A Couple of Real Gems from the "Harvey and Lee" Website

[Bernie Laverick]

 

9 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Mr. Laverick correctly points out that Sewell described Lee Oswald as 5’6” or 5’7”, but fails to point out that Sewell  also said  “Joseph Moore” was “the shorter of the two” men, which, unless you want to consider “Moore” was under 5’5”, certainly leaves room that Lee Oswald may have actually been several inches taller.  Mr. Sewell was undoubtedly more interested in the size of Oswald’s bank account than his frame.

Ha ha ha!!!! So when your star witness says something that doesn't fit your fantasy you simply ignore it and assume he must have been mistaken. 

No, Mr Sewell was probably more interested in HIS bank account, as were many other chancers, (like Bledsoe's son) who thought they may be able to make a quick buck out of the assassination. 

Why have you not addressed the absurdity of allowing the small and weedy 'doppelganger' being allowed to go and buy trucks from someone who may at some later stage reveal this and thus blow the whole thing? (I say "blow", but it doesn't even fit with YOUR narrative because the doppelganger should have been a good 4" + taller!!). 

[Jim Hargrove]

And trying to laugh it all away is about all you can do, isn’t it Mr. Laverick?  Because Fred Sewell missed Lee Oswald’s height by four or five inches, you try to pretend that both he and Oscar Deslatte were wrong about thinking they both had met “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  Oscar Deslatte clearly thought he met LHO, because his comments were being talked about all over town, according to the report to J. Edgar Hoover below.  And Fred Sewell told Jim Garrison he also thought it was Lee Harvey Oswald.  But you know so much better, eh, even though the name "Oswald" was written right on the bid!

You don’t want to talk about the “Friends of Democratic Cuba,” clearly indicated on the Bolton Ford bid, because the officers in that organization included LHO’s former employer, Gerard Tugague, and none other than LHO’s Camp Street fellow provocateur, former Chicago FBI head Guy Banister.  What a coincidence, eh?  But for you, it all goes away because Sewell said Oswald was four or five inches shorter than he really was.  Is that the best you can do?

 

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Jim Hargrove

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim writes:

<blockquote>Oscar Deslatte clearly thought he met LHO, because his comments were being talked about all over town</blockquote>

On the contrary, Oscar Deslatte was not sure that he had met the actual Lee Harvey Oswald, because he specifically told the FBI that the man did not give the first name, Lee, and because he could not recall the man's appearance well enough to be able to provide a description. What Deslatte remembered was that he had encountered someone with the surname, Oswald.

It's interesting to see how Jim picks and chooses which aspects of Fred Sewell's evidence to accept:

- Sewell, who was interviewed six years after the event, claimed that the man gave the name 'Lee Oswald'. Jim can use that part. But we know that Sewell was wrong when he claimed that the full name 'Lee Oswald' had been written on the paperwork, so there is every reason to conclude that he was wrong about this too, especially as Oscar Deslatte, who had spent more time with the customer than Sewell had, specifically denied that the man had provided a first name.

- Sewell claimed that the man was 5'6" or 5'7", two or three inches shorter than the real-life Lee Harvey Oswald, and four or five inches shorter than the fictional 'Harvey' doppelganger who, according to 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' doctrine, was the customer at the Bolton Ford dealership. Obviously, if Sewell was correct about the man's height, the incident cannot have involved the fictional 'Harvey'. Jim doesn't like that part.

So Fred Sewell was a reliable witness, according to Jim, when he claimed that the man gave the name 'Lee Oswald', even though there is documentary evidence that the man did not give the name 'Lee Oswald', but Sewell was an unreliable witness, according to Jim, when he claimed that the man was several inches shorter than the fictional 'Harvey'. To any objective reader, it's clear that Sewell was simply mistaken in linking Lee Harvey Oswald to the Bolton Ford incident.

It is a fact that the historical Lee Harvey Oswald was far from being the only Oswald in Louisiana in 1961, and it is a fact that plenty of business owners and FBI agents were opposed to the Castro regime. The fact that the incident involved an anti-Castro organisation which included one of Oswald's former employers and one of his future associates tells us nothing except that plenty of business owners and former FBI agents were opposed to the Castro regime.

I'm looking forward to seeing how Jim manages to reconcile, on the one hand, the doctrinal need to keep the fictional 'Harvey' doppelganger out of the public eye with, on the other hand, an incident in which the fictional 'Harvey' doppelganger is wandering around in public trying to buy trucks.

I think it's time for Jim to divert attention by changing the subject again. Did you know that Oswald was in two schools at the same time? It's true, I tell you!

Edited September 4, 2017 by Jeremy Bojczuk

[Bernie Laverick]

12 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

And trying to laugh it all away is about all you can do, isn’t it Mr. Laverick?  Because Fred Sewell missed Lee Oswald’s height by four or five inches, you try to pretend that both he and Oscar Deslatte were wrong about thinking they both had met “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  Oscar Deslatte clearly thought he met LHO, because his comments were being talked about all over town, according to the report to J. Edgar Hoover below.  And Fred Sewell told Jim Garrison he also thought it was Lee Harvey Oswald.  But you know so much better, eh, even though the name "Oswald" was written right on the bid!

You don’t want to talk about the “Friends of Democratic Cuba,” clearly indicated on the Bolton Ford bid, because the officers in that organization included LHO’s former employer, Gerard Tugague, and none other than LHO’s Camp Street fellow provocateur, former Chicago FBI head Guy Banister.  What a coincidence, eh?  But for you, it all goes away because Sewell said Oswald was four or five inches shorter than he really was.  Is that the best you can do?

 

 

Because Fred Sewell missed Lee Oswald’s height by four or five inches, you try to pretend that both he and Oscar Deslatte were wrong about thinking they both had met “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  

Er, yes...! That is a huge margin of error. Too much. So your theory goes out of the window.  

Is there a reason his handlers decided to trash over a decade's worth of elaborate intrigue and allow tiny little 'Lee' to deliberately blow his cover by buying trucks using his real name? 

Why won't you answer this? Because you can't without exposing how utterly childish this nonsense has become. So what's next Jim? Taiwan? School records? Or will you now plump for a gigantic info dump? 

 

[Mathias Baumann]

13 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

And trying to laugh it all away is about all you can do, isn’t it Mr. Laverick?  Because Fred Sewell missed Lee Oswald’s height by four or five inches, you try to pretend that both he and Oscar Deslatte were wrong about thinking they both had met “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  Oscar Deslatte clearly thought he met LHO, because his comments were being talked about all over town, according to the report to J. Edgar Hoover below.  And Fred Sewell told Jim Garrison he also thought it was Lee Harvey Oswald.  But you know so much better, eh, even though the name "Oswald" was written right on the bid!

You don’t want to talk about the “Friends of Democratic Cuba,” clearly indicated on the Bolton Ford bid, because the officers in that organization included LHO’s former employer, Gerard Tugague, and none other than LHO’s Camp Street fellow provocateur, former Chicago FBI head Guy Banister.  What a coincidence, eh?  But for you, it all goes away because Sewell said Oswald was four or five inches shorter than he really was.  Is that the best you can do?

 

 

Jim,

Garrison thought that the man who impersonated Oswald could've been Kerry Thornley. Thornley knew that Oswald was in Russia and he lived in New Orleans at the time the incident happened. He and Oswald also looked quite similar. And if I remember correctly Thornley also WAS shorter than Oswald.

[Jim Hargrove]

Garrison was just guessing, trying to make sense out of information that seemed nonsensical.  He probably wasn't aware of all the people who had interacted with Lee Oswald in U.S. anti-Castro circles at the same time Harvey Oswald was in the USSR.

[Jim Hargrove]

Mr. Bojczuk’s comments in black, mine in red:

On the contrary, Oscar Deslatte was not sure that he had met the actual Lee Harvey Oswald, because he specifically told the FBI that the man did not give the first name, Lee, and because he could not recall the man's appearance well enough to be able to provide a description. What Deslatte remembered was that he had encountered someone with the surname, Oswald.

If we are to believe the wording in the FBI report, we must wonder why Oscar Deslatte  was so convinced he had met with “Lee Harvey Oswald” in the first place that he was telling his story to others and, according to the FBI, people all over town were talking about his encounter.  Why did that FBI report go directly to J. Edgar Hoover? Because it threatened to expose the entire “Oswald Project,” which would lead directly to the U.S. government.  Mr. Bojczuk must wonder at the coincidence that, according to the FBI report, “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” New Orleans radio debate partner and street theater antagonist, Carlos Bringuier, was the one who brought the Bolton Ford matter to the attention of the Secret Service.

 

Sewell, who was interviewed six years after the event, claimed that the man gave the name 'Lee Oswald'. Jim can use that part. But we know that Sewell was wrong when he claimed that the full name 'Lee Oswald' had been written on the paperwork, so there is every reason to conclude that he was wrong about this too, especially as Oscar Deslatte, who had spent more time with the customer than Sewell had, specifically denied that the man had provided a first name.

Mr Bojczuk conveniently forgets that I’ve already shown him that Sewell stated, late in the interview, that he couldn’t remember whether one name or two were written on the Bolton Ford bid form.

JG: Did it have "OSWALD" on it or "LEE OSWALD"? Do you
remember looking at it?

FS: I can't remember that. It's been six years but I know
that the man who identified himself as OSWALD was in the
office and made that remark. Now, I do know that.

Sewell claimed that the man was 5'6" or 5'7", two or three inches shorter than the real-life Lee Harvey Oswald, and five or six inches shorter than the fictional 'Harvey' doppelganger who, according to 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' doctrine, was the customer at the Bolton Ford dealership. Obviously, if Sewell was correct about the man's height, the incident canhttp://harveyandlee.net/Comrade/Friends.gifnot have involved the fictional 'Harvey'. Jim doesn't like that part.

Sewell was clearly off by four or five inches about Lee Oswald’s height.  People who want to hide the significance of the Bolton Ford incident must hang every hat they possess on that simple miscalculation.  Sewell also said that Oswald was taller than Moore.  The Bolton Ford deniers must ignore the mountain of evidence that connects the “Oswald” who visited Bolton on behalf of the “Friends of Democratic Cuba” to one of the two Oswalds associated with this case.

….

It is a fact that the historical Lee Harvey Oswald was far from being the only Oswald in Louisiana in 1961, and it is a fact that plenty of business owners and FBI agents were opposed to the Castro regime. The fact that the incident involved an anti-Castro organisation which included one of Oswald's former employers and one of his future associates tells us nothing except that plenty of business owners and former FBI agents were opposed to the Castro regime.

When Oscar Deslatte began spreading the word around New Orleans that he had met with Lee Harvey Oswald to  buy trucks for an anti-Castro organization, the media was already trumpeting the “fact” that LHO was a communist or at least a communist sympathizer.  It is pretty obvious that the Bolton Ford Oswald was an anti-Castro supporter, as noted not only by Deslatte and Sewell, but also by Valentine Ashworth, Marinez Malo, Marita Lorenz and others who saw Lee Oswald working in association with anti-Castro operatives in Florida and New Orleans while Harvey Oswald was in the Soviet Union.

You want us to believe that a completely different Oswald was living in New Orleans and was associated with anti-Castro operatives and Carlos Bringuier, Guy Banister, and Gerard Tugague?   I trust you’re trying your best not to laugh making that excuse.

 

 

I'm looking forward to seeing how Jim manages to reconcile, on the one hand, the doctrinal need to keep the fictional 'Harvey' doppelganger out of the public eye with, on the other hand, an incident in which the fictional 'Harvey' doppelganger is wandering around in public trying to buy trucks.

Mr. Bojczuk may not understand that the original purpose of the Oswald Project was not to assassinate a president.  The purpose was to give a Russian-speaking youth an American identity and send him to the Soviet Union, where he could secretly understand more of what was going on around him than he let others believe.

The identity-sharing operation did not have to survive the scrutiny of an investigation into a presidential assassination.  It only had to fool Soviet operatives in the U.S. who might look into Oswald’s biography following the “defection.” Soldiering in the Everglades or buying a few trucks for anti-Castroites would hardly be in danger of blowing the operation to Russian investigators.  Once again, Mr. Bojczuk demonstrates that he does not even understand the basics of the evidence he is trying so hard to debunk

I think it's time for Jim to divert attention by changing the subject again. Did you know that Oswald was in two schools at the same time? It's true, I tell you!

Its' true, as DJ and Sandy and I have demonstrated in this very thread many times, but for this post, at least, let’s continue discussing the Bolton Ford incident.

Let’s go back to that FBI report; the one that says, “Deslatte was exhibited a photograph of LEE HARVEY OSWALD and he said he cannot recall ever having seen him before….”  Pretty remarkable, since both Deslatte and Sewell seemed so certain they had met with Lee Harvey Oswald.  Here’s that report:

Fred Sewell clearly told Garrison just the opposite, that he had NOT been shown a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald.  

 

Mr. Bojczuk REALLY want us to believe the FBI report on Deslatte over the Garrison transcript of Fred Sewell’s interview!  Well, let’s see some more about how reliable the FBI was in this case….

Here’s a brief three-minute YouTube movie proving how the FBI altered statements by crucial Dealey Plaza witnesses so that it could pin the blame solely on Lee Harvey Oswald

 

 

Here’s an example of how the FBI had a procedure in place to materially alter the testimony of its own agents, even over the objections of Warren Commission attorneys:

 

And here’s my favorite:

In the wee hours of the night of Nov 22-23, 1963, the FBI secretly took “Oswald's Possessions” from the Dallas Police Department, transported them to Washington, D.C. altered them, and then secretly returned them to Dallas, only to publicly send them to Washington. D.C. a few days later. Among a great many other alterations, a Minox “spy camera” became a Minox “light meter.” FBI agent James Cadigan inadvertently spilled the bean about the secret transfer during his sworn WC testimony, which was altered by the WC.
 

 

Yessiree, Mr. Bojczuk REALLY want us to believe the FBI report on Deslatte over the Garrison transcript of Fred Sewell’s interview!  Because, you know, the FBI was so honest and all, and it  sincerely wanted to get to the bottom of this crime.  Sheesh!

Mr. Bojczuk wants you to visit Greg Parker’s site and see how he tries to hid the significance of  the Bolton Ford incident.  If you want to know what REALLY happened, read the truth here:

http://harveyandlee.net/Misc/Bolton.html

[Mathias Baumann]

26 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Garrison was just guessing, trying to make sense out of information that seemed nonsensical.  He probably wasn't aware of all the people who had interacted with Lee Oswald in U.S. anti-Castro circles at the same time Harvey Oswald was in the USSR.

Jim,

so what role did Thornley play in your opinion?

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by Mathias Baumann

[Sandy Larsen]

On 9/1/2017 at 8:51 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

On 9/1/2017 at 5:10 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

During the Fall semester of 8th grade, he attended both Public School 44 in NYC and Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans simultaneously. We know it was simultaneous because he attended close to the full semester at both. This is what the school records show.

During the first half of the Fall semester of 9th grade, he attended both Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans and Stripling Junior High in Fort Worth simultaneously. Attendance at Stripling is known through multiple eyewitnesses. The records were taken by the FBI and haven't been seen since.

Your statement is not supported by the preponderance of the evidence. You believe that the school records show this, but even if they do there is a mountain of other evidence against 2 Oswalds. LHO never attended Stripling, the witnesses are mistaken. Kudlaty says records were taken but if they were they were records for Robert Oswald who did attend Stripling. But as is always the case, if someone says something that fits the H&L theory  it becomes a fact regardless of any other evidence.

So what you are saying, then, is that the two-Oswald evidence is all wrong.

Gotcha! 

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

On 9/2/2017 at 4:52 AM, Michael Walton said:

The FBI's main goal after 11/22 was to pin the blame on Oswald.  That's all. Creating a whole Oswald clone story by making it appear that he had a super-secret government-sponsored clone goes completely goes AGAINST their intended aims because if they tried to make it look like Oswald was involved in some secret clone operation, then that actually PROVES conspiracy or will raise a lot of red flags in the official narrative of what happened.

Mike,

Inception of the Oswald Project had nothing to do with assassinating President Kennedy, a fact that is self evident. The Oswald Project was about planting a Russian speaking spy in the Soviet Union and having an innocent looking background on him available for the Soviets to see if they bothered to do a background check on him.

It didn't matter to the plotters of the assassination that Oswald had an intelligence background because a secondary purpose of killing Kennedy was to have it blamed on the Cubans and Russians. Mexico City evidence was fabricated to show that Oswald was in cahoots with with them and was paid $6500 to kill Kennedy. Had the investigation shown Oswald to have intelligence connections, he would have been labeled as a double agent. One out to kill Kennedy.

The FBI's mandate (re. the Katzenbach memo) was to cover up the (fabricated) Cuban/Russian connection in order to prevent a WW3 outcome.

HARVEY had apparently worn out his usefulness to the CIA and he was scarified.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 9/2/2017 at 1:11 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

On 9/2/2017 at 0:16 PM, Jim Hargrove said:

That is why the Stripling school records all disappeared, despite all the people who said Oswald attended it.

The only evidence that the Stripling records "disappeared" is from Frank Kudlaty. He was speaking 30 + years after the fact and as I have pointed out many times, Armstrong has a way of getting witnesses to "remember" amazing facts that help the H&L cause. If Kudlaty was so concerned that the FBI had confiscated records why didn't he speak out at the time and/or demand a receipt? This is just another witness statement that has little credibility without supporting evidence. Yet the H&L people repeat this as a "fact."

So what you are saying, then, is that John Armstrong is capable of planting false testimony in his victim's brains.

And so, therefore, the two-Oswald testimony -- like the evidence -- is all wrong.

Gotcha! 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

So what you are saying, then, is that John Armstrong is capable of planting false testimony in his victim's brains.

And so, therefore, the two-Oswald testimony -- like the evidence -- is all wrong.

Gotcha! 

I wonder how John Armstrong planted false testimony in the brains of all the early two-Oswald witnesses?

 

[Bernie Laverick]

"The Oswald Project was about planting a Russian speaking spy in the Soviet Union and having an innocent looking background on him available for the Soviets to see if they bothered to do a background check on him."

So...why did they allow 'Lee' to go and buy some trucks using his real name while a rudimentary "background check on him" could possibly reveal this? What would the KGB have thought had they received this information? Why take such a monumental risk? You have him locked up in a safe house for the full time 'Harvey' is in Russia so as not the compromise the integrity of the defection plot but based on the flimsiest bit of 'evidence' - the word Oswald! - you make this tortuous link to an appalling B movie script even if it totally defeats your own rationale.

As for Sewell being wrong about the height, was he also wrong about him "needing a meal"? That's not like our 'Lee'. Our 'Lee' is big and muscular and did NOT look like he needed a meal, or why would you spend so much time illustrating how big, and therefore different,  he was to 'Harvey'.

Oops!

[Bernie Laverick]

44 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I wonder how John Armstrong planted false testimony in the brains of all the early two-Oswald witnesses?

 

By having one of them introduced to him by Jack White, a researcher who contributed to H&L and who was a fervent supporter of the theory, as he was with Chemtrails, moon landings, and a few other far out conspiracies. He declared that he was a personal friend of Kudlaty and had known him for over 50 years. Jack himself revealed this on another H&L topic on this forum. He mentioned it so as to bolster up Kudlaty's credibility by vouching for his integrity based on the many years of friendship. Can you not see a clear conflict of interest here? Jack did, because he then backpedalled and denied he was Kudlaty's friend, rather it was his wife's friend, and that Jack had only ever met him three or four times in 50 years. It's all on here for folk to see for themselves. 

I wouldn't normally raise something like this when the person concerned is sadly no longer with us. I have no intention of trying to blacken Jack's name, particularly because he can't respond, but this information is publically available and it needs to be said. Kudlaty came to Armstrong's attention through Jack White, a fellow researcher who also believed in H&L and who was a personal friend of the witness this information came from thirty years after it happened. 

As such, his testimony is tainted and cannot be trusted.

[Jim Hargrove]

10 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Jim,

so what role did Thornley play in your opinion?

Hi, Mathias,

I don’t know what to make of Thornley.  Jim Garrison thought he was lying about not meeting “Oswald” in New Orleans, and John thinks he was lying about not meeting “Oswald” in Dallas, and so I’m inclined to think he was probably lying about not meeting “Oswald” somewhere, and perhaps everywhere.  But it may have been just because he was afraid to be involved and wasn't a very bright bulb, though he may have been involved in some suspicious activity AFTER the assassination which is escaping me at the moment.  Do you have more incriminating information?