W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) For Jim Hargrove or anyone on the Armstrong team, Is there anything else forthcoming on the "Frankenstein" photo issue from Armstrong? Or does your "Evolution of the Defection photo" page represent the final word on the issue? Edited June 22, 2015 by W. Tracy Parnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Hey EDUCATION FORUMers... Don't forget to visit the Greg Parker Memorial Frankenstein Oswald page... right here: http://harveyandlee.net/Marines/Defection_Photo_Evolution.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 (edited) Is this pic from the same 'session'? Bart, It's the same happy-looking young guy with the same face wearing the same white t-shirt under same Marine Corps(?) blouse with the same starched collar in the same crummy kind of photograph. Oswald could very well have been standing in front of that lower, single-story building on the far right behind the car when the "Frankenstein" photo of him was taken of him that day. Great find! --Tommy Edited June 27, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) Is this pic from the same 'session'? Bart, IMHO, it's the same happy-looking young guy with the same "baby fat" face wearing the same Marine Corps(?) blouse with the same starched collar in the same crummy kind of photograph taken from different camera angles. It looks like Lee Harvey Oswald could very well have been standing in front of that single-story building behind the car on the right when the touched-up "Frankenstein" photo of him was taken of him that day. Great find! It's interesting to note that his name badge or "USMC" badge is on the opposite side of his Marine Corps(?) blouse in this photo that the "Frankenstein Oswald" photo, leading me to speculate that one of the photos was "reversed." Note how the hairlines look "different" because of that, but actually they are mirror images of each other. The hairlines are actually identical. --Tommy PS-- This is from Hargrove's website. He says the top one is "Harvey" and the bottom one is "Lee," but note how Lee Harvey Oswald's eyes and ears are the same in both photos. edited a little and bumped Edited June 27, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Largey Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 From Hargrove's "Marines Corps and Soviet Union" page: Throughout the summer of 1959 HARVEY Oswald continued to promote communism and anything and everything Russian to fellow marines. On September 4, HARVEY Oswald applied for a passport in Santa Ana, California. But the passport contained a photo of LEE Oswald--not HARVEY. If this photo is compared with a photo taken of HARVEY Oswald a week later, standing next to Robert Oswald, you can see they are two different people. The caption for the photo of LHO and Robert says "Grainy 1959 photo of Harvey standing next to Robert Oswald". But this photo is a screen grab from the "Biography" show on Oswald. This was apparently a composite made by the producers in order to show the brothers together (for purposes of illustration) even though they weren't. The original shown in Robert's book is not grainy at all and perfectly clear. What could be the reason for using this "grainy" version of the photo? Could it be that using the grainy photo makes it more likely the reader will think they are looking at two different individuals? That could also explain why Armstrong showed a poor quality photo of Marguerite standing in front of a sink and wearing a nightgown to witnesses to represent the "imposter" Marguerite and used a better quality photo taken at the shoe store to represent the "tall beautiful" Marguerite. http://wtracyparnell.com/using-photos-to-misrepresent/ Tracy, let's assume for this point it's the same woman. Isn't it as obvious to you as it is me that something happened to her that drastically changed her appearance over a space of a few years? Whether it was a period of ill health or an accident that left her house bound, a change of diet and exercise, something seems to have changed her, it's nothing to do with poor images. Surely you see that too? Now, could you answer your own question for me please regarding the photo you chose: "Why not use this photo, which according to the book is also the “imposter” Marguerite?" Other than the quality of the image, why would you Tracy use that one specifically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 (edited) From Hargrove's "Marines Corps and Soviet Union" page: Throughout the summer of 1959 HARVEY Oswald continued to promote communism and anything and everything Russian to fellow marines. On September 4, HARVEY Oswald applied for a passport in Santa Ana, California. But the passport contained a photo of LEE Oswald--not HARVEY. If this photo is compared with a photo taken of HARVEY Oswald a week later, standing next to Robert Oswald, you can see they are two different people. The caption for the photo of LHO and Robert says "Grainy 1959 photo of Harvey standing next to Robert Oswald". But this photo is a screen grab from the "Biography" show on Oswald. This was apparently a composite made by the producers in order to show the brothers together (for purposes of illustration) even though they weren't. The original shown in Robert's book is not grainy at all and perfectly clear. What could be the reason for using this "grainy" version of the photo? Could it be that using the grainy photo makes it more likely the reader will think they are looking at two different individuals? That could also explain why Armstrong showed a poor quality photo of Marguerite standing in front of a sink and wearing a nightgown to witnesses to represent the "imposter" Marguerite and used a better quality photo taken at the shoe store to represent the "tall beautiful" Marguerite. http://wtracyparnell.com/using-photos-to-misrepresent/ Tracy, let's assume for this point it's the same woman. Isn't it as obvious to you as it is me that something happened to her that drastically changed her appearance over a space of a few years? Whether it was a period of ill health or an accident that left her house bound, a change of diet and exercise, something seems to have changed her, it's nothing to do with poor images. Surely you see that too? Now, could you answer your own question for me please regarding the photo you chose: "Why not use this photo, which according to the book is also the “imposter” Marguerite?" Other than the quality of the image, why would you Tracy use that one specifically? "Isn't it as obvious to you as it is me that something happened to her that drastically changed her appearance over a space of a few years? Whether it was a period of ill health or an accident that left her house bound, a change of diet and exercise..." I wonder what that could have been? Let's think... Maybe it was seeing her son accused of the murder of the century and then seeing that same son being gunned down on live TV!! Do you have kids Clive? Imagine seeing one of them being shot and killed in front of you and the entire world media as it happened. If I saw MY daughter gunned down on live TV after being accused of a heinous crime I dare say my demeanour, along with the normal aging process, would alter significantly to reflect that unique and very public tragedy. Wouldn't you? In H&L world even a mother's grief is ruthlessly used to add more 'glitter' to the fantasy. Shameful. Edited June 27, 2015 by Bernie Laverick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Largey Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Sorry Bernie but "the change" hit her well before NOV 1963. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Sorry Bernie but "the change" hit her well before NOV 1963. People change. Surely you have experienced that. They put on weight. Lose their hair. Develop wrinkles. Live a hard life. Experience grief or divorce. Worry stress and poor diet ages people. Ageing brings on changes. It is not proof that there was a doppelganger parent supervising a doppelganger patsy. She just aged. For goodness sake... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) Bernie, My point is simply that to represent the "imposter" Marguerite (both in the book and when speaking to people he interviewed), Armstrong used a poor quality photo of her in a nightgown when she was probably not expecting to be photographed and looking about as bad as was possible rather than the smiling pose I have shown. And he does the same thing with the poor quality A&E composite photo (compared to the passport photo) to make it easier for the reader to believe they are seeing two different men when a better quality photo is available. Not a major point I admit, but an example of the little things he does in the book to make his points. I think you are quite right that the stress of the assassination was a factor in her premature aging, although she eventually came to enjoy the limelight. But at first I am sure it took a major toll as it would on anyone. Edited June 28, 2015 by W. Tracy Parnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 he real Mrs. Oswald was never a nurse.... the impostor was disagreeable and disliked at every job spending most of the time as a nurse, working at a bar, housekeeping, etc The real Mrs. Oswald never wore or needed glasses.. The real Mrs. O also did not have a mole under her right eye. The woman with glasses did (3rd row from bottom on left side, closeup with glasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 David Josephs said: The real Mrs. Oswald never wore or needed glasses.. Nonsense. Marguerite didn't wear glasses (full time anyway) until about the age of 60. Conveniently, that is when the "beautiful" Marguerite disappeared never to be seen again. I guess Armstrong and friends have given up on the "the imposter never smiled" thing since it was so easily disproved even before the book was published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) Is this pic from the same 'session'? Bart, IMHO, it's the same happy-looking young guy with the same "baby fat" face wearing the same Marine Corps(?) blouse with the same starched collar in the same crummy kind of photograph taken from different camera angles. It looks like Lee Harvey Oswald could very well have been standing in front of that single-story building behind the car on the right when the touched-up "Frankenstein" photo of him was taken of him that day. Great find! It's interesting to note that his name badge or "USMC" badge is on the opposite side of his Marine Corps(?) blouse in this photo that the "Frankenstein Oswald" photo, leading me to speculate that one of the photos was "reversed." Note how the hairlines look "different" because of that, but actually they are mirror images of each other. The hairlines are actually identical. --Tommy PS-- This is from Hargrove's website. He says the top one is "Harvey" and the bottom one is "Lee," but note how Lee Harvey Oswald's eyes and ears are the same in both photos. edited a little and bumped Bumped in an effort to get this thread back on track. Why not start a new thread on "The Two Marguerites"? Edited June 28, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Largey Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Sorry Bernie but "the change" hit her well before NOV 1963. People change. Surely you have experienced that. They put on weight. Lose their hair. Develop wrinkles. Live a hard life. Experience grief or divorce. Worry stress and poor diet ages people. Ageing brings on changes. It is not proof that there was a doppelganger parent supervising a doppelganger patsy. She just aged. For goodness sake... That was my whole point, the women looks very different from when she worked at the shoe shop but Tracy seems to think it's just the images that are to blame. Get it? Let him answer me if he wants too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Largey Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Thomas, you picked up on the one thing that we probably all agree on, those two images most likely come from as Bart put it, the same session. David Josephs pointed to some more earlier in the thread: The middle photo shows the same building in the background as the Oswald photo https://www.maryferr...eId=26&tab=page and is listed as "Marine friend of Oswald" on page 2. (This is the same batch of photos which includes Roscoe White (p25) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) They do appear to be the same uniform at about the same time at what appears to be the same place - these are all LEE (except for the altered FWST photo) David, I neglected to ask the follow up 101 question, if we're happy they're part of a set or at least a pair then where did the one on the left come from? Seems pretty memorable, was Robert asked about it? Also can anyone interested in this think of a legitimate reason for a newspaper man to block out that window? It's hardly going to identify the area as a military base if left alone. It would also be interesting I think to look at the rest of that FWST edition and see if any other image is as poor as the altered one we are focusing on. Two wild guesses. 1 ) No distracting / ugly window panes background? 2 ) Alterations to Lee Harvey Oswald's face would be less obvious with no grid-like, window pane background to deal with? --Tommy Edited June 28, 2015 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now