A Question for Richard Gilbride

[Greg Parker]

Less definitive but certainly in the mix, one can't exclude the doppelganger's role in the Tippit murder and Texas Theater.

Less definitive than figments of your own imaginations?

[Greg Parker]

A further doppelganger is in one of the tramps photos, in the background talking to Inspector Sawyer approx. 2:19 PM. I don't think he has a designated name yet. How's Leeski sound? Leeski, the Amerikanski.

Of course! You can't have a doppelganger without a designated name! How else are you going to keep them all straight?

[Greg Parker]

There is the Margaret Keating enigma also,

I think Mr Spock is using the MKE (Margaret Keating Enigma) to power the USSS BULLSHIZER to the planet Claptrap.

someone out there knows a heck of a lot more than I do about her

Ya think?

This folks, is another innocent victim of the Two Oswald Theory that Ate the Cities of Decency, Commonsense and Bits of Tokyo, now playing at a JFK Forum near you!

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Margaret_Keating_(8)

Edited December 28, 2015 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

bumped

[Richard Gilbride]

Thanks, Greg, for the information you provided as to the 1941 HUAC hearings. It was my guess, as expressed in post #4, that this Harvey & Lee information might relate to the biological production of a doppelganger. Evidently it does not.

I don't see how you can spin that bad guess of mine into you being correct about the 2nd-floor lunchroom. Here is one of your bad guesses to ponder: your mini-essay at the old ROKC forum, Was Eddie Piper on the Sixth Floor?

Greg Parker: How's that sword in the ground holding up, sport?

You're getting into ad hominem attacks, and follow that up with 5 consecutive posts flailing against me. Having anger management issues, Greg? You hate me, don't you, for exposing your lunchroom sophistry. Maybe your ROKC tribe can sport up for a groupview of Breakfast at Tiffany's.

[Greg Parker]

Thanks, Greg, for the information you provided as to the 1941 HUAC hearings. It was my guess, as expressed in post #4, that this Harvey & Lee information might relate to the biological production of a doppelganger. Evidently it does not.

I don't see how you can spin that bad guess of mine into you being correct about the 2nd-floor lunchroom. Here is one of your bad guesses to ponder: your mini-essay at the old ROKC forum, Was Eddie Piper on the Sixth Floor?

Greg Parker: How's that sword in the ground holding up, sport?

You're getting into ad hominem attacks, and follow that up with 5 consecutive posts flailing against me. Having anger management issues, Greg? You hate me, don't you, for exposing your lunchroom sophistry. Maybe your ROKC tribe can sport up for a groupview of Breakfast at Tiffany's.

Nice dodge. Your guess wasn't the problem. But you already know that. It was your blind faith that "this Harvey and Lee information" was accurate to start with. This is what it says on the Harvey and Lee site:

In January, 1953, the House on Un-American Activities in New York had a file on a "Marguerite Oswald." This file contained references to 1941, Nazi's, New Jersey, and was eventually discovered in a CIA office of Security file. The Assassination Records Review Board requested this file, which apparently contained background information related to "Marguerite Oswald," but their request was denied.

http://harveyandlee.net/Early/Early.html

You and countless others have all fallen for it. There was NO file on Marguerite. Pure and simple. Armstrong made it up by turning "Mrs. Oswald" into Marguerite Oswald.

Ad hom? Where have I attacked your character or motives instead of your arguments? Another dodge.

Anger management? It's not me with the sword in the ground acting all brave by coming here and making actual ad hom attacks on two people not here to defend themselves,

example: " Sean Murphy & Greg Parker are zealots in regards to this issue. They cannot and will not be reasoned with. To admit defeat would entail a loss of their sycophants, and an extreme loss of face. After all, they are the co-discoverers and marketers of this pernicious school of thought. They might seem progressive, but are actually regressive. In this arena they are sophists extraordinaire." sees this and other posts in thread titled:

"One Last Thing Before Xmas Eve: 2nd Floor Lunch Room Encounter" I was your biggest defender until then, sport. But I'm here now so let's see how brave you are from here on.

[Sandy Larsen]

Nice dodge. Your guess wasn't the problem. But you already know that. It was your blind faith that "this Harvey and Lee information" was accurate to start with. This is what it says on the Harvey and Lee site:

In January, 1953, the House on Un-American Activities in New York had a file on a "Marguerite Oswald." This file contained references to 1941, Nazi's, New Jersey, and was eventually discovered in a CIA office of Security file. The Assassination Records Review Board requested this file, which apparently contained background information related to "Marguerite Oswald," but their request was denied.

http://harveyandlee.net/Early/Early.html

You and countless others have all fallen for it. There was NO file on Marguerite. Pure and simple. Armstrong made it up by turning "Mrs. Oswald" into Marguerite Oswald.

Greg,

Have you brought this inaccuracy to John Armstrong's attention so that he can fix it on his website and in his book should there be another edition?

[Greg Parker]

Nice dodge. Your guess wasn't the problem. But you already know that. It was your blind faith that "this Harvey and Lee information" was accurate to start with. This is what it says on the Harvey and Lee site:

In January, 1953, the House on Un-American Activities in New York had a file on a "Marguerite Oswald." This file contained references to 1941, Nazi's, New Jersey, and was eventually discovered in a CIA office of Security file. The Assassination Records Review Board requested this file, which apparently contained background information related to "Marguerite Oswald," but their request was denied.

http://harveyandlee.net/Early/Early.html

You and countless others have all fallen for it. There was NO file on Marguerite. Pure and simple. Armstrong made it up by turning "Mrs. Oswald" into Marguerite Oswald.

Greg,

Have you brought this inaccuracy to John Armstrong's attention so that he can fix it on his website and in his book should there be another edition?

The webmeister has been forced to make changes in the past... very reluctantly.... and not fully, so i've given up on asking them to correct their mistakes. They have enough members and lurkers here that they will be aware of it by now, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for any remedial work on the site, and i any case, the damage is done. Google marguerite Oswald nazis and 1941 and see how often this garbage has been repeated.