Harvey and Lee: John Armstrong

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Nice looking site Greg-using humor might be a good idea when discussing this subject.

[Jim Hargrove]

Well, Jim, I've also read that before. Some try to use that quote to prove that Marina Oswald was fluent in English back in Russia, and so her troubles with English in the USA were all a sham.

But that's pushing too hard with too little data. Some dude heard Marina Oswald speak a few words of English, in some social gathering in Russia, and concluded that she spoke English "fluently?" Where's the scientific testing?

Almost any American can speak a few words of Spanish in a social gathering in the USA, but would be like a fish out of water if they were in Mexico City talking to a cab driver.

Without scientific testing, such anecdotal evidence is a weak foundation to conclude that Marina was "fluent" in English. Also, it's virtually impossible to FAKE trouble with a foreign language. Also, Marina was a teenager when she married Lee Harvey Oswald -- so its very unlikely that she was already a skilled superspy.

Also, Marina's confusion of Oswald's background with Webster's background isn't really unusual; she knew Oswald very little time before they were married -- and no Russian teenage girls were virgins in the USSR. The fact that her uncle was affiliated with the KGB may have influenced her social life, but she married poorly with Lee Harvey Oswald -- I think she'd agree when she was in Fort Worth, under the sneering eyes of Oswald's mother. So, this wasn't part of any spy planning. It was dumb fate.

No -- the evidence suggests that Oswald was poor as a Church mouse, and struggling like thunder to get a good paying job to support his growing family. Oswald was desperate, really, but he truly believed he could get a job with the CIA if he just did MORE.

Yet Oswald had left the USSR like a Maverick -- my guess is that his contract with the ONI wasn't yet finished when he left -- and that is why his Marine discharge was downgraded -- and why he never got that job with the CIA that he had been promised.

Sorry -- he doesn't look or quack like a duck to me, Jim. Instead, Lee Harvey Oswald looks and sounds like a CIA "wannabe" from start to finish.

There is no way that Oswald could have been made the Patsy of the JFK murder if he was a bona fide CIA Officer.

The best explanation -- using Occam's Razor -- for Oswald being the JFK Patsy is that he got too close to the fire and got burned, i.e. he craved for a job in the CIA, and so he fell prey to liars and plotters who used this weakness to exploit him for evil.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

We may just have to agree to disagree, Paul, but to me the connection of “Lee Harvey Oswald” to the CIA is obvious both by circumstantial evidence and by sworn testimony. In fact, I argue (as John A. does more thoroughly) that what CIA accountant James Wilcott called “the Oswald Project” was, in fact, a creation of American Intelligence involving two young men using the same identity. But let's back up a bit….

You wrote that Oswald “never got that job with the CIA he had been promised.” That is an interesting thought, but it is hard to accept that all he did was done as part of some elaborate job application. That strikes me as unlikely. Although Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald was indeed, as you say, poor as a church mouse most of his short life, it is weird how well he travelled to Russia, staying at top-notch European hotels and hiring expensive private tour guides once in Moscow. There is no evidence that he ever before or after lived so well. The Warren Commision told us Oswald used his Marine Corps income to finance—barely-- his “defection,” but failed to tell us that much of that income was in non-convertible military script.

The information on Robert Webster was not included primarily to discuss Marina's English skills but to show that the striking similarites of the false “defections” of Robert Webster and “Lee Harvey Oswald,” strongly suggesting that both were under the same management. Can you suggest any managerial candidates other than the CIA? Why wasn't Oswald arrested for espionage when he returned to the U.S? Why was he allowed by the U.S. to “defect” yet again just weeks before the assassination of JFK?

CIA accountant James Wilcott swore under oath in secret testimony to the HSCA that he was told by other CIA employees at his station in Japan that money he had personally disbursed to an encrypted account was for “Oswald or the Oswald Project.” HSCA counsel Robert Tanenbaum testified to the ARRB that he read a WC secret transcript of a conversation in which the Attorney General of Texas, Henry Wade the District Attorney, and Leon Jaworsky, counsel to the Attorney General, told Earl Warren that Oswald was a contract agent of both the CIA and the FBI.

You wrote, “There is no way that Oswald could have been made the Patsy of the JFK murder if he was a bona fide CIA Officer.”

Oswald was hardly a bona fide CIA officer. Instead, the evidence suggests he was a paid operative, of both the FBI and the CIA. And here's where the evil genious of the assassination plot becomes most clear.

No doubt we will both agree that if you are plotting to murder the president of the United States, you simply have to have a pre-ordained fall guy. If not, the hunt for you will be relentless. It will not stop until you're caught. Unless you can figure out a way to shut down the investigation quickly, you will be doomed. What better way than to pick a patsy, and plant some evidence, even if it doesn't hold up well to scrutiny, against a guy with ties to both Hoover's FBI and the CIA? Assuming he wasn't one of the plotters, what do you suppose Hoover's reaction was when he realized that his own contract employee had been set up for the hit?

Does anyone here disagree that the "Oswald project," as CIA accountant James Wilcott referred to it, was a creation of American Intelligence?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Jim Hargrove said:

Does anyone here disagree that the "Oswald project," as CIA accountant James Wilcott referred to it, was a creation of American Intelligence?

The HSCA certainly disagreed:

In an attempt to investigate Wilcott's allegations, the committee interviewed several present and former CIA employees selected on the basis of the position each had held during the years 1954-64. Among the persons interviewed were individuals whose responsibilities covered a broad spectrum of areas in the post abroad, including the chief and deputy chief of station, as well as officers in finance, registry, the Soviet Branch and counterintelligence.

None of these individuals interviewed had ever seen any documents or heard any information indicating that Oswald was an agent. (18) This allegation was not known by any of them until it was published by critics of the Warren Commission in the late 1960's.(19) Some of the individuals, including a chief of counterintelligence in the Soviet Branch, expressed the belief that it was possible that Oswald had been recruited by the Soviet KGB during his military tour of duty overseas, as the CIA had identified a KGB program aimed at recruiting U.S. military personnel during the-period Oswald was stationed there. (20) An intelligence analyst whom Wilcott had specifically named as having been involved in a conversation about the Oswald allegation told the committee that he was not in the post abroad at the time of the assassination.(21) A review of this individual's office of personnel file confirmed that, in fact, he had been transferred from the post abroad to the United States in 1962. (22) The chief of the post abroad from 1961 to 1964 stated that had Oswald been used by the Agency he certainly would have learned about it.(23) Similarly, almost all those persons interviewed who worked in the Soviet Branch of that station indicated they would have known if Oswald had, in fact, been recruited by the CIA when he was overseas.(24) These persons-expressed the opinion that, had Oswald been recruited without their knowledge, it would have been a rare exception contrary to the working policy and guidelines of the post abroad. (25)

Based on all the evidence, the committee concluded that Wilcott's allegation was not worthy of belief.

[Jim Hargrove]

Sure, Tracy, but if we all believed the U.S. government could be trusted investigating itself, none of us would be here.

[Paul Trejo]

Sure, Tracy, but if we all believed the U.S. government could be trusted investigating itself, none of us would be here.

However, Jim, there has to be a limit. The JFK CT community is all over the map -- very uncoordinated.

It is probably agreed 100% however, that J. Edgar Hoover's "Lone Nut" theory was a Big Lie.

Yet after that, everybody here has a different take on WHO ELSE is lying.

Aside from the Big Lies, there are also Big Mistakes. For example, the many cases of Mistaken Identity of Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963 -- which adds much fuel to the Double-Oswald fire.

In fact, because the Truth about the JFK murder was deliberately withheld by Earl Warren (and Hoover, Dulles and LBJ), all guesses today seem to be as good as all other guesses.

Based on the Big Lie told by the Warren Commission (as supported by J. Edgar Hoover) one cannot blame John Anderson or anybody else for their Grand Theories of Lee Harvey Oswald. Hoover deserves all the blame (as well as all the credit, should it turn out that the "Lone Nut" theory saved the USA from internal riots during the Cold War).

The TRUTH will finally be revealed by the US Government on 26 October 2017, according to the ARRB and JFK Records Act of 1992, signed by President GHW Bush.

However, after 50 years of wild Conspiracy Theories, I detect that many CTers will even claim that the ARRB is lying on 26 October 2017 -- if it fails to agree with their favorite theory.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited June 9, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[David Josephs]

David Josephs,

I don't have the mental acuity to understand the disagreement you and Greg have over the number of attendance days, and I want to understand both sides of the disagreement.

Will you please lay out your argument both conceptually and in detail? And also lay out Greg's competing argument in the same manner?

Thanks for your patience in attending to my request.

Can you explain what is confusing you in my calculations?

Jon... it's really quite simple. The FBI took the originals of all the school records and submitted copies as evidence (as if the boys Jr High school records were necessary to solving the case)

We find this SOP in every aspect of the evidence.

The Permanent Record, which I've posted, as well as the FBI report above tells us that after starting PS44 on March 23, 1953 he attended 171 & 11 1/2 days

and was absent for 18 & 11 1/2 days for a total of 171 + 18 + 11 (22 1/2 days) = 200 total days either attended of absent from 3/23/63 thru 1/12/54

The 200 and change is derived by adding the 3/23/53 - 6/26/53 dates to the 9/14/53 - 1/12/54 dates on the copied school record.

Attended = 109 + 62 + 11 1/2 days = 176.5 days

Absent = 15 + 3 + 11 1/2 days = 23.5 days

Total = 200 days of actual school on which our student COULD have attended.

The problem with Greg's math is a mystery to me... so I decided to spell it all out so it was easier to visualize.

There are 210 weekdays between 3/23/53 and 1/12/54

There are 55 weekdays of summer on which our Oswald did not attend any school...

That leaves 155 days on which to attend school (the FBI offers a total of 200 days)

Students are neither absent of attending school during winter and spring break - usually 2 weeks in the winter and 1 week in spring = remove 15 school days

Leaving 140 total days this child COULD have attended school

Youth House is not mentioned in the records for this child even though he was out of school for 17 days there.(green)

While I subtracted in down below let's assume that this is included with the "attended" days of 171 & 11 1/2 days.

I did not highlight any of the 1 or 2 day holidays of which there are about 8-12 every school year which brings the total potential days to attend down even further.

If Greg can show us how the FBI and NYC school records can fit 200 days of attendance and absences into less than 140 days of school..

maybe the mystery of his math will be solved.

The contention discovered by Armstrong here is that the FBI needs to go back into history and reconstruct the man's past while hiding the facts related to there being two Lee Harvey Oswalds.

If Greg is wrong about the June 26th date and the year ended 2 weeks earlier on the 12th as I think it did, the 210 days becomes the 200 days we see totaled above.

Whoever created this record for the WCR did not remove the summer days from the count... It is most likely that LEE's attendance is described starting 9/14/53 while the attendance prior to that is a mixture of the two boys. LEE never went to Youth House, Harvey did. The point remains... the NYC school records showing a 5'4" 115 lb boy attending school in 1952 while a 4'10" 95lb boy is photographed in July/August at the Bronx Zoo.

At the end of the day we are offering example after example of the eveidence found in the collection of evidence to hide the existence of one of these boys 10+ years after the fact.

That question "why does the FBI need any of these old records after the man is already dead?" seems to be continually ignored.

Why go to Stripling on the 23rd? (Across the street from where Marg is living) or Pfisterer's the following week other than to nip a problem in the bud.... they failed.

While Robert Oswald claims the boy on the left is his brother, John Pic tells us about the boy at the zoo:

Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that?

Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City?

Mr. PIC - No, sir.

the boy onthe left is not a 5'4" 115 kid... and looks little if anything like the real Lee Oswald on the right.

As for Greg's argument against - he has posted what he has which speaks for itself. If he has provided a compelling argument against these boys being different people yet can still offer analysis of 200 days fitting into less than 140 actual school days in that time period - then it remains up to you to decide. I've done what I can to illustrate the areas in which he presents conclusions which differ drastically from the evidence they are based upon.

I hope that answers your questions Jon...

DJ

[Paul Trejo]

We may just have to agree to disagree, Paul, but to me the connection of “Lee Harvey Oswald” to the CIA is obvious both by circumstantial evidence and by sworn testimony. In fact, I argue (as John A. does more thoroughly) that what CIA accountant James Wilcott called “the Oswald Project” was, in fact, a creation of American Intelligence involving two young men using the same identity. But let's back up a bit….

You wrote that Oswald “never got that job with the CIA he had been promised.” That is an interesting thought, but it is hard to accept that all he did was done as part of some elaborate job application. That strikes me as unlikely. Although Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald was indeed, as you say, poor as a church mouse most of his short life, it is weird how well he travelled to Russia, staying at top-notch European hotels and hiring expensive private tour guides once in Moscow. There is no evidence that he ever before or after lived so well. The Warren Commision told us Oswald used his Marine Corps income to finance—barely-- his “defection,” but failed to tell us that much of that income was in non-convertible military script.

The information on Robert Webster was not included primarily to discuss Marina's English skills but to show that the striking similarites of the false “defections” of Robert Webster and “Lee Harvey Oswald,” strongly suggesting that both were under the same management. Can you suggest any managerial candidates other than the CIA? Why wasn't Oswald arrested for espionage when he returned to the U.S? Why was he allowed by the U.S. to “defect” yet again just weeks before the assassination of JFK?

CIA accountant James Wilcott swore under oath in secret testimony to the HSCA that he was told by other CIA employees at his station in Japan that money he had personally disbursed to an encrypted account was for “Oswald or the Oswald Project.” HSCA counsel Robert Tanenbaum testified to the ARRB that he read a WC secret transcript of a conversation in which the Attorney General of Texas, Henry Wade the District Attorney, and Leon Jaworsky, counsel to the Attorney General, told Earl Warren that Oswald was a contract agent of both the CIA and the FBI.

You wrote, “There is no way that Oswald could have been made the Patsy of the JFK murder if he was a bona fide CIA Officer.”

Oswald was hardly a bona fide CIA officer. Instead, the evidence suggests he was a paid operative, of both the FBI and the CIA. And here's where the evil genious of the assassination plot becomes most clear.

No doubt we will both agree that if you are plotting to murder the president of the United States, you simply have to have a pre-ordained fall guy. If not, the hunt for you will be relentless. It will not stop until you're caught. Unless you can figure out a way to shut down the investigation quickly, you will be doomed. What better way than to pick a patsy, and plant some evidence, even if it doesn't hold up well to scrutiny, against a guy with ties to both Hoover's FBI and the CIA? Assuming he wasn't one of the plotters, what do you suppose Hoover's reaction was when he realized that his own contract employee had been set up for the hit?

I can agree to disagree, Jim. To you, the connection of “Lee Harvey Oswald” to the CIA is "obvious", based on CIA accountant James Wilcott claim of an “the Oswald Project.”

When I look at the same data, I see this: Oswald, a teenager in the Marines at Atsugi in 1959 was invited to participate in what former CIA Agent Victor Marchetti said was an ONI program which involved 36-40 young men who were made to appear disenchanted, poor, American youths who wanted to live in the USSR. They were sent into the USSR as "dangles" not so much to sneak information, but to confirm information slowly, in groups organized from ONI high-command.

In my theory, the reason Oswald's Marine discharge was downgraded when he returned to the USA was precisely because he broke his ONI contract. This wasn't yet a full-time job in US Intelligence -- but it was planned to be. Sadly, Oswald was too independent to finish his assignment in the USSR. He got married, Marina had a baby, and then he insisted on returning home to show off.

It's quite true that in the USSR Lee Harvey Oswald never had it so good. He was allowed to stay in the new apartment building in Minsk. In addition to his factory salary, he was given an almost equal stipend by the Red Cross -- so that his income was almost as great as the Factory Director. He partied all the time, and had lots of girl friends. That all came to an end when he became a family man..

I think this is where the US Intelligence Community broke with Oswald -- at least temporarily. The CIA still considered "laying on of interviews" even after that period. I take it that Lee Harvey Oswald was clearly intelligent enough as a young man to qualify for CIA employment. His problem was not intelligence, it was obedience. He was still too head-strong and independent.

That is why I say that Oswald “never got that job with the CIA he had been promised.” But, I agree, the CIA was still interested, and Oswald knew it, and he wanted that wonderful job above all other things.

His downfall came when he was paired with George De Mohrenschildt in 1962. Although Lee Harvey Oswald really loved George, we can see from George's WC testimony that George merely tolerated Lee Harvey Oswald. In fact, George meddled with Lee's life horribly. One key flaw was George's wish to convince Lee Harvey Oswald that Ex-General Edwin Walker was the true enemy of the USA -- beyond Fidel Castro. George would call Walker "Fokker" to Lee, for a laugh.

Also, George's friend, Volkmar Schmdit, worked on Oswald at a party for hours, to get him to loathe and despise Edwin Walker, and to link his name with that of Adolf Hitler. (This was in February 1963.)

It worked. IMHO, Oswald took the bait, and went immediately made plans to assassinate Edwin Walker. The Backyard Photographs were part of his elaborate plan. We garner from Jack White's photo analysis that the second body-double of Oswald in the Backyard Photographs was Roscoe White, a former Marine, also at Atsugi (later named by his son to be part of the JFK Kill-Team). IMHO, Oswald himself made those Fake Backyard Photographs at his place of employment, Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, where he also made his fake Alek J. Hidell card, his fake CPUSA card, and probably developed many of the photos of Walker's Dallas home.

In any case, according to Dick Russell (TMWKTM, 1992), four days after the Walker shooting, George De Mohrenschildt told his friends (Mr. and Mrs. Igor Voshinin) that he was pretty sure that Oswald was the shooter, and Mrs. Voshinin immediately telephoned the FBI and told them what George said. This would make it possible for Ex-General Edwin Walker to have learned the name of Lee Harvey Oswald "within days" after the shooting, as he later told the world several times, for the rest of his life.

(Here are just two of many examples:)

http://www.pet880.com/images/19631129_Deutsche_NZ.jpg

http://www.pet880.com/images/19750623_Church_Oswald_released.pdf

So -- IMHO, the US Intelligence Community knew that Lee Harvey Oswald had tried to murder Ex-General Edwin Walker. THAT WAS THE ABSOLUTE END OF ANY CHANCE OSWALD WOULD EVER HAVE TO BECOME A BONA FIDE CIA AGENT.

However, at this point, liars and cheaters swooped down on Lee Harvey Oswald to manipulate him and exploit him for anything and everything. Plot #1 was to kill Fidel Castro. David Atlee Phillips (The AMLASH Legacy, 1988) admitted that he was grooming Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate Fidel Castro, when "somebody" stole him away for the JFK plot. Guy Banister was there. So were Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Fred Crisman, Jack S. Martin and Tom Beckham. (Also present were probably Frank Sturgis, Gerry Patrick Hemming and Howard Hunt, Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Carlos Bringuier and Ex-General Edwin Walker himself).

Why did Lee Harvey Oswald live so well in the USSR? Precisely because he was an American who claimed to prefer the USSR way of life -- so he was held up as a model for all USSR youth in Minsk. That's not a big mystery. The Red Cross also helped finance Oswald in Minsk -- because he never really "defected" or renounced his US citizenship. You asked about Bob Webster, again, Jim, and I'm inclined to believe that he was dimly related to that same ONI program in which Lee Harvey Oswald was serving. You and I seem to agree firmly that these were both "fake defectors". I have little doubt that CIA accountant James Wilcott learned in Japan that money he personally processed was for “Oswald or the Oswald Project.” That was part of the "dangle" operation of the ONI that Victor Marchetti talked about.

As for the story by Waggoner Carr, Leon Jaworsky and Henry Wade that Oswald was a contract agent of both the CIA and the FBI -- that story first came out in the book by Gerald Ford (Portrait of the Assassin, 1966). Nothing new there, and nothing radical, either. Evidently, James Hosty paid Oswald $200 monthly for ad hoc street information.

I'm glad we can agree, Jim, on this point: that there is no way that Oswald could have been made the Patsy of the JFK murder if he had been a bona fide CIA Officer. We seem to agree that Oswald -- whatever his level -- was clearly below that of a full-time employee of the CIA or ONI.

Finally -- as for Presidential Assassins -- most in history have been above board -- the killer always used a hand-gun at close range, and was quickly caught, and announced his political reasons for his heinous act, like the courageous man he always hoped to be. I think that most Presidential Assassinations in the future will still be of this nature -- and the JFK Assassination was the exception. This is because, IMHO, the JFK Kill-Team really didn't want JFK dead as much as they wanted Fidel Castro dead -- and blaming Fidel Castro for killing JFK was the most certain route to an invasion of Cuba that they could imagine.

When the FBI and LBJ slammed that option shut -- they ran away like the yellow cowards they were, hiding in the shadows for the rest of their lives. I don't think that will happen again. Most Americans are not so cowardly. The Patsy method of Assassination was borrowed from Europe. Adolf Hitler had already used it when he burned the Reichstag. It was an old European trick that some Americans learned during World War Two. Yes, it worked -- until it didn't.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited June 9, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Jim Hargrove]

Paul,

Thank you for your thoughtful response. We agree on a lot, and I'll try to get back asap with a more complete follow-up, but here are just three quick rebuttal points:

• First, I'm pretty sure that Robert Webster was not even in the Navy, and so it seems unlikely that the managers of both his and Oswald's parallel false defections called ONI their home.
• Second, Gerald Ford's description of The Commission's "First Shock" was hardly the same as the accusation made by Mr. Tanenbaum. In Portrait of the Assassin, Mr. Ford claims only that Carr made the charge that Oswald was an "undercover agent" for the FBI. He leaves the accusation of CIA involvement up to Marguerite. It's funny, though, that throughout the remainder of the book, Ford fails to directly and positively refute either accusation.
• Last, just because the Oswalds were not CIA Officers is hardly an indication that they weren't what we would call full time employees.

This is a very enjoyable talk, and I hope we can keep it going. Thanks again!

[Jim Hargrove]

Jon... it's really quite simple. The FBI took the originals of all the school records and submitted copies as evidence (as if the boys Jr High school records were necessary to solving the case)

We find this SOP in every aspect of the evidence.

As you know, DJ, it's remarkable how many experienced researchers are still unaware of the FBI's work cooking the evidence less than 24 hours after the assassination. Many researchers still don't know that, in the wee hours of the night of Nov. 22/Nov. 23, the FBI secretly confiscated all of Oswald's "possessions" from Dallas Police Headquarters, flew them to D.C. in the dead of night, played with them for three long days, and then secretly returned them to Dallas, all before "Oswald's possessions" were OFFICIALLY handed over to the FBI on November 26!

I'm still not allowed to upload any graphics here, but the proof of this secret transfer is shown by the WC/FBI's alteration of the testimony of James Cadigan. That altered testimony can be seen here, about halfway down the page:

http://harveyandlee.net/FBI/FBI.html

What is remarkable about the FBI's behavior in this remarkable case is that its agents, within 72 hours of the assassination, were confiscating ALL of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" teenage employment and school records, before even attempting to discover if other high ranking government officials were in danger of assassination, or if the assassination involved conspirators other than the official patsy. ALL of the original versions of the teenage Oswald records, by the way, forever disappeared. Not a single original document remains in the National Archives. This gets at, among so many other things, what all those HSCA handwriting experts were complaining about when they said they were not shown original documents.

Thanks for doing so much heavy lifting on this school records stuff.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Jim Hargrove

[Greg Parker]

Nice looking site Greg-using humor might be a good idea when discussing this subject.

Thanks Tracy. Humor + facts.

[Greg Parker]

What is remarkable about the FBI's behavior in this remarkable case is that its agents, within 72 hours of the assassination, were confiscating ALL of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" teenage employment and school records,

That is just not the case. The law required that the school records be obtained via the school boards - and that's exactly what happened. They were not "confiscated" which is a term meant to mislead people into believing there was something nefarious about obtaining those records.

[Jon G. Tidd]

It appears to me David Josephs has the superior argument as to the number of attendance days.

Greg, I like your Oswald and the Cold War book. And look forward to your upcoming books.

[Jim Hargrove]

What is remarkable about the FBI's behavior in this remarkable case is that its agents, within 72 hours of the assassination, were confiscating ALL of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" teenage employment and school records,

That is just not the case. The law required that the school records be obtained via the school boards - and that's exactly what happened. They were not "confiscated" which is a term meant to mislead people into believing there was something nefarious about obtaining those records.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCz5_bd3R6g

[Greg Parker]

It appears to me David Josephs has the superior argument as to the number of attendance days.

Greg, I like your Oswald and the Cold War book. And look forward to your upcoming books.

You can actually follow his argument? I honestly cannot.

I calculated previously that the number of days accounted for in the 52/53 school year, as shown on the PS44 record, was approximately 182.

I agree I got the number of days wrong for the summer break. The summer break was either 50 or 55 school days (I'll take David's word it was 55) - but that has nil effect on my calculations for the 52-53 year.

Here is the 52-53 year again.

PS 117 (start of school year) = 15 + 47 + 4 half days (2 full days)

days not enrolled = 40

PS 44 = 109 + 15 (includes schools days spent in Youth House) + 6 half days (3 full days)

School year ends approx June 26 so deduct 49 days as ps 44 numbers go through to the start of the new school year on Sept 14.

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

so.... 15 + 47 + 2 + 40 + 109 + 15 + 3 - 49 = 182 - approximate only - actual figure would depend on date school year ended for 52/53 year.

Figures are taken from

http://www.maryferre...eId=14&tab=page

School year end date assumed from current year end date as shown here

http://schools.nyc.g...ilyFriendly.pdf

15 days at Youth House shown as days absence from PS 44.

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

David says he doubts that the school year finished on June 26, but if you count forward 55 WEEK days from that date, you come to Friday, September 11, 1953. According to the PS44 report, Oswald commenced the 8th grade on Mon Sept 14 - so it all fits like a glove. I cannot see what the issue is except that in my original calc, I miscounted and deducted 49 days instead of 55 - so the approximate figure would actually be 176 for 52-53.

With regard to Youth House: PS 44 shows 15 full days and 3 part day absences. David seems to expect to find Youth House having it's own special entry on the form somewhere and he miscounted the school days he was there. Apr 16 to May 7 is 3 weeks exactly. Since May 7 was a Thursday, he may have been released early enough for a full or part day at PS 44. I therefore maintain that absences shown in the record from PS44 account for Youth House.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

What is remarkable about the FBI's behavior in this remarkable case is that its agents, within 72 hours of the assassination, were confiscating ALL of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" teenage employment and school records,

That is just not the case. The law required that the school records be obtained via the school boards - and that's exactly what happened. They were not "confiscated" which is a term meant to mislead people into believing there was something nefarious about obtaining those records.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCz5_bd3R6g

That is one school out of how many? And moreover, there is no evidence except the say so of an old friend of one of Armstrong's lieutenants. Furthermore, old school records are kept by the school board, not by the school and indeed, the FW school Board did give the FBI all the records from FW schools attended by LHO.

In short, Kudlaty is quite literally unbelievable - but even if I granted you Kudlaty, your original claim that "within 72 hours of the assassination, [the FBI] were confiscating ALL of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" teenage employment and school records," is still hyperbolic. All that's missing are the colorful fonts and dancing emoticons.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Greg Parker