Harvey and Lee: John Armstrong

[Greg Parker]

What do his maths grades have to to with you guys deliberately misinterpreting what "re-ad" means, and the process necessary to find the total number of school days that school year?

I know I know - like everyone else at the Bates Motel, you're very busy...

whatever

Seems you've checked in at the Bates as well - tends to happen when you're stuck as to what to do next...

Don't like how I addressed your inaccuracies?. You're so wrapped up in dissing H&L you forget about the grade cards or to do a real timeline with the evidence to see what a joke the FBI left us...

So let's go Greg... Since I know you've not done your homework related to these documents and rely instead on the poor, wrong and terribly sourced arguments you offered years ago without update... this NEW VOLUME of yours will undoubtedly be full of these errors.

Gonna post another passage? Or need to figure out how you got it so wrong.

You mean to tell us that you, the man who knows everything about Oswald, cannot tell us when the BJHS year began or why the grade cards conflict with the permenant record?

And yet you write a book on Oswald anyway. This will be like showing Posner or Myers for what they were... 5% truth mixed into 95% speculative and inaccurate fluff.

Please tell me you continued on in that new volume to Easton, Arlington and beyond with the same attention to detail.

Your take on Tujague's should also be illuminating... but first... punch your way out of this paper bag.

I was kicked out of the Bates Motel (aka the deepfoo) because I was destroying your 2 Oswald myths.

What inaccuracies did you address?

All you did was made a fool of yourself again by claiming that the 5 days absence and the 12 days absence pertained to the same school year. They don't.

That is total bull and you know it. You were banned from DPF due to your nasty posts and many people emailing us about them, asking that we get rid of you or they would leave.. No one gets banned due to a particular view. especially if it is well argued. As proof your buddy Bart is posting at DPF and is not being nasty so there is no discussion of banning him. Likewise, no one gets banned without a lot of discussion among the founders, and finally, if warranted, a vote.

The fact that you are so obsessed with JA is very telling.

That is not bull at all. You were pleading with me to stop posting about H & L and instead, post about my book. I said I was happy to if anyone asked a question about it. No one did. Post a link to where I was nasty? Unless they have all been deleted I can post links showing what I was getting said to me from some of your members. Put up or shut up Dawn.

Oh, and show where Vanessa was nasty to anyone while you're at it, before she was threatened with being banned.

The real joke is that the Bates Motel got it's name because it is harboring and protecting someone who assumed their deceased father's online identity. The same person is a Holocaust denier. A real charmer. But that's what you guys are about. Wouldn't matter if he was an axe murderer - he defends the Harvey and Lee bs and that's all that matters.

You and that forum are a joke because of it.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

Greg... the same exhibit which offers the perm record, offers the grade cards which feed into that record...

Show us where 12 absences are recorded on grade cards to corroborate the permanent record.

if 168 + 12 = 180, you are saying that 12 means something and was derived from actual records... that 12 equates to his absences from school... no?

"168" is written there and as you explain, it makes up the rest of the school year.. most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance"

Except you.

THESE are the records in evidence.. if one does not begat the other... the origin of the other comes into question.

Now why would the actual records of those specific years need creation ????

and what again is the significance of 3830 West 6th Apt 3 ... and then you can tell us where he was from Oct 55 thru Sept 56...

You wrote a book about this time period, didn't you? why is getting the details correct so hard for you?

You've been trying to make some point about "Re-Ad" yet you don't seem to be able to close this circle of your guesswork so it actually means something.

If there were 180 days in a school year, and the student missed 12 days... how many days did he attend?

If 168 is your answer, and 168 appears under the Re-Ad column... I'm thinking even you can connect those two dots...

Those grade cards appear to me to be for the 53-54 school year - not the 54-55.

"most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance"

Except you."

Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Greg Parker

[Jim Hargrove]

Central Intelligence Agency. Following President Kennedy's assassination

former President Harry Truman, who established the CIA in 1947, made a formal state-

ment on December 21, 1963:

"For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted

from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-

making arm of government. I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA

it would be injected into peacetime cloak-and-dagger operations. Some of the

complications and embarrassment that I think we have experienced are in part

attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President's has

been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol

of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue-and a subject for cold-war enemy pro-

paganda."

. . .

In October 1977 Carl Bernstein, in an article for Rolling Stone magazine, wrote

about the relationship between the CIA and major media organizations. Bernstein dis-

covered long-standing cooperation between the Agency and the three major television

networks (especially CBS), Time, Newsweek, The New York Times, the Associated

Press, and United Press International. Following President Kennedy's assassination the

CIA sent a dispatch to their stations with instructions on how to handle and employ CIA

media assets to support the conclusions of the Warren Commission:

* Discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite contacts (espe-

cially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made

as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics

are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only

plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the con-

spiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists.

Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible

speculation.

* To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics.

Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.

The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful back-

ground material for passage to assets ..…

* In private or media discussion not directed at any particular writer, or

in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following argu-

ments should be useful:

a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did

not consider .....

b. Critics usually overvalue items and ignore others .....

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to

conceal in the United States .....

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual

pride . .... ^VICTORS-11

This CIA dispatch helps to explain why those who support the government's

position on President Kennedy's assassination receive full and widespread coverage,

while assassination critics receive little, if any, coverage from the mainstream media and

are often ridiculed.

--From Harvey and Lee, pp. 979-980

[Steven Gaal]

In the "Greg Parker has been banned" thread, one Deep Politics member said:

"In all honesty, I thought Greg was putting up a fair debate. And, the argumentation and disruption came from both sides of this debate. And, I wonder who could be these invisible complainers? Part of some Facebook group or something? They should have had the guts to respond on the forum.

"Sorry but it seems a bit unfair to me......"

I think so too. // SORENSEN

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Golly they don't even allow me on the DPF> and here on the Conspiracy side numerous posts of mine are "locked". .since the DPF has been brought up...........

much of the Marine material is inexplicable

==

JOSEPH 3/26/14 DPF

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu...o-arm/id/40301

When interviewed by the HSCA in 1978, (Richard Allen) Cyr produced his original set of Marine orders from the Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Casual Company, Department of the Pacific, Marine Barracks, United States Naval Station, Treasure Island, San Francisco, California. The list containedthe names of seven Marines and their addresses, all of whom had served atAtsugi in Japan and knew Lee Oswald. They were: John E. Bordenkircher(Florida), Richard A. Bullock (AtlanticCity, NJ), Russell Burton (Long Island, NY), James A. Groden (Tullahona,TN), Lance lves (Belfair, WA), Richard Korson (North Point, Ml), and Charles Benedict (Newton, MA).

(hmmm... that's funny, not a single one of the people on this list were ever contacted to be shown a picture of the Oswald who killed JFK and aks if it was the same person..... )

Until....
In July, 2003 JFK researcher Bill Kelley interviewed Richard A.Bullock, who
knew Lee Oswald in Japan. Bullock knew him as "Ozzie," andsaid he was 30-40
pounds heavier and 3-4 inches taller than the man accused of killingPresident Kennedy.
Bullock said the Oswald he knew in Japan was not man accused of killingthe President.

This statement directly contradicts the FBI SUMMARY REPORT submitted by SA Darrel B Currie.
When he spoke to the HSCA about any interviews he gave at the time of the assasinationn he told them:

He was not questioned when
Oswald defected to the Soviet Union. He was questioned
concerning the nickle-plated 22 caliber Derringer, about
a week or two weeks after the assassination of President Kennedy
by two FBI agents, one of whose names Cyr recalled as
being Agent Nightengale.

In the FBI report from 6/3/64, Currie claims that Cyr told him that Oswald was a very quiet guy and that other than the shooting incident he was never the subject of conversation, which
if you follow the link and read the HSCA interview, and remember that Oswald was disciplined for a variety of things that never made it to this early FBI report... one has to wonder how badly the FBI was interested in Oswald's time in Japan and the people he knew there.. or what exactly Cyr told him if anything... yet another example of a FBI, unsigned and unchecked SUMMARY REPORT which is at odds with the actual facts discovered later, when complete interviews were performed.

[Greg Parker]

In the "Greg Parker has been banned" thread, one Deep Politics member said:

"In all honesty, I thought Greg was putting up a fair debate. And, the argumentation and disruption came from both sides of this debate. And, I wonder who could be these invisible complainers? Part of some Facebook group or something? They should have had the guts to respond on the forum.

"Sorry but it seems a bit unfair to me......"

I think so too. // SORENSEN

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Golly they don't even allow me on the DPF> and here on the Conspiracy side numerous posts of mine are "locked". .since the DPF has been brought up...........

much of the Marine material is inexplicable

==

JOSEPH 3/26/14 DPF

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu...o-arm/id/40301

When interviewed by the HSCA in 1978, (Richard Allen) Cyr produced his original set of Marine orders from the Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Casual Company, Department of the Pacific, Marine Barracks, United States Naval Station, Treasure Island, San Francisco, California. The list containedthe names of seven Marines and their addresses, all of whom had served atAtsugi in Japan and knew Lee Oswald. They were: John E. Bordenkircher(Florida), Richard A. Bullock (AtlanticCity, NJ), Russell Burton (Long Island, NY), James A. Groden (Tullahona,TN), Lance lves (Belfair, WA), Richard Korson (North Point, Ml), and Charles Benedict (Newton, MA).

(hmmm... that's funny, not a single one of the people on this list were ever contacted to be shown a picture of the Oswald who killed JFK and aks if it was the same person..... )

Until....

In July, 2003 JFK researcher Bill Kelley interviewed Richard A.Bullock, who

knew Lee Oswald in Japan. Bullock knew him as "Ozzie," andsaid he was 30-40

pounds heavier and 3-4 inches taller than the man accused of killingPresident Kennedy.

Bullock said the Oswald he knew in Japan was not man accused of killingthe President.

This statement directly contradicts the FBI SUMMARY REPORT submitted by SA Darrel B Currie.

When he spoke to the HSCA about any interviews he gave at the time of the assasinationn he told them:

He was not questioned when

Oswald defected to the Soviet Union. He was questioned

concerning the nickle-plated 22 caliber Derringer, about

a week or two weeks after the assassination of President Kennedy

by two FBI agents, one of whose names Cyr recalled as

being Agent Nightengale.

In the FBI report from 6/3/64, Currie claims that Cyr told him that Oswald was a very quiet guy and that other than the shooting incident he was never the subject of conversation, which

if you follow the link and read the HSCA interview, and remember that Oswald was disciplined for a variety of things that never made it to this early FBI report... one has to wonder how badly the FBI was interested in Oswald's time in Japan and the people he knew there.. or what exactly Cyr told him if anything... yet another example of a FBI, unsigned and unchecked SUMMARY REPORT which is at odds with the actual facts discovered later, when complete interviews were performed.

Golly gee and whoopty-dooo!

[Steven Gaal]

Golly gee and whoopty-dooo! // Parker

==========================================

David Josephs

4/10/2014 DPF

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?13173-Detailed-discussion-and-analysis-of-the-H-amp-L-evidence/page6

During his time in the Marines Oswald’s medical record was kept as was the medical records for all the marines. Oswald was in San Diego from 26 Oct 56 thru 18 Jan 57 and in platoon 2060 with one Alan Felde and 6 other men who were then sent to Camp Pendleton for 13 WEEKS of Boot Camp followed by 3 weeks of specialized combat training starting January 20 1957. (Google "Marines Boot Camp" and see discussions of it being 13 weeks for as long as anyone remembers with the 3 weeks that follow as well) 13 weeks from Jan 20, 1957 is April 21, 1957 plus the 3 weeks of combat training is now May 12, 1957 ….

Yet CE1961 has Oswald finishing Combat Training in only 5 weeks and going to Jacksonville FL between Feb 26^{th and March 18th} (normally a 2 day trip as recorded by those who went to Biloxi on May 2nd) Allen Felde says that in MAY 1957 he and Oswald were sent to the A&P School in Jacksonville FL… Yet according to the testimony of one Daniel Powers LEE Harvey Oswald was given orders to report to Keesler AFB effective May 3, 1957 with 4 other men:

On the evening of May 2 these six Marines boarded a train for Biloxi and arrived
on May 4.21 Their departure from Jacksonville is confirmed by Marine Corps
Unit Diary No 105-57, p. 722. 57-12

…Camarata, Bandoni, Brereton, Schrand, and Powers. 23

Donald Peter Camarata told the FBI that he first met Lee Oswald when they
traveled together on a train from Jacksonville, Florida to Biloxi on May 2. Camarata
said that during the time he knew Oswald, "He had no recollection .... of any remarks on his
part concerning Communism, Russia, or Cuba. " 24
Edward J. Bandoni and James N. Brereton met Lee Oswald when they traveled
together on the train from Jacksonville, Florida to Biloxi on May 2. Neither man
was interviewed by the FBI or Warren Commission.
Martin Schrand also met Lee Oswald when they travelled together on the train
from Jacksonville, Florida on May 2. Lee Oswald and Schrand were assigned to the same
unit in the Philippines on January 5, 1958 when Schrand was killed by a shotgun blast while on
guard duty.
Daniel Patrick Powers was the only member of the 6-man group interviewed
by the Warren Commission. Reading from his Marine Corps orders, Powers told the
Commission that his group attended Course number AB27037 and Class number
08057.25 57-13 Harvey Oswald's Marine Corps record, however, show that he attended Course
number AB27330, and Class number 24047.




^57-12.jpg



So basically we have Lee HARVEY Oswald in platoon 2060 at combat training thru May 1957 while LEE Harvey Oswald from platoon 1070 or 1069 has already been to Combat Training, been to Jacksonville FL and is on now his way to Biloxi Miss by May 2, 1957, when HARVEY and FELDE are just arriving in Jacksonville.

The men who traveled with LEE are not called to discuss their time with him, while the one man who is called – Daniel Powers – has orders which match the Marine Corp Unit Diaries and has LEE traveling with this same group of men. This is an example of the combining of records and the dismissal of anyone who could connect LEE with HARVEY between Jan 1957 and May 1957.


What does this have to do with Tonsils? It simple establishes that the Oswald with the colds, and reoccurring sore throats was HARVEY Oswald from platoon 2060, Allen Felde’s acquaintance… and NOT the man Powers and a handful of others knew as LEE who supposedly finished 13 weeks of basic training in 5 weeks.

Edited August 2, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Greg Parker]

This reliance on witnesses is needed to prop up this mess, but is totally unreliable in the real world:

The vast majority of testimonial errors-and every trial lawyer

knows they are numerous-are those of the average, normal honest

man, errors unknown to the witness and wholly unintentional, represented

in the great body of testimony which is subjectively accurate

but objectively false. What are the factors determining the accuracy

and reliability of the memory of a particular witness? Juries quite

generally regard the assertiveness and positiveness of the witness

as the best test of accuracy, but experimental psychology has demonstrated

that the most positive feeling of accuracy is no guarantee of, or

evidence of, the truthfulness of the testimony.'

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1341&context=clr

[Steven Gaal]

This reliance on witnesses is needed to prop up this mess, but is totally unreliable in the real world:

The vast majority of testimonial errors-and every trial lawyer

knows they are numerous-are those of the average, normal honest

man, errors unknown to the witness and wholly unintentional, represented

in the great body of testimony which is subjectively accurate

but objectively false. What are the factors determining the accuracy

and reliability of the memory of a particular witness? Juries quite

generally regard the assertiveness and positiveness of the witness

as the best test of accuracy, but experimental psychology has demonstrated

that the most positive feeling of accuracy is no guarantee of, or

evidence of, the truthfulness of the testimony.'

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1341&context=clr

I thought you on occasion you , Mr. Parker, used Ruth Paine as a witness. SAID Ruth one degree of separation from Steve suspect # 1 Allen Dulles. ,gaal

================================

================================

Greg Parker, on 16 Jul 2015 - 2:56 PM, said:

Steven Gaal, on 16 Jul 2015 - 2:22 PM, said:

The ears appear smaller (less lobe) in the "CATHY" photo than the Santa Anna passport photo., gaal

=====================================================

Greg Parker

I'm guessing that this is not your correct head size? (PICTURE STEVEN GAAL head photo , not allowed to use that image extension on this community.)

The lobotomy scars appear smaller than I imagined they would..

I am willing to stand corrected, however... // end Parker

===========================================

Lets try common sense of our eyes. Insults sometimes come from someone cornered and defeated.

Looking at LHO of the same time period and the Oswald what is called the "CATHY" photo in comparison >> there is a mismatch .. thus proof of TWO OSWALDS. , gaal

[Greg Parker]

This reliance on witnesses is needed to prop up this mess, but is totally unreliable in the real world:

The vast majority of testimonial errors-and every trial lawyer

knows they are numerous-are those of the average, normal honest

man, errors unknown to the witness and wholly unintentional, represented

in the great body of testimony which is subjectively accurate

but objectively false. What are the factors determining the accuracy

and reliability of the memory of a particular witness? Juries quite

generally regard the assertiveness and positiveness of the witness

as the best test of accuracy, but experimental psychology has demonstrated

that the most positive feeling of accuracy is no guarantee of, or

evidence of, the truthfulness of the testimony.'

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1341&context=clr

I thought you on occasion you , Mr. Parker, used Ruth Paine as a witness. SAID Ruth one degree of separation from Steve suspect # 1 Allen Dulles. ,gaal

================================

================================

Greg Parker, on 16 Jul 2015 - 2:56 PM, said:

Steven Gaal, on 16 Jul 2015 - 2:22 PM, said:

The ears appear smaller (less lobe) in the "CATHY" photo than the Santa Anna passport photo., gaal

=====================================================

Greg Parker

I'm guessing that this is not your correct head size? (PICTURE STEVEN GAAL head photo , not allowed to use that image extension on this community.)

The lobotomy scars appear smaller than I imagined they would..

I am willing to stand corrected, however... // end Parker

===========================================

Lets try common sense of our eyes. Insults sometimes come from someone cornered and defeated.

Looking at LHO of the same time period and the Oswald what is called the "CATHY" photo in comparison >> there is a mismatch .. thus proof of TWO OSWALDS. , gaal

That wasn't an insult. It was an example of how you lot look at photos.

I use witnesses when there is other evidence to back them up, or when they have shown a level of accuracy in the past.

You lot use witnesses based only on one criteria: "can their memory be used to support my theory"? If the criteria was more honest than that, you would be citing a lot of other witnesses who remember things differently than your hand-picked troupe.

So I take it you cannot answer the question as to why the fake Marguerite would risk exposing the operation by producing a photo of the fake Lee for the WC?

[Steven Gaal]

　

Greg Parker, on 02 Aug 2015 - 2:06 PM, said:

This reliance on witnesses is needed to prop up this mess, but is totally unreliable in the real world:

Quote

The vast majority of testimonial errors-and every trial lawyer

knows they are numerous-are those of the average, normal honest

man, errors unknown to the witness and wholly unintentional, represented

in the great body of testimony which is subjectively accurate

but objectively false. What are the factors determining the accuracy

and reliability of the memory of a particular witness? Juries quite

generally regard the assertiveness and positiveness of the witness

as the best test of accuracy, but experimental psychology has demonstrated

that the most positive feeling of accuracy is no guarantee of, or

evidence of, the truthfulness of the testimony.'

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1341&context=clr

==============================================================================================

I thought you on occasion you , Mr. Parker, used Ruth Paine as a witness. SAID Ruth one degree of separation from Steve suspect # 1 Allen Dulles. ,gaal

================================

================================

　

Steven Gaal, on 16 Jul 2015 - 2:22 PM, said:

The ears appear smaller (less lobe) in the "CATHY" photo than the Santa Anna passport photo., gaal
=====================================================
Greg Parker

I'm guessing that this is not your correct head size? (PICTURE STEVEN GAAL head photo , not allowed to use that image extension on this community.)

The lobotomy scars appear smaller than I imagined they would..

I am willing to stand corrected, however... // end Parker

===========================================

Lets try common sense of our eyes. Insults sometimes come from someone cornered and defeated.

Looking at LHO of the same time period and the Oswald what is called the "CATHY" photo in comparison >> there is a mismatch .. thus proof of TWO OSWALDS. , gaal

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

START PARKER

That wasn't an insult. It was an example of how you lot look at photos.

I use witnesses when there is other evidence to back them up, or when they have shown a level of accuracy in the past.

You lot use witnesses based only on one criteria: "can their memory be used to support my theory"? If the criteria was more honest than that, you would be citing a lot of other witnesses who remember things differently than your hand-picked troupe.

So I take it you cannot answer the question as to why the fake Marguerite would risk exposing the operation by producing a photo of the fake Lee for the WC? // END PARKER

=====

Greg Parker, on 02 Aug 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

=

Since I don't believe Harvey existed, how could I possibly know the answer to these questions?

If it was something more than just a happy family snap, what was the purpose of it?

Why did (presumably the fake) Marguerite provide it to the WC, when it might give the game away?

I am asking because I want to know what you guys believe in regard to these questions. I don't intend to argue about your answers. // END PARKER

==============================================================================================

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. , gaal

===============================================================================================

start Parker

So you're saying it was just a normal family snap of "Harvey" not taken for any hidden purpose?

Can you answer the other question as to why the fake Marguerite would hand over a picture of the fake Lee that his own brother doesn't recognize, and thereby put the whole scheme in jeopardy of being exposed? // END PARKER (OTHER THREAD)

==================================================

ANSWER gaal

How would she know that it would be used for cross examination. ??? ....????

AS STATED

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. , gaal

=============================

That wasn't an insult. It was an example of how you lot look at photos.// PARKER

LOBOTOMY ?? Well I bet most people would say that was a insult.// GAAL

=============================

Looking at LHO of the same time period and the Oswald what is called the "CATHY" photo in comparison >> there is a mismatch .. thus proof of TWO OSWALDS. // gaal

==

Mr. Parker, used Ruth Paine as a witness. SAID Ruth one degree of separation from Steve suspect # 1 Allen Dulles. // gaal

Edited August 2, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Greg Parker]

　

Greg Parker, on 02 Aug 2015 - 2:06 PM, said:

This reliance on witnesses is needed to prop up this mess, but is totally unreliable in the real world:

Quote

The vast majority of testimonial errors-and every trial lawyer

knows they are numerous-are those of the average, normal honest

man, errors unknown to the witness and wholly unintentional, represented

in the great body of testimony which is subjectively accurate

but objectively false. What are the factors determining the accuracy

and reliability of the memory of a particular witness? Juries quite

generally regard the assertiveness and positiveness of the witness

as the best test of accuracy, but experimental psychology has demonstrated

that the most positive feeling of accuracy is no guarantee of, or

evidence of, the truthfulness of the testimony.'

http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1341&context=clr

==============================================================================================

I thought you on occasion you , Mr. Parker, used Ruth Paine as a witness. SAID Ruth one degree of separation from Steve suspect # 1 Allen Dulles. ,gaal

================================

================================

　

Steven Gaal, on 16 Jul 2015 - 2:22 PM, said:

The ears appear smaller (less lobe) in the "CATHY" photo than the Santa Anna passport photo., gaal

=====================================================

Greg Parker

I'm guessing that this is not your correct head size? (PICTURE STEVEN GAAL head photo , not allowed to use that image extension on this community.)

The lobotomy scars appear smaller than I imagined they would..

I am willing to stand corrected, however... // end Parker

===========================================

Lets try common sense of our eyes. Insults sometimes come from someone cornered and defeated.

Looking at LHO of the same time period and the Oswald what is called the "CATHY" photo in comparison >> there is a mismatch .. thus proof of TWO OSWALDS. , gaal

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

START PARKER

That wasn't an insult. It was an example of how you lot look at photos.

I use witnesses when there is other evidence to back them up, or when they have shown a level of accuracy in the past.

You lot use witnesses based only on one criteria: "can their memory be used to support my theory"? If the criteria was more honest than that, you would be citing a lot of other witnesses who remember things differently than your hand-picked troupe.

So I take it you cannot answer the question as to why the fake Marguerite would risk exposing the operation by producing a photo of the fake Lee for the WC? // END PARKER

=====

Greg Parker, on 02 Aug 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

=

Since I don't believe Harvey existed, how could I possibly know the answer to these questions?

If it was something more than just a happy family snap, what was the purpose of it?

Why did (presumably the fake) Marguerite provide it to the WC, when it might give the game away?

I am asking because I want to know what you guys believe in regard to these questions. I don't intend to argue about your answers. // END PARKER

==============================================================================================

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. , gaal

===============================================================================================

start Parker

So you're saying it was just a normal family snap of "Harvey" not taken for any hidden purpose?

Can you answer the other question as to why the fake Marguerite would hand over a picture of the fake Lee that his own brother doesn't recognize, and thereby put the whole scheme in jeopardy of being exposed? // END PARKER (OTHER THREAD)

==================================================

ANSWER gaal

How would she know that it would be used for cross examination. ??? ....????

AS STATED

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. , gaal

=============================

That wasn't an insult. It was an example of how you lot look at photos.// PARKER

LOBOTOMY ?? Well I bet most people would say that was a insult.// GAAL

=============================

Looking at LHO of the same time period and the Oswald what is called the "CATHY" photo in comparison >> there is a mismatch .. thus proof of TWO OSWALDS. // gaal

==

Mr. Parker, used Ruth Paine as a witness. SAID Ruth one degree of separation from Steve suspect # 1 Allen Dulles. // gaal

I got it already. You can't answer the question. Thanks.

[Steven Gaal]

Can you answer the other question as to why the fake Marguerite would hand over a picture of the fake Lee that his own brother doesn't recognize, and thereby put the whole scheme in jeopardy of being exposed? // PARKER (OTHER THREAD)

==

I got it already. You can't answer the question. Thanks. // Parker

======================================================== for the third time I will give you an answer

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. ,

A normal looking childhood is part of the scheme. A concept that seem to me easy to understand. ,gaal

==================================================

(Bill Kelly post)

American University Symposium on Oliver Stone's film "JFK"

CSPAN – (Circa 1991-2)

　

John Judge

I think from my own work, I have read the 26 volumes of the Warren Commission….You know Alan Dulles, when he was asked about releasing the evidence by Hale Boggs, replied, "Go ahead and print it, nobody will read (or look at ,gaal) it anyway."
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Some people dont WANT to believe the truth. ,gaal

archaeological evidence supports the historical accuracy of the Biblical account in every detail

=

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/06/The-Walls-of-Jericho.aspx

article/53 min video

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

[David Josephs]

Greg... the same exhibit which offers the perm record, offers the grade cards which feed into that record...

Show us where 12 absences are recorded on grade cards to corroborate the permanent record.

if 168 + 12 = 180, you are saying that 12 means something and was derived from actual records... that 12 equates to his absences from school... no?

"168" is written there and as you explain, it makes up the rest of the school year.. most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance"

Except you.

THESE are the records in evidence.. if one does not begat the other... the origin of the other comes into question.

Now why would the actual records of those specific years need creation ????

and what again is the significance of 3830 West 6th Apt 3 ... and then you can tell us where he was from Oct 55 thru Sept 56...

You wrote a book about this time period, didn't you? why is getting the details correct so hard for you?

You've been trying to make some point about "Re-Ad" yet you don't seem to be able to close this circle of your guesswork so it actually means something.

If there were 180 days in a school year, and the student missed 12 days... how many days did he attend?

If 168 is your answer, and 168 appears under the Re-Ad column... I'm thinking even you can connect those two dots...

Those grade cards appear to me to be for the 53-54 school year - not the 54-55.

"most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance"

Except you."

Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences.

C'mon Greg...

If you are going to say these are from 53-54 - how can anything you ever say be taken seriously if you'd get something this easy this wrong?

Just match the grades per trimester and the final grades... the only thing wrong is the absences not matching and the Gen Math grades...

i.e. English: 62, 77.3 & 70. The grade card shows 62 (+ 2 absences), 77.3 (3 absences) for a final grade of 70 (total 5 absences)

General Science? 75.6, 77, & 76. Grade card? 75.6, 77, for a final grade of 76 and 5 absences...

"Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences"

So we need to add back the absences to the Re-Ad # to get the total number of school days... 168 + 12 = 180

179 + 5 = 184. You've claimed both of these #'s are correct for the total days in the 53-54 school year (184) and the 54-55 year (180)... yes?

So where are the 12 absences? and why are there also absences of 5, 6, 7 & 9?

Here's a hint Greg... the FBI created fraudulent evidence.

Now Greg...if you're going to attack witnesses it cuts both ways... And the statement you linked to does not discuss what witness testimony says when the FBI creates physical evidence which is a lie. Witness testimony is usually a problem when the physical evidence contradicts their testimony since in most cases (we'd hope), the evidence is authentic.

In this case the evidence is NOT authentic... when Jean Hill claims 4-6 shots and some from the behind the fence she is countered NOT by real evidence but by the insistence of the FBI that she's wrong... regardless.

In our case, a witness is as reliable if not moreso that the FBI which was tasked with accumulating the evidence. The FBI can be shown to have created evidence repeatedly in this case and simply does not get the benfit of the doubt. The films and photos in their control are also suspect for authenticity where as witnesses are corroborated by many, many others...

If we're going to discount witness testimony - we ALL suffer the consequences.

It seems that if the witness accounts can be authenticated, they carry much more weight than the FBI's.

[Greg Parker]

Greg... the same exhibit which offers the perm record, offers the grade cards which feed into that record...

Show us where 12 absences are recorded on grade cards to corroborate the permanent record.

if 168 + 12 = 180, you are saying that 12 means something and was derived from actual records... that 12 equates to his absences from school... no?

"168" is written there and as you explain, it makes up the rest of the school year.. most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance"

Except you.

THESE are the records in evidence.. if one does not begat the other... the origin of the other comes into question.

Now why would the actual records of those specific years need creation ????

and what again is the significance of 3830 West 6th Apt 3 ... and then you can tell us where he was from Oct 55 thru Sept 56...

You wrote a book about this time period, didn't you? why is getting the details correct so hard for you?

You've been trying to make some point about "Re-Ad" yet you don't seem to be able to close this circle of your guesswork so it actually means something.

If there were 180 days in a school year, and the student missed 12 days... how many days did he attend?

If 168 is your answer, and 168 appears under the Re-Ad column... I'm thinking even you can connect those two dots...

Those grade cards appear to me to be for the 53-54 school year - not the 54-55.

"most people understand that the number which is not "absences" is "attendance"

Except you."

Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences.

C'mon Greg...

If you are going to say these are from 53-54 - how can anything you ever say be taken seriously if you'd get something this easy this wrong?

Just match the grades per trimester and the final grades... the only thing wrong is the absences not matching and the Gen Math grades...

i.e. English: 62, 77.3 & 70. The grade card shows 62 (+ 2 absences), 77.3 (3 absences) for a final grade of 70 (total 5 absences)

General Science? 75.6, 77, & 76. Grade card? 75.6, 77, for a final grade of 76 and 5 absences...

"Me and Mr Head (a Vice Principal) who initially stated that the figure represents the number of school days. Remember? It does - but only after you add back the absences"

So we need to add back the absences to the Re-Ad # to get the total number of school days... 168 + 12 = 180

179 + 5 = 184. You've claimed both of these #'s are correct for the total days in the 53-54 school year (184) and the 54-55 year (180)... yes?

So where are the 12 absences? and why are there also absences of 5, 6, 7 & 9?

Here's a hint Greg... the FBI created fraudulent evidence.

Now Greg...if you're going to attack witnesses it cuts both ways... And the statement you linked to does not discuss what witness testimony says when the FBI creates physical evidence which is a lie. Witness testimony is usually a problem when the physical evidence contradicts their testimony since in most cases (we'd hope), the evidence is authentic.

In this case the evidence is NOT authentic... when Jean Hill claims 4-6 shots and some from the behind the fence she is countered NOT by real evidence but by the insistence of the FBI that she's wrong... regardless.

In our case, a witness is as reliable if not moreso that the FBI which was tasked with accumulating the evidence. The FBI can be shown to have created evidence repeatedly in this case and simply does not get the benfit of the doubt. The films and photos in their control are also suspect for authenticity where as witnesses are corroborated by many, many others...

If we're going to discount witness testimony - we ALL suffer the consequences.

It seems that if the witness accounts can be authenticated, they carry much more weight than the FBI's.

In short, you have no proof those grades are for 54-55 - you just need them be to - so they must be. And along the way, we'll just ignore the little fact that the five days absences match the records for 53-54.

Do you have an answer for me regarding why the fake Marguerite produced the photo of the fake Oswald for the WC and risked exposing the whole operation? I have just stopped rolling around laughing at Gaal's excuse that she was channeling Allen Dulles' in thinking no one would read the report anyway...

[Steven Gaal]

(Bill Kelly post)

American University Symposium on Oliver Stone's film "JFK"

CSPAN – (Circa 1991-2)

　

John Judge

I think from my own work, I have read the 26 volumes of the Warren Commission….You know Alan Dulles, when he was asked about releasing the evidence by Hale Boggs, replied, "Go ahead and print it, nobody will read (or look at ,gaal) it anyway."

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

Do you have an answer for me regarding why the fake Marguerite produced the photo of the fake Oswald for the WC and risked exposing the whole operation? I have just stopped rolling around laughing at Gaal's excuse that she was channeling Allen Dulles' in thinking no one would read the report anyway... // PARKER

================================

channeling // Parker >>>>> THATS A BACK HANDED INSULT. //,gaal

Who said she was channeling Allen Dulles ?? Marguerite has a story to tell and that's her job. The photo wasn't deep sixed because nobody reads/looks and the photos of that LHO time frame are scarce and an intell tale of H & L is being told. If someone did look they would see a child experiencing a normal time and that's the tale the CIA wants to tell. //,gaal

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

Edited August 3, 2015 by Steven Gaal