Bernie Laverick Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 6 hours ago, Gene Kelly said: John Armstrong's work is impressive and thoughtful. It seems there exists a concerted effort to push back persistently on Jim Hargrove (127 posts later) with no sign of ending. The critique and counterpoints consist mainly of ad hominem attacks. I've read every inch of Harvey and Lee, and try to occasionally learn something new from these threads. This particular thread leaves me with the impression that Armstrong was onto something important here ... and (to quote the Bard's Hamlet) "methinks thou dost protest too much" Hi Gene, this isn't a provocative question, you've seen all the posts in this thread, which of the four options do you think is the most likely to explain how Lee's body is where Harvey should have been, if H&L has any credibility at all? Not knowing the answer is fine...But that surely must put a massive question mark on everything for you. If DVP were to make bold outrageous statements pointing at LHO's guilt without any evidence to back it up you would rightly see straight through it, wouldn't you? You would demand that he backed his nonsense up with some facts. If he then offered you multiple explanations, none of which with any evidence, you would probably become a little irritated towards the end. This is what is happening here. Data dumps and with reams and reams of info mean nothing if you can't explain how the known reality conflicts with the H&L story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 18 minutes ago, Bernie Laverick said: Data dumps and with reams and reams of info mean nothing if you can't explain how the known reality conflicts with the H&L stor Yes exactly that. I've said this numerous times here. There is NO plausibility and realistic narrative in the whole HL story. The story is like a murderer who keeps claiming he's innocent when he was found at the scene bloodied and standing over the victim. Any seasoned homicide detective would laugh Jim out of the room and throw the book and CDs in the trash if he read the HL story. Anyone on here who supports it is just paranoid and thinks the entire case is rigged or sees little monsters in the shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 hour ago, Bernie Laverick said: Data dumps and with reams and reams of info mean nothing if you can't explain how the known reality conflicts with the H&L story. What "known reality" conflicts with the H&L story? I can't think of any. Though I can think of several known realities that support the H&L story. Like Oswald attending two schools in different states simultaneously. Like Oswald losing his tooth in a fist fight but still having it when his body was exhumed. Like Oswald being treated for VD in Japan while at the same time being in Taiwan. Etc., etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Kelly Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Bernie and Michael: Your points are well taken, particularly about the body and exhumation. That challenge is healthy, and makes one look at the Armstrong evidence with a critical eye. I've noted in other threads that, in my business, we encourage a healthy skepticism - trust but verify - and questioning attitude. Its a hallmark of our culture and keeps our products technically rigorous. There are many stories and topical areas surrounding JFK's murder that have ambiguity, uncertainty and differing views. The bottom line for me is that I respect your opinions and don't feel compelled to change them, or tell you that you're wrong. There is no wrong or right (imho) in this complex murder story. Gene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 8 hours ago, James Norwood said: But why you don't allow the readers of the forum to make up their own minds? I invite them to do that. My purpose is to provide information that I believe refutes H&L and let readers decide. If anyone wishes to believe the theory, they are free to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 8 hours ago, Gene Kelly said: John Armstrong's work is impressive and thoughtful. It seems there exists a concerted effort to push back persistently on Jim Hargrove (127 posts later) with no sign of ending. The critique and counterpoints consist mainly of ad hominem attacks. I've read every inch of Harvey and Lee, and try to occasionally learn something new from these threads. This particular thread leaves me with the impression that Armstrong was onto something important here ... and (to quote the Bard's Hamlet) "methinks thou dost protest too much" Really. The level of back stabbing and ad hominem attacks on this thread appear designed by the Armstrong haters to dissuade readers from reading or posting on this thread. And the irony is that John is one of the nicest researchers I have ever known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 31 minutes ago, Dawn Meredith said: Really. The level of back stabbing and ad hominem attacks on this thread appear designed by the Armstrong haters to dissuade readers from reading or posting on this thread. And the irony is that John is one of the nicest researchers I have ever known. To be fair Dawn, while sadly, I do sometimes get reduced to venting my frustration in a non too pleasant manner, you have to agree that we also receive as much, if not more in return. My frustration is both honest and clear. As I explained before in an earlier post, I temporarily believed in the possibility of H&L. I was actually a passive advocate on this very forum. I cannot be accused of being closed minded when I started from a position of support. Then I read the rebuttals from others and compared the differing explanations. Because that's what adults are supposed to do. I should have been a prime target as an interested student of the assassination, someone looking for answers with no preconditions, and like a lot of H&L supporters, someone who despaired at the naivety of believing that our governments aren't capable of doing whatever it takes to further their own murky agenda. I think that's what first intrigued/attracted me to the idea. That we have to think BIG and not rule anything out, including H&L. But there are just too many unanswered questions, and the more I witnessed on here with the deliberate flame wars and personal insults, but worse, the tacking and weaving and not being totally honest convinced me that H&L was actually a more potent weapon against discovering the truth than anything that a 1,000 DVPs could achieve. I don't believe those proposing it are working for anyone other than themselves; it's not cointelpro, or some carefully laid out scheme, or any other such wild accusation. I simply think you have bought into a scenario that for me doesn't fit the known facts. So in my opinion, for what it's worth, H&L is an obstacle to overcome and I cringe at the very idea of the MSM deciding to focus in on this aspect of the case. What on earth would you say to them? Best regards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 15 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said: Using the method I explained in the article, his head is 11.4 inches. You have never explained where you got the blue ruler or what it is based on. It appears to be just something you estimated. My analysis is based on science and described and I stand by it. I also resent your implication that I have no interests since you don't know me and therefore could not know what my interest are. I think this conversation is over for now. Very good Tracy..., Now explain how a 13 year old has an 11.5" head... and the 18 year old has a 13" head... both over 50% too big... You gonna try to sell me a bridge next? I hear the GW is up for sale... and Bernie... don't hurt yourself thinking/asking about the who, what, where, when & how. your little brain might simply explode. 4 hours ago, Bernie Laverick said: So someone is now, at last, going to explain how 'Lee's' body ended up in 'Harvey's' grave. omg... you truly are a lost cause... keep posting PLEASE... you representing the antithesis is more than we could have ever desired... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) On 10/31/2017 at 3:46 AM, Michael Walton said: Yes exactly that. I've said this numerous times here. There is NO plausibility and realistic narrative in the whole HL story. The story is like a murderer who keeps claiming he's innocent when he was found at the scene bloodied and standing over the victim. Any seasoned homicide detective would laugh Jim out of the room and throw the book and CDs in the trash if he read the HL story. Anyone on here who supports it is just paranoid and thinks the entire case is rigged or sees little monsters in the shadows. Mike... have you tried reading the book ? As for "seasoned detectives" - they were part of the conspiracy bud... the entire Dallas homicide department completely forgot how to run an investigation? Short of the Cliff notes Mike... what are you expecting here? Have you read about Angleton and Harvey, Helms and Hunt and Phillips and Shakely and Robertson and on and on... You are claiming with a straight face that the CIA of the 50's and 60's was not only the perfect entity to enact these plans but the only one capable of hiding it completely... Angleton kept files the CIA didn't even know about.... So once again I see that those who can't DO, Critique others.... Do you always smack things you don't understand with a stick... or do you try to understand that which you currently don't? Are you claiming what you know of H&L could NOT be accomplished by those in power? What exactly is your bone of contention - that YOU can't buy it? that YOU have a problem seeing... cause I have yet to see you debunk any of the evidence... I'm fairly sure you're not even familiar with the evidence enough to try and debunk it.... Judy Baker on the other hand is easily debunked... I've posted and written articles on the woman's lying and conning abilities. At the end of the day I think what bothers you most is that you just don't know what to do about it... the evidence is all there... the interviews are all there... John and I have talked about the small cadre of folk who feel it their duty to debunk this theory... He's thrilled since all along the point was to take a closer look. You looked and it doesn't ring true for you... fine... but nothing offered so far DEBUNKS the evidence of these 2 men or the charade that was played with a 12 year old boy and his mother. For those who follow... keep digging, ask questions. And see if you can deal with this.... El Toro and Santa Ana are 2 DIFFERENT bases... You think the assistant Provo Marshall is inclined to lie about things just for grins? and we all know about John Ely's journey thru the looking glass... Show me something compelling to deal with the evidence from the years 1952 thru 1963... explain the 7th, 8th, & 9th grade problems in the records, from Carro and the ongoing misremembered life of Margaret/Marguerite's testimony. Sorry Mike... these two men are not the same man... yet both were identified as LHO. Shoulders don't lie. Let me ask you something Mike... just to identify fakes and forgeries... the following is the LHO Marine induction photo... What is wrong with this picture? Edited June 18, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bernie Laverick said: 2 hours ago, Dawn Meredith said: Really. The level of back stabbing and ad hominem attacks on this thread appear designed by the Armstrong haters to dissuade readers from reading or posting on this thread. And the irony is that John is one of the nicest researchers I have ever known. To be fair Dawn, while sadly, I do sometimes get reduced to venting my frustration in a non too pleasant manner, you have to agree that we also receive as much, if not more in return. I don't think so, Bernie. If you kick a dog and it bites back, that doesn't justify your kicking it. Truth is, you're a trouble maker here. Plain and simple. Edited October 31, 2017 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 7 hours ago, Bernie Laverick said: Hi Gene, this isn't a provocative question, you've seen all the posts in this thread, which of the four options do you think is the most likely to explain how Lee's body is where Harvey should have been, if H&L has any credibility at all? Isn't it AMAZING how Mr. Laverick always forgets to mention LEE Oswald's MAGIC tooth? On 10/29/2017 at 9:27 AM, Jim Hargrove said: I'd like to hear his detailed explanation of how that front tooth regrew. 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 before anyone claims Voebel seemed uncertain about the missing tooth, let's just review his use of the word "think" during his WC testimony. Yes. Well, I think one of them was in the same grade as Lee. The fight, I think started on the school ground, I think John was a little smaller, a little shorter than Lee. Well, I think Oswald was getting the best of John, but I think I just went on home and everybody went their way, and Oswald I think, was a little in front of me I think that was what brought it all about. I think this was sort of a revenge thing on the part of the Neumeyer boys I think he even lost a tooth from that. I think he was cut on the lip, and a tooth was knocked out. I don't think he was that good I don't think he was a great pool player I think I met her one time I think the legal age here is 18 I think in a way I understood him better than most of the other kids I think they have gotten worse I think we were in the same grade, I think we were. .... and on and on. Ed Voegel says “I think” or “think” nearly a hundred times during his testimony. It seems to be part of the way he talked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 (edited) I worked on my masterpiece reply last night. It involves contrast, 13 inch heads, sloping shoulders and no bridges, including the kind you cross and the kind that fills in missing teeth. I will post it this weekend and it will refute once and for all the HL fairy tale. If it makes me appear to be a trouble maker that's great as well. Stay tuned... Edited November 1, 2017 by Michael Walton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Laverick Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 You are a trouble causer; anyone who questions H&L is. You are also stupid and ignorant with not ounce of original thought. Have you even read the book? No? Oh, there's tons of stuff in there that we haven't talked about. Oh yes all the compelling parts are in there if you read it. Just because we don't share those bits doesn't mean they aren't there. We just share the bits that have an inherent alternative explanation, but the bits from the book that we don't talk about on here prove the theory to be 100% correct. If you buy/read the book you too will be the recipient of this superior knowledge and you will be convinced of the ultimate truth. Don't go by what we write on here, that doesn't mean a thing. It's ALL in the book! So Michael, since you haven't taken out a mortgage to buy a book who's central themes have been discussed infinitum on here over many many years, you are simply not qualified to even make a comment unless it is in agreement. So give us your best shot, son! Let's see your chops! You are a joke sunshine a complete joke! I thought I'd give David Josephs a day off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted November 1, 2017 Share Posted November 1, 2017 From Phillips to Ruby ... KLIF radio founder Gordon McLendon was a former Naval Intelligence officer who was a close friend and confidant of CIA officer David Atlee Phillips. Jack Ruby called McLendon’s unlisted phone number the day of the assassination. Ruby was overheard that very afternoon saying he could be reached at KLIF, and he continued writing letters to McLendon even from prison. In 1975 McLendon and David Atlee Phillips formed the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO). The two men had known one another since childhood. And it was Phillips who was spotted by Antonio Veciana talking to LEE Oswald at the Southland building in Dallas in the summer of 1963. And so we are starring at a direct chain of command from CIA’s David Atlee Phillips to former intel officer Gordon McLendon to McLendon’s close friend Jack Ruby. From Harvey and Lee: Around 1:15 am KLIF radio announcer Russ Knight approached the entrance to the police station and asked if anyone had seen District Attorney Henry Wade. Jack Ruby, who was milling around talking to people said, "I'll show you" and escorted Knight to the basement. Before reaching the basement Ruby asked Knight, twice, to ask District Attorney Wade if he thought Oswald was "insane." After reaching the base- ment Ruby once again approached Wade and told him that radio announcer Russ Knight wanted to speak with him.142 As Knight began talking with Wade, Dallas Police Lieutenant James Gilmore saw Ruby and asked him what he was doing at the police station after midnight. Ruby told Gilmore that he was passing out sandwiches and planning to deliver sandwiches to KLIF radio, the station owned by Gordon McLendon.143 NOTE: Jack Ruby listed Gordon McLendon, the owner of Dallas radio station KLIF, as one of his six closest friends. McClendon had known career CIA officer David Atlee Phillips since both men were in their teens and attended school in Fort Worth. In the 1970's McLendon joined Phillips to form the Association of Former Intelligence Offic- ers (AFIO). .... Jack Ruby-1:30 am to 6:00am After Russ Knight finished talking with Henry Wade he and Ruby walked out of the police station. Ruby asked Knight if he needed a ride to the KLIF station, but Knight declined and walked to KLIF, while Ruby walked to his car.147 About 1:45am Ruby arrived at KLIF with sandwiches and soft drinks and again talked with Knight. At 2:00am, with Ruby nearby, Knight went on the air and told ra- dio listeners, "Through a tip from a local nightclub owner I asked Mr. Wade the ques- tion of Oswald's insanity." Around 2:15am, following the radio broadcast, Knight and Ruby left the radio station. On the steps of the building Ruby handed Knight the text of a speech called "Heroism" from H.L. Hunt's LIFE Line radio program, broadcast on radio station KRLD. Ruby told Knight there were elements such as Hunt's in Dallas that hated Presi- dent Kennedy. Knight remembered the late night incident and said, "Ruby had the speech but he didn't seem to be cognizant fully of what the speech was or actually what side that he stood on ..... just mentioned like there is an element here that hates, that hated Mr. Kennedy." When Knight asked Ruby if he meant the Hunt's, Ruby said nothing.148 NOTE: After Ruby shot Oswald, Knight began to think about the "Heroism" speech that Ruby gave him and said, "It seemed to me like too much of a coincidence that he should be carrying a speech called 'Heroism' and then for him to shoot Oswald on Sunday mormng...."149 --From Harvey and Lee, pp. 904-905, Copyright © 2003 by John Armstrong. All rights reserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted November 2, 2017 Share Posted November 2, 2017 On 11/1/2017 at 4:54 AM, Bernie Laverick said: You are a trouble causer; anyone who questions H&L is. You are also stupid and ignorant with not ounce of original thought. Have you even read the book? No? Oh, there's tons of stuff in there that we haven't talked about. Oh yes all the compelling parts are in there if you read it. Just because we don't share those bits doesn't mean they aren't there. We just share the bits that have an inherent alternative explanation, but the bits from the book that we don't talk about on here prove the theory to be 100% correct. If you buy/read the book you too will be the recipient of this superior knowledge and you will be convinced of the ultimate truth. Don't go by what we write on here, that doesn't mean a thing. It's ALL in the book! So Michael, since you haven't taken out a mortgage to buy a book who's central themes have been discussed infinitum on here over many many years, you are simply not qualified to even make a comment unless it is in agreement. So give us your best shot, son! Let's see your chops! You are a joke sunshine a complete joke! I thought I'd give David Josephs a day off! Hey there Sandy... so little yappy dog attempts to bite.... $65 is a house mortgage for you Bernie? Gigs not paying what they used to I guess Really Bernie... you're going to whine over $65? Then again you'll cry and whine about most anything... poor you... never heard of a library? The book was never intended for people like you Bernie.... in fact most books aren't. No doubt muddling thru a book with words and no pictures is 3 steps above your pay grade... and you aint never gonna learn what you don't wanna know... So why spend so much of that precious time you have on this if you are so sure it's not true? (RHETORICAL QUESTION) A: Cause you have nothing to offer and need to stand on the shoulders of your betters just to be heard. When do you ever come here and ADD to the discussion instead of poke it with a stick for a few weeks? (RHETORICAL QUESTION) (hint: you don't) On 11/1/2017 at 4:01 AM, Michael Walton said: I worked on my masterpiece reply last night. It involves contrast, 13 inch heads, sloping shoulders and no bridges, including the kind you cross and the kind that fills in missing teeth. WALTON... if you think a 13" head on a 5'8" 18 year old is normal... your head remains so firmly planted in the ground it's comical. Amazing how you are so insecure you can't even trust your own eyes if it somehow conflicts with your pre-conceived and wholly unsupported ideas. We're pretty sure what it was you "worked on" last night, all by your little lonesome self... Geez, between you and Tracy you can't add or measure.... and we're suppose to look to you for evidence backed rebuttal... When do you ever come here and ADD to the discussion instead of poke it with a stick for a few weeks? (RHETORICAL QUESTION) (hint: you don't) 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