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

[Sandy Larsen]

On 2/3/2018 at 12:58 PM, Thomas Graves said:

With all due respect, how likely is it that a boy whose first language is Hungarian and second language is Russian can end up speaking English better than most college graduates?

That depends on

1. At what age the boy immigrated to a English speaking country.
2. How much exposure the boy had to the speech and writings of those who spoke and/or wrote with proper grammar.
3. What the aptitude level of the boy was for picking up proper speech.
4. Does the boy have trouble with second-language interference?

Harvey moved here at a young age. Check number 1.

He read a lot of books. If they weren't all cheap novels, check number 2.

Given his ability to pick up where he left off speaking Russian at a young age, and become an excellent reader and speaker of Russian, it is obvious he had a high aptitude for picking up proper speech. Check number 3. And that he didn't suffer from second-language interference. Check number 4.

Given those four facts, I'm not surprised that Harvey could speak both English and Russian very well.

 

Quote

Expected answer:  "I gotta admit that it's not very likely, but Harvey did it, and that's all that matters."

Well that's not my answer, but it's yours. I mean, if you change "Harvey" in that sentence to "the one and only LHO."

I don't understand your insistence that a person's first language is going to prevent that person from learning that one grammatical rule that is so important to you. I mean, aside from that one objection of yours, I've already related a couple stories of immigrants to the U.S. who picked up English quite well. So well that no one could tell they are speaking English as a second language.

 

Edited February 5, 2018 by Sandy Larsen

[Thomas Graves]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

That depends up

1. At what age the boy immigrated to a English speaking country.
2. How much exposure the boy had to the speech and writings of those who spoke and/or wrote with proper grammar.
3. What the aptitude level of the boy was for picking up proper speech.
4. Does the boy have trouble with second-language interference?

Harvey moved here at a young age. Check number 1.

He read a lot of books. If they weren't all cheap novels, check number 2.

Given his ability to pick up where he left off speaking Russian at a young age, and become an excellent reader and speaker of Russian, it is obvious he had a high aptitude for picking up proper speech. Check number 3. And that he didn't suffer from second-language interference. Check number 4.

Given those four facts, I'm not surprised that Harvey could speak both English and Russian very well.

 

Well that's not my answer, but it's yours. I mean, if you change "Harvey" in that sentence to "the one and only LHO."

I don't understand your insistence that a person's first language is going to prevent that person from learning that one grammatical rule that is so important to you. I mean, aside from that one objection of yours, I've already related a couple stories of immigrants to the U.S. who picked up English quite well. So well that no one could tell they are speaking English as a second language.

 

 

Ješiš Maria, Sandy,  as I've pointed out in other posts, this thread,  it's not just one grammar rule (which rule is very rarely used, even by college graduates) that your "Hungary-born and Russian-speaking Harvey" applied correctly in his speech (and in his formal letters, too). 

I'm talkin' grammar, here, Sandy.  Not talkin' 'bout spellin'. 

Like the one and only Oswald, I'm a reel bad speler, to..

Sandy, as Hemingway had his protagonists say from time to time, "What's the matter with you?"

--  Tommy 

 

Edited February 4, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Walton]

7 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

(Grammar, Sandy.  Not talking about spelling.  FWIW, I'm a bad speller, too..).

When all is said and done, it does boggle my mind how Team Hardly uses this as part of their "evidence" to prove that there was an Oswald clone. Said another way, TH says that because it'd be logically impossible for one person to learn Russian fluently, speak English (native) well - but be a poor speller of that native language - and be a HS dropout to boot - that there just had to be an Oswald clone.

Is there such a thing as logical people thinking illogically?

[Paul Trejo]

6 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

When all is said and done, it does boggle my mind how Team Hardly uses this as part of their "evidence" to prove that there was an Oswald clone. Said another way, TH says that because it'd be logically impossible for one person to learn Russian fluently, speak English (native) well - but be a poor speller of that native language - and be a HS dropout to boot - that there just had to be an Oswald clone.

Is there such a thing as logical people thinking illogically?

Michael,

To be more a bit more accurate: logical people think logically -- while illogical people think illogically.

There are 12 classical logical fallacies, and illogical people fall for them continually.

If one wished to undertake the mammoth effort to go through every sentence published by John Armstrong, one could demonstrate this, easily.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 4, 2018 by Paul Trejo

[Jim Hargrove]

There’s nothing wrong with John’s logical skills, although people who work endlessly to defend the CIA’s involvement in the murder of JFK will tell you otherwise--endlessly.  

John grew up in a poor family but went on to become extremely wealthy from dual careers in both the petroleum distribution and custom home building businesses.  He probably lost millions of dollars in income because he gave up more than a decade of his life to study the Kennedy assassination.  Nevertheless, he is probably worth more today than the total wealth of everyone who has posted here in the last few days.  

That kind of economic success is seldom the result of faulty mental processes.

To judge for yourself, read the speech he wrote himself and delivered at the University of Minnesota way back in 1999. Read it HERE.

Or just visit his Website:

HarveyandLee.net

Or, just just stay here and read what the Agency defenders want you to believe.  It’s your choice.

P.S.  Was the CIA involved in the Kennedy assassination?

* Richard Sprague, chief counsel to the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations said, "If he had it to do over again, he would begin his investigation of the Kennedy assassination by probing 'Oswald's ties to the Central Intelligence Agency."

* Sen. Richard Schweiker said, "We do know Oswald had intelligence connections. Everywhere you look with him, there're fingerprints of intelligence." 

* Victor Marchetti was the former Executive Assistant to the Deputy Director of the CIA. Marchetti said, "The more I have learned, the more concerned I have become that the government was involved in the assassination of President John F.  Kennedy." 

* CIA Agent Donald Norton said, "Oswald was with the CIA, and if he did it then you better believe the whole CIA was involved."

* Former CIA agent Joseph Newbrough said, "Oswald was an agent for the CIA and acting under orders."

* CIA Agent John Garrett Underhill told friends, just before he died, "Oswald is a patsy. They set him up. They've killed the President. I've been listening and hearing things. I couldn't believe they'd get away with it, but they did."

* CIA Agent William Gaudet said, "The man who probably knows as much as anybody alive on all of this... is... I still think is Howard Hunt"----CIA Agent and Watergate burglar E. Howard Hunt.

* CIA employee Donald Deneslya read reports of a CIA "contact" who had worked at a radio factory in Minsk and returned to the US with a Russian wife and child--that agent could only have been Oswald, and he was obviously much more than a "contact."

* CIA officer David Phillips provided the Warren Commission with information that Oswald was at the Russian and Cuban embassies in Mexico City, then later admitted that the information he had provided was false.

* Marvin Watson, an adviser to President Lyndon Johnson, said that Johnson had told him that he was convinced that there was a plot in connection with the assassination. Watson said the President felt the CIA had something to do with this plot.

And then, of course, there is the war between JFK and the CIA, as recorded by Arthur Krock in the NY Times shortly before our government killed JFK.

 

Edited February 5, 2018 by Jim Hargrove

[Michael Walton]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

If one wished to undertake the mammoth effort to go through every sentence published by John Armstrong, one could demonstrate this, easily.

Paul - I couldn't find 12 but did find 10.  Wow, amazingly the list I found sure fits a lot of things I've seen in this thread. Especially the ad hominem one where someone who rebuts the clone theory and they're attacked.  And then another one - the bandwagon one - where someone gets on here and says "good going Team Hardly" without adding anything to the discussion.

Thanks for sharing these fallacies - you learn something new every day. Here's what I found on Google:

https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic and Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

[Sandy Larsen]

17 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Ješiš Maria, Sandy,  as I've pointed out in other posts, this thread,  it's not just one grammar rule (which rule is very rarely used, even by college graduates) that your "Hungary-born and Russian-speaking Harvey" applied correctly in his speech (and in his formal letters, too). 

Tommy,

I pointed out that one particular rule because it's the one you judged Oswald by. (Didn't you call it the "golden rule" or something like that.)

 

17 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

I'm talkin' grammar, here, Sandy.  Not talkin' 'bout spellin'. 

Yes, I know that. That's what I was referring to in my post as well.

(BTW, it's great to see you using descriptive grammar here... writin' the way you want to write.    Keep it up!)

 

17 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Like the one and only Oswald, I'm a reel bad speler, to..

Oh, my mistake. I see now that you were just makin' a point. 

 

[Michael Walton]

14 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

And then, of course, there is the war between JFK and the CIA, as recorded by Arthur Krock in the NY Times shortly before our government killed JFK.

 

Yes, Jim, but what does this have to do with the clone story?  As the logic fallacy says:

Fallacy Ex:       
Premise: You loved The Matrix.
Premise: Keanu Reaves is in The Matrix
Premise: Keanu Reaves is in Speed.
Conclusion: You must love Speed. 
(Affirming The Consequent Fallacy: you may have like The Matrix even if you don't like Keanu Reaves, or in spite of the fact that he was in it, or maybe you liked him in it but hate him in everything else etc.)

So if Oswald was a low level agent - as presented in a much more accurate and logical story like Simpich's State Secret - it does NOT also equate that there was an Oswald clone running around in parallel. This is what I meant about how there are a lot of clearly illogical parts of the clone story.

[Sandy Larsen]

17 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Paul - I couldn't find 12 but did find 10.  Wow, amazingly the list I found sure fits a lot of things I've seen in this thread. Especially the ad hominem one where someone who rebuts the clone theory and they're attacked.  And then another one - the bandwagon one - where someone gets on here and says "good going Team Hardly" without adding anything to the discussion.

Thanks for sharing these fallacies - you learn something new every day. Here's what I found on Google:

https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic and Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

 

FWIW there are a lot more than a dozen logical fallacies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[Jim Hargrove]

17 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

So if Oswald was a low level agent - as presented in a much more accurate and logical story like Simpich's State Secret

EXCUSE ME?

Mr. Simpich says three times in the first chapter of SS that "Oswald was a spy in his own mind." 

HAVE YOU BOTHERED TO READ THE BOOK?

[Michael Walton]

1 minute ago, Jim Hargrove said:

EXCUSE ME?

Mr. Simpich says three times in the first chapter of SS that "Oswald was a spy in his own mind." 

HAVE YOU BOTHERED TO READ THE BOOK?

The whole point of SS is Oswald and Webster were witting participants, Jim.  That's what Simpich meant - Oswald read spy and detective novels so he liked the intrigue of it all.  There is simply no way that LHO nor Webster could have done the things they did to get into Russia and out with little or no resistance.  This was the height of the Cold War. If Oswald has been the little old nobody that the WR tries to paint him as being - and if he had defected and then come back - they would have arrested him in the US and probably tried him for treason. But he just waltzed right back into America with nary a peep and a Russian wife to boot.

Once again you're using another logical fallacy - Simpich says LHO was a spy in his own mind; therefore, he was not one.

And yes I've read SS too many times than I care to admit.

[Sandy Larsen]

2 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Once again you're using another logical fallacy - Simpich says LHO was a spy in his own mind; therefore, he was not one.

When Simpich says Oswald was a spy in his own mind, he is definitely implying that he wasn't a spy in reality. There is nothing wrong with Jim's logic regarding this.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

1 hour ago, Michael Walton said:

Simpich says LHO was a spy in his own mind; therefore, he was not one.

REALLY?

21 Facts Indicating the Oswald Project Was Run by the CIA

1. CIA accountant James Wilcott said he made payments to an encrypted account for “Oswald or the Oswald Project.”

2. Antonio Veciana said he saw LHO meeting with CIA’s Maurice Bishop/David Atlee Phillips in Dallas in August 1963.

3. A 1978 CIA memo indicates that a CIA operations officer “had run an agent into the USSR, that man having met a Russian girl and eventually marrying her,” a case very similar to Oswald’s and clearly indicating that the Agency ran a “false defector” program in the 1950s.

4. Robert Webster and LHO "defected" a few months apart in 1959, both tried to "defect" on a Saturday, both possessed "sensitive" information of possible value to the Russians, both were befriended by Marina Prusakova, and both returned to the United States in the spring of 1962.

5. Richard Sprague, Richard Schweiker, and CIA agents Donald Norton and Joseph Newbrough all said LHO was associated with the CIA. 

6. CIA employee Donald Deneslya said he read reports of a CIA "contact" who had worked at a radio factory in Minsk and returned to the US with a Russian wife and child.

7. Kenneth Porter, employee of CIA-connected Collins Radio, left his family to marry (and probably monitor) Marina Oswald after LHO’s death.

8. George Joannides, case officer and paymaster for DRE (which LHO had attempted to infiltrate) was put in charge of lying to the HSCA and never told them of his relationship to DRE.

9. For his achievements, Joannides was given a medal by the CIA.

10. FBI took Oswald off the watch list at the same time a CIA cable gave him a clean bill of political health, weeks after Oswald’s New Orleans arrest and less than two months before the assassination.

11. Oswald’s lengthy “Lives of Russian Workers” essay reads like a pretty good intelligence report.

12. Oswald’s possessions were searched for microdots.

13. Oswald owned an expensive Minox spy camera, which the FBI tried to make disappear.

14. Even the official cover story of the radar operator near American U-2 planes defecting to Russia, saying he would give away all his secrets, and returning home without penalty smells like a spy story.

15. CIA Richard Case Nagell clearly knew about the plot to assassinate JFK and LHO’s relation to it, and he said that the CIA and the FBI ignored his warnings.

16. LHO always seemed poor as a church mouse, until it was time to go “on assignment.”  For his Russian adventure, we’re to believe he saved all the money he needed for first class European hotels and private tour guides in Moscow from the non-convertible USMC script he saved. In the summer of 1963, he once again seemed to have enough money to travel abroad to Communist nations.

17. To this day, the CIA claims it never interacted with Oswald, that it didn’t even bother debriefing him after the “defection.” What utter bs….

18. After he “defected” to the Soviet Union in 1959, bragging to U.S. embassy personnel in Moscow that he would tell the Russians everything he knew about U.S. military secrets, he returns to the U.S. without punishment and is then in 1963 given the OK to travel to Cuba and the Soviet Union again!

19. Allen Dulles, the CIA director fired by JFK, and the Warren Commission clearly wanted the truth hidden from the public to protect sources and methods of intelligence agencies such as the CIA. Earl Warren said, “Full disclosure was not possible for reasons of national security.”

20. CIA's Ann Egerter, who worked for J.J. Angleton's Counterintelligence Special Interest Group (CI/SIG), opened a "201" file on Oswald on December 9, 1960.  Egerter testified to the HSCA: "We were charged with the investigation of Agency personnel....”  When asked if the purpose was to "investigate Agency employees," she answered, "That is correct."  When asked, "Would there be any other reason for opening up a file?" she answered, "No, I can't think of one."

21. President Kennedy and the CIA clearly were at war with each other in the weeks immediately before his assassination, as evidenced by Arthur Krock's infamous defense of the Agency in the Oct. 3, 1963 New York Times. “Oswald” was the CIA’s pawn.

 

Hey, Walton,

Why don't you just discuss the evidence?  You can't, can you?

 

 

Edited February 5, 2018 by Jim Hargrove

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, Michael Walton said:

There is simply no way that LHO nor Webster could have done the things they did to get into Russia and out with little or no resistance. 

This was the height of the Cold War. If Oswald has been the little old nobody that the WR tries to paint him as being - and if he had defected and then come back - they would have arrested him in the US and probably tried him for treason.

But he just waltzed right back into America with nary a peep and a Russian wife to boot.

Michael,

Let me raise some vital facts of the case of LHO getting into the USSR.    First, LHO was only 19 years old when applied for entry into the USSR   Cold War or not, most adults are sympathetic to the young.   Adults think of teenagers as ignorant and have a lot to learn, so we are sympathetic and give breaks to the young that we wouldn't give to adults.

Also, LHO cut his own wrists when he was denied entry.  He was 19 years old and he cut his own wrists -- he was going to get sympathy -- playing on human emotions, across political barriers.    

Also, the US State Department compared LHO's position with the dozens of other Americans who had applied to enter into the USSR because of their Marxist beliefs.   In a maximum of two years, said John McVickar, State Department official for the US Embassy in the USSR in 1963, most of these guys change their minds and beg to return to the USA.    Some of them made it, some of them didn't.   

McVickar told LHO he was going to hold back his US Passport -- doing LHO a big favor -- so that LHO could change his mind at anytime.   LHO agreed to this plan -- but he was too young at the time to know what a big favor McVickar did for him.   It was the humane thing to do, because Oswald was only 19 years old, and had cut his wrists to get into the USSR.  McVickar would have done the same for any other 19 year old, I believe.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Hey, Walton,

Why don't you just discuss the evidence?  You can't, can you?

JIm, 

I've already debunked your 21 so-called "facts" about LHO and the CIA.    

If you repeat posting your "21" list,  I think I have the right to repeat posting my debunking of it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 5, 2018 by Paul Trejo