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

[Bernie Laverick]

10 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

We don't even have a debate on this topic.  We have the H&L group posting evidence, fact, their RESEARCH, and the detractors posting opinion and misinformation/purposeful misinterpretation.  It's pathetic.

 

Josephs and Hargrove have the patience of saints. 

Correct. There is no debate here. The "research" and "evidence" you are alluding to has all been debunked over and over and over again.

Maybe you can tell us Michael how Lee's body ended up in Harvey's grave? If you can answer that then your contribution may hold some merit. But be warned, because the most knowledgeable men on H&L can't answer it. Have I misinterpreted this? If so, please accept my apologies along with their, of your, crystal clear explanation as to how this may have happened.

Of course, should you be unable to do this, then you may want to question why you make such pointless posts.

While your at it, fancy trying to calculate the odds of two unrelated boys picked as children eventually growing up to look identical...?

 

[Jim Hargrove]

6 minutes ago, Bernie Laverick said:

Maybe you can tell us Michael how Lee's body ended up in Harvey's grave?

It is quite obviously not Lee's body in Harvey's grave.  If it was, perhaps Mr. Laverick can tell us how Lee's missing front tooth regrew in Harvey's grave!

[Jim Hargrove]

9 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

The anti-H&L crowd is losing their grip...  that's why they hang their hat on the exhumation and an 18 year gap.

And even that has failed them!

[Jim Hargrove]

29 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

We don't even have a debate on this topic.  We have the H&L group posting evidence, fact, their RESEARCH, and the detractors posting opinion and misinformation/purposeful misinterpretation.  It's pathetic.

Josephs and Hargrove have the patience of saints. 

Mr. Cross is clearly a man who understands the situation here and has great insights!

[Michael Cross]

3 hours ago, Bernie Laverick said:

Correct. There is no debate here. The "research" and "evidence" you are alluding to has all been debunked over and over and over again.

Maybe you can tell us Michael how Lee's body ended up in Harvey's grave? If you can answer that then your contribution may hold some merit. But be warned, because the most knowledgeable men on H&L can't answer it. Have I misinterpreted this? If so, please accept my apologies along with their, of your, crystal clear explanation as to how this may have happened.

Of course, should you be unable to do this, then you may want to question why you make such pointless posts.

While your at it, fancy trying to calculate the odds of two unrelated boys picked as children eventually growing up to look identical...?

 

Again, saying it has been debunked doesn't debunk it.  Just as ignoring what it costs to be alive with kids when calculating income simply invalidates your assertions.  

 

Exhumation?  Please.  I'm on record as a H&L agnostic.  But there is so much ACTUAL evidence of, AT A MINIMUM, an organized campaign to impersonate LHO, that those of you simply opining and being purposefully obtuse make me wonder if you're disinformation agents.  Wonder, not accuse, because this observer can't find another explanation. 

[Bernie Laverick]

14 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

Again, saying it has been debunked doesn't debunk it.  Just as ignoring what it costs to be alive with kids when calculating income simply invalidates your assertions.  

 

Exhumation?  Please.  I'm on record as a H&L agnostic.  But there is so much ACTUAL evidence of, AT A MINIMUM, an organized campaign to impersonate LHO, that those of you simply opining and being purposefully obtuse make me wonder if you're disinformation agents.  Wonder, not accuse, because this observer can't find another explanation. 

This translates as..."Anyone who has a different opinion to me must be a disinformation agent". Looks like you have the credentials to be a fully fledged member Michael.

But unfortunately you say you are "agnostic". Good. That means you are not fully convinced. Good. Like to share which bits you don't believe...or would that make you a disinformation agent too? Do you even know how silly you sound calling people disinformation agents? Do you think they play their evil games here on a silly forum rather than organising an 'accident' for Jim or for Armstrong? Why have these people allowed you all to get to the 'truth'? Ever ask yourselves that? Are you in danger? According to you guys, you should be. You've discovered the 'truth' and you're telling us these people will stop at nothing to prevent this getting out. Yet here you all are every day revealing top secret information to the whole world. 

Why isn't anyone in the world listening though?

Because they are ALL working for the American intelligence services!!! That's the only possible explanation!

[Michael Cross]

No.  Anyone that doesn't present research, skews the available research and presents misinformation, or opinion as fact, may be a misinformation agent.

 

As to being an agnostic, I'm not convinced of the "Oswald Project".  I am convinced there was a deliberate attempt to impersonate him at the least.  I'm also convinced there are far too many incidents of LHO being in two places at once for it to be a clerical issue. 

 

And my God, get off your high horse.  In danger?  Did you notice what happened yesterday?  The American sheeple are asleep. There will be no riots over the withholding of the documents, and those in the shadows know it.  

 

Try doing some research of your own.  Present something rather than attack with empty rhetoric. 

[Bernie Laverick]

30 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

Again, saying it has been debunked doesn't debunk it.  Just as ignoring what it costs to be alive with kids when calculating income simply invalidates your assertions.  

 

Exhumation?  Please.  I'm on record as a H&L agnostic.  But there is so much ACTUAL evidence of, AT A MINIMUM, an organized campaign to impersonate LHO, that those of you simply opining and being purposefully obtuse make me wonder if you're disinformation agents.  Wonder, not accuse, because this observer can't find another explanation. 

How do YOU explain the mastoid operation scar found on the corpse? The one that is consistent with the operation we know 'Lee' had. Please tell us how 'Harvey' also had that same mastoid scar? But don't conjure up some scenario, with or without any documentation or witness testimony, that the operation was also done on Harvey to perfectly replicate 'Lee's' mouth (should he be inevitably exhumed), because they didn't do the much easier procedure of replicating his dental status!!!

Any ideas?

[Michael Cross]

Do you even read what people write?

[Jim Hargrove]

Harvey and Lee: Spycraft as Usual

Identity tricks are common in spycraft.

Cuban Intelligence’s DeLaguardia Brothers

 

The book “Castro’s Final Hour” included a photograph of Antonio and Patricio DeLaGuardia, top spies for Cuba during the 1960s, ‘70s, and ‘80s. They were identical twins, useful, among other ways, for providing an alibi when one or the other got in trouble.

Russian Spy Gordon Lonsdale/Konon Molody

 

The use of impostors is common in spycraft.  A Russian named Konon Molody, born in Moscow in 1922, was sent to Berkley, California at the age of seven to learn English and develop familiarity with American customs.  Ten years later, he returned to the USSR, was commissioned in the Soviet Navy, and started espionage training.

By 1954, Molody sailed to Canada with a birth certificate and other paperwork for a Canadian named  Gordon Arnold Lonsdale who had died c. 1943.  As “Gordon Lonsdale,” Molody had a significant career as a Soviet spy, including interactions with Rudolph Abel in the U.S. and with the British military.  He was convicted of espionage in London in 1961.

Mossad officer Michael Ross

Much more recently, a fellow named Michael Ross was born in British Columbia in 1961. He traveled to Israel in 1982 where he eventually married an Israeli woman and joined the Mossad.  According to the Canadian daily National Post (1/14/12), “Over the next 14 years, the Canadian-Israeli assumed six different identities — one cover lasted a full seven years — and led a life wildly different from the one his family believed true so he could gather intelligence and seduce defectors.”

German Spy Mata Hari

The famed Dutch exotic dancer and German spy with the stage name Mata Hari used stage doubles for her dancing shows so that she could undertake other activities. One of Allen Dulles’s books extols the usefulness of doubles in spycraft, and he should know.  The H&L critics here would like you to believe this sort of thing never happens, but spy games with similarities to the Harvey and Lee scenario are really quite easy to find. 

[Jim Hargrove]

7 minutes ago, Bernie Laverick said:

How do YOU explain the mastoid operation scar found on the corpse? The one that is consistent with the operation we know 'Lee' had. Please tell us how 'Harvey' also had that same mastoid scar? But don't conjure up some scenario, with or without any documentation or witness testimony, that the operation was also done on Harvey to perfectly replicate 'Lee's' mouth (should he be inevitably exhumed), because they didn't do the much easier procedure of replicating his dental status!!!

Any ideas?

Plenty of ideas, Mr. Laverick!  Even exhumation physician Vincent DiMaio admitted that many Word War II era children bore that same mastoidectomy scar.  But how many children in ALL OF HISTORY had a front tooth grow back in the grave?  Eagerly awaiting your citation.

[Bernie Laverick]

23 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

Do you even read what people write?

No idea then...? Thought so.

Reading what others have written is precisely why I am questioning their multiple conclusions, as varied and as exotic as they have been. As you can see above, Jim has now reverted back to the operation been done by complete chance while the Hungarian/Russian refugee/orphan was 'over there'. No documentation. No evidence. Just blind faith.

Only 20 posts ago Jim was convinced that the operation was "most likely" (see the evidence he provides there?) done in NY, "probably" (and again) in 1952/3. He's ditched that now. He's gone back to an exact same obscure operation been performed on a Hungarian refugee who was picked by unknown hands for an as yet unspecified espionage plot and who again, coincidentally, managed to grow through adolescence to look identical to the character he was destined to adopt. That's not even a pair of twos in a poker game! 

It has been said by the H&L faction that the exhumation was faked too. Is this on top of the coincidental mastoid operation explanation... or an alternative one?  

Three explanations for one event, and all three have been proposed without a shred of evidence. When one explanation is rebutted, even with scientific evidence, they revert to another.

1 - 'Harvey' by pure chance had had the same mastoid operation as a kid. 

2 - It was done in NY in 1952/3

3 - The exhumation or its findings were faked.

You would agree Michael that should one of these be true you would want to see some proof? Or is me asking that question adequate evidence in your mind that I am some spooky disinfo agent?

In fact, because there are three explanations, all of which are interwovenly used, it really is beholden on those that promote the theory to go and look for the smoking gun. Or at least, pick one of them and stick to it!

I implore the H&L supporters to do what the best researchers do on here. Develop it!! Prove it! Dig out more information. NOTHING has been added to this story in over twenty years. Nothing. What does that tell you Michael?

That's why they don't bother looking - because there's nothing for them to find!

 

[Jim Hargrove]

You are EXACTLY RIGHT, Mr. Laverick.  There are at least three different ways to explain the mastoidectomy.  A fourth, of course, is discussed by DJ when he wonders why a steel reinforced concrete burial vault would fail in less than two decades.

Now give me one possible way that "Lee Harvey Oswald's" missing front tooth could grow back in his grave.  You ALWAYS forget to mention that! 

[Michael Cross]

11 minutes ago, Bernie Laverick said:

No idea then...? Thought so.

Reading what others have written is precisely why I am questioning their multiple conclusions, as varied and as exotic as they have been. As you can see above, Jim has now reverted back to the operation been done by complete chance while the Hungarian/Russian refugee/orphan was 'over there'. No documentation. No evidence. Just blind faith.

Only 20 posts ago Jim was convinced that the operation was "most likely" (see the evidence he provides there?) done in NY, "probably" (and again) in 1952/3. He's ditched that now. He's gone back to an exact same obscure operation been performed on a Hungarian refugee who was picked by unknown hands for an as yet unspecified espionage plot and who again, coincidentally, managed to grow through adolescence to look identical to the character he was destined to adopt. That's not even a pair of twos in a poker game! 

It has been said by the H&L faction that the exhumation was faked too. Is this on top of the coincidental mastoid operation explanation... or an alternative one?  

Three explanations for one event, and all three have been proposed without a shred of evidence. When one explanation is rebutted, even with scientific evidence, they revert to another.

1 - 'Harvey' by pure chance had had the same mastoid operation as a kid. 

2 - It was done in NY in 1952/3

3 - The exhumation or its findings were faked.

You would agree Michael that should one of these be true you would want to see some proof? Or is me asking that question adequate evidence in your mind that I am some spooky disinfo agent?

In fact, because there are three explanations, all of which are interwovenly used, it really is beholden on those that promote the theory to go and look for the smoking gun. Or at least, pick one of them and stick to it!

I implore the H&L supporters to do what the best researchers do on here. Develop it!! Prove it! Dig out more information. NOTHING has been added to this story in over twenty years. Nothing. What does that tell you Michael?

That's why they don't bother looking - because there's nothing for them to find!

 

Again, do you even read what people write?  What's my stance?  Do I believe in the Oswald project?  

I'm resisting using derogatory names, but it's hard.  Your purposeful obtuseness sucks.

[Bernie Laverick]

47 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

Again, do you even read what people write?  What's my stance?  Do I believe in the Oswald project?  

I'm resisting using derogatory names, but it's hard.  Your purposeful obtuseness sucks.

????

I don't really care what you believe Michael. I do know that you risibly labelled me a "disinformation agent" because I question and doubt the theory generating this thread.

If you believe in an Oswald project, that does NOT therefore conclude that H&L is the one and only explanation behind such a project. If we want to find the truth behind that project then we need to remove any obstacles that are in the way. I believe H&L is such an obstacle. Why is that not a perfectly legitimate stance to take?

You are attacking me for questioning Jim and Sandy, that I am deliberately being "obtuse", that I don't present research, that Jim has laid out a logical series of evidence etc...forgive me for thinking you too believed in H&L. As I say, I don't give two hoots what you believe. But maybe instead of pithy one liners you join the debate and state your position. then we will all be enlightened.

Don't hold back on the derogatory names Michael, it's the logical next step!

Before you do though, would you like to state which of the three above possibilities you find the most likely explanation for the mastoid debacle? Bearing in mind that if that fuels some of your agnosticism then the entire H&L crumbles into the dust. It is NOT just one of the many other 'examples'. You can lose Bolton Ford and still live to fight another day. Lose this and it all tipples off the edge of a cliff.

That's why I am pursuing it.  And that's why you are all getting angry!