Jim Hargrove Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 5 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Bernie has repeatedly claimed things about my position that are not true. Ignore him. When Mr. Laverick can explain how "Oswald's" cadaver grew a new front tooth, he'll have my attention! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: Jim, First, please note that in my post I accidentally used the phrase "exhumation evidence was faked" instead of "exhumation finding was faked," the latter being what I intended. That said.... One of the possibilities explaining the exhumation finding -- that Harvey had a mastoidectomy bone scar -- is that Harvey was given an unnecessary mastoidectomy in order to keep the medical records for the two Oswalds identical. I include this possibility under the umbrella I refer to as "faked exhumation finding". It was faked presumptively. There is actually one other similar possibility, and that is that Harvey also happened to have been treated for mastoiditis on the same ear as Lee's. While that possibility doesn't strictly fit my umbrella phrase, I include it there for simplicity's sake. It would have been much more accurate to separate it out, but for sake of pithiness I didn't. Maybe this works: If Oswald had a missing tooth -- as the preponderance of evidence shows -- this fact in and of itself proves not only that the exhumation finding was either faked or coincidental, but also that there were indeed two young Oswalds. You do agree with what I'm saying, don't you Jim? If not, where does what I am saying differ from your understanding? Yes, I think that's a fair description. Let's remember that the people involved in the exhumation were trying to find out if a Russian young man had replaced "Lee Harvey Oswald" when he returned to the U.S. They were not considering that the person in the grave had also been in the U.S. Marines and had also shared many similar experiences in the U.S. I believe they honestly thought they had proved the man in the grave was the man born as "Lee Harvey Oswald" in New Orleans in 1939. Clearly, they were not aware of all the evidence available then and now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: For some reason you think that the photos you post contradict what we are saying. They don't. They agree with what we are saying. Totally understand, Sandy, that you say (or think) that the pictures I'm talking about are HARVEY. What I and others are saying is that they show Lee Harvey Oswald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 29 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said: When Mr. Laverick can explain how "Oswald's" cadaver grew a new front tooth, he'll have my attention! Nothing "grew" Jim. It's the same tooth in the skull and traces back to the same person you see in the smiling soldier photo, and on back to the smiling HS photo, and probably all other photos that can be dug up in between showing his front teeth. The "look here" class photo that HL supporters use to show a missing tooth is simply too blurry and at too odd of an angle to make a determined analysis of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 This is not adding to this HL narrative but a pretty interesting photo of LHO in the background when Marion Morrison visited a USMC base in Japan. The same skinny frame, the slightly pushed in shape of the head and that unmistakable mop of hair on his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: 3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: For some reason you think that the photos you post contradict what we are saying. They don't. They agree with what we are saying. Totally understand, Sandy, that you say (or think) that the pictures I'm talking about are HARVEY. What I and others are saying is that they show Lee Harvey Oswald. So then what is the point of your posting the photos? For example, after posting your latest photo you say the following to Jim Hargrove, as though he disagrees with your assessment of the photo, when in fact he doesn't: Quote Jim 1 + 1 + 1 = 3. As in the above HS photo, the smiling soldier photo, and the exhume photo. All showing the same LHO with teeth intact. There's no other way around it. You're right, there is no way around it. Jim knows that. We all know it. Your post doesn't make any point beyond what we all agree on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Michael, This is Lee Harvey Oswald. 1+1=2 There's no way around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 Sandy, I'm just trying to prevent new people here from falling too far down the HL rabbit hole. If we didn't argue the merits here, then there could be a lot of suckers who could fall for the story without hearing the merits of both sides. As a matter of fact, these photos could actually be a great starting point for newbies to begin then work their way back. The reason is simple - unlike the many, many fallacies of the HL story, which is based on a misinterpretation of the written record, coaching witnesses (e.g., buttering them up by calling them sweetheart), cherry picking and sheer dishonesty (after all, the story needs to be kept up so Armstrong hopes to continue to sell his book and disks for $60), these three photos are documented proof that the exhume photo, the military photo, and the HS photo show that Lee Harvey Oswald had a full set of front teeth. Then, newbies can read both sides of the story and make their determination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 I agree. The same LHO in the military and in Dallas. The same eye brows, nose, curled ears, narrow jaw leading to the pointed chin. It's all there. No clone. PS - this is a large animated GIF. Give it time to load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 36 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: I'm just trying to prevent new people here from falling too far down the HL rabbit hole. If we didn't argue the merits here, then there could be a lot of suckers who could fall for the story without hearing the merits of both sides. But in fact what you are doing is making it sound like you have shown something that negates the H&L theory, when in fact you haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 (edited) Based on the animated GIF above it's hard to believe anyone would think those are two different people. But as is the case here, stranger things have happened. Edited October 21, 2017 by Michael Walton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 39 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: The reason is simple - unlike the many, many fallacies of the HL story, which is based on a misinterpretation of the written record, .... Like what? 39 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: coaching witnesses (e.g., buttering them up by calling them sweetheart), cherry picking and sheer dishonesty Like what? 39 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: (after all, the story needs to be kept up so Armstrong hopes to continue to sell his book and disks for $60) The book is free online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 45 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: .... these three photos are documented proof that the exhume photo, the military photo, and the HS photo show that Lee Harvey Oswald had a full set of front teeth. Yes, everybody knows that. The H&L group knows that. John Armstrong knows that. The photos agree with the H&L theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said: I'll be doing that when I present the evidence for the JFK assassination conspiracy to an investigative journalist. I expect both to be treated with the same degree of seriousness. OK, keep us informed. BTW, to my knowledge, Linda Norton and Vincent DiMaio are still with us. Be sure and have your journalist confront both of them with the "evidence" that shows they were in on a major plot. That should prove interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 21, 2017 Share Posted October 21, 2017 24 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: I agree. The same LHO in the military and in Dallas. The same eye brows, nose, curled ears, narrow jaw leading to the pointed chin. It's all there. No clone. PS - this is a large animated GIF. Give it time to load. Are you aware that you're comparing a photograph to a pencil drawing? 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