of Oswald for two months, from April 24, through June 26. These dates cover Oswald’s move to New Orleans and his first month of FPCC activity there.”

Newman also noted that there is at least one instance in which a FBI report about Oswald employment with Reily was giving a false date. At page 348, Newman wrote:

”On September 10, 1963, Special Agent Hosty sent a report to the Bureau and to New Orleans. (…) Hosty then said Oswald had been working at the William Reily Coffe Company on August 5. He apparently did not know that Oswald had been fired from his job at Reily Coffee on July 19.”

In addition of this foggy period in Oswald's chronology, another curious fact tends to give credibility to the possibility that Oswald took a trip to Montreal at this time. On May 29, just after his hypothetical return from Montreal, Oswald used the name “Osborne” when ordering FPCC handbill in New Orleans. The curious things are that: 1) Osborne was the name of Oswald’s companion on his us trip to Mexico, and 2) that Osborne was from Montreal. That opens many questions: Did Oswald knew Osborne during his spring trip to Montreal? Did Osborne travel to Montreal with Oswald just as he did when Oswald got to Mexico to visit the Cuban embassy? Was Osborne, in Montreal, an handler of Oswald in his FPCC penetration activities?

In conclusion, given Jean-Paul Tremblay’s credibility as a witness (he was a professional investigator); given Aurelien Chassé and Lawrence Fleshman’s endorsement of Tremblay’s account (they were U.S. treasury high officials); given the fact that both RCMP and FBI have not dismissed Tremblay’s account and had made investigative works on its basis; given the hole in Oswald’s whereabouts and his use of the Osborne name that seems to corroborate his contact with this Montrealer; I am on the opinion that Oswald was indeed the man seen by Tremblay in Montreal. Obviously, such a trip wasn’t initiate on his own and had intelligence purposes.

posted by youshouldknow @ 1:48 AM

Nice post, Steven.

It's actually readable.

--Tommy

[David Josephs]

Mockery is unpleasant. I like the exchange of serious thoughts. A of people posting here know a lot more than I do, and I have lost it a bit on occassion with one poster or another. But some of you, and I am sure you know who you are, make a habit of putting down the ideas of others.

Paul - you had asked about the problem here, yet your posts seemed to have disappeared...

I don't think it's too much to ask that the evidence supporting one's position actually say what the person posting says it does...

That the poster does not omit enough of the source to make their position appear supported and when shown the conflicts in the source, they deal with it rather than kill the messenger.

All one need do is to look at the posts - who provides sources that support the post... and who offers opinion backed by air - and indignantly at that?

Just because someone is somewhat articulate about a rebuttal does not make it right... until it is supported with something tangible...

When a witness says "about a month before the assassination" and the poster's argument is that she was wrong or misremembered by an entire month because they want the witness to support the theory offered - we have the WCR.

We have the HSCA...

When the poster uses the account of one person and neglects to show that from the same investigation and at the same time there is no corroboration for said single witnesses testimony - and actually shows that it conflicts with more of the evidence that was not even offered...

seems to me the poster is hiding something rather than offering an honest rebuttal with all the related facts since the source is not offered to begin with and if one doesn't know the details one may assume the poster is correct...

But we, but I know better. Is it not a surprise to many that some posters must enter into areas where their knowledge is terribly limited and become indignant when they are shown they only offered a fraction of the story rather than ask a few question and allow those who have done the work to offer it up... to see the source docs... to make connections and consider more than one FBI report when the mountain of reports from this incident are easily proven to be frauds. To not insult our intelligence and offer up Marina and Ruth as prime sources of incriminating info on Oswald...

Paul... I expect better than what Parker offers. and then I expect him not to import his forum's style of attack-posting so we MUST deal with it here.

For those who have not, please follow some of his links and read thru some of the thread... If I'm wrong about the Lord of the Flies I will apologize... but where else do you go to learn about the JFK case and find a select group of members who have created derogatory names for those in the research world they don't like... y'know, like 5 year olds... and then slap each other on the back when referring to them in the negative.

I'm "Fez"... I think... and since Mr. P has decided to rejoin our group here... his behavior has been consistent.

At some point as a group, as moderators, don't we deserve better than that? Are we really not astute enough to know wheat from shaft?

--------------

Did I not end a post recently with the forecast that Parker would behave exactly as he did? Mini-rant... lack of evidence... accuse the messenger...

here's an idea... I will keep posting the way I do with the background and sources so those with their own minds can come to their own conclusions... what others do is up to them and what's tolerated.

[Don Jeffries]

Greg,

You continue to attack the messenger and not address the bulk of the message, in the best tradition of Warren Commission apologists. I never said that Bogard was definitely beaten up- if you recall I stated that the source for this was apparently Penn Jones, and I recognize that his accuracy wasn't perfect. He still had a better track record than any mainstream journalist, and given what we know of other witnesses who were intimated, threatened, etc., it's perfectly believable to me that he was beaten up.

You've also referred more than once to Bogard's alleged mental issues, in an identical manner to the way Ralph Yates was denigrated on this and other forums. And we know that Gerald Posner, like Wesley Liebeler and others defending the official story, claimed that Syliva Odio had suffered from mental problems as well. Maybe everyone who claimed to encounter an Oswald impostor just happened to have mental issues. But that's what Posner and other lone nutters believe. So you're in good company there.

You just cavalierly say that the Warren Commission had already discredited Bogard's story. That's your opinion, not a fact. Most of us, I think, would disagree about that. In the same way, you are perfectly fine in using the dubious testimony of Ruth Paine, when it suits your purposes. You ask us to explain the rationale of conspirators; why would they plant a nearly pristine bullet, instead of one that at least looked like it had hit something? There are lots of obvious bread crumbs out there, which led Vince Salandria and others (like me) to believe that whoever killed JFK wanted the flaws in the official story to be easily uncovered, and the controversy to explode.

We find these bad B-movie like elements to all significant political events, as I document in my book. One of the most overt was the comment by the computer programmer in charge of Dade County, Florida's election forecast software, who told the Collier brothers during their Votescam investigation, "You'll never prove a thing." Just because they're powerful, doesn't mean they're clever. Maybe they just like beating up unfriendly witnesses.

I've been investigating this case since the mid-1970s, longer than most researchers. I am confident that I'm well versed on all aspects of the JFK assassination. I am not a "clown," and by accepting there was an attempt to impersonate Oswald- something recognized very early on by Richard Popkin in his book The Second Oswald, and referenced by all the early critics, I am not being "disgraceful" to the memory of anyone, nor to the research community.

You, on the other hand, have a seemingly obsessive compulsion to destroy the Harvey and Lee thesis, and this has led you to discount all the very credible incidents involving Oswald impersonators, which represent strong indications of conspiracy. And you've thrown the good name of Maynard G. Krebs into this discussion for no clear reason.