Steven Gaal Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Steven, That entire post was a quote from Mark Valenti (see link) http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,12391.0.html Mr. Parnell just quoted it. SO GEE IF I QUOTE A POST FROM ANOTHER SITE SAYING PARNELL IS PAID TO POSTS ITS OK WITH Kathy Beckett // GAAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Steve, I was just calling attention to a post by an ex-member Mark Valenti describing what he feels are problems with the H&L theory in regards to the conspiracy community as a whole. I personally doubt that anyone who posts pro-H&L material is being paid to do so, but I respect Valenti's opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Steve, I was just calling attention to a post by an ex-member Mark Valenti describing what he feels are problems with the H&L theory in regards to the conspiracy community as a whole. I personally doubt that anyone who posts pro-H&L material is being paid to do so, but I respect Valenti's opinions. Many people on the CT side sacrificed career ,health ,wealth and relationships. I don't know what lone nutters have given up. For a number of Lone nutters were extremely well paid via book deals and career advancement. =============== this post unaddressed by ANTI H & L side http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21997&p=305797 Edited June 18, 2015 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 Re H & L: Those who planned and plotted JFK's murder were highly sophisticated, IMO. And also were and are able to wield great power in the United States. To posit anything humanly possible as being beyond these persons' capability is to deny their insider knowledge and their power. So Jon... they have you in the infamous poll as AGAINST the H&L theory being even possible and that the evidence presented by some of the members here refutes with corroboration some of the issues I've put forward as proof. Are you of a mind that H&L is not possible given the evidence - you know, just to get it straight.... and YES Steve... there is so much not addressed... like how they get 200 days of school out of 123 possible days to attend... must be trickle down Reaganomics math Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) According to the Education Forum.... Harvey and Lee are PUBLIC ENEMY # 1 Click HERE to read the Ed Forum's version of the CRIMES OF H&L Edited June 19, 2015 by Jim Hargrove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 So... we are... PUBLIC ENEMY # 1 ??? Do y'a'll HATE US THIS MUCH??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 Hate to break up Jim's conversation with himself here! Fantastic idea from Vanessa Loney today over at DPF. She is proposing a debate between John Armstrong himself and Greg Parker. Now, that would be a debate! Unfortunately, I don't think it will happen because Armstrong would not agree. BTW, good to see Jim & DJ back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Steve Gaal wrote: this post unaddressed by ANTI H & L side Speaking of unaddressed issues, when is the H&L team going to address the 1981 exhumation? Oswald or "Harvey" according to H&L was dug up and he had a mastoid operation that he wasn't supposed to have. Also, in Russia "Harvey" was examined by doctors and again he had the mastoid scar that wasn't supposed to be there (CE 985). Armstrong just ignores this in H&L. Paul Groody had a theory about what happened. For years, I didn't realize this-I just thought Groody was playing devil's advocate and saying something was not right. Then I listened to his 2006 appearance of Coast to Coast and it turns out he thought the head only was switched prior to the exhumation. Now Groody was always adamant that the body was the one he buried in 1963 as he recognized the clothes, rings and even the viscera bag which contained the internal organs. But he believed the body was that of a double (who had been shot by Ruby) and had been dug up (even though he said in 1963 it would be almost impossible to do that) at some point and the real Oswald's head (which was somehow readily available) was somehow reattached to the double's body. This explained, in Groody's mind, the fact that he didn't see the craniotomy incision on the skull (even though photos show it and witnesses remember it), rather than his own mistaken memory. This is all detailed here: http://wtracyparnell.com/paul-groodys-theory/ But the question is how does the H&L team explain the exhumation? Do they think "Harvey" was dug up and "Lee's" head attached to "Harvey's" body? And how was this accomplished? That would also get rid of "Lee" although Armstrong has always said he could still be alive. But what of CD 985? A head switch wouldn't explain that. Do they agree with Jack White who said on the JFK Research forum there were multiple "Harveys"? These issues need to be addressed as they kill H&L as it stands today. Edited June 19, 2015 by W. Tracy Parnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Paul, Thanks for your kind words. One question about the 2017 documents while I'm thinking of it. Didn't the ARRB say they had seen all of the JFK documents and there is nothing indicating conspiracy there. Does this refer to the 2017 documents in your view or I am I off in my thinking here? I would appreciate your comments. Well, Tracy, I personally don't care what the ARRB said or didn't say -- I only want to see the Top Secret documents. If they only show that Oswald was the "Lone Nut", then why in the world are they Top Secret? This was Bertrand Russell's question in 1964 (when he was 93 years old): "If Oswald was the lone shooter, then where is the question of National Security in exposing the record about him, since he is now dead?" So, I'm convinced that the Top Secret documents that still remain will show us something that no previous FOIA documents have shown us so far. The result will be dramatic, IMHO. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited June 19, 2015 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 Thanks Paul, appreciate the answer and I am sure 2017 will be of interest to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 So... we are... PUBLIC ENEMY # 1 ??? Do y'a'll HATE US THIS MUCH??? Where in God's name does this come from? Is it because of the poll? And do you really think that people hate you because of what you believe to be true?And not only that but you say the Forum has labelled you such. That's all of us, everyone. Members judge theories--the Forum allows them to discuss them. Does that really bother you so much that you have to say things like the above?And the font size??Good Heavens! Why do you people do that? Some of this stuff looks like those junky auto sale ads you get in the mail. The Forum is supposed to be used for back and forth debate.You are going to get people who read everything you present, and still not believe it.Why can't that be a given? BTW, I think Armstrong's theory is fascinating, whether it is true or not. I have all of his stuff, including the books from Lancer.And I don't believe for a minute that the H&L theory is an attempt to make CTs look bad with the impending release of the files. It comes from their own state of confusion, Kathy. On the one hand, they claim the poll is meaningless, then on the other, get their pretzels all soggy from crying because they're not feeling the love they think is their due. FWIW, Kathy, I think it's a fascinating theory, too. I can even understand exploring the possibility. But when you need to bend and twist the evidence, claim anything from the FBI is faked if it goes against you, misrepresent faked photos and make a whole new art-form out of cherry-picking, well... at that point, the whole thing implodes. No one said the theory is an attempt to make the CT community look bad in the lead up to the release of files. Mark V. simply noted that there seems to be more activity and a big push for more converts by the H & L true-believers in the lead-up to those file releases. If you think this theory is the biggest sham since Milli Vanilli, then that is a genuine concern. If they get a foothoid in the mainstream, no-one is going to have any hope of being taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 In fact, I think I'll dub it the Milli Vanilli Theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 David Josephs, You misread my comment, perhaps because I wasn't clear. I meant by the comment that those who planned and plotted JFK's murder were so sophisticated and wielded such power that nothing, including making use of look-alikes such as H&L, should be considered beyond their ability and willingness to employ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 According to the Milli Vanilli Theory (MVT) - a theory tailored toward the undiscerning and terminally obdurate among us - it was one of those CIA doppelgangers who test drove a car with Bogard. Balderdash! Utter balderdash! The stout Defender of the Faith at DeepFoo, Brian Doyle, seems to believe you obtain a learner's permit by strolling in and asking for one - no paperwork required! Talk about a paperless office! Pity is, it just ain't so. Even in the Land of the Free, the bureaucracy must be fed its paper. It really isn't rocket science. Ruth took him to get his permit. The place was closed for a holiday. He shoved the application in his wallet. It got all marked and dirty, Ruth testified that he thought he needed a car for the driving test and when she pulled out of taking him a second time, he went and made a half-hearted attempt to buy one. Simple as that, and when he learned that he couldn't buy one because he didn't have a credit history or a steady employment record, he did what a lot of people do - he told a little white lie about coming into some money soon and he'd be back in a week or two. It was just saving face - no more, no less. Then he learned from Ruth that he didn't need a car at all, so he went down and went through all the requirements. The official story of course, is that the second time he went, the queue was too long and he missed out again, Was Oz Mr Bad Luck, or wot? Don't believe it, Don't believe it for a second. He got the paperwork in and who knows, it may even have been processed with a license ready to send out. But if so, it and the application were confiscated by the feds who destroyed the license and claimed the application was found at the boarding house. Their motivation for doing it is the same motivation forcing MVT adherents to deny deny deny that Oz could drive. A driving Oz is no good to the official portrait of Oz and no good for a doppelganger theory. Frair stated that what they saw was dirty and stained and this was the condition of that paperwork when it entered the evidence stream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 According to the Milli Vanilli Theory (MVT) - a theory tailored toward the undiscerning and terminally obdurate among us - it was one of those CIA doppelgangers who test drove a car with Bogard. Balderdash! Utter balderdash! The stout Defender of the Faith at DeepFoo, Brian Doyle, seems to believe you obtain a learner's permit by strolling in and asking for one - no paperwork required! Talk about a paperless office! Pity is, it just ain't so. Even in the Land of the Free, the bureaucracy must be fed its paper. It really isn't rocket science. Ruth took him to get his permit. The place was closed for a holiday. He shoved the application in his wallet. It got all marked and dirty, Ruth testified that he thought he needed a car for the driving test and when she pulled out of taking him a second time, he went and made a half-hearted attempt to buy one. Simple as that, and when he learned that he couldn't buy one because he didn't have a credit history or a steady employment record, he did what a lot of people do - he told a little white lie about coming into some money soon and he'd be back in a week or two. It was just saving face - no more, no less. Then he learned from Ruth that he didn't need a car at all, so he went down and went through all the requirements. The official story of course, is that the second time he went, the queue was too long and he missed out again, Was Oz Mr Bad Luck, or wot? Don't believe it, Don't believe it for a second. He got the paperwork in and who knows, it may even have been processed with a license ready to send out. But if so, it and the application were confiscated by the feds who destroyed the license and claimed the application was found at the boarding house. Their motivation for doing it is the same motivation forcing MVT adherents to deny deny deny that Oz could drive. A driving Oz is no good to the official portrait of Oz and no good for a doppelganger theory. Frair stated that what they saw was dirty and stained and this was the condition of that paperwork when it entered the evidence stream. Makes perfect sense to me. --Paul T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts