Harvey and Lee

[Kathleen Collins]

In Harvey and Lee by John Armstrong, after Kennedy is killed, Lee came down the path of the TSBD and got into a green rambler and was probably driven off to Redbird Airport. But next JD Tippit was killed, possibly by Lee and Lee ends up in the Texas Theater's balcony.

Meantime, Harvey gets home, changes his clothes. A cop car stops in front of the boarding house and beeps its horn twice. Officer Tippit is killed. Harvey retreats to the Texas Theater, doesn't pay for his ticket and someone calls the cops. The police show up and arrest Harvey. A riot ensues outside. He is taken in as the culprit.

Meanwhile, Lee is taken out by 2 cops quietly, using the back door and we never hear from him again.

How can he get into a rambler, yet wind up in a theater? I thought the car was supposed to take him to an airport.

Can anyone make sense out of this?

Kathy C

[Joseph Backes]

Yes. It's simple. "Harvey and Lee" is 100% BS. It accepts every story of Oswald now matter what, or from who and puts one set of actions by Oswald in the Lee column and one in a Harvey column. No story is ever addressed as being A.) a lie or B.) someone who was not Oswald at all. Armstrong's knowledge of the entire case is tissue thin. He accepts things that if he was an educated man he'd reject.

No thought is given to the reality that Oswald did not kill Tippit.

And as for going "home," to 1026 N. Beckley "he" whether you want to call him Lee or Harvey DOES NOT GO THERE TO CHANGE HIS CLOTHES. Actually, if you follow the Mary Bledsoe story Oswald did not change his clothes at all when he went to 1026 N. Beckley. The WC said this. I went into this on my blog. Here's the relevant portion from - http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2012/01/lifton-education-forum-mary-bledsoe.html

But, there’s are several problems with Bledsoe recognizing Oswald by his shirt. He’s wearing a blue jacket according to McWatters and Jones over that shirt. So, how does she see torn off buttons and a hole near the elbow? This sounds like the shirt Oswald was wearing when arrested in the Texas Theatre, and matches the description of what we see in the TV coverage when he’s under arrest and brought up and down those hallways. But, he went home and changed his shirt. So, he’s supposed to be wearing a different shirt than what Bledsoe claims she saw him wearing on the bus. She shouldn’t be shown the shirt he was arrested in, but the one he wore before, that he had on while on the bus

[ Point # 65 ] Oswald going to 1026 North Beckley and changing his clothes gets a rewrite too!

The brown shirt and grey trousers are listed on F. M. Turner exhibit #1, Volume 21, page 679, the last two items on the page.

Now wait a minute, didn't Oswald change his shirt at 1026 N. Beckley? See the problem? If Oswald was wearing a ripped and torn shirt all day, though only Bledsoe saw it, and Oswald goes home and changes his shirt, how come he's still wearing the ripped and torn shirt when arrested? Or are there supposed to be two pairs of brown shirts and two grey trousers? Oops.

Moreover, Oswald told Captain Fritz that during his brief visit to his room he had changed his trousers and his shirt, "because they were dirty," and that he placed them "In the lower drawer of his dresser." (WCR 604-605, 622) The police officers who searched the room did not indicate on the police property list that discarded trousers and shirt were found there. So, where did they go?

“Nevertheless, the Commission asserts on the strength of Mrs. Bledsoe's testimony and the bus transfer found on Oswald that "although Oswald...claimed to have changed his shirt, the evidence indicates that he continued wearing the same shirt he was wearing all morning and which he was still wearing when arrested."

(from Meagher p. 80, quoting WCR 124-125)

There are witnesses that say Oswald did pay for his ticket.

Yes, there are reports of an arrest in the balcony of the Texas theatre and reports of someone being taken out the back. But, there is no reason to believe this is a second Oswald.

Don't try to sort this case out from Armstrong's book. It can't be done.

Joe Backes

[Guest Robert Morrow]

The story of "Harvey and Lee" is one of the great canards of the JFK assassination research.

It is pure junk. There was one Oswald and his name was Lee Harvey Oswald.

Oswald, of course, was being impersonated in Mexico by someone who looked and sounded nothing like him. My guess it was a crude attempt by the CIA to pin the JFK assassination on Oswald in order to blame it on Cuba or Russia.

I do think that Oswald did actually visit Mexico in fall, 1963. But perhaps he was photographed with someone else that the CIA did not want to been seen.

[Michael Hogan]

The story of "Harvey and Lee" is one of the great canards of the JFK assassination research.

It is pure junk. There was one Oswald and his name was Lee Harvey Oswald.

Oswald, of course, was being impersonated in Mexico by someone who looked and sounded nothing like him. My guess it was a crude attempt by the CIA to pin the JFK assassination on Oswald in order to blame it on Cuba or Russia.

I do think that Oswald did actually visit Mexico in fall, 1963. But perhaps he was photographed with someone else that the CIA did not want to been seen.

That's quite a sophisticated analysis of Oswald and Mexico City.

I guess "folks" can disregard what Melanson, Newman and Fonzi wrote about MC as well.

Five minutes talking to Madeleine Brown will tell you more about the what happened in the JFK assassination than the complete works Melanson, Newman and Gaeton Fonzi. Anyone that does not have Lyndon Johnson as one of the primary players in the JFK assassination simply does not know what they are talking. It is one of the key markers I look for when evaluating the credibility of a JFK researcher.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

"Five minutes talking to Madeleine Brown will tell you more about the what happened in the JFK assassination than the complete works Melanson, Newman and Gaeton Fonzi. Anyone that does not have Lyndon Johnson as one of the primary players in the JFK assassination simply does not know what they are talking. It is one of the key markers I look for when evaluating the credibility of a JFK researcher."

Correct.

[Michael Hogan]

The story of "Harvey and Lee" is one of the great canards of the JFK assassination research.

It is pure junk. There was one Oswald and his name was Lee Harvey Oswald.

Oswald, of course, was being impersonated in Mexico by someone who looked and sounded nothing like him. My guess it was a crude attempt by the CIA to pin the JFK assassination on Oswald in order to blame it on Cuba or Russia.

I do think that Oswald did actually visit Mexico in fall, 1963. But perhaps he was photographed with someone else that the CIA did not want to been seen.

That's quite a sophisticated analysis of Oswald and Mexico City.

I guess "folks" can disregard what Melanson, Newman and Fonzi wrote about MC as well.

Five minutes talking to Madeleine Brown will tell you more about the what happened in the JFK assassination than the complete works Melanson, Newman and Gaeton Fonzi. Anyone that does not have Lyndon Johnson as one of the primary players in the JFK assassination simply does not know what they are talking. It is one of the key markers I look for when evaluating the credibility of a JFK researcher.

Correct.

I'm sure that "folks" are surprised that Morrow agrees with himself.

[Kathleen Collins]

Yes. It's simple. "Harvey and Lee" is 100% BS. It accepts every story of Oswald now matter what, or from who and puts one set of actions by Oswald in the Lee column and one in a Harvey column. No story is ever addressed as being A.) a lie or B.) someone who was not Oswald at all. Armstrong's knowledge of the entire case is tissue thin. He accepts things that if he was an educated man he'd reject.

No thought is given to the reality that Oswald did not kill Tippit.

And as for going "home," to 1026 N. Beckley "he" whether you want to call him Lee or Harvey DOES NOT GO THERE TO CHANGE HIS CLOTHES. Actually, if you follow the Mary Bledsoe story Oswald did not change his clothes at all when he went to 1026 N. Beckley. The WC said this. I went into this on my blog. Here's the relevant portion from - http://justiceforken...ry-bledsoe.html

But, there's are several problems with Bledsoe recognizing Oswald by his shirt. He's wearing a blue jacket according to McWatters and Jones over that shirt. So, how does she see torn off buttons and a hole near the elbow? This sounds like the shirt Oswald was wearing when arrested in the Texas Theatre, and matches the description of what we see in the TV coverage when he's under arrest and brought up and down those hallways. But, he went home and changed his shirt. So, he's supposed to be wearing a different shirt than what Bledsoe claims she saw him wearing on the bus. She shouldn't be shown the shirt he was arrested in, but the one he wore before, that he had on while on the bus

[ Point # 65 ] Oswald going to 1026 North Beckley and changing his clothes gets a rewrite too!

The brown shirt and grey trousers are listed on F. M. Turner exhibit #1, Volume 21, page 679, the last two items on the page.

Now wait a minute, didn't Oswald change his shirt at 1026 N. Beckley? See the problem? If Oswald was wearing a ripped and torn shirt all day, though only Bledsoe saw it, and Oswald goes home and changes his shirt, how come he's still wearing the ripped and torn shirt when arrested? Or are there supposed to be two pairs of brown shirts and two grey trousers? Oops.

Moreover, Oswald told Captain Fritz that during his brief visit to his room he had changed his trousers and his shirt, "because they were dirty," and that he placed them "In the lower drawer of his dresser." (WCR 604-605, 622) The police officers who searched the room did not indicate on the police property list that discarded trousers and shirt were found there. So, where did they go?

"Nevertheless, the Commission asserts on the strength of Mrs. Bledsoe's testimony and the bus transfer found on Oswald that "although Oswald...claimed to have changed his shirt, the evidence indicates that he continued wearing the same shirt he was wearing all morning and which he was still wearing when arrested."

(from Meagher p. 80, quoting WCR 124-125)

There are witnesses that say Oswald did pay for his ticket.

Yes, there are reports of an arrest in the balcony of the Texas theatre and reports of someone being taken out the back. But, there is no reason to believe this is a second Oswald.

Don't try to sort this case out from Armstrong's book. It can't be done.

Joe Backes

I respect everyone's opinion. I think Oswald was Russian. Also I remember that Bledsoe noted that Oswald was sitting on the bus in black pants with white paint stains on them.

And who the hell is Donald O. Norton? A figment of someone's imagination? On the Internet I found he owned a fishing gear store, lived about 2 hours from me. He chartered boats up and down the Atlantic Coast of Florida. I was told he was Lee Oswald. He didn't look like Oswald to me. And that his signature was similar to LHO's. Also his shop became a tourist attraction. He upped and left.

Kathy C

[Kathleen Collins]

Oswald, of course, was being impersonated in Mexico by someone who looked and sounded nothing like him. My guess it was a crude attempt by the CIA to pin the JFK assassination on Oswald in order to blame it on Cuba or Russia.

Thank you for telling me the significance of Oswald in Mexico right before the Assassination.

Kathy C

[Joseph Backes]

Yes. It's simple. "Harvey and Lee" is 100% BS. It accepts every story of Oswald now matter what, or from who and puts one set of actions by Oswald in the Lee column and one in a Harvey column. No story is ever addressed as being A.) a lie or B.) someone who was not Oswald at all. Armstrong's knowledge of the entire case is tissue thin. He accepts things that if he was an educated man he'd reject.

No thought is given to the reality that Oswald did not kill Tippit.

And as for going "home," to 1026 N. Beckley "he" whether you want to call him Lee or Harvey DOES NOT GO THERE TO CHANGE HIS CLOTHES. Actually, if you follow the Mary Bledsoe story Oswald did not change his clothes at all when he went to 1026 N. Beckley. The WC said this. I went into this on my blog. Here's the relevant portion from - http://justiceforken...ry-bledsoe.html

But, there's are several problems with Bledsoe recognizing Oswald by his shirt. He's wearing a blue jacket according to McWatters and Jones over that shirt. So, how does she see torn off buttons and a hole near the elbow? This sounds like the shirt Oswald was wearing when arrested in the Texas Theatre, and matches the description of what we see in the TV coverage when he's under arrest and brought up and down those hallways. But, he went home and changed his shirt. So, he's supposed to be wearing a different shirt than what Bledsoe claims she saw him wearing on the bus. She shouldn't be shown the shirt he was arrested in, but the one he wore before, that he had on while on the bus

[ Point # 65 ] Oswald going to 1026 North Beckley and changing his clothes gets a rewrite too!

The brown shirt and grey trousers are listed on F. M. Turner exhibit #1, Volume 21, page 679, the last two items on the page.

Now wait a minute, didn't Oswald change his shirt at 1026 N. Beckley? See the problem? If Oswald was wearing a ripped and torn shirt all day, though only Bledsoe saw it, and Oswald goes home and changes his shirt, how come he's still wearing the ripped and torn shirt when arrested? Or are there supposed to be two pairs of brown shirts and two grey trousers? Oops.

Moreover, Oswald told Captain Fritz that during his brief visit to his room he had changed his trousers and his shirt, "because they were dirty," and that he placed them "In the lower drawer of his dresser." (WCR 604-605, 622) The police officers who searched the room did not indicate on the police property list that discarded trousers and shirt were found there. So, where did they go?

"Nevertheless, the Commission asserts on the strength of Mrs. Bledsoe's testimony and the bus transfer found on Oswald that "although Oswald...claimed to have changed his shirt, the evidence indicates that he continued wearing the same shirt he was wearing all morning and which he was still wearing when arrested."

(from Meagher p. 80, quoting WCR 124-125)

There are witnesses that say Oswald did pay for his ticket.

Yes, there are reports of an arrest in the balcony of the Texas theatre and reports of someone being taken out the back. But, there is no reason to believe this is a second Oswald.

Don't try to sort this case out from Armstrong's book. It can't be done.

Joe Backes

I respect everyone's opinion. I think Oswald was Russian. Also I remember that Bledsoe noted that Oswald was sitting on the bus in black pants with white paint stains on them.

And who the hell is Donald O. Norton? A figment of someone's imagination? On the Internet I found he owned a fishing gear store, lived about 2 hours from me. He chartered boats up and down the Atlantic Coast of Florida. I was told he was Lee Oswald. He didn't look like Oswald to me. And that his signature was similar to LHO's. Also his shop became a tourist attraction. He upped and left.

Kathy C

A Florida researcher, who sends out way too many emails, believes that one of Armstrong's Oswalds lived on under the name of Donald Norton.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Joseph Backes

[Rodney Rivers]

Never heard of this book or theory, but it sounds a lot like the beginning of the movie 'SALT' starring Angelina Jolie. If you've not seen it, it starts with the premise that in the early 60s, LHO went to the USSR and was killed and replaced by a 100 percent lookalike Russian assassin named Alex Hidell. And then Hidell is the one who killed JFK. The U.S. Gov figured it out and thats why it had to remain hush hush.

I enjoyed that movie, good action, good twist at the end. Had no idea it had JFKA stuff in it, and was surprised to see it in the intro of the movie.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Rodney Rivers

[Guest Tom Scully]

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11510&relPageId=836

and -

I found the image above in a dead link displayed as a footnote in a "political decoy" wikipedia article. I was able to recover the image via archive.org

If the image is a compilation, it is a good one, right down to the inclusion of the State Dept. Office of Security file number, 39 61981.

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/boxes/collection/po-arm

JFK - John Armstrong Collection

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/search/collection/po-arm/searchterm/07!06/field/box!notebo/mode/exact!all/conn/and/order/tab

7-6 Social Security Records Box 8

[Michael Hogan]

Yes. It's simple. "Harvey and Lee" is 100% BS. It accepts every story of Oswald now matter what, or from who and puts one set of actions by Oswald in the Lee column and one in a Harvey column. No story is ever addressed as being A.) a lie or B.) someone who was not Oswald at all. Armstrong's knowledge of the entire case is tissue thin. He accepts things that if he was an educated man he'd reject...

....Yes, there are reports of an arrest in the balcony of the Texas theatre and reports of someone being taken out the back. But, there is no reason to believe this is a second Oswald.

Don't try to sort this case out from Armstrong's book. It can't be done.

Probably not.

It seems hard to sort this case out from any perspective.

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/29/2928-001.gif

Deputy Sheriff Bill Courson received a radio report that "The suspect, wearing a white or light colored jacket,

was seen running into the balcony of the Texas Theatre." (Sneed, No More Silence)

He heard this from Tippit's radio, which was still on and proceeded immediately to the Texas Theatre.

Courson told Larry Sneed that he was "reasonably satisfied in my own mind that I met Oswald coming down (from the balcony).

Courson did not stop him because Oswald was not wearing a jacket per the radioed description.

Courson repeated for the second time: "But I'm reasonably sure it was Oswald."

From Buddy Walthers' report:

"...we started towards 10th Street, where the police officer had

been killed in an effort to obtain further information and then received

radio information from Deputy Sheriff Bill Courson, who was also in the

Oak Cliff area, that the suspect was in the balcony of the Texas Theatre

on West Jefferson . We arrived at this location within a few seconds

and were met by mant other officers. Upon proceeding to the balcony

of the theatre, I ordered the manager to turn on the house lights . Some

unknown officer was holding a white man at the steps of the balcony and

I proceeded on into the balcony.I looked over the balcony and saw a

commotion in the center section, near the back, in the downstairs of the

theatre, and I hollered to other officers, "He's downstairs"

[Joseph Backes]

Actually we've had that document for a very long time. I would imagine the mary ferrell foundation should have it.

One source is -http://whokilledjfk.net/lho.ht8.gif

[Joseph Backes]

Never heard of this book or theory, but it sounds a lot like the beginning of the movie 'SALT' starring Angelina Jolie. If you've not seen it, it starts with the premise that in the early 60s, LHO went to the USSR and was killed and replaced by a 100 percent lookalike Russian assassin named Alex Hidell. And then Hidell is the one who killed JFK. The U.S. Gov figured it out and thats why it had to remain hush hush.

I enjoyed that movie, good action, good twist at the end. Had no idea it had JFKA stuff in it, and was surprised to see it in the intro of the movie.

I've seen it. Some of it was filmed here in Albany, NY. They liked our roads, bridges, underpasses and overpasses on 787 which parallel the Hudson river. It was hysterical to watch the road out of Washington, D.C. become the roads around downtown Albany. You'd have to have lived here to really know it though.

[Guest Tom Scully]

Yes. It's simple. "Harvey and Lee" is 100% BS. It accepts every story of Oswald now matter what, or from who and puts one set of actions by Oswald in the Lee column and one in a Harvey column. No story is ever addressed as being A.) a lie or B.) someone who was not Oswald at all. Armstrong's knowledge of the entire case is tissue thin. He accepts things that if he was an educated man he'd reject...

....Yes, there are reports of an arrest in the balcony of the Texas theatre and reports of someone being taken out the back. But, there is no reason to believe this is a second Oswald.

Don't try to sort this case out from Armstrong's book. It can't be done.

Probably not.

It seems hard to sort this case out from any perspective. .....

........................

I think Jim Root has it exactly backwards, asserting that the method chosen to protect the top level assassination conspirators was to keep the planning as simple and narrow as possible, involving the least number of people on a need to know basis.

The people I know owe the American people an actual explanation of what they knew related to the JFK Assassination, the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, and the half century long, officially supported cover up of those details, have a long record of conducting by intention, complicated and confusing "operations" using a counter-intuitive, but demonstrably effective strategy of confusion involving many individuals. This strategy has been so successful that there is no consensus to this day whether the high level government "operators" of the 1980's were or were not also culpable in the Assassination of JFK and the cover up.

.............................

According to the CIA/Bellin letter we find that if it would have been known that Oswald had attempted to assassinate Walker then, with the other information about Oswald that was available at the time, it could have been predicted that Oswald would kill Kennedy if given the opportunity. Rather than needing to recruit an assassin all that was needed was to direct a motorcade past where Oswald was working.

FBI Agent J P Hosty's third note provided the information about where Oswald was working. This information, without Hosty's knowledge, was made available to highest levels of US Intelligence. Perhaps the most important piece in this part of my investigation is that that note has disappeared from the files of the CIA. A note has disappeared that, if available, would show exactly eho had had access to the information that it contained. I find this to be a wonderful reason that explains, very easily, why that note has disappeared.....without having to speculate on alot of other scenarios!

Mark, I am not big on the idea of a broad based conspiracy to kill the JFK. Throughout my research I have constantly looked for, and it seems have found, explanations that seem to provide for a conspiracy that invovled very few people.....but those same people would have to have been at the very top of the heap when it comes to directing intelligence assets and having access to intelligence information.

Jim Root

Jim, please devote just a couple of hours of study of this. I avoided looking at any of it beyond what I read or heard from the news media, back then, in real time, until just the other day when comments were posted on another thread here on the subject of the credibility of one "Chip Tatum".

Focus on just this one snippet of the Iran-Contra saga, a 1988 plane crash in which we were told a man named Nir was killed, a man rumored to have recorded the dialogue of a 1986 meeting with then U.S. VP George HW Bush. Nir was supposed to testify before the inquiry convened to investigate the Iran-Contra irregularities.

I was impressed with the way, right from the initial reporting, the confusion was so skillfully injected into what could have been a thoroughly and accurately reported incident, the crash in daylight and fair weather of a small rented airplane with no more than six occupants. .....

....From the time of the crash until today, there seems no agreement on key details and relationships, exactly the outcome that it would seem would be most beneficial for Mr. Bush and a number of his 1980's associates.

I am inclined to view the roles of Oswald, Ruby, and Walker in the assassination conspiracy as a similar dark hole as this example is, an investigation of incidents that, by design, can probably lead nowhere. This example may simply be a scenario lifting the veil on what can be expected of these people if they feel they are being cornered, or feel threatened to any serious degree, for that matter.:

.......

Edited April 1, 2012 by Tom Scully