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

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Armstrong called one witness "sweetheart" and Palmer McBride "magically" changed his tune after talking to Armstrong.

I studied the Palmer McBride incident and I agree with Palmer. He had to change his story because Lifton showed him that he couldn't possibly be right. There'd have to be TWO Oswalds for him to be right, after all. Palmer changed his story back after he gave it more thought and used more memory "landmarks" to get the year right. PLUS there is corroboration for what he remembers.

That's just like the case of several Parkland doctors changing their stories when they were shown that autopsy photo, which shows no blowout in the back of the head. Before that, nearly every medical professional there (about 20 of them) claimed there was a blowout wound on the back of the head.

As for the sweetheart remark, you're aware of that only because Jim Hargrove posted it. Read the story here:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.conspiracy.jfk/cifnFZW_bnw

Sweetheart is a term of endearment. Some people are very guarded in their use of these terms and some are not. My grandmother called everybody sweety. (Well, everybody she liked.) Big deal. If it were something shameful, Jim wouldn't have posted it.

Sweetheart also means "a particularly lovable or pleasing person or thing." For example, "she's a real sweetheart."

 

Edited October 19, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Sandy did well to dig out the testimony of Lillian Murret, aunt of the historical, one and only Lee Harvey Oswald. Unfortunately, Lillian Murret does not support Ed Voebel's claim that Oswald had had a tooth knocked out in a fight at school. In fact, she corroborates Bennierita Smith's account of the fight. This is what Bennierita Smith said:

"I guess because there was this boy - he wasn't going to Beauregard, this boy he had the fight with, and he was a little guy. I think his name was Robin Riley. He hit Lee, and his tooth came through his lip ... it actually tore the lip." (WCHE vol.8, p.22: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=36#relPageId=30 )

And this is what Lillian Murret said:

"There were boys in back of him and one of them called his name, and he said, 'Lee', and when he turned around, this boy punched him in the mouth and ran, and it ran his tooth through the lip, so she [Marguerite Oswald] had to go over to the school and take him to the dentist, and I paid for the dentist bill myself, and that's all I know about that." (WCHE vol.8, p.124: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=36#relPageId=132 )

Neither of the women claims that a tooth was knocked out, but both of them claim that a tooth penetrated Oswald's lip. Against this, we have one poor-quality photograph and Ed Voebel's statement that he thought (but wasn't sure) that Oswald had had a tooth knocked out.

If Oswald had in fact had a tooth knocked out, there ought to be plenty of evidence for it:

- Dozens, if not hundreds, of people who had met Oswald must have seen his picture on television and in newspapers after the assassination. Apart from Ed Voebel, did any of them point out the inconsistency that the person they remembered had one of his front teeth missing yet this guy had a full set?

- Are there any other photographs of Oswald which even suggest that he had a front tooth missing?

- Do any of the medical records made during Oswald's lifetime, such as those from his enlistment in the marines, mention a missing front tooth?

- Did the body in Oswald's grave have a front tooth missing?

Unless anyone can produce some evidence to answer these questions, the only reasonable conclusion is that Oswald's fight at school did not result in one of his front teeth being knocked out. Yet another piece of the 'Harvey and Lee and Marguerite and Marguerite' fantasy bites (as it were) the dust.

More here: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1603-lillian-murret-the-dentist

[Jim Hargrove]

Sheesh!  Sometimes a picture really is worth 10,000 words.

 

 

Of all the fuzzy photos I’ve looked at over the years, wondering who was on the stairs of the TSBD for example, the picture above is plenty clear enough to tell the story.

If you were a 14-year-old boy in the 1950s who got a front tooth knocked out in a fight, do you think you would have spent the rest of your life with a toothless smile?  Of course not.  In those days before implants, you’d get a false tooth held in place by a dental bridge.  A very common procedure.

As to Lillian Murret’s recollection, why on earth would a mother (who, we’re told, was practical nurse) bring her kid to a dentist for a split lip?  She’d go to a doctor, like anyone else looking to get a lacerated lip treated.

Ed Voebel was with Lee Oswald during the fight.  Ed Voebel tried to patch him up after the fight.  And Ed Voebel took the picture of Lee with the missing tooth.  And we're supposed to take Lillian Murret's hearsay recollection over Voebels?  Hah!

Mr. Bojczuk asks, “Did the body in Oswald's grave have a front tooth missing?”

The answer, of course, is no.  Mr. B. makes our point for us, again.

Hey, let's look at that exhumation photo one more time!

Still can't see that missing front tooth.  The two top teeth sure look natural.  

[W. Tracy Parnell]

9 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Sweetheart is a term of endearment.

Yes, I'm aware of that. It is also a term that anyone who is objectively looking for the facts would not use. Armstrong had a predetermined conclusion which was based on a few cherry picked "facts" and he set about finding "confirmation" for that conclusion. 

EDIT: Lillian Murret and the Dentist by Greg Parker:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1603-lillian-murret-the-dentist

Edited October 19, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell

[Jim Hargrove]

As is so often the case, the H&L critics are afraid to put their arguments here, on the JFK Assassination Debate Forum, where they can be fully debated for all to see.  Arguments on other websites can be altered at will... with no editing stamps... and the content forever obfuscated.

How did "Lee Harvey Oswald" grow a new front tooth in his grave?

[Bernie Laverick]

8 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Sheesh!  Sometimes a picture really is worth 10,000 words.

 

 

Of all the fuzzy photos I’ve looked at over the years, wondering who was on the stairs of the TSBD for example, the picture above is plenty clear enough to tell the story.

If you were a 14-year-old boy in the 1950s who got a front tooth knocked out in a fight, do you think you would have spent the rest of your life with a toothless smile?  Of course not.  In those days before implants, you’d get a false tooth held in place by a dental bridge.  A very common procedure.

As to Lillian Murret’s recollection, why on earth would a mother (who, we’re told, was practical nurse) bring her kid to a dentist for a split lip?  She’d go to a doctor, like anyone else looking to get a lacerated lip treated.

Ed Voebel was with Lee Oswald during the fight.  Ed Voebel tried to patch him up after the fight.  And Ed Voebel took the picture of Lee with the missing tooth.  And we're supposed to take Lillian Murret's hearsay recollection over Voebels?  Hah!

Mr. Bojczuk asks, “Did the body in Oswald's grave have a front tooth missing?”

The answer, of course, is no.  Mr. B. makes our point for us, again.

Hey, let's look at that exhumation photo one more time!

Still can't see that missing front tooth.  The two top teeth sure look natural.  

Ha ha ha!!!

"Still can't see that missing front tooth."  

That's because there wasn't one missing!

"The two top teeth sure look natural."

They are. They belong to LHO, and all the fillings still attached match up perfectly with LHO's dental record

So, did they also replicate all the fillings as well as the mastoidectomy?

So they gave 'Harvey' an unnecessary mastoidectomy AND they replicated all of 'Lee's' fillings so as to match...? But then didn't see fit to remove a tooth.

How far lost do you have to be to believe in this crock of sh it?

 

 

[Bernie Laverick]

15 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

As is so often the case, the H&L critics are afraid to put their arguments here, on the JFK Assassination Debate Forum, where they can be fully debated for all to see.  Arguments on other websites can be altered at will... with no editing stamps... and the content forever obfuscated.

How did "Lee Harvey Oswald" grow a new front tooth in his grave?

."How did "Lee Harvey Oswald" grow a new front tooth in his grave?"

He didn't have one missing in the first place! You can see from his corpse that there isn't one missing. Just as we have all said. But you keep insisting it's 'Harvey'

So you have to explain 'Harvey's' mastoid scar that matches up with 'Lee's' medical record, and also 'Harvey's' fillings that match up with 'Lee's' dental record. 

The arguments are being debated here "for all to see", but just as you link to the H&L website why cry when others do likewise?

The problem you are experiencing by having the arguments debated here is that you are repeatedly being cringingly humiliated. 

But the putrid arrogance is so far developed you really can't see how outstandingly stupid you all sound.

I'm torn between the comedy gold you give so generously (and the wonderful entertainment that that provides), and the genuine concern for what seems like a profound issue with grasping reality.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

32 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

As is so often the case, the H&L critics are afraid to put their arguments here, on the JFK Assassination Debate Forum, where they can be fully debated for all to see.  Arguments on other websites can be altered at will... with no editing stamps... and the content forever obfuscated.

How did "Lee Harvey Oswald" grow a new front tooth in his grave?

Since Jim refuses to go to Greg parker's site, here is a recent post he made:

Sandy Larsen wrote: For those of you who think Voebel was wrong about the tooth breaking, we have corroboration from Oswald's Aunt, Lillian Murret. Here is an excerpt from her WC testimony:


"Another time they were coming out of school at 3 o'clock, and there were boys in back of him and one of them called his name, and he said, "Lee," and when he turned around, this boy punched him in the mouth and ran, and it ran his tooth through the lip, so she had to go over to the school and take him to the dentist, and I paid for the dentist bill
myself, and that's all I know about that, and he was not supposed to have started any of that at that time."

Marguerite had to take Lee to the dentist! Why would she have done that if his tooth had not been broken or knocked out?
So there we have it. Voebel thought the tooth had been knocked out. Murret said that Marguerite had taken him to the dentist, obviously for that reason. And finally, we have the photo taken shortly thereafter showing the missing tooth. Or rather, notshowing the missing tooth.

It's a slam dunk!

[Greg Parker] THAT'S not a slam dunk!

FFS! Lillian is NOT a witness for you. She is OUR witness.


Who the [expletive deleted] goes to the dentist if they get a tooth knocked out unless it is to reset it or get an implant?

Was it reset? Was an implant put in? Not according to you guys. 

At best, this blurred image may show that the tooth was knocked back and is in shadow. If that was the case, a visit to the dentist would be imperative due to the possibility of root damage or gum infection - either of which could lead to losing the tooth altogether. To give the tooth a chance to reset itself, the dentist would splint the tooth against the teeth next to it.

So you are back to your interpretation of a blurred image and Voebel's QUALIFIED statement that the tooth may have been knocked out. Knock off making a positive statement out of what Voebel said - knock off trying to use a witness who is actually on OUR side and while you are at, do what Armstrong should have and address Ms Smith's testimony. Unlike Voebel, she knew the name of the person who hit Lee. She reports only - and without qualification - that the tooth went through the lip. This is supported by the autopsy which showed a scar on the lip.

One Qualified witness statement and blurred photos = smoke and mirrors.

ON our side, we have 
Ms Smith
Lillian Murret
No one ever claiming Lee had a missing tooth
No missing teeth showing from either autopsy

THIS is a slam dunk!

---------------------------------

And here is another post:

Jim Hargrove said: If you were a 14-year-old boy in the 1950s who got a front tooth knocked out in a fight, do you think you would have spent the rest of your life with a toothless smile?  Of course not.  In those days before implants, you’d get a false tooth held in place by a dental bridge.  A very common procedure.

As to Lillian Murret’s recollection, why on earth would a mother (who, we’re told, was practical nurse) bring her kid to a dentist for a split lip?  She’d go to a doctor, like anyone else looking to get a lacerated lip treated.

Greg Parker said: Jim doesn't believe that implants existed in 1954-55.

From wiki

The early part of the 20th century saw a number of implants made of a variety of materials. One of the earliest successful implants was the Greenfield implant system of 1913 (also known as the Greenfield crib or basket).[51] Greenfield's implant, an iridioplatinum implant attached to a gold crown, showed evidence of osseointegration and lasted for a number of years.[51] The first use of titanium as an implantable material was by Bothe, Beaton and Davenport in 1940, who observed how close the bone grew to titanium screws, and the difficulty they had in extracting them.[52] Bothe et al. were the first researchers to describe what would later be called osseointegration (a name that would be marketed later on by Per-Ingvar Brånemark). In 1951, Gottlieb Leventhal implanted titanium rods in rabbits.[53] Leventhal's positive results led him to believe that titanium represented the ideal metal for surgery.[53]
 

[Michael Cross]

This topic is the most infuriating bit of the research.  Those like Bernie and Parnell that simply won't look are discarding tons of credible evidence that there was something odd, at a minimum, going on with Lee Harvey Oswald.  He, again, at a minimum, was NOT who the government said he was.

You don't have to buy in on the Oswald Project hook line and sinker.  I'm an agnostic on Harvey and Lee.  But FFS, SOMETHING was going on, he was being impersonated, there are far too many contradictory records to be explained away as clerical errors.  

The photo showing LHO with a missing tooth above, if you won't even LOOK at that how serious can you be about finding the truth?

Give up your pet positions people.  

[W. Tracy Parnell]

18 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

This topic is the most infuriating bit of the research.  Those like Bernie and Parnell that simply won't look are discarding tons of credible evidence that there was something odd, at a minimum, going on with Lee Harvey Oswald.  He, again, at a minimum, was NOT who the government said he was.

You don't have to buy in on the Oswald Project hook line and sinker.  I'm an agnostic on Harvey and Lee.  But FFS, SOMETHING was going on, he was being impersonated, there are far too many contradictory records to be explained away as clerical errors.  

The photo showing LHO with a missing tooth above, if you won't even LOOK at that how serious can you be about finding the truth?

Give up your pet positions people.  

Sorry, but a photograph that some people believe shows a missing tooth just doesn't trump all of the scientific evidence. And many people believe in Oswald impersonators and so on but do not believe in H&L.

[Michael Cross]

Yes, thanks for making my point.  

[Jim Hargrove]

3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

And here is another post:

Jim Hargrove said: If you were a 14-year-old boy in the 1950s who got a front tooth knocked out in a fight, do you think you would have spent the rest of your life with a toothless smile?  Of course not.  In those days before implants, you’d get a false tooth held in place by a dental bridge.  A very common procedure.

As to Lillian Murret’s recollection, why on earth would a mother (who, we’re told, was practical nurse) bring her kid to a dentist for a split lip?  She’d go to a doctor, like anyone else looking to get a lacerated lip treated.

Greg Parker said: Jim doesn't believe that implants existed in 1954-55.

From wiki

The early part of the 20th century saw a number of implants made of a variety of materials. One of the earliest successful implants was the Greenfield implant system of 1913 (also known as the Greenfield crib or basket).[51] Greenfield's implant, an iridioplatinum implant attached to a gold crown, showed evidence of osseointegration and lasted for a number of years.[51] The first use of titanium as an implantable material was by Bothe, Beaton and Davenport in 1940, who observed how close the bone grew to titanium screws, and the difficulty they had in extracting them.[52] Bothe et al. were the first researchers to describe what would later be called osseointegration (a name that would be marketed later on by Per-Ingvar Brånemark). In 1951, Gottlieb Leventhal implanted titanium rods in rabbits.[53] Leventhal's positive results led him to believe that titanium represented the ideal metal for surgery.[53]
 

FINALLY!!!  Mr. Parnell reposts some Actual Words from Greg Parker's website.  Now, we can debate!  But alas....

Clearly, Mr. Parker wants to debate about the history dental implants, rather than debate about the magical growth of a new upper tooth in "Lee Harvey Oswald's" cadaver.  Gee, I wonder why.  Oh, I know, Mr. Parker wants us to believe that LEE Oswald's front tooth was implanted!!!!

So, because "In 1951, Gottlieb Leventhal implanted titanium rods in rabbits.[53] Leventhal's positive results led him to believe that titanium represented the ideal metal for surgery," we're supposed to believe Mr. Parker's claim that "LHO" had a dental implant in the same decade.  Hah-hah-hah-hah.

[Jim Hargrove]

3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Since Jim refuses to go to Greg parker's site, here is a recent post he made:

Sandy Larsen wrote: For those of you who think Voebel was wrong about the tooth breaking, we have corroboration from Oswald's Aunt, Lillian Murret. Here is an excerpt from her WC testimony:


"Another time they were coming out of school at 3 o'clock, and there were boys in back of him and one of them called his name, and he said, "Lee," and when he turned around, this boy punched him in the mouth and ran, and it ran his tooth through the lip, so she had to go over to the school and take him to the dentist, and I paid for the dentist bill
myself, and that's all I know about that, and he was not supposed to have started any of that at that time."

Marguerite had to take Lee to the dentist! Why would she have done that if his tooth had not been broken or knocked out?
So there we have it. Voebel thought the tooth had been knocked out. Murret said that Marguerite had taken him to the dentist, obviously for that reason. And finally, we have the photo taken shortly thereafter showing the missing tooth. Or rather, notshowing the missing tooth.

It's a slam dunk!

[Greg Parker] THAT'S not a slam dunk!

FFS! Lillian is NOT a witness for you. She is OUR witness.


Who the [expletive deleted] goes to the dentist if they get a tooth knocked out unless it is to reset it or get an implant?

Was it reset? Was an implant put in? Not according to you guys. 

At best, this blurred image may show that the tooth was knocked back and is in shadow. If that was the case, a visit to the dentist would be imperative due to the possibility of root damage or gum infection - either of which could lead to losing the tooth altogether. To give the tooth a chance to reset itself, the dentist would splint the tooth against the teeth next to it.

So you are back to your interpretation of a blurred image and Voebel's QUALIFIED statement that the tooth may have been knocked out. Knock off making a positive statement out of what Voebel said - knock off trying to use a witness who is actually on OUR side and while you are at, do what Armstrong should have and address Ms Smith's testimony. Unlike Voebel, she knew the name of the person who hit Lee. She reports only - and without qualification - that the tooth went through the lip. This is supported by the autopsy which showed a scar on the lip.

One Qualified witness statement and blurred photos = smoke and mirrors.

ON our side, we have 
Ms Smith
Lillian Murret
No one ever claiming Lee had a missing tooth
No missing teeth showing from either autopsy

THIS is a slam dunk!

It sure is a slam dunk!

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.

And here is the photo Ed Voebel took of LEE Oswald showing off his missing tooth!

Of course, you guys simply cannot see it!

[Jim Hargrove]

3 hours ago, Bernie Laverick said:

The problem you are experiencing by having the arguments debated here is that you are repeatedly being cringingly humiliated. 

But the putrid arrogance is so far developed you really can't see how outstandingly stupid you all sound.

Wow, this is the kind of name calling Mr. Laverick advances when he has clearly lost an argument.  It may scare the children on Halloween, but it doesn't mean much here.

How did "Lee Harvey Oswald's" cadaver re-grow a front tooth?
 

[Jim Hargrove]

 

Witnesses see two men on the 6th floor

Minutes before 12:30 PM, on the morning of November 22, 1963 many people observed two men on the 6th floor as the Presidential motorcade approached Dealey Plaza. Charles L. Bronson was using his home movie camera to film scenes outside of the Book Depository. At 12:24 pm, his camera captured the images of two men moving in the south­ eastern window of the 6th floor, an area that is now known as the snipers nest. 

Carolyn E. Walther was standing on the west side of Houston Street about 50 feet south of Elm. Just before the motorcade arrived she looked up at the Book Depository and saw two men in an upper floor window, one of whom was holding a rifle with the bar­rel pointed downward. She described the rifle as being considerably shorter and fatter than the rifle found by Dallas Police. She said the man carrying the gun was blond or light haired and was wearing a white shirt. The other man was wearing a brown suit coat.

Ruby Henderson was standing across the street from the Book Depository and also saw two men on an upper floor of the building. She said one of the men was wearing a white shirt and the other man was wearing a dark shirt. Ruby said, "One of them had dark hair ..... a darker complexion than the other ..... You could see their head and shoulders, but not like they were leaning out."

Ronald B. Fischer was standing next to Robert Edwards on the southwest cor­ner of Elm and Houston directly across the street from the Book Depository. Fischer saw the head and shoulders of a white man in his late 20's, with light hair, wearing an open-neck light ­colored shirt, staring in the direction of the triple underpass. Following the assassina­tion Fisher was interviewed by the Dallas Police and shown photographs of Harvey Oswald. Fisher said the photos looked like the man he saw at the window that shot at the President, but would not say the photographs were the same man.

Robert Edwin Edwards was standing next to Ronald Fischer facing the Book Depository two or three minutes before the motorcade arrived. He saw a white man on the 6th floor wearing a light-colored sports shirt, open at the neck, and said the man had short, light, sandy hair. When shown photographs of Oswald after the assassination, Edwards said he could not be sure the photographs were the same man.

Tom Dillard, the chief news photographer of the Dallas Morning News, saw two men in the arched windows on the 6th floor of the Book Depository as the car he was riding in turned the corner from Main onto Houston.

Howard L. Brennan, a construction worker, saw a man sitting sideways on the windowsill prior to the arrival of the motorcade. Brennan said he could practically see his whole body, from the hips up. He said the individual was a white man in his early 30's, was fair complexioned, slender, possibly 5-foot 10, 160 to 170 pounds, and wore light-colored clothing.

Richard Randolph Carr observed a man looking out the top floor of the Book Depository moments before the shooting. Carr, like Carolyn Walther, said the man was wearing a light brown coat. He described the man as having an athletic build, wearing horn rim glasses, and a hat. A few minutes after the assassination Carr saw the same man walking toward him on Houston, constantly looking back over his shoulder. The man turned east on Commerce St, walked one block to Record St., and got into a 1961 or 1962 light colored Nash Rambler station wagon. I believe this vehicle drove north on Record St., turned left on Elm, and was seen by Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig as LEE Oswald hurried down the grassy knoll and got into this car at 12:40 PM. This incident occurred while Harvey Oswald, the man accused of killing President Kennedy, was riding in a city bus several blocks east of the Book Depository.

Across the street from the Book Depository as many as 40 inmates on the 5th floor of the county jail (see photo below) watched the two men as they "fooled around" with a scope on a rifle about 6 minutes before the shooting. Powell said the two men in the window "looked darker" than whites and were wearing "kind of brownish looking or duller clothes .... .like work clothes."

Seventeen-year-old Johnny L. Powell had been in the county jail for 3 days charged with disturbing the peace. Powell said, "Quite a few of us jail inmates saw two men in the 6th floor window of the Book Depository. Everybody was trying to watch the parade and all that. We were looking across the street at the Book Depository because it was directly straight across. The first thing I thought is, it was security guards .... I remember the guys."
 

NOTE: Attorney Stanley M Kaufman, who represented one of the inmates, Willie Mitchell, told WC attorney Leon D. Hubert that numerous inmates witnessed the assas­sination from the 5th and 6th floors of the county jail. Kaufman said, "I remember that did occur and it sort of concerned me at the time as to why--if they were trying to find out all these facts--why they, the Warren Commission, didn't go up there and talk to these prisoners."

 

Above excerpted from "Escape from the 6th Floor," which has been updated throughout by John Armstrong and appears for the first time today on HarveyandLee.net.  It can be read in its entirety here:

Escape from the 6th Floor
 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Jim Hargrove