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

[David Josephs]

On ‎9‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 10:21 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Brilliant Jeremy!

No doubt Tracy...  you're there whenever a H&L evidence-less supporter vomits up verbal diarrhea from a most fertile mind with a scenario born from ignorance of the topic...  

Let me see... doesn't the evidence which proves H&L basically render your work and Parker's books and research, moot and meaningless? 
H&L cannot exist in the Parker world - not because of the evidence but of the implications it has on his own work...  that and exposing the inability of the detractors to add correctly.  Can't have that now can we?

You and the other minions are tireless and dedicated - I give you that!  

[Michael Walton]

David you  might want to read on to later posts on here. I clearly post other items that show after your MC post and SS there's  simply no way for the HL story to possibly  work.

[David Josephs]

20 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

David you  might want to read on to later posts on here. I clearly post other items that show after your MC post and SS there's  simply no way for the HL story to possibly  work.

Michael... Sidestepping the question is very telling.  

You might want to read the book and follow the evidence before you come to conclusions and present them as if you're someone who gave serious time and effort to the project....  

Reading the posts of those who can't be bothered by doing the work necessary has become a complete waste of time...
Making your mind up with a cursory reading at best and a lack of exposure to 90% of the work... obviously gives you the credibility necessary to sway understanding of the H&L history.

That you continue to laugh off the reality of history just goes to show the complete lack of depth to your understanding of the world around you.

The only humorous thing that remains is the trio of acolytes here trying so hard to explain away the obvious with every possible excuse imaginable.   Maybe instead of taking up so much time and brain power with denials... you could take a few weeks/months and read the work, follow the footnotes and then come back here and talk to us from a position of knowledge instead of conjecture...

The manner in which you deny this harkens back to how the WCR, Blakey and the HSCA and then the ARRB whitewashed the entire event thru "official" investigation.   It's shameful the way you can look at simple evidence and then dance the denier dance cause it doesn't fit your version of the story...

The worst remains the vitriolic manner in which you and the other go about trying to discredit the work of another, while your own body of published work remains woefully inadequate.  The only thing H&L does directly is render Parker's conclusions about Oswald inaccurate... he and you and the others have no choice but to continue to the fight...

Other than it flying in the face of Parker's work... what is your specific problem with the evidence and the work of John Ely discovering the amazing duality of existence when compiling his bio? 

What skin do you have in this discussion Michael....  or you just being contrary for the fun of it?

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

No doubt Tracy...  you're there whenever a H&L evidence-less supporter vomits up verbal diarrhea from a most fertile mind with a scenario born from ignorance of the topic...  

Let me see... doesn't the evidence which proves H&L basically render your work and Parker's books and research, moot and meaningless? 
H&L cannot exist in the Parker world - not because of the evidence but of the implications it has on his own work...  that and exposing the inability of the detractors to add correctly.  Can't have that now can we?

You and the other minions are tireless and dedicated - I give you that!  

I see the discussion of the exhumation has ended here as well and I'm not surprised since the exhumation and the HSCA work renders the H&L theory moot. Until someone can successfully address those issues there is really no need for further debate although I will continue to pop in to keep you guys honest.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

33 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

the work of John Ely discovering the amazing duality of existence when compiling his bio? 

John Ely didn't think there were 2 Oswalds. He just wanted the WC to conduct as thorough an investigation into LHO's life as was possible.

[Jim Hargrove]

The FBI Fabricated
LHO’s 1956 Tax Return

According to the Warren Commission, “Lee Harvey Oswald” signed his IRS Form 1040 Income Tax Return for 1956 on February 27, 1957. But it can be easily shown that this document was forged in order to hide the true dates of employment at Pfisterer Dental Lab, Gerard Tujague, and J.R. Michels.

Here is the forged document:

 

How do we know the document was forged?  There are a number of different ways to show it is falsified, but here is the quickest and the simplest.  According to the Official Story®, “Lee Harvey Oswald” enlisted in the Marine Corps on October 24, 1956.  He therefore should have reported more than two months of Marine Corps income on his 1956 tax return.

But there is no Marine Corps income shown on the alleged return. Why would a Marine complete a tax return and not list his Marine Corp income on the return? The answer is simple: Oswald did not complete the 1956 tax return.

Why is no USMC income shown?  Because whoever forged the document (almost certainly in the FBI) didn’t have access to “Oswald’s” military payroll records at the time the document was fabricated.  In fact, the Department of the Navy didn’t certify Oswald's pay records until September 15, 1964.

 

John wrote this on our website:

In mid-to-late January, 1957, employers mailed W-2 forms to their employees. The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) mailed W-2 forms to military personnel. Oswald's address, listed in his military file, was 4936 Collinwood, Ft. Worth, TX. The Warren Commission would like us to believe that Oswald somehow received the J.R. Michels, Tujague's, and Pfisterer W-2 forms, but never received the W-2 form mailed by the DFAS. The WC would also like us to believe that Oswald kept the J.R. Michels, Tujague's, and Pfisterer W-2 forms for the next 7 years--from 1956 to 1963, yet lost or never received the W-2 form from the Marine Corps.  If Oswald never received a W-2 from DFAS, he could easily have obtained payroll information through his company commander. Why would a Marine complete a tax return and not list his Marine Corp income on the return? The answer is simple: Oswald did not complete the 1956 tax return.

Edited September 25, 2017 by Jim Hargrove

[David Josephs]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

John Ely didn't think there were 2 Oswalds. He just wanted the WC to conduct as thorough an investigation into LHO's life as was possible.

John Ely found there were two distinct sets of people who knew one or the other Oswald... that there were records indicating one of them being in one place while the other was somewhere else, concurrently.

That he encountered a long list of Marines who were supposedly stationed with "LEE" who were not mentioned by a single person within "Harvey's" bio... that these men in fact were involved with a much larger, non-political, fighter/drinker who bore little resemblance in detail to Harvey.

I'll continue to chalk this up to your inability to add 2 and 2 without arriving at some bizarre, unrelated conclusion about the origins of the numbers instead of dealing with the core inability to add....

Here you go Tracy...   once again please show us how 200 days of school fits into the 123 available from the 210 possible without including the entire summer and the entire Youth House stay....  this should be simple for someone with your abilities...  

or you can whine about it some more, change the subject and still look as confused and lost as ever    

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

John Ely found there were two distinct sets of people who knew one or the other Oswald... that there were records indicating one of them being in one place while the other was somewhere else, concurrently.

You want to show me where Ely informed the commission about the "two distinct sets of people?" That is merely your interpretation of the evidence.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

How do we know the document was forged?  There are a number of different ways to show it is falsified, but here is the quickest and the simplest.  According to the Official Story®, “Lee Harvey Oswald” enlisted in the Marine Corps on October 24, 1956.  He therefore should have reported more than two months of Marine Corps income on his 1956 tax return.

Once again, that is your interpretation of the evidence only. Other explanations are he forgot to report the income, didn't know he was supposed to or cheated on his taxes. BTW, I thought you weren't going to do any more "data dumps?"

EDIT: I forgot to mention that once the ARRB proved there was nothing to the tax record thing, David Lifton predicted that Armstrong would say the records were forged and he was right. Anyone can search McAdams' group for the thread.

 

Edited September 25, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell

[Jim Hargrove]

Don't worry, Mr. Parnell....

... I'm going to post LOTS more Harvey and Lee evidence.

Do you really think LHO "forgot" to report his 1956 Marine Corps income while he was on active duty wearing a Marine Corps uniform?   Are you going to say that with a straight face? Hah-hah-hah!

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Don't worry, Mr. Parnell....

... I'm going to post LOTS more Harvey and Lee evidence.

Do you really think LHO "forgot" to report his 1956 Marine Corps income while he was on active duty wearing a Marine Corps uniform?   Are you going to say that with a straight face? Hah-hah-hah!

I think the likelihood is that it benefitted him financially not to report it. But are you going to really say there is anything to the tax records issue when it was thoroughly investigated and debunked by the ARRB?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/horne.txt

[Jim Hargrove]

Oh, brother!  The ARRB followed in the proud tradition of the WC and the HSCA, proving that the Federal government is completely incapable of investigating its own culpability in the Kennedy assassination.

But let’s talk about you, Mr. Parnell....

Is it your position that “Lee Harvey Oswald” planned to hide his employment by the U.S. Marine Corps from the IRS for some reason?   Is that really the position you’re taking here? 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Oh, brother!  The ARRB followed in the proud tradition of the WC and the HSCA, proving that the Federal government is completely incapable of investigating its own culpability in the Kennedy assassination.

But let’s talk about you, Mr. Parnell....

Is it your position that “Lee Harvey Oswald” planned to hide his employment by the U.S. Marine Corps from the IRS for some reason?   Is that really the position you’re taking here? 

My position is that we know there were not two Oswalds from the scientific evidence and common sense. Therefore the fact that he didn't report income is irrelevant as is the reason, which will never be known.

[Michael Walton]

Knowing what we know - especially from Bill Simpich's outstanding State Secret article with complete documention - pretty much negates the HL story. Bill's article clearly follows the path of Oswald from the time he returned from Russia until 11/22.

It clearly demonstrates how the legend of Oswald was started there, especially the height discrepency that was broadcast - two years later and within minutes of the shooting. You have to ask yourself - if there were no witnesses to LHO pulling the trigger, where exactly did this 5-10 165 come from? It came from two years before.

This story is very clear because it connects the dots from 11/22 backward.

There is simply no room in the State Secret narrative to fit any of the puzzle pieces from HL into it. Another very big weakness of the HL story is readers are expected to believe pre-conceived notions of the available papers and documentation.  For example, one HL apologist states that the official record cannot be trusted at all. To do an honest analysis of the papers and documention, you simply cannot do this because it will color one's judgement of the result.

[Jim Hargrove]

3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

My position is that we know there were not two Oswalds from the scientific evidence and common sense. Therefore the fact that he didn't report income is irrelevant as is the reason, which will never be known.

Nonsense.  We know exactly why the 1956 tax return was fabricated.  It was done to hide the fact that two teenage boys named “Oswald” (Harvey and Lee) were working and living in New Orleans in 1956.  A full accounting of their actual employment histories would have shown that two different boys were involved.  And so the employment dates had to be altered.

For example....   

The Warren Commission said LHO worked at Tujagues from November 10 , 1956  to January 13, 1957, a period of just two months and three days.  John Armstrong met Frank DiBenedetto, Oswald's supervisor at Tujagues, in 1995. Frank said that Oswald worked for Tujague's "a year, maybe longer."  Frank told the HSCA in 1978 that (LEE) Oswald worked at Tujague's "a year to a year and a half."  Secretary Gloria Callaghan, who still worked at Tujague's in the mid-1990s, recalled, "I went on maternity leave in March, 1956 (her son was born March 15) and he (LEE Oswald) was still working for us at that time."

Now, why do you suppose the lifetime earnings report of “Lee Harvey Oswald” from the Social Security Administration shows no income whatsoever from his employers in the 1950s?

For the full story on the tax shenanigans, see: 

http://harveyandlee.net/1956/1956.html

Of course, whoever fabricated that document at the FBI didn't have the information on LHOs Marine Corps income from 1956, and so there was no choice but to omit the information entirely and hope no one would notice.