Jim Hargrove: Are these photos of the the tall, attractive Marguerite Oswald, or the short, dumpy Marguerite imposter?

[David Josephs]

On 1/10/2017 at 6:00 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I am not a photo analyst, It would be impossible for the shadows to "fall the exact same way as the BYP" IMO because the photos are taken in different locations in the world and latitude/longitude would make a difference.

So basically you'll argue against anything and everything.  You can't trust your own eyes to see how the shadows fall on top of each other and in the same direction away from the subject.  Their lengths are almost the same as well.  That it does not follow for you that shadows falling at an angle creating a shadow on a nose also at that angle might suggest the BYP face and the position of the sun in that photo are in conflict?

With regards to Oswald being two people with different heights and weights, this is not confined to military records. 

What do you have to say about Ely report and then the followup memo from Jenner to Rankin?  

Any ideas why "material alterations and omissions" would be necessary?  Amazing how many conflicts there are within the man's history and how many third party investigators stumble upon the same inconsistencies suggesting the existence of two men.

Believe it or not Tracy, I respect what you're doing.  I take issue only with the fact you don't like to include ALL the evidence, just that which you want to contradict.  There are literally hundreds of instances of conflict throughout the H&L book.  Of instances where Oswalds are in multiple locations at the same time (the Robert McKowen incident while Oswald and family are in Ft Worth for one, for two - Anna Lewis swearing twice with JVB in the room that she and her husband and Lee and Judy are in New Orleans Jan-Apr 1962 when the Oswalds are in Minsk)

I have no doubt that out of these hundreds of conflicts, some are the result of speculation based off some evidence.  that other nefarious activities may have been going on at the time involving Cubans, Oswald-look alikes, the FBI and the CIA... the entire Alice TX episode with Lee, a foreign woman and 2 children months before the 2nd child is born for example.  Point is for every single hole you think you've uncovered there are 40 more related to it that you cannot, but because so few people are fully versed in the H&L evidence, you get away with it.

What amazes me most is this need to prove John wrong about a subject that is truly not that far outside the activities of the time.  As more and more of what Dulles and his "staffers" did throughout the war and up thru the 60's, the H&L not only makes sense but would be something our CIA would want to try and succeed at...  While the rest of the world had been spying successfully for hundreds of years, the US intelligence community was in its infancy.  

Tracy, I'm sorry you need to attack this with so much passion.  It appears that you forget all the strange and amazing things our CIA and FBI did over the years... so much so you can discount evidence rather than give it the deep and considerate thought you give your rebuttals.  

Please stop cherry-picking and do your homework.  As for what you've seen or not... or whether I am trying to change your mind... I'm not.  You've decided regardless.  But for those reading your work, they should know that you leave out 10 times as much supporting evidence as you present conflicting.  Between Gorsky, Donovan, Felde, Grafe, and a list of Marines who knew one but not the other, you're telling only a small portion of the story - which worked for the WCR but doesn't fly here.

[Michael Walton]

I don't buy the "Two Oswalds and Two Mothers Created by the CIA" theory.  It's simply too silly and too outrageous and not plausible.  I do think there was "someone" going around in Dallas months before the shooting acting like Oswald and doing memorable things (i.e., like shooting another guy's target at a shooting range). And we mustn't forget that even Hoover told LBJ that the guy in Mexico had a different voice and appearance than the Oswald in jail that weekend.

I do think the BYP's are fakes - Oswald himself said they were when he was shown them that weekend.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

 

Quote

But for those reading your work, they should know that you leave out 10 times as much supporting evidence as you present conflicting.

 

Let’s not be silly David. Do you or Armstrong present all the conflicting evidence on every point relating to the H&L theory? Of course not and nobody expects you to. I am attempting to refute your version. Researchers can find all the facts on their own and decide. Our relationship is like attorneys in a courtroom. Each attorney explains their side, they don’t explain both sides. If you believe I am misrepresenting something you can point that out. Be neither of us are under an obligation to argue for the other side.

We probably both have better things to do than argue the H&L theory. I’ll just leave everyone with one thought. There are some anomalies in the documentation, that is true. However, most of the H&L theory is based on witnesses. One example out of many-instead of the 1981 exhumation which provides scientific evidence that the theory is false, Jim Hargrove would prefer you believe a witness (Robertson) who says Marguerite told her that LHO was going to Jacobi (which didn’t exist at the time) for mental tests. Hargrove then asks you to believe that instead of mental tests “Harvey” was given a mastoid operation to match “Lee”. Just one case out of many where Armstrong supporters say a dubious witness statement trumps scientific or other hard evidence.

The problem with witnesses is people can and do say things that are false for any number of reasons. In the 2015 case of Richard Matt and David Sweat, who broke out of prison in NY, over 2000 sightings were reported to police. 2 were accurate. People “saw” them in parts of the state where they never were. Now I will admit that these witnesses are not completely relatable to what we are talking about since they probably expected to get a reward for what they were saying and that is the motive for many of them. But this does make the point that witnesses must be evaluated carefully and preference given to those who are verified by other evidence. But H&L gives priority to witnesses that help the theory no matter how dubious.

Edited January 13, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell

[Jim Hargrove]

On 1/11/2017 at 7:36 PM, Michael Walton said:

I don't buy the "Two Oswalds and Two Mothers Created by the CIA" theory.  It's simply too silly and too outrageous and not plausible.  I do think there was "someone" going around in Dallas months before the shooting acting like Oswald and doing memorable things (i.e., like shooting another guy's target at a shooting range). And we mustn't forget that even Hoover told LBJ that the guy in Mexico had a different voice and appearance than the Oswald in jail that weekend.

Mike,

I still have 6 stitches in my index finger and a big splint, but I'm getting ready to fight again.  Please read the last paragraph in the graphic below  ....

Are you SURE the USG had no "Oswald Project"?

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Quote

I still have 6 stitches in my index finger and a big splint, but I'm getting ready to fight again.

Jim,

Take care of yourself and I hope your hand heals quickly.

[James DiEugenio]

TP: Thanks for posting the gif progression which shows perfectly IMO the natural aging process

 

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Deleted

Edited January 15, 2017 by James DiEugenio

[Jim Hargrove]

OK, I can type again, slowly....

Let's get this thread moving again.

What's the question about "Marguerite," Sandy?

Please show me photos of "Marguerite" placed in evidence before 1965, and NOTHING AFTER THAT!  

Just for the moment or two, let's restrict the evidence to that!

Edited January 20, 2017 by Jim Hargrove

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Jim,

What would be helpful is for you or David to make a composite graphic ala Jack White featuring all known photos of the two Marguerites and showing which is which with dates etc.

[Sandy Larsen]

On 1/7/2017 at 8:45 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

(Challenge from this post.)

 

14 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

OK, I can type again, slowly....

Let's get this thread moving again.

What's the question about "Marguerite," Sandy?

Please show me photos of "Marguerite" placed in evidence before 1965, and NOTHING AFTER THAT!  

Just for the moment or two, let's restrict the evidence to that!

Jim,

Here's my question:

Are the photos above of the authentic "attractive" Marguerite or the "dumpy" fake Marguerite?

From the glasses I get the impression it is the fake Marguerite. On the other hand she looks more attractive, like the real one.

[Michael Walton]

Are the photos above of the authentic "attractive" Marguerite or the "dumpy" fake Marguerite?

Fake? That is a very long leap, indeed, Jim H. Faked by whom? How?

[Mark Knight]

Marguerite Oswald was Lee Harvey Oswald's mother.

Margaret Keating Oswald was Robert E. Lee Oswald's first wife, whom he divorced in 1933.

So of COURSE there were "two" Marguerite Oswalds.  One simply spelled her first name differently.

I'm pretty sure that solves the mystery.

[Michael Walton]

Yeah, I mean it's just too outrageous, too silly to think that the US government was falsifying all of this, to create a legend if you will, of Oswald way way back in the 1950's.  For what purpose? For what end?  They didn't even know Kennedy was going to be president for goodness sake so how'd they be able to create this fantastical back story?

And I think the Jim H impostor memo above by Hoover is reasonable and simple - there was a whole lot of crazy intrigue going on back then because let's face it, Hoover breeded paranoia over silly communism while he himself was covering up his own life as a homosexual and Negro hater. So the above memo is nothing more than a "be on the lookout" for someone who could be impersonating one of the CIA's own moles (Oswald) who was a witting agent trying to flush out a KGB spy.

But as it is with the people on this forum, the first little word or phrase they read they latch onto and start creating these batxxxx crazy theories about the assassination.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Another strong argument against the impostor Marguerite theory is the strange behavior of the impostor. This woman supposedly worked for the CIA and would be expected to keep a low profile. Instead, she was running around spouting the most outlandish theories such as the assassination of JFK by her son was a mercy killing because he had Addison's disease. She auctioned off letters from LHO (netting over $7000) ostensibly to raise money for a "investigative" trip to Russia that never materialized. She appeared in books, magazines and on TV and radio shows always hinting that she had her own theories about what happened. Now I suppose that Armstrong & company could say she was putting on an act (I don't know what else they could say), but that was some performance.

[Jim Hargrove]

On 1/20/2017 at 0:06 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Jim,

Here's my question:

Are the photos above of the authentic "attractive" Marguerite or the "dumpy" fake Marguerite?

From the glasses I get the impression it is the fake Marguerite. On the other hand she looks more attractive, like the real one.

Sandy,

Which photos of "Marguerite" were in evidence by the time the HSCA published its findings in 1978?  I should be more knowledgeable about this, but I'm not. I'd like to start our discussion about photos of Marguerite by limiting them to photos placed in evidence by or before 1978.  Do you know where your photos originated?   Did you just find them on the "net?"