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

[Bernie Laverick]

7 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

 

The above quote would seem to be a personal attack. The remark you objected to "your cultish fantasy" is an attack on the H&L concept. Please stick to the debate David and stop with the personal attacks.

He does this every time he is incapable of addressing a basic flaw in the cultish fantasy he adheres to. So, he does it quite a lot. He'll start insulting my family next, you watch.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

5 minutes ago, Bernie Laverick said:

He does this every time he is incapable of addressing a basic flaw in the cultish fantasy he adheres to. So, he does it quite a lot. He'll start insulting my family next, you watch.

Perhaps he is hoping the thread will be locked so he doesn't have to answer any inconvenient questions.

[Bernie Laverick]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

In the fall of 1954, LEE Oswald was in the 9th grade at Beauregard JHS, where he became friends with a kid named Ed Voebel after Voebel witnessed him in a protracted fight with the Neumeyer brothers, Johnny and Mike.  Voebel and a couple of other kids attempted to patch Lee up.  This was in November. Voebel told the Warren Commission that Oswald lost a tooth in the fight.

Mr. JENNER. But you do remember that you attempted to help him when he was struck in the mouth on that occasion; is that right?
Mr. VOEBEL. Yes; I think he even lost a tooth from that. I think he was cut on the lip, and a tooth was knocked out.

Soon after the fight, Voebel took a famous photograph of Oswald that he eventually sold to LIFE magazine after the assassination.  It appears to show LEE Oswald with a missing tooth.

 

Here’s a close-up from Voebel’s photo:

About a half century later, after one of a number of meetings John Armstrong had with Marina (Oswald) Porter, she gave him all the original photos of the 1981 exhumation.  Here is one of them.

 

As you can see, there is no missing front tooth.

I have the Feb. 21, 1964 edition of LIFE magazine which contains a HUGE halftone reproduction of Voebel's photo that fills up all of page 70 and extends onto page 71. Now that I have a better scanner, I'll see if I can make a clearer image.

No missing front tooth eh? Then it can't have been missing in the first place because...well, look! Nothing's missing! And yet we know for a FACT that this is 'Lee's' skull because of the mastoid scar and your admission that none of those involved in the exhumation had faked the findings.

So what is the point of this post? Are you seriously trying to prove that that body must belong to someone other than 'Lee'? Despite the kicking you have all just had on that very subject? Really??

A much less arrogant person would stay well clear of the body in that grave especially when you demonstrably cannot explain why or how it even got there!

[Bernie Laverick]

12 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Perhaps he is hoping the thread will be locked so he doesn't have to answer any inconvenient questions.

Correct. 

[David Josephs]

Basic flaw?

Simply question then Tracy...

What occurred at that gravesite between 1963 and the exhumation?

You can start the chronology in Jan 1964...  Show us how, despite there having been a vault of concrete poured as if usual practice, this casket didn't last but a few years.

Alex Hoyt, Family Service Manager, Funeral Director

Answered Nov 21 2015

Most all (I'd say 99% of) cemeteries require a concrete vault which is set into the grave first. The casket is then lowered into the vault and a heavy lid is placed on top.  The vaults are made of varying quality and interior linings. Any vault above a grave liner (the most basic)  has a tongue-in-groove type lid - inside which has a thick epoxy-like substance that seals the lid in place.
That being said, a casket placed in a vault in dry conditions could easily last a century without noticeable wear. Many factors come into play - wood caskets will eventually rot, metal caskets will eventually rust.

What do you suppose it was that cracked the vault and exposed the corpse inside the casket???
When do you think that happened?
Do you see it as an impossibility that "something" could have happened to that body during that time?
 

Is it beyond the CIA or FBI to CYA in this situation?  Tracy, if this was the one and only thing supporting H&L we'd have a discussion... it's not.
When you finally come to grips with 1000 pages and tens of thousands of source documents supporting H&L... then add in first person testimony that you and others can only frown at and claim "mistakes"...

You understanding or not this is no skin off my nose...  Bernie pretending to have contributed here in some way remains the real joke.
The little mouse in the corner yelling "ME TOO" so as to maybe get some of the credit ??  IDK.

And by far the worst of all is this belief that something like this could not have happened...  like thinking political assassination doesn't occur in the USA...

Thank goodness for there being at least 2 sides to every story...  you guys can post your dribble forever and not worry about ever being close to the truth...

 

 

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

18 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

What do you suppose it was that cracked the vault and exposed the corpse inside the casket???

My guess is heavy equipment used by the cemetery (causing pressure on the vault), although it could have been a simple shifting of the ground. Your source is correct to say that a casket in dry conditions could remain in good shape, but I doubt that happens in reality. From my exhumation series on McAdams' site:

Indeed, the idea of a burial vault being any sort of safe haven for the deceased seems to be coming under fire. Darryl J. Roberts is a 30-year veteran of the “death care industry” who has written a whistle-blowing book that features allegations of serious price gouging by funeral homes.  Roberts’ book, Profits of Death, exposes many myths about death and dying. On page 50-51 Roberts writes:

“No vault is impervious to eventual disintegration, and there is very little chance of placing anything underground and having it remain waterproof. I have personally witnessed as many as forty disinterments from vaults (even those made by the leading manufacturers) that were guaranteed waterproof from which water had to be drained before they could be moved. Often, they were full of water.”

Roberts continues:

“It’s frequently necessary, when disinterring one of these vaults, to knock drainage holes in the bottom before it can be moved. Only then can the vault-still with the hole in the bottom-and casket be reinterred in another location.”

From my article about Paul Groody:

It is a fact that things like normal shifting of the ground and heavy equipment can cause vaults to break. The Wilbert Vault Company’s (the same brand LHO was buried in) own web site admits the problem and advises customers to seek:

...superior long-lasting protection against subsoil elements and the weight of heavy cemetery maintenance equipment.

So, cracked vaults do happen and fairly often it would seem. One of the reasons that Groody was suspicious about the exhumation was the cracked vault. He believed his own sales pitch about the "steel reinforced vault" being nearly impervious and thus offered a lifetime guarantee. But in reality, how many people are going to dig up the grave to check the vault? Only happens during an exhumation and as Roberts points out, there are many failures. 

 

[Bernie Laverick]

This is getting more and more absurd. Neither Jim or Sandy have offered an explanation as to why 'Lee's' skull was found in Harvey's grave. They have offered...

1) The same mastoid operation was performed on young 'Harvey' at some un-named location by unknown persons so that the skulls would match should he ever be dug up after death (yet clumsily, they forgot to chip one of the teeth while they were at it thus destroying the whole plot!)

2) They performed the operation on a dead body despite there been copious evidence of natural healing.

3) They faked it. But if so, we would then have to add all those involved to the TWENTY TWO others, according to Jim, who knew about H&L.

If you believe it to be 3, then the onus is on you to provide proof or evidence to back that up. But all we get is "These people are baaad people, capable of anything..." etc...

That's it? That's your proof? Your own rampant paranoia?

Grow up!

[Sandy Larsen]

18 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Sandy is promoting the idea that the exhumation team faked the exam and was therefore in on the plot.

To clarify, I don't know at what point the information was faked. That the exhumation team faked it is one possibility.

It would not have been necessary for the exhumation team to be aware of the Oswald Project to fake the part about the mastoidectomy scar. They merely would been instructed to make that claim for "National Security" reasons. Have them sign non-disclosure agreements with stiff penalties.

The JFK assassination was covered up. I don't why anybody who accepts that couldn't accept that a single finding in the exhumation (the lack of mastoidectomy scar) was likewise covered up.

 

Edited October 14, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

7 hours ago, Bernie Laverick said:

This is getting more and more absurd. Neither Jim or Sandy have offered an explanation as to why 'Lee's' skull was found in Harvey's grave.

I haven't offered an explanation because I didn't know or claim that Lee's skull was found in Harvey's grave.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 10/12/2017 at 2:37 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Greg Parker said:
1. No, Oswald was never a CIA agent. You need a deeper understanding of terminology.

I do believe that Oswald was a CIA agent. You know... a spy.

Why do I need a "deeper understanding of terminology?" Do you prefer I say "CIA field operative?" Something else?

 

[Bernie Laverick]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I haven't offered an explanation because I didn't know or claim that Lee's skull was found in Harvey's grave.

 

Well it was. So now you know. We know it was Lee's skull because it fitted perfectly with LHO's own medical record.

This is a big big problem for you, I understand that. I also understand all the flailing about too. If it is Lee's skull then H&L is a crock of nonsense. So you now have absolutely no choice other than to desperately try and prove that it isn't. But you have absolutely nothing to go on. Nothing!

"They performed it when he was a 6 year old" "They did the operation on 'Harvey's' dead body" (your preferred explanation!) "The concrete company were all in on it" And lastly, the fall back position for everything you believe in..."It was faked". 

No evidence is offered other than paranoid supposition and endless what-if-ary. "These bad guys are capable of anything..." is the ONLY 'proof' they have.

I think there is yet another Oswald, living on the moon, waiting to perform another assassination but with total deniability. After all these people are capable of anything so any accusation against them must be the truth.

Barking mad...and creepily scary with it. (You don't all own motels do you?)

[Bernie Laverick]

Here's another thing about the whole H&L cult...they are NEVER wrong! They have never EVER made a mistake and EVERYTHING that is written in H&L is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Not one single jot of it is wrong. Apparently...

Are we to believe that there isn't one factual error in this book? Not even one? If so...which? With the benefit of hindsight, where did Armstrong err or go slightly wrong? Even Darwin made a few mistakes, as you would expect. But Armstrong wrote over 1,000 pages and not one bit of it is incorrect according to his congregation. How likely is that?

So in the spirit of self honesty could you list all the things that you now know that Armstrong got wrong?

And while you're t it, could you make another one listing all the NEW evidence that has emerged since the H&L publication. After 20 odd years that list should now be bigger than the book itself. But in all these forum debates you have never once revealed anything you have found yourselves. Your WHOLE debate is centred on what Armstrong wrote a quarter of a century ago which we have now discovered was effectively debunked two decades prior to that!

If you believe this story to be true why aren't you doing anything about it? Why haven't you got off your backsides to go look for all the other 'clues' that must still be floating around if this is the truth? Orwell, a huge fan of murder mysteries, once said truth is a like a dead body..."it will always out in the end".

So why aren't you still looking? Why keep parroting someone else's work when more truth is still out there for you to find for yourselves? 

Is the reason you bring nothing new to the table because there is nothing new you have found? Or are you just being coy and playing hard to get?

 

[Bernie Laverick]

3 minutes ago, Bernie Laverick said:

Here's another thing about the whole H&L cult...they are NEVER wrong! They have never EVER made a mistake and EVERYTHING that is written in H&L is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Not one single jot of it is wrong. Apparently...

Are we to believe that there isn't one factual error in this book? Not even one? If so...which? With the benefit of hindsight, where did Armstrong err or go slightly wrong? Even Darwin made a few mistakes, as you would expect. But Armstrong wrote over 1,000 pages and not one bit of it is incorrect according to his congregation. How likely is that?

So in the spirit of self honesty could you list all the things that you now know that Armstrong got wrong?

And while you're t it, could you make another one listing all the NEW evidence that has emerged since the H&L publication. After 20 odd years that list should now be bigger than the book itself. But in all these forum debates you have never once revealed anything you have found yourselves. Your WHOLE debate is centred on what Armstrong wrote a quarter of a century ago which we have now discovered was effectively debunked two decades prior to that!

If you believe this story to be true why aren't you doing anything about it? Why haven't you got off your backsides to go look for all the other 'clues' that must still be floating around if this is the truth? Orwell, a huge fan of murder mysteries, once said truth is a like a dead body..."it will always out in the end".

So why aren't you still looking? Why keep parroting someone else's work when more truth is still out there for you to find for yourselves? 

Is the reason you bring nothing new to the table because there is nothing new you have found? Or are you just being coy and playing hard to get?

 

And it's no good saying "Yes, but all the other evidence is so compelling" so we can skip around the exhumation and its findings. As I said before, it's like a LN accepting that Oswald was on the steps of the TSBD but still insisting that he was the shooter because "...all the other evidence is so compelling". If he WAS on the steps then all the other evidence is self evidently meaningless and not worth discussing anymore. Who cares about the "curtain rods"? Who cares about any of the other false narratives. Being on the steps trumps all the other 'evidence'. Full stop.

Likewise with 'Lee's' exhumation (when it should have been 'Harvey'!) and the subsequent peer reviewed study of its findings. It trumps all your other evidence - none of which was at all conclusive and anyway could be explained without recourse to far out fantasy - so you have finally come to the end of the road, I say road, more of dirt track leading up to a high cliff.

Do the decent thing and throw that damned book off the edge of it!

[Bernie Laverick]

I've been thinking about stuff and trying to get my head around the H&L cult mind-set. Then I thought, given the super bad guys are capable of anything and that is all one needs for a theory, let's try this.

As you can see below, these are clearly two different men. I mean, ahem...the sloping shoulders? Is it remotely possible that there were two JFKs? One, the doppelganger, did the shooting because who would ever believe that JFK shot JFK? It's so fiendishly clever and perfectly in line with what these super bad guys are capable of that I'm surprised no one has thought about it before. Jackie would have been in on it too, in fact there is proof of there been two Jackies because on one picture she is young and attractive and the other, taken a few decades later, she looks older and more middle aged. What more proof do we need?

This avenue of thought needs investigating...

 

...?

[Michael Walton]

14 hours ago, David Josephs said:

What occurred at that gravesite between 1963 and the exhumation?

You can start the chronology in Jan 1964...  Show us how, despite there having been a vault of concrete poured as if usual practice, this casket didn't last but a few years.

David, what you don't seem to understand is the funeral business is a racket.  It's like the car business. When my Mom died, I did not want to get her embalmed because -- why? She was going to rot away anyway and embalming was like an extra $1,000 bucks that I wasn't going to give them.

When I said no, the guy got a little - "Oh, now, I'm sure you want to keep your Mother's dignity..." and some other nonsense.  I said no.  Guess what? On the day of her funeral, he came up and said, "Out of courtesy to your dearly departed Mother, we went ahead with the embalming at no charge."

They prey on the bereaved and once the crying and flower laying are over, it's pretty much a done deal. The cheap coffin is lowered, the vault cover is laid and who in the xxxx knows what happens down there? Think about it - this happens thousands and thousands of times all over the world and unless you're paranoid JE Hoover, who had a lead lined coffin that the bearers almost threw their balls out carrying it around, most of this stuff is cheaply made. And with the lot of weight laying on the cover, why would it be so surprising that this stuff breaks down?

Didn't a handle break off on Kennedy's coffin at the airport?

The point is - it's very disingenuous and paranoid of you to think that just because the vault was broken that you say - YEP! They snuck down and swapped bodies or took the head in the middle of the night and drilled a mastoid hole in it. I mean are you really THAT paranoid and suspicious of EVERYTHING?! Wow!

You're turning these simple stories of mistaken identity and broken vaults into crazy stories that even the best fictional authors would not even dream up.