W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: I think that Jim DiEugenio, for example, probably wants to maintain good relationships with all the authors who contribute to K&K, including John Armstrong and Greg Parker. Understandably so. Yes, and that is why he doesn't say too much about the H&L theory publically, but I have no doubt that he doesn't believe it. Very few CTs do which was my original point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 5 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said: Sandy still seems to be under the misapprehension that quantity beats quality when it comes to evidence. In the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' corner, we have a steaming pile of weak evidence, all of which has a perfectly reasonable alternative explanation. Not so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 5 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said: 8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: I think that Jim DiEugenio, for example, probably wants to maintain good relationships with all the authors who contribute to K&K, including John Armstrong and Greg Parker. Understandably so. Yes, and that is why he doesn't say too much about the H&L theory publically, but I have no doubt that [DiEugenio] doesn't believe it. Very few CTs do which was my original point. You should have doubts. Yesterday I was researching the topic and I came across a thread where somebody pointed out that Greg Parker had shown that Palmer McBride changed the year in which he'd been friends with Oswald in New Orleans, from 1957/58 -- when Oswald was in Japan -- to 1956. The person claimed that this alone disproved the H&L theory, which of course was an absurd thing to claim. Anyway this got me curious and I did more searching. I found that apparently there was a dispute as to who discovered this change-of-year first, Greg Parker or David Lifton. Lifton posted a few lines from a transcript where he asked McBride about the date, and indeed he told Lifton it was 1956. Later I saw in that or another thread a letter written by McBride addressed to David Lifton, in which he said that Lifton had bullied him into saying 1956. ("Bullied" is my characterization.) I recognized the letter as being the same one Jim Hargrove posted several days ago. (I had forgotten about that letter, probably because I wasn't aware of the big controversy when I first read it.) Anyway, among all the posts I read was one from Jim DiEugenio. In it, Jim defended the 1957/58 claim, noting that other witnesses had agreed with McBride's 1857/58 recollection. (I think he was referring to people mentioned in a video interview of the then president of Pfisterer Dental Laboratory, where the two boys worked together.) Now, why would Jim post that if he didn't think that Palmer McBride was correct in his 1957/58 recollection? Anybody who believes in that also believes there were two Oswald's. I don't want to speak for Jim, so readers can take from this what they want. (In the meantime I'll do some more searching to see if I can find that post.) Also, that post was from four years ago and people can change their minds. My point is only that you shouldn't be so sure about Jim DiEugenio's beliefs regarding H&L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 I'll put it this way, I'd be very surprised if Jim D. believed the entire H&L theory. Perhaps he will weight in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 10, 2017 Share Posted October 10, 2017 (edited) On 10/10/2017 at 1:13 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said: I'll put it this way, I'd be very surprised if Jim D. believed the entire H&L theory. Perhaps he will weight in. I'd be surprised by that too. Edited October 11, 2017 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Greg Parker notes a couple more problems with the H&L theory: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1594-another-axe-falls-on-the-h-l-cult Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said: Greg Parker notes a couple more problems with the H&L theory: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1594-another-axe-falls-on-the-h-l-cult I quit following the links to Greg's site some time ago because I rarly found anything of substance or importance. (To his credit, he did have a few good points regarding the ship that sailed to Taiwan.) But this was the only thing posted today so I decided to check the link out. Someone ("lurker") posted this on Greg's site: Quote lurker wrote: During the midnight presser, Oswald is heard to say "...when the reporters in the hall AXED me that question...""Axed" is how blacks and poor whites from New Orleans...say "asked." It's a regional thing. From:https://yatlagniappe.com/2015/10/24/yatspeak-the-history-of-ax-instead-of-ask/New Orleans, not originally an anglophone city, was linguistically isolated from the rest of the country. It had close semantic ties with many Caribbean cities and a heavy African-American presence. It’s no surprise why many black and white New Orleanians continue to say “axe” over “ask”. It’s not wrong; it’s just archaic. Greg responded: So how does a Hungarian refugee pick that. "Harvey supposedly lived in NO for about 2 years. Is that long enough to pick up the "axe" habit for the rest of your life? I wonder if Greg accepts that Oswald was a CIA agent and fake defector. (There is a ton of evidence pointing to this conclusion, and one smoking gun that I can think of.) Oswald's cover story was that of being a poor southern young man. I would think that he'd try to take on the accent, vocabulary, and mannerisms of his cover character. BTW, New Orleans is not the only place poor people use or have used the "ax" pronunciation of "ask." I used to live in the San Francisco Bay area and I heard a lot of people use that pronunciation. Edited October 11, 2017 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 The southern boy who came to NY had a southern accent... The boy who returned from NY in 1954 no longer had the accent and never redeveloped it during the remaining years of his life in the south. Those who know a thing or two say English was this man's 2nd language... FWIW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Why was the southern boy's head found in the grave of 'Harvey' the Hungarian? If you can give a rational explanation as to how that would occur please, it would be awfully nice. I'm going to compile a list of all the people that would have had to be 'in' on this 'plot' At the last count it was somewhere over thirty! Now we have those involved in the exhumation and the subsequent peer reviewed report to add to the list. I think there are more people on that list than have bought the book! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 1 minute ago, Bernie Laverick said: Why was the southern boy's head found in the grave of 'Harvey' the Hungarian? If you can give a rational explanation as to how that would occur please, it would be awfully nice. I'm going to compile a list of all the people that would have had to be 'in' on this 'plot' At the last count it was somewhere over thirty! Now we have those involved in the exhumation and the subsequent peer reviewed report to add to the list. I think there are more people on that list than have bought the book! Bernie, Here's a good start: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/harvey-lee-who-was-involved-in-plot.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Tracy has on his website the following information. Is it true? If not please tell us which of the following people DIDN'T know about the H&L plot Note: An asterisk denotes those involved in the creation, planning and execution of the plot. CIA James Angleton* Bernard Barker George H.W. Bush Charles Cabell Ann Goodpasture Richard Helms* E. Howard Hunt* David Phillips* Ray Rocca Sergio Arcacha Smith* (assassin) Frank Sturgis Dallas Police Jesse Curry Gus Rose FBI C.D. DeLoach J. Edgar Hoover James Hosty Gordon Shanklin LBJ Cliff Carter Malcolm Wallace Media Hugh Aynesworth (CIA asset) Priscilla Johnson McMillan (CIA asset) Oswald Family & Friends Charles (Dutz) Murret Lillian Murret Marilyn Murret Marguerite Oswald “Historic” Marguerite Oswald “Imposter” Marina Oswald (KGB) Robert Oswald Vada Oswald Michael Paine Ruth Paine American Embassy Moscow Richard Snyder (CIA asset) John McVickar (CIA asset) WC Allen Dulles* Gerald Ford Earl Warren The following people did not actively participate in the plot, but were aware that there were two Marguerites and said nothing. Edward Aizer Mrs. Harry Bodour Dr. Cuthbert Brown Otis Carleton Mrs. Benny Commenge Mrs. Oris Duane Julian Evans Myrtle Evans Herbert Farrell Dr. Bruno Mancuso Edward Pic Viola Peterman Clem Sehrt The following people who attended the exhumation of LHO must have also been in on the plot and instructed to fake the exhumation and stay silent about it. I say this because the exhumation disproves the H&L theory and Armstrong offers no explanation whatsoever for the exhumation findings. Dr. Linda Norton Dr. Vincent DiMaio Dr. James Coffone Dr. Irwin Sopher William Dear (Security) John Cullins (friend of Marina) Hampton Hall (filmed exhumation) Several other assistants of the doctors Wouldn't you think even an eight year old would find this ridiculous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 (edited) Greg Parker wrote sandy larsen wrote: I wonder if Greg accepts that Oswald was a CIA agent and fake defector. (There is a ton of evidence pointing to this conclusion, and one smoking gun that I can think of.) Oswald's cover story was that of being a poor southern young man. I would think that he'd try to take on the accent, vocabulary, and mannerisms of his cover character. BTW, New Orleans is not the only place poor people use or have used the "ax" pronunciation of "ask." I used to live in the San Francisco Bay area and I heard a lot of people use that pronunciation. 1. No, Oswald was never a CIA agent. You need a deeper understanding of terminology. 2. The "fake defector" angle is not so cut and dry. Lots of complexity regarding his stay. 3. Excuse re accent exactly as predicted. 4. And New Orleans is not the only place your "Harvey" allegedly ever lived - but no sign of a North Dakotan accent. That part of the story not important? David Josephs wrote: The southern boy who came to NY had a southern accent... The boy who returned from NY in 1954 no longer had the accent and never redeveloped it during the remaining years of his life in the south. Those who know a thing or two say English was this man's 2nd language... FWIW. So it must have been Lee photographed at the Bronx Zoo looking perfectly comfortable in those jeans and cut down shirt. So it must have been Lee under arrest using the accent of the place in which he was born and partially raised. Sandy Larsen wrote: I quit following the links to Greg's site some time ago because I rarly found anything of substance or importance. (To his credit, he did have a few good points regarding the ship that sailed to Taiwan.) But this was the only thing posted today so I decided to check the link out. Someone ("lurker") posted this on Greg's site: Most gracious of you Sandy! So you must believe then that Louis Weinstock who was named as Lee's father or uncle in the Tippit call bear an uncanny resemblances to our boy. Sorry. But I don't see it myself. Maybe if DJ used his magical powers with photoshop it might help. You must also believe the H & L Brains Trust regarding Ely's bio of Oswald. The fact is that Ely's bio stopped at the point where Oswald joined the Marines and later, a memo was produced stating that the evidence showed that bio needs some tweaking somehow should apply to EVERYTHING Ely did. I mean, why do Jim and David try and fool people into believing that this memo asking for PRE USMC changes can also apply to an interview Ely did with a fellow Marine of Oswald's? https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1587-back-to-the-future-with-the-ely-memo Maybe you also believe the [expletive deleted] about the number of teeth in the exhumed body also "proving" it was not Lee? Did you read this https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1572-it-has-finally-come-down-to-counting-teethBe specific. Which on this list of debunkings do you disagree with and why? (Please leave aside the Beauregard/PS44 crap for the sake of sanity) https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1588-harvey-lee-links-to-alternative-explanations Edited October 12, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 On 10/11/2017 at 5:10 PM, Bernie Laverick said: Tracy has on his website the following information. Is it true? If not please tell us which of the following people DIDN'T know about the H&L plot CIA James Angleton* YES Bernard Barker YES George H.W. Bush YES Charles Cabell PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL Ann Goodpasture PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL Richard Helms* YES E. Howard Hunt* YES David Phillips* YES Ray Rocca PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL Sergio Arcacha Smith* (assassin) ?? Frank Sturgis YES Dallas Police WESTBROOK (YES, he had the second Oswald wallet) Jesse Curry NO Gus Rose NO FBI C.D. DeLoach NO J. Edgar Hoover PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL James Hosty NO Gordon Shanklin NO LBJ Cliff Carter NO Malcolm Wallace NO Media Hugh Aynesworth (CIA asset) NO Priscilla Johnson McMillan (CIA asset) NO Oswald Family & Friends Charles (Dutz) Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Lillian Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marilyn Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marguerite Oswald “Historic” NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marguerite Oswald “Imposter” NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marina Oswald (KGB) NO Robert Oswald NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Vada Oswald NO, AND LIKELY SUSPECTED 2 LHO'S Michael Paine NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Ruth Paine NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S American Embassy Moscow Richard Snyder (CIA asset) NO John McVickar (CIA asset) NO WC Allen Dulles* YES Gerald Ford NO Earl Warren NO Two Marguerites Edward Aizer NO Mrs. Harry Bodour NO Dr. Cuthbert Brown NO Otis Carleton NO Mrs. Benny Commenge NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Mrs. Oris Duane NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Julian Evans NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Myrtle Evans NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Herbert Farrell NO Dr. Bruno Mancuso NO Edward Pic NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Viola Peterman NO Clem Sehrt NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE exhumation Dr. Linda Norton NO Dr. Vincent DiMaio NO Dr. James Coffone NO Dr. Irwin Sopher NO William Dear (Security) NO John Cullins (friend of Marina) NO Hampton Hall (filmed exhumation) NO Several other assistants of the doctors NO It should be noted that a number of people above expressed disbelief about the appearances of Harvey and phony Marguerite to the Warren Commission. Both Julian and Myrtle Evans, for example, said they never would have recognized “Marguerite” had they not been told who she was. John Pic said a number of photos of Harvey, including the famous Bronx Zoo photo, did not appear to be his brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 12 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: Oswald Family & Friends Charles (Dutz) Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S I wish Jim would explain how and why all of these family members knew about 2 Oswalds and said nothing. And if your answer is that they knew LHO was a spy or whatever (which logic says they would NOT be privy to) and it was for the good of the country, wouldn't they rethink the whole thing after the assassination? 12 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: Mrs. Benny Commenge NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE All of these people and many more would have seen the "fake" Marguerite on TV or in newspapers and realized it was not the woman they had known. They didn't need to be "face to face." 12 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: Dr. Linda Norton NO Sandy is promoting the idea that the exhumation team faked the exam and was therefore in on the plot. If that is not the "official" H&L position what is? And for the one millionth time, neither the Evans' or John Pic ever said there were two Marguerites, only that Marguerite had changed and that some photos didn't look like LHO (respectively). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: CIA James Angleton* YES Bernard Barker YES George H.W. Bush YES Charles Cabell PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL Ann Goodpasture PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL Richard Helms* YES E. Howard Hunt* YES David Phillips* YES Ray Rocca PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL Sergio Arcacha Smith* (assassin) ?? Frank Sturgis YES Dallas Police WESTBROOK (YES, he had the second Oswald wallet) Jesse Curry NO Gus Rose NO FBI C.D. DeLoach NO J. Edgar Hoover PRIOR KNOWLEDGE IS DOUBTFUL James Hosty NO Gordon Shanklin NO LBJ Cliff Carter NO Malcolm Wallace NO Media Hugh Aynesworth (CIA asset) NO Priscilla Johnson McMillan (CIA asset) NO Oswald Family & Friends Charles (Dutz) Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Lillian Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marilyn Murret NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marguerite Oswald “Historic” NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marguerite Oswald “Imposter” NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Marina Oswald (KGB) NO Robert Oswald NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Vada Oswald NO, AND LIKELY SUSPECTED 2 LHO'S Michael Paine NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S Ruth Paine NO, BUT KNEW ABOUT 2 LHO'S American Embassy Moscow Richard Snyder (CIA asset) NO John McVickar (CIA asset) NO WC Allen Dulles* YES Gerald Ford NO Earl Warren NO Two Marguerites Edward Aizer NO Mrs. Harry Bodour NO Dr. Cuthbert Brown NO Otis Carleton NO Mrs. Benny Commenge NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Mrs. Oris Duane NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Julian Evans NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Myrtle Evans NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Herbert Farrell NO Dr. Bruno Mancuso NO Edward Pic NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE Viola Peterman NO Clem Sehrt NO, BUT WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED A DIFFERENT PERSON IF FACE TO FACE exhumation Dr. Linda Norton NO Dr. Vincent DiMaio NO Dr. James Coffone NO Dr. Irwin Sopher NO William Dear (Security) NO John Cullins (friend of Marina) NO Hampton Hall (filmed exhumation) NO Several other assistants of the doctors NO It should be noted that a number of people above expressed disbelief about the appearances of Harvey and phony Marguerite to the Warren Commission. Both Julian and Myrtle Evans, for example, said they never would have recognized “Marguerite” had they not been told who she was. John Pic said a number of photos of Harvey, including the famous Bronx Zoo photo, did not appear to be his brother. Yes - 9 a) - Prior knowledge is doubtful – 4 b - No but knew of two Oswalds – 9 c) - No but would have recognised a different person if face to face - 6 The sneaky dishonesty just gets worse doesn't it? ...So we have NINE definites. a) "Prior knowledge"? What does that mean? Prior to what? The obvious implication then is that they too knew of this plot, but they learned beyond your self imposed time limit. Still counts! b ) This is the best one. In response to an exhaustive and highly unlikely list of people who knew of this plot this is Jim's attempt to massage the numbers down. Jim realises that the more people he admits were a part of H&L the more ridiculous the whole thing sounds. So he chooses the formula, "No, but knew of two Oswalds". So who knew of H&L? Not those in this category; they only knew of there being two Oswalds!! Still counts. Sorry. c) That is your opinion only and cannot possibly be tested. Not recognising someone from a blurry photo doesn't count. You said face to face. So what does that sentence actually mean? Did they know that there were two Oswalds? And finally, you have now admitted that the exhumation and its findings weren't in any way faked or falsified. If they had been then those doing it would have known too...right? 22 people by Jim's admission were in on this plot, more if we include some of section c. And there'll be even more next month when this has died down and the motley crew, once again, start posting about the CIA manipulating the exhumation reports. This is what they do. They post a load of nonsense which gets overwhelmingly and cringingly debunked before scurrying off, only to return a few days, weeks, or months later to start the whole process again. You've gone too far this time. You've made utter fools of yourselves! And still you come back for more... Edited October 13, 2017 by Bernie Laverick 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