Harvey and Lee: John Armstrong

[Larry Hancock]

Once again I have to point out some factual issues about Oswald and the U-2"

"From the Atsugi radar bubble monitoring top-secret U2 flights"

Oswald worked in ground control approach radar, the systems he would have been around were for tracking local flights and relatively low altitudes on approach and

departure to the runways at Atsugi....same as his later radar assignment on the west coast. That would have left him familiar with the various traffic patterns, the

civilian vs. military routes and other information interesting from an air defense standpoint. However he was not a surveillance radar operator, which involves

different systems. He might well have tracked a U-2 leaving or departing base but that's it, the U-2 took hours to lumber itself up to surveillance altitude and it

would have been well away and well beyond any radar he was watching...and certainly no base radar could have tracked its actual mission profile over foreign

targets. In short, Oswald was not monitoring top secret U-2 flights and if he knew anything pertinent about the aircraft it would have been base scuttle butt rather

than any direct involvement with its missions.

[Thomas Graves]

Once again I have to point out some factual issues about Oswald and the U-2"

"From the Atsugi radar bubble monitoring top-secret U2 flights"

Oswald worked in ground control approach radar, the systems he would have been around were for tracking local flights and relatively low altitudes on approach and

departure to the runways at Atsugi....same as his later radar assignment on the west coast. That would have left him familiar with the various traffic patterns, the

civilian vs. military routes and other information interesting from an air defense standpoint. However he was not a surveillance radar operator, which involves

different systems. He might well have tracked a U-2 leaving or departing base but that's it, the U-2 took hours to lumber itself up to surveillance altitude and it

would have been well away and well beyond any radar he was watching...and certainly no base radar could have tracked its actual mission profile over foreign

targets. In short, Oswald was not monitoring top secret U-2 flights and if he knew anything pertinent about the aircraft it would have been base scuttle butt rather

than any direct involvement with its missions.

Hi Larry,

Going from memory here, but I've read somewhere that Oswald tracked a U-2 while it was flying over China and brought it to the attention of his surprised co-workers in the bubble?

Thanks,

--Tommy

Edited August 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Larry Hancock]

No doubt you have read it Tommy, sounds somewhat familiar to me as well. I'd like to know the source if you happen to come across it again. Of course its wrong but still....using a distance mapping tool it looks like some 1,100 miles from Atsuki to the Chinese coast. That would be beyond not only GCA radar sets but the best long distance surveillance radar of the day. Would have to do some research but I doubt you could even have tracked it as far as South Korea. The leading surveillance radar of the 59-60 period would be the AN/FPS 7 with a range of 270 miles and an altitude of 100,000 feet.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Larry Hancock

[Jim Hargrove]

Larry Hancock's description of Lee Oswald's limited knowledge of U-2 reconnaissance and flight specs makes perfect sense. No particular claims about it are made in Harvey and Lee, and it would certainly make no sense whatsoever for American Intel publicly to send a young guy with real knowledge of the U-2 behind enemy lines in the Soviet Union.

But what mattered in a false defection was only whether some Russian officials would believe Oswald might have useful information, not what he actually knew or what we might think about it. When Paul Trejo speculates that he might have been an ONI dangle, that is a clear suggestion that Paul at least thinks some folks in U.S. Intel at the time believed some Russians might believe Oswald knew real secrets about U.S. reconnaissance flights. What else could possibly be of more interest at this point in the Cold War?

But none of the above matters. The Russian-speaking young man who “defected” to the Soviet Union was never stationed at Atsugi. He had no knowledge whatsoever of the U-2, either direct or via the grapevine. It was, therefore, completely safe to send him into potential harm's way in Russia.

In the thousand or so pages of Harvey and Lee, nowhere else is the evidence for two Oswalds clearer than in the roughly 150 pages covering the service of both young men in the USMC (primarily on pp. 146-290.) The evidence is far too long to even summarize here, involving Unit Diaries, medical and other records, interviews with soldiers who associated with one man or the other, and so on. Here is a brief excerpt from H&L that kind of summarizes the difference between the two soldiers.

Lee Oswald - drunk and not interested in politics or communism

Harvey Oswald seldom drank and was referred to by many people as a "tee-

totaler," but not Lee Oswald. Jerry Pitts recalled one night when (Lee) Oswald was passed

out drunk in a parking lot next to the barracks. Peter Cassisi remembered that Lee

Oswald returned from leave on several occasions in a completely drunken condition. John

Rene Heindel remembered that while in Japan, Lee Oswald drank a great deal, often

becoming intoxicated.⁷³ He said, "Although I generally regarded Oswald as an intelli-

gent person, I did not observe him to be particularly interested in politics or international

affairs.”⁷⁴

The Marines who knew the tall, husky Lee Oswald in Japan said that he never

spoke about communism, was not interested in politics, and never spoke or studied a

foreign language. He kept to himself, read a great deal, drank a great deal, and occa-

sionally engaged in fights with fellow Marines, but not Harvey.

The shorter, thinner Harvey Oswald was never known to have been involved

in a fist fight, continuously discussed communism and politics (North Dakota-1953,

Arlington Heights High School-1956, Allen Felde-1957, Palmer McBride-1957/58, Santa

Ana, California-1959), never drank, and spoke Russian fluently (MACS 9, Santa Ana,

California-1959).

H&L, p. 172

[Jim Hargrove]

--From Harvey and Lee, pp. 185-186

January--Lee in the Philippines

While stationed in the Philippines several of the Marines from Oswald's unit

often walked through the countryside and explored relics and equipment from World

War II while off duty. James R. "Bud" Persons enjoyed these expeditions and became

acquainted with Lee Oswald during this period. He remembered, "Oswald was easy to

get along with. He was quiet ..... he was not one of those animal-like guys."

Daniel Patrick Powers, who had known Oswald since radar school in Biloxi,

rejoined the squadron during this time and again saw Oswald. On January 22nd the

squad was put aboard an LST (Landing Ship Tank) en route to Corregidor, a distance

of 40 miles. T hey set up a radar bubble and arranged sleeping quarters in the remains

of a hospital that was bombed during World War II.

In Corregidor, Zack Stout, George Wilkins, Bobby Warren, and Oswald spent

countless off-duty hours exploring caves, tunnels and old battle sites from WWII.

Oswald took numerous color photographs of Stout, Wilkins, Warren and fellow Marines

that are now located in the National Archives. I obtained copies of these photographs

and sent them to Zack Stout, and he was able to identify several of his former Marine

buddies.

George A. "Hans" Wilkins, Jr. remembered that Oswald was on mess duty the

entire time he was there and became a proficient cook.9 A week or so after their unit

arrived they were visited by actor John Wayne, who was filming The Barbarian and the

Geisha. Wayne flew overhead in a helicopter and asked permission to land. When the

chopper landed Wayne was greeted by dozens of Marines who rushed out, crowded

around him, and then escorted him to the NCO club where he had more than a few

drinks.

On January 28 one of Oswald's friends, Richard Cyr, left Japan for Beaufort,

South Carolina. Cyr said that one of the Marines who would have known Oswald best

was Sergeant Gordon R. Dietrich.10 Sidney Robinson, whom Oswald assisted with guard

186duty, last saw Oswald in February, 1958.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Jim Hargrove

[Paul Trejo]

--From Harvey and Lee, pp. 185-186

January--Lee in the Philippines

While stationed in the Philippines several of the Marines from Oswald's unit often walked through the countryside and explored relics and equipment from World War II while off duty. James R. "Bud" Persons enjoyed these expeditions and became acquainted with Lee Oswald during this period. He remembered, "Oswald was easy to get along with. He was quiet ..... he was not one of those animal-like guys."

Daniel Patrick Powers, who had known Oswald since radar school in Biloxi, rejoined the squadron during this time and again saw Oswald. On January 22nd the squad was put aboard an LST (Landing Ship Tank) en route to Corregidor, a distance of 40 miles. T hey set up a radar bubble and arranged sleeping quarters in the remains of a hospital that was bombed during World War II.

In Corregidor, Zack Stout, George Wilkins, Bobby Warren, and Oswald spent countless off-duty hours exploring caves, tunnels and old battle sites from WWII. Oswald took numerous color photographs of Stout, Wilkins, Warren and fellow Marines that are now located in the National Archives. I obtained copies of these photographs and sent them to Zack Stout, and he was able to identify several of his former Marine buddies.

George A. "Hans" Wilkins, Jr. remembered that Oswald was on mess duty the entire time he was there and became a proficient cook.9 A week or so after their unit arrived they were visited by actor John Wayne, who was filming The Barbarian and the Geisha. Wayne flew overhead in a helicopter and asked permission to land. When the chopper landed Wayne was greeted by dozens of Marines who rushed out, crowded around him, and then escorted him to the NCO club where he had more than a few drinks.

On January 28 one of Oswald's friends, Richard Cyr, left Japan for Beaufort,South Carolina. Cyr said that one of the Marines who would have known Oswald best was Sergeant Gordon R. Dietrich.10 Sidney Robinson, whom Oswald assisted with guard duty, last saw Oswald in February, 1958.

Thanks Jim, for sharing this portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald in the Marines. It illustrates the fact that in no possible way was Oswald a Loner or a Lone Nut. He was a very social person. His mystery then begins when he makes every effort to become a full-time employee of the CIA. It seems to me that Oswald never made the grade. It seems to John Armstrong, on the other hand, that Oswald was hired full-time, and this lets Armstrong fill in the blanks of this "secret career" as he wishes.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited August 9, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Jim Hargrove]

Paul,

The CIA was only interested in Harvey Oswald because he spoke Russian. A guy with his education would never be an officer.

[Greg Parker]

Paul,

The CIA was only interested in Harvey Oswald because he spoke Russian.

This is just too rich. You have not gone anywhere near establishing that there was a "Harvey" so how can you claim to know what interest the CIA had in him?

For starters, the people Armstrong claims were "Harvey's" father and uncle were not related to each other by blood or marriage and bore no resemblance to Oswald.

http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t87-the-mrs-jack-d-tippit-phone-call

[Glenn Nall]

This is a major publishing event in the JFK assassination world. Parts of Armstrong's work has been on the Net and he's spoken at some of the big JFK conferences. His work-in-progress became spoken of as 'the John Armstrong research'; and finally we have the book, a self-published 1000 pages; plus a CD-Rom containing documents he cites. (I haven't even looked at the CD-Rom yet.) Since one reading of this (and some sections I merely skimmed), is all I have managed so far, and that is barely scratching the surface of 1000 pages, this is a

provisional report; first reactions.

This is a staggering piece of research, twelve years of it, and a lot of money spent in the process. Armstrong has interviewed people who haven't been interviewed since the Warren Commission - and many who have never been interviewed before. He has read official files no non-official had seen before him. Lots of new ground is broken here in all kinds of little subsections of the story. But it is far too long. If the text was copy-edited, he or she deserves a slap: the text is full of stupid little errors. The typesetting is eccentric: the text is covered in italicisation, bold and underlining. A potentially great 400 or 500 page book is buried in this behemoth. Or perhaps it shouldn't be thought of as a book, but more as research assembled in book form.

Armstrong does three things. First, he is offering a theory of the assassination. His minute - microscopic - analysis of key episodes in the case is punctuated by chunks of the ClA's coven activities in the 1950s and 60s: Armstrong wants us to

see what the Agency is known to have been doing while the Oswald story unfolded. But his thesis that the CIA killed JFK and framed Oswald fails for the same reason that previous versions of this have failed: no matter how plausible the idea, no matter how much detail we are given of other, analogous things the CIA was doing in the post-war years, Armstrong cannot show who was doing the shooting; and he cannot identify the CIA conspirators. The only plausible conspirators he offers are Jack Ruby and Lee, one of the two 'Oswalds' in the story. Both have connections to the ClA-funded anti-Castro operations; but that is all.

The second thing Armstrong does is show in great detail how the FBI 'edited' the evidence about the shooting. The FBI had all the evidence collected by the Dallas police sent to Washington and a lot of it didn't return. Armstrong thinks the editing was done to conceal evidence of the two 'Oswalds'; and while this looks very plausible, it is not conclusively demonstrated.

Thirdly, and centrally, Armstrong takes on the 'two Oswalds' question, which has been around since 1967. It arose first because there seemed to be someone pretending to be Oswald, apparently framing the other, genuine 'Oswald'. Professor

Richard Popkin detailed this first in his The Second Oswald (London: Andre Deutscn/ Sphere, 1967). Then 'Oswalds' with different heights and slightly different faces were noticed. A decade after Popkin, Michael Eddowes published The Oswald

File (New York: Clarkson Potter, 1977), which concluded that one 'Oswald', the American Marine 'Oswald', went to the Soviet Union but another 'Oswald' came back in his place, a ringer being run by the Soviets, who shot the President. In Alias Oswald (Manchester, Maine; GKG partners, 1985) Robert Cutler and W. R. Morris argued that the second 'Oswald', was not a Soviet spy but a US spy. In their analysis the switch from one 'Oswald' to the other took place in 1958 while Oswald was serving in the Marine Corps in Japan.

By dint of minute examination of the paper record and a lot of phone-bashing and travelling, Armstrong validates the Cutler-Morris thesis - there was a switch - and has tried to trace the life of the 'hidden' Oswald. He appears to have established the existence of an intelligence operation which began with two boys, of different heights, but who looked similar and who lived parallel lives. One, Harvey, was Russian-speaking, probably a refugee from Eastern Europe; the other, Lee, was an American.

It begins in the early WOs, some of the cooler years of the Cold War. US intelligence had no reliable information on the Soviet Union. (This was before U-2 over-flights and satellites.) Soviet nuclear arms, even the Soviet economy, were a mystery. All the agents sent in by CIA and MI6 had been turned or captured. How could they get agents in? One way was to send them in as defectors. There seems to have been a CIA programme of defectors - Armstrong discusses some of the others - in which, he hypothesises, there was an attempt at a better class of defection. Armstrong believes the CIA ran two real identities in parallel, merged them - Lee and Harvey became Lee Harvey - and switched them just before the apparent defection of the American 'Oswald', Lee. Thus the CIA would insert into the Soviet Union a defector, Harvey, with two outstanding characteristics: one, unknown to the Soviet authorities, he could speak Russian; two, if Soviet intelligence checked his biography, they would find the American 'Lee Oswald', not a 'legend' but a real life. If this seems elaborate, Armstrong reminds the reader of the Soviet use of 'illegals', and quotes the example of Molody, 'Gordon Lonsdale', who operated in the UK.

This hypothesised CIA plan entailed both boys being in the Marines at the same time. Armstrong shows reports and presents recollections of 'Oswald' in two places at the same time through secondary school and in the Marines. The two 'Oswalds' explains the mass of contradictory material about Oswald in the Marines: one who couldn't shoot; one who could: one who was an apparent Marxist and read Russian, the other who didn't: one who was outgoing and a brawler; the other a bookworm. The plan also meant two 'mothers of Oswald', two 'Marguerite Oswalds'. Here the programme didn't extend to two women who looked similar: one was tall and elegant and the other short and plain. If Armstrong is correct, and the evidence looks convincing on one reading, a woman spent nearly ten years, pretending to be 'Marguerite Oswald', following the real Marguerite round the country, taking a series' of xxxx-jobs to do so.

It should be noted that there is no evidence, either paper record or firsthand, that this scheme took place. Armstrong infers it from the evidence of the two 'Oswalds'. If this is true, Armstrong has uncovered the most elaborate intelligence operation (and done the greatest piece of espionage detective work) I have ever read about.

Passage from Lobster Magazine (Summer, 2004)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Being a devotee of the Internet as a means of quickly identifying Warren Commission, HSCA and ARRB Documents, I also will do searches on individuals whose names come up on the JFK Forum from time to time. While I do not have John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee" I seem to constantly stumble upon material from it and references to it on other JFK Forums. My point is that some of the material referenced if accurate I think, has a place in JFK Research in general. My overall attitude in researching the assassination is that "nothing should be ruled out" when approaching possible "angles" to the assassination. But Armstrong's premise is even hard for me to swallow. Still I would like to mention that I have read portions of his stuff in other forums, which present IMO valid "leads." For example, On excerpt describes an Oswald impersonator with Ruby somewhere in the New Orleans area prior to November 22, 63, it mentions that this person who claimed to be Oswald had a tatoo on his left arm. I don't believe a JFK researcher should be guilty of "throwing the baby out with the bath water." One does not have to accept Armstrong's premise of a "Harvey and Lee" to utilize the information contained in his research that is credible. Anyone?

"Though Armstrong's premise is hard for me to swallow, my overall attitude in researching the assassination is that "nothing should be ruled out" when approaching possible "angles" to the assassination."

I agree completely.

"File (New York: Clarkson Potter, 1977), which concluded that one 'Oswald', the American Marine 'Oswald', went to the Soviet Union but another 'Oswald' came back in his place, a ringer being run by the Soviets, who shot the President."

Just a thought:

According to Jennifer Lake:

A) Oswald indeed, especially in New Orleans, became closely involved with the flow of small arms and ammunition and there is speculative evidence that nuclear materials were moved by that flow. Key persons and agencies connected to the JFK assassination had direct and profitable activities in atomic industry. Even a reframing of the U.S. Public Health Service particle accelerator story given by Ed Haslam in Dr. Mary’s Monkey, has more ominous implications used to “recharge” or transform nuclear fuel in a spent or raw state.

Jim Garrison: …”control was so careful that ammunition was kept far-flung in outlying areas. Dispersal was the rule… in New Orleans only small amounts were kept at Banister’s office at any one time.” If these munitions emitted a particular radioactive signature it would be wise to manage their storage in this way. On the Houma military base, which was guarded and active 24/7, perhaps it made no difference when the cache was militarily protected, but we are also to believe that the transfers were protected as a sanctioned trade under the watchful eyes of government operatives, even in the open on the streets of downtown New Orleans –why then would these munitions require dispersal and isolation? What made these munitions “unique” and who, with any firearms experience, would use the word “unique”? Were they variously labeled for purposes of special handling and destination routes? Was all the ‘cancer research’, including the disease cases of David Ferrie and Jack Ruby, more expressly intended for themselves as special handlers of carcinogenic cargo?

C) Robert Oswald remarked on the physical changes in his brother Lee, returned from Russia at age 22, as having thinned wire-textured hair and a sallow complexion –very unlike the robustly youthful marine he had last seen in the fall of 1959. Signs of early aging, like LHO’s, are a common and predictable side-effect of radiation exposure. The black-and-white photo below on the right shows not just thinning hair but patches of scalp which can be confirmed in the video images of Oswald being taken through the Dallas PD hallway.

just a thought...

[Glenn Nall]

This is a major publishing event in the JFK assassination world. Parts of Armstrong's work has been on the Net and he's spoken at some of the big JFK conferences. His work-in-progress became spoken of as 'the John Armstrong research'; and finally we have the book, a self-published 1000 pages; plus a CD-Rom containing documents he cites. (I haven't even looked at the CD-Rom yet.) Since one reading of this (and some sections I merely skimmed), is all I have managed so far, and that is barely scratching the surface of 1000 pages, this is a

provisional report; first reactions.

This is a staggering piece of research, twelve years of it, and a lot of money spent in the process. Armstrong has interviewed people who haven't been interviewed since the Warren Commission - and many who have never been interviewed before. He has read official files no non-official had seen before him. Lots of new ground is broken here in all kinds of little subsections of the story. But it is far too long. If the text was copy-edited, he or she deserves a slap: the text is full of stupid little errors. The typesetting is eccentric: the text is covered in italicisation, bold and underlining. A potentially great 400 or 500 page book is buried in this behemoth. Or perhaps it shouldn't be thought of as a book, but more as research assembled in book form.

Armstrong does three things. First, he is offering a theory of the assassination. His minute - microscopic - analysis of key episodes in the case is punctuated by chunks of the ClA's coven activities in the 1950s and 60s: Armstrong wants us to

see what the Agency is known to have been doing while the Oswald story unfolded. But his thesis that the CIA killed JFK and framed Oswald fails for the same reason that previous versions of this have failed: no matter how plausible the idea, no matter how much detail we are given of other, analogous things the CIA was doing in the post-war years, Armstrong cannot show who was doing the shooting; and he cannot identify the CIA conspirators. The only plausible conspirators he offers are Jack Ruby and Lee, one of the two 'Oswalds' in the story. Both have connections to the ClA-funded anti-Castro operations; but that is all.

The second thing Armstrong does is show in great detail how the FBI 'edited' the evidence about the shooting. The FBI had all the evidence collected by the Dallas police sent to Washington and a lot of it didn't return. Armstrong thinks the editing was done to conceal evidence of the two 'Oswalds'; and while this looks very plausible, it is not conclusively demonstrated.

Thirdly, and centrally, Armstrong takes on the 'two Oswalds' question, which has been around since 1967. It arose first because there seemed to be someone pretending to be Oswald, apparently framing the other, genuine 'Oswald'. Professor

Richard Popkin detailed this first in his The Second Oswald (London: Andre Deutscn/ Sphere, 1967). Then 'Oswalds' with different heights and slightly different faces were noticed. A decade after Popkin, Michael Eddowes published The Oswald

File (New York: Clarkson Potter, 1977), which concluded that one 'Oswald', the American Marine 'Oswald', went to the Soviet Union but another 'Oswald' came back in his place, a ringer being run by the Soviets, who shot the President. In Alias Oswald (Manchester, Maine; GKG partners, 1985) Robert Cutler and W. R. Morris argued that the second 'Oswald', was not a Soviet spy but a US spy. In their analysis the switch from one 'Oswald' to the other took place in 1958 while Oswald was serving in the Marine Corps in Japan.

By dint of minute examination of the paper record and a lot of phone-bashing and travelling, Armstrong validates the Cutler-Morris thesis - there was a switch - and has tried to trace the life of the 'hidden' Oswald. He appears to have established the existence of an intelligence operation which began with two boys, of different heights, but who looked similar and who lived parallel lives. One, Harvey, was Russian-speaking, probably a refugee from Eastern Europe; the other, Lee, was an American.

It begins in the early WOs, some of the cooler years of the Cold War. US intelligence had no reliable information on the Soviet Union. (This was before U-2 over-flights and satellites.) Soviet nuclear arms, even the Soviet economy, were a mystery. All the agents sent in by CIA and MI6 had been turned or captured. How could they get agents in? One way was to send them in as defectors. There seems to have been a CIA programme of defectors - Armstrong discusses some of the others - in which, he hypothesises, there was an attempt at a better class of defection. Armstrong believes the CIA ran two real identities in parallel, merged them - Lee and Harvey became Lee Harvey - and switched them just before the apparent defection of the American 'Oswald', Lee. Thus the CIA would insert into the Soviet Union a defector, Harvey, with two outstanding characteristics: one, unknown to the Soviet authorities, he could speak Russian; two, if Soviet intelligence checked his biography, they would find the American 'Lee Oswald', not a 'legend' but a real life. If this seems elaborate, Armstrong reminds the reader of the Soviet use of 'illegals', and quotes the example of Molody, 'Gordon Lonsdale', who operated in the UK.

This hypothesised CIA plan entailed both boys being in the Marines at the same time. Armstrong shows reports and presents recollections of 'Oswald' in two places at the same time through secondary school and in the Marines. The two 'Oswalds' explains the mass of contradictory material about Oswald in the Marines: one who couldn't shoot; one who could: one who was an apparent Marxist and read Russian, the other who didn't: one who was outgoing and a brawler; the other a bookworm. The plan also meant two 'mothers of Oswald', two 'Marguerite Oswalds'. Here the programme didn't extend to two women who looked similar: one was tall and elegant and the other short and plain. If Armstrong is correct, and the evidence looks convincing on one reading, a woman spent nearly ten years, pretending to be 'Marguerite Oswald', following the real Marguerite round the country, taking a series' of xxxx-jobs to do so.

It should be noted that there is no evidence, either paper record or firsthand, that this scheme took place. Armstrong infers it from the evidence of the two 'Oswalds'. If this is true, Armstrong has uncovered the most elaborate intelligence operation (and done the greatest piece of espionage detective work) I have ever read about.

Passage from Lobster Magazine (Summer, 2004)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Being a devotee of the Internet as a means of quickly identifying Warren Commission, HSCA and ARRB Documents, I also will do searches on individuals whose names come up on the JFK Forum from time to time. While I do not have John Armstrong's "Harvey and Lee" I seem to constantly stumble upon material from it and references to it on other JFK Forums. My point is that some of the material referenced if accurate I think, has a place in JFK Research in general. My overall attitude in researching the assassination is that "nothing should be ruled out" when approaching possible "angles" to the assassination. But Armstrong's premise is even hard for me to swallow. Still I would like to mention that I have read portions of his stuff in other forums, which present IMO valid "leads." For example, On excerpt describes an Oswald impersonator with Ruby somewhere in the New Orleans area prior to November 22, 63, it mentions that this person who claimed to be Oswald had a tatoo on his left arm. I don't believe a JFK researcher should be guilty of "throwing the baby out with the bath water." One does not have to accept Armstrong's premise of a "Harvey and Lee" to utilize the information contained in his research that is credible. Anyone?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First off, there were in fact two (2) M. Oswald's.

Margaret Oswald, who was the first wife of Robert E. Lee Oswald (Sr.), and who did not intitially change her name upon divorce from R.E. L. Oswald (Sr.)

&

Marguerite Oswald, who was the second wife of Robert E. Lee Oswald (Sr.)

Secondly, a little known fact!

It was not uncommon practice in the South, and especially in large cities such as New Orleans, where the proprietor actually knew the family, to issue two checks to a person who worked for them.

1 check in the person's name.

1 check in a minor child's name.

This was done for a combination of reasons which included:

1. The employer could actually report a lower salary to the IRS for the actual worker, while in fact paying the worker a portion of their salary through the name of a dependent child.

2. Since the child was usually only a "part time" worker, certain tax advantages could be taken advantage of by reporting a portion of the actual workers income as having been earned by a dependent child.

And, even if Income Taxes were withheld on the child, they would normally be all returned at the end of the tax year when a return was filed.

3. When "Worker's Compensation" laws came into effect, this arrangement was of benefit to the Employer as the worker was reportedly earning a considerably lower income than was truely the case. Therefore, that "contribution" made by the employer for any worker compensation insurance was lower, based on the reported lower salary of the employee.

And, part-time employees were not required to be fully covered under worker's comp.

4. In maintaing a "low income", the worker could frequently qualify for various assistance programs such as the old "commodities" assistance which was given to low income families.

Therefore, just because there may be indications of checks made out to Lee Harvey Oswald, when he was or was not there to collect and receive said monies, is not of itself full indication of some giant espionage game.

Merely those games that people play in order to avoid giving some of their income to the IRS, as well as still qualifying for various federal subsidy programs.

Tom

I'm not averse to believing something as radical as 2 Ms and even 2 LHOs - I'm open to its possibility.

I also like to see documentation when it's available.

when making a statement of fact that's a bit off the beaten path - "First off, there were in fact two (2) M. Oswald's." - , a casual citation goes a long way in lending the statement some credibility.

I HAVE read some fairly curious stories about one M being in NY and another being out west, or in NO or something... it's hard to piece all that stuff together. (the story of one LHO applying for the job at the Dallas Employment Agency and a different LHO in the office once LHO was employed at TSBD IS intriguing...)

anyway - what is there showing that there are 2 Ms?

[Greg Parker]

C) Robert Oswald remarked on the physical changes in his brother Lee, returned from Russia at age 22, as having thinned wire-textured hair and a sallow complexion –very unlike the robustly youthful marine he had last seen in the fall of 1959. Signs of early aging, like LHO’s, are a common and predictable side-effect of radiation exposure. The black-and-white photo below on the right shows not just thinning hair but patches of scalp which can be confirmed in the video images of Oswald being taken through the Dallas PD hallway.

The answer is in his medical records.

Nothing to do with doppelgangers, or radiation exposure. Very mundane.

[Thomas Graves]

Once again I have to point out some factual issues about Oswald and the U-2"

"From the Atsugi radar bubble monitoring top-secret U2 flights"

Oswald worked in ground control approach radar, the systems he would have been around were for tracking local flights and relatively low altitudes on approach and

departure to the runways at Atsugi....same as his later radar assignment on the west coast. That would have left him familiar with the various traffic patterns, the

civilian vs. military routes and other information interesting from an air defense standpoint. However he was not a surveillance radar operator, which involves

different systems. He might well have tracked a U-2 leaving or departing base but that's it, the U-2 took hours to lumber itself up to surveillance altitude and it

would have been well away and well beyond any radar he was watching...and certainly no base radar could have tracked its actual mission profile over foreign

targets. In short, Oswald was not monitoring top secret U-2 flights and if he knew anything pertinent about the aircraft it would have been base scuttle butt rather

than any direct involvement with its missions.

Hi Larry,

Going from memory here, but I've read somewhere that Oswald tracked a U-2 while it was flying over China and brought it to the attention of his surprised co-workers in the bubble?

Thanks,

--Tommy

Larry,

It's in a chapter called "Eiderdown Chess" in John Newman's book, Oswald and the CIA :

"... It's Moving Over China!"

[...] Oswald's unit had not been operational very long [at Cubi Point, Philippines] before he noticed something interesting. [Oswald's commander, John] Donovan describes what happened:

One time we were watching the radar there at Cubi Point and Oswald said, "Look at this thing." He had a trail in grease mark and he said, "This thing just took off from Clark and it's moving over China!" And I said, "You can't be right," and he agreed. A week later he saw it again, so several of us began looking hard, and we saw it. Oswald was right, and we saw it so regularly that we started clocking them. I even called the duty officer about them and he said, "Look fella, there's no planes flying over China." We knew better. We saw them all the time, mostly flying out of Cubi Point, but sometimes they flew out of Clark."

This story confirms what Hospital Corpsman Hobbs told the ONI in 1964 about the gossip at Atsugi in 1958. The CIA was flying U2's over China as well as over the Soviet Union. Oswald's unit later deployed (September 14 through October 6, 1958) to Ping Tong on the north side of Taiwan, and Donovan was his commander there, too. Donovan recalls: "In Formosa [Taiwan] we were near to the U-2 as well. (14)" There, Oswald spent many hours drawing traces of the U-2's tracks over the People's Republic of China. [...]

--Tommy

Edited August 10, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Parker]

Once again I have to point out some factual issues about Oswald and the U-2"

"From the Atsugi radar bubble monitoring top-secret U2 flights"

Oswald worked in ground control approach radar, the systems he would have been around were for tracking local flights and relatively low altitudes on approach and

departure to the runways at Atsugi....same as his later radar assignment on the west coast. That would have left him familiar with the various traffic patterns, the

civilian vs. military routes and other information interesting from an air defense standpoint. However he was not a surveillance radar operator, which involves

different systems. He might well have tracked a U-2 leaving or departing base but that's it, the U-2 took hours to lumber itself up to surveillance altitude and it

would have been well away and well beyond any radar he was watching...and certainly no base radar could have tracked its actual mission profile over foreign

targets. In short, Oswald was not monitoring top secret U-2 flights and if he knew anything pertinent about the aircraft it would have been base scuttle butt rather

than any direct involvement with its missions.

Hi Larry,

Going from memory here, but I've read somewhere that Oswald tracked a U-2 while it was flying over China and brought it to the attention of his surprised co-workers in the bubble?

Thanks,

--Tommy

Larry,

It's in a chapter called "Eiderdown Chess" in John Newman's book, Oswald and the CIA :

"... It's Moving Over China!"

[...] Oswald's unit had not been operational very long [at Cubi Point, Philippines] before he noticed something interesting. [Oswald's commander, John] Donovan describes what happened:

One time we were watching the radar there at Cubi Point and Oswald said, "Look at this thing." He had a trail in grease mark and he said, "This thing just took off from Clark and it's moving over China!" And I said, "You can't be right," and he agreed. A week later he saw it again, so several of us began looking hard, and we saw it. Oswald was right, and we saw it so regularly that we started clocking them. I even called the duty officer about them and he said, "Look fella, there's no planes flying over China." We knew better. We saw them all the time, mostly flying out of Cubi Point, but sometimes they flew out of Clark."

This story confirms what Hospital Corpsman Hobbs told the ONI in 1964 about the gossip at Atsugi in 1958. The CIA was flying U2's over China as well as over the Soviet Union. Oswald's unit later deployed (September 14 through October 6, 1958) to Ping Tong on the north side of Taiwan, and Donovan was his commander there, too. Donovan recalls: "In Formosa [Taiwan] we were near to the U-2 as well. (14)" There, Oswald spent many hours drawing traces of the U-2's tracks over the People's Republic of China. [...]

--Tommy

Tommy,

Donovan is not credible. He suggested in his WC testimony that he only knew Oswald at Santa Ana. He backed that up by saying he had to ask Oswald's superior officers in Japan as to what sort of person he was.

What we see in your quote is part of the set-up. The paydirt is when he starts strongly hinting that Oswald got connected to Communists in Japan. He leaves it up to others reading his words to connect the dots. Oswald was a communist collaborator who gave the Soviets info on the U2 program.

I'm appalled that revered authors use anything by this man.

I will only add that his date with the airline stewardess following Oswald's date with her was, imo, no coincidence.

Doesn't matter. The truth is coming, baby & like a runaway train, there's no stopping it...

[Ray Mitcham]

No doubt you have read it Tommy, sounds somewhat familiar to me as well. I'd like to know the source if you happen to come across it again. Of course its wrong but still....using a distance mapping tool it looks like some 1,100 miles from Atsuki to the Chinese coast. That would be beyond not only GCA radar sets but the best long distance surveillance radar of the day. Would have to do some research but I doubt you could even have tracked it as far as South Korea. The leading surveillance radar of the 59-60 period would be the AN/FPS 7 with a range of 270 miles and an altitude of 100,000 feet.

I agree with you, Larry. The operational range of the type 80 that we used in the RAF in the fifties, had a reliable range of 250 miles and 90,000 feet.

These were used for Air Defence Operations.

As South Korea is at least 500 miles from Atsugi, then it would have been strange for them to track it even that far.

[Larry Hancock]

This is an example of how unchecked statements can lead us astray, even though Clarke field in the Philippines is closer to the Chinese mainland its still some 700 miles just to the coast, no way Donovan can be

accepted as reliable....and you have to love the fact that he is quoting Oswald as saying the aircraft just took off from Clarke and is going over China - you have to laugh if you have even a basic knowldege

of U-2 performance...