Jeremy Bojczuk Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 Greg Parker has replied to Sandy's latest post about the school records: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records#20974 Greg writes: <blockquote>We seem to be finally on the same page because this is the interpretation I have being trying to get across all along by repeating that the the Beauregard records incorporate transferred records from PS 44. All that remains now is for you to admit that this shoots the H & L interpretation of two boys at two schools simultaneously right in the butt.</blockquote> As with many other aspects of the 'Harvey and Lee' fantasy, there is a perfectly credible, common-sense interpretation of the evidence which renders the theory unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Bojczuk Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 We've had some interesting suggestions about how to explain the evidence of a mastoidectomy operation on the body in Oswald's grave. The obvious, common-sense explanation is that the body in Oswald's grave was that of the historical, one-and-only Lee Harvey Oswald who, as we know from documentary evidence, underwent a mastoidectomy operation at the age of six. Unfortunately for the members of the 'Harvey and Lee' cult, the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' theory requires the body in the grave to have been that of a fictional character who had not undergone a mastoidectomy operation. If the common-sense explanation is correct, the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' theory was conclusively refuted two decades before the theory was even published. Unsurprisingly, solid scientific evidence has defeated a far-fetched theory that's built on nothing but dubious interpretations and decades-old memories. There seem to be three alternative explanations that might be able to resurrect the cult members' belief. Needless to say, there is no specific documentary evidence to support any of the claims. Here they are, in ascending order of incredibility, from you're-kidding-me to you're-completely-bonkers: (a) The Bad Guys who ran the fictional two-Oswald scheme falsified the report of the scientists who performed the exhumation in 1981. The reasoning is that because the government agencies which investigated the JFK assassination appear to have falsified certain pieces of documentary evidence such as witness statements, those agencies were also capable of falsifying a report by reputable scientists which was published in a reputable, peer-reviewed scientific journal. (b) The scientists who performed the exhumation were coerced into manipulating the body in Oswald's grave to give it the appearance of having undergone a mastoidectomy, and were then coerced into keeping the manipulation secret. The reasoning here is presumably much the same as for the previous explanation. (c) Difficult though it might be for the cult members to accept, one element of the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' theory must be wrong. The fictional Oswald clone who, according to the theory, was buried in Oswald's grave and who had not undergone a mastoidectomy operation must in fact have undergone such an operation at the age of six, just like the real-life Lee Harvey Oswald. The reasoning, if that's the right word for it, is that because the CIA was capable of administering LSD to thousands of people, the CIA or some other Bad Guys were capable of not only looking into the future to identify a six-year-old boy who was going to grow up to look like a completely unrelated six-year-old boy, but they were also capable of looking into the future to anticipate that the boy's body might need to be dug up several decades later, and for that reason they had an unnecessary mastoidectomy operation performed on the boy. That's three far-fetched explanations, each devoid of supporting documentary evidence and each theoretically unlikely in its own way, versus the common-sense explanation that the body in Oswald's grave was that of the one and only Lee Harvey Oswald. There isn't any way to conclusively prove or refute any of these four explanations, unless some of the non-existent documentary evidence turns up, which isn't likely to happen even if the cult members get off their rear ends and start looking for it. All we can do is choose the explanation which best matches our own view of how the world works. Like any rational person, I'd go for the common-sense explanation, the one which happens to destroy the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' theory. Jim seems to have favoured explanation (c) but, perhaps realising that it makes him look utterly paranoid, is now hedging his bets. Sandy finds explanation (c) hard to believe and has put forward explanation (b) instead. Are there any other members of the 'Harvey and Lee' cult who are willing to state for the record which of the three far-fetched explanations they believe in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) Following the suggestion by Mathias to ask an educator here to look at the school documents, I tried to send a message to James Gordon but was told he cannot receive messages. Edited October 6, 2017 by Jim Hargrove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 7 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said: Greg Parker has replied to Sandy's latest post about the school records: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1500-one-more-attempt-at-those-darn-school-records#20974 Greg writes: <blockquote>We seem to be finally on the same page because this is the interpretation I have being trying to get across all along by repeating that the the Beauregard records incorporate transferred records from PS 44. All that remains now is for you to admit that this shoots the H & L interpretation of two boys at two schools simultaneously right in the butt.</blockquote> As with many other aspects of the 'Harvey and Lee' fantasy, there is a perfectly credible, common-sense interpretation of the evidence which renders the theory unnecessary. A few problems.... There are no PS 44 records published in the Beauregard file, and the one indication of "PS 44" is misnamed "Byron Jr. High." Since there are multiple PS 44s in the various NYC boroughs, how would the Beauregard know where to get the data? And if it somehow it did get the data, why does the first semester line indicate none of the PS 44 courses Oswald attended? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 10 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: I have a hard time believing the CIA would give the one Oswald an unnecessary mastoidectomy while still alive. But I can believe they'd give the dead body a crude one. Especially given all the widespread suspicion of conspiracy going on and even suspicions of there being two Oswalds. Obviously they would have had to do it when nobody was talking about exhumation, so it could have gone unnoticed.. I wonder if they could have given the corpse a mastoidectomy before it was buried. Would they possibly have thought that far ahead? As we examined the skull, the small hole in the left mastoid process leapt out. Its man-made edges were rounded and smooth, healed but not natural. It was an old lesion that couldn’t be faked. Our dead man and Lee Harvey Oswald had both undergone a mastoidectomy in the distant past. DiMaio, Dr. Vincent; Franscell, Ron. Morgue: A Life in Death (p. 118). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 9 hours ago, Roger DeLaria said: I remember reading somewhere (can't for the life of me remember where) that when the body was exhumed, they noticed the bottom of the concrete vault the casket was in was broken, and something not right about the head. The idea being when "they" went to remove the body, they tried raising the vault with a small crane/lift or something, and the vault being too heavy snapped the line and the concrete broke. There were many rumors, but what happened is the vault simply cracked at some point in time allowing water to get in and damage the corpse. One of the things that made groody initially suspicious was the cracked vault, but my research showed that it was a fairly common occurrence often caused by heavy digging equipment. There was nothing wrong with the head and it was attached to the body. This is all covered here: http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/xindex.htm http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/paul-groody.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) One of the things that made [G]roody initially suspicious was the cracked vault, but my research showed that it was a fairly common occurrence often caused by heavy digging equipment. Did they dig near Oswald's vault? The plot on his left hand is still empty, and will stay that way, since in 1996 an obscure comedian named "Nick Beef" ghoulishly purchased the empty plot and put a grave marker with his own stage name on it. Much call among Texans to buried near Oz? I'm thinking that even "Nick Beef" will pick elsewhere. Apparently Marina also. Definition of a "lonely grave." https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/how-nick-beef-became-lee-harvey-oswalds-neighbor/312295/ Edited October 7, 2017 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 2 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said: because the CIA was capable of administering LSD to thousands of people, the CIA or some other Bad Guys were capable of not only looking into the future to identify a six-year-old boy who was going to grow up to look like a completely unrelated six-year-old boy, but they were also capable of looking into the future to anticipate that the boy's body might need to be dug up several decades later, and for that reason they had an unnecessary mastoidectomy operation performed on the boy. The whole point of the "Oswald Project" was to give a Russian-speaking youth a U.S. identity so he could "defect" to the Soviet Union and hide his Russian fluency from those around him. The identity he was given was of a boy who had undergone a mastoidectomy. At the time, it had nothing to do with the Kennedy assassination. It’s amazing how Mr. Bojczuk feels compelled to misrepresent John Armstrong’s work before he tries to debunk the misrepresentation. John and I think HARVEY may have had a mastoidectomy in New York City when he was about 14 years old (which is an estimate since we don’t know his exact birthdate). Louise Robertson told the FBI that she was hired as a housekeeper for “Marguerite” and Marguerite said that she and her son came to New York so the kid “could have mental tests at Jacobi Hospital, Bronx, NY.” That would be the time Harvey could have been given the mastoidectomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 On 10/2/2017 at 12:20 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said: Yes, I have seen that letter from McBride and heard all the arguments. He has been thoroughly debunked by myself, Greg Parker and David Lifton. Pathetic Tracy... Desperate and pathetic. You'll hang your hat on some article about riots? That's you're big debunk against a first hand eye witness... Again... Pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stevens Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: Following the suggestion by Mathias to ask an educator here to look at the school documents, I tried to send a message to James Gordon but was told he cannot receive messages. Hey Jim, The training manager at my site was a teacher for 20 years. If you would like for me to ask her to review the records and provide her opinion / perspective I would be glad to ask. Just post here, or send me a pm with what you would like her to review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Mark Stevens said: Hey Jim, The training manager at my site was a teacher for 20 years. If you would like for me to ask her to review the records and provide her opinion / perspective I would be glad to ask. Just post here, or send me a pm with what you would like her to review. Sure. I hope others will check this too. The two docs are below. They're a little hard to read, but can be enlarged. We're interested in the first semester of the 1953-54 school year. NYC school on top, New Orleans beneath it. Edited October 6, 2017 by Jim Hargrove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 I think this whole thread should just be closed. I think it's a complete waste of time and is, quite frankly, embarrassing to this "education" forum. People are going to believe what they want and the biggest problem is there are too many people here who think their version of the evidence is correct but what they have absolutely no capability of doing is looking at themselves in the mirror and realizing that their evidence is very tainted because of pre-conceived notions. For example, some think their beliefs are the correct beliefs but what they they don't realize is if you go into something thinking that every single goddamned thing was altered, changed, misinterpreted and lied about, then how in the hell can you trust this person to make a sane, reasoned analysis based on the evidence? You can't. It's as simple as that. I can't speak for Jim Hargrove. For all we know, he may be posing as Hargrove but really be a relative of Armstrong or even Armstrong himself. But I think this thread has revealed a lot about a lot of so-called researchers. For example, David Josephs. I mean he wrote a great, well-researched story about how LHO was probably never in MC, that it was all just bullxxxx as part of the legend the planners of the murder wanted to create for LHO once he was arrested for Kennedy's murder. But then, after discussing other things with him here, I've lost a huge amount of respect for him because he revealed himself to be a "everything was faked" kind of people, when no such thing EVER took place in this case. And he's now reverted to belittling people who have made reasoned, well thought out rebuttals of this HL story. So I think this whole thread should just be archived and closed for good. Otherwise, it's just going to go on and on and on while people who come here are just going to be doing a lot of eye-rolling, which I'm sure has already happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) Maybe, just maybe Mr. Walton will someday stop heaping his judgments and decisions on the rest of us and JUST LEAVE. Nobody asked you to comment, nobody asked you anything related to H&L... you came here all on your own and now, since you don't like the sand in this little box, you need to disparage it and insult everyone who disagrees with you? No, you can't speak for Jim or to the evidence offered in H&L... but you sure can critique that which you have no real understanding. As for YOUR respect in me... you're kidding right? I suffer fools like you who can hear yet refuse to listen or think. Thankfully you are neither a moderator or the voice of anyone's reason here. I appreciate you were able to read and get what you could from my other work... What amazes me most about you and this reaction is it feels as if you have skin in the game here... Humans do all sorts of strange things... add in unlimited money and power and the Cold War setting and things like Northwoods get attempted. I'm sorry this causes such a problem for you Michael... you seem to have generally quality additions to conversations - except here. Why does H&L bother you so much? What is it you think this suggests Michael? Why would there need to be omissions and alterations when there are obviously two complete sets of people who both knew a different Oswald. And then, when the FBI did finally follow up, they found the wrong men to ask.... (if you read the Mexico work you'll remember they found virtually every other person who ever took a bus those 5 days, just not Oswald.) Maybe Mike, if you'd stop railing against the wind here and take a serious look at the key elements of the duality... One man was large, a fighter, not too bright and like Nagell like the Asian ladies.... the other was small, political, and an FBI infiltrator. This will be the last I attempt this with you Mike. Of all those here you seem most able to see what is being said and follow the evidence a bit more than just pronouncing judgment... yet if you have concluded this a waste of your time.... Don't let the thread's door hit you in the @$$ on the say out... Edited June 18, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 All Jenner meant was that some of the things Ely came up with would have to be changed or left out of the WR because, in his opinion, they were incorrect. After all, nobody is perfect. Much ado about nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 5 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said: All Jenner meant was that some of the things Ely came up with would have to be changed or left out of the WR because, in his opinion, they were incorrect. After all, nobody is perfect. Much ado about nothing. Yet again... Pathetic. That's the best you got ? Albert Jenner was being, what.... truthful? Jenner and Leibeler were looking out for the interests of honesty and historical accuracy... How many Brooklyn Bridges in swamp land in FL do you own by now ??? Let's see: Castle, Glidden, Goutier, Herd, King, Malden, Rubenstein and Sawchuck are all at Santa Ana with one Oswald while the other men are at El Toro with the other... also at separate times (Gorsky) And you think this remains about opinions... Pathetic Tracy... and why isn't it that you take this H&L hate show to the source over at ROKC or whatever cesspool he's calling it now? That way you can catch up on the nicknames, use foul language freely, and never - ever have to worry about actual evidence or the accurate interpretation there of..... Sounds like the perfect place for you... your feeble presentation here is only good for laughs... they reach around and bend over backward to show you the love at ROKC... Jenner wanted to get it accurately... you're a riot! 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