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

[Jim Hargrove]

13 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

It would be nice if a Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites specialist were to put together a new graphic showing, separately, all of the photos of "Lee," and all of the photos of "Harvey" (which appear to be all mixed together in Jack White's "poster"), and which included, if necessary, a special category for "undecided."

(I've got a sneakin' hunch that the "undecided" photos will comprise a very large group, indeed.)

--  Tommy

I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to characterize many of those photos.
What the John Armstrong/Jack White poster called "THE EVOLUTION OF LEE HARVEY
OSWALD" proves is that the photographic record has been seriously messed with.
I've had that poster taped to my home office door for fifteen years or so.  It
doesn't make much more sense now than when I first looked at it.

The image I uploaded here, if enlarged, has sufficient resolution to read the 
print beneath each shot. People should read the captions and study the issue for 
themselves instead of asking me to do all their work for them.

[Jim Hargrove]

57 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Dawn Meredith writes ( http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/&do=findComment&comment=349992 ):

But there is ample evidence that when Oswald returned to the USA, his spoken Russian, though good, was far from perfect. That's the point: he was clearly not a native speaker, unless, somehow, spending more than two and a half years surrounded by other native speakers of Russian had caused him to forget the grammar of his native language, which is, to put it mildly, not very likely.

What is your evidence for Oswald having "not mastered the English language"? Listen to any of the surviving recordings of Oswald speaking English. He is clearly a native speaker. True, his written English was poor, but that proves nothing. There are plenty of reasons (dyslexia being the best known, though it may not have applied to Oswald) why native speakers communicate poorly in the written form of their own language. The mistakes he made in writing, he did not make in speaking. And his command of spoken English was that of someone born and brought up among native English speakers in the USA. The natively Russian-speaking 'Harvey' was a fictional character.

In the immortal words of Natalie Ray, asked by Liebeler if "Oswald" spoke to her in Russian:

Yes; just perfect; really surprised me... it's just too good speaking Russian to be such
a short time, you know.... I said, "How come you speak so good Russian? I been here so long
and still don't speak very well English."

Of course George De Mohrenschildt, a Russian immigrant and a teacher of Russian, said it
best:

Incidentally I never saw him interested in anything else except Russian
books and magazines. He said he didn't want to forget the language -
but it amazed me that he read such difficult writers like Gorki, Dostoevski,
Gogol, Tolstoi and Turgenieff - in Russian . As everyone knows Russian is
a complex language and he was supposed to have stayed in the Soviet Union
only a little over two years. He must have had some previous training and
that point had never been brought up by the Warren Committee - and it is
still puzzling to me. In my opinion Lee was a very bright person but not
a genius . He never mastered the English language yet he learned such a dif-
icult language! I taught Russian at all level in a large University, and
I never saw such a profficiency in the best senior students who constantly
listened to  Russian tapes and spoke to Russian fiends . As a matter of
fact American-born instructors never mastered Russian spoken language as
well as Lee did.

If you want to believe that "Lee Harvey Oswald" learned Russian with that level of
fluency by reading Russian newspapers in his spare time in the Marines and spending
two and a half years mostly working full-time in a factory in Russia, I've got
a bridge I'd like to sell you.

[Jim Hargrove]

As for Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald's command of English, just look at how he wrote:

The first sentence reads:

“Sorry too take so long to write but I thought sometime might have
come up but we’re still waiting.”

Note the comma splice in the second sentence.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I'm not sure about the exhumed body really having signs of mastoidectomy. I've seen too many cases of witness tampering and experts getting things wrong in the WC and HSCA.

Here is a list of who would have been in on the plot to fake the exhumation:

Michael Eddowes, who paid for the exhumation, would have had to somehow be in on the plot to fake it. Strange though since he was the one who wanted it because he thought it would prove his theory.

Marina Oswald

The four doctors whose dental and mastoid examination confirmed each other.

The doctors assistants.

A witness I spoke to who saw the exhumation video (commissioned by Marina) and said it confirmed what the doctors reported. So either he was lying or the video commissioned by Marina was faked.

Additionally, the numerous photos taken that day would have to have ben faked.

Let me know if Hargrove and Josephs are making the same claim as you Sandy. If they are, I can add the above to my list of who was in on the H&L plot.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

54 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

What the John Armstrong/Jack White poster called "THE EVOLUTION OF LEE HARVEY
OSWALD" proves is that the photographic record has been seriously messed with.

If the photographic record has been "seriously messed with" how do you know which photos you can trust? Answer-those that support H&L.

[Jim Hargrove]

In a 30-year-old radio interview, Harold Wesiberg (author of Whitewash and other books) recalled hearing, in 1965, from a caller to a radio station claiming to be a Marine veteran who knew a second Oswald in the USMC. The caller then came into the station and talked at length.  Harold gets into the story about 30 seconds into the recording.

 

 

Edited April 13, 2017 by Jim Hargrove

[Thomas Graves]

7 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to characterize many of those photos.
What the John Armstrong/Jack White poster called "THE EVOLUTION OF LEE HARVEY
OSWALD" proves is that the photographic record has been seriously messed with.
I've had that poster taped to my home office door for fifteen years or so.  It
doesn't make much more sense now than when I first looked at it.

The image I uploaded here, if enlarged, has sufficient resolution to read the 
print beneath each shot. People should read the captions and study the issue for 
themselves instead of asking me to do all their work for them.

Dear Jim,

Oh, regardless of the fact you have "no idea how to characterize many of those 'Harvey and Lee' photos" (but do have boundless faith in the 'highly-esteemed expert researchers' ARMSTRONG and JACK "We Never Went To The Moon" WHITE (R.I.P.) who created the poster, all of the photos on it must be correct, mustn't they.

I see.

Well, all I can say is hopefully Johnny and Jackie weren't advised by the group comprised of 'expert researchers' Thierry "Fake News" Speth, Don Roberdeau, and Robin Unger, which group incorrectly identified Stella Jacob, Gloria Holt, and Sharon Simmons as "Gloria Calvary" (in reality the "Big Girl" standing between "Peggy Burney" and John Templin, below), "Karan Hicks," and "Carol Reed" in the Z-Frame, below.  Etc.  Etc.  Etc.

 

 

Carry on,

--  Tommy

Edited April 13, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Walton]

I'm  really glad that one researcher finally opened the door and allowed us to finally see how he and other "conspiracy is everywhere" researchers think. This researcher has always seemed to hold his research in high esteem and with a scent of "I know better...I'm  always right because I  know how to research...and you  don't."

But after revealing his modus operandi  it's  obvious to me and I'm  sure others that his "All government  bad" way of analyzing  things is no more accurate or true than this entire Harvey and Lee caper.

 

[Thomas Graves]

2 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

I'm  really glad that one researcher finally opened the door and allowed us to finally see how he and other "conspiracy is everywhere" researchers think. This researcher has always seemed to hold his research in high esteem and with a scent of "I know better...I'm  always right because I  know how to research...and you  don't."

But after revealing his modus operandi  it's  obvious to me and I'm  sure others that his "All government  bad" way of analyzing  things is no more accurate or true than this entire Harvey and Lee caper.

 

Mike,

Please try to make it a little less ambiguous as to whom you're talking about here.

"You talkin' 'bout me?"

Or is the general paranoiac mindset of many of my "colleagues" finally affecting me, too?

IMHO

--  Tommy

Edited April 13, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

3 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

I'm  really glad that one researcher finally opened the door and allowed us to finally see how he and other "conspiracy is everywhere" researchers think. This researcher has always seemed to hold his research in high esteem and with a scent of "I know better...I'm  always right because I  know how to research...and you  don't."

But after revealing his modus operandi  it's  obvious to me and I'm  sure others that his "All government  bad" way of analyzing  things is no more accurate or true than this entire Harvey and Lee caper.

 

Dear Mikey,

Please explicate!

Modus operandi?  What modus operandi?

Why are you pussyfooting around here, Mikey?

--  Tommy

PS  Can you name any of the "conspiracy is everywhere" researchers you allude to, so conveniently and ... uh .... ambiguously, above?

And what, pray tell, does "all government bad" mean in the context of your wish-washy post?  

If you're talking about me, wouldn't be more accurate to accuse me of believing that "All fake news and witting misrepresentation of facts which intends to entrench "true believers" in even more divisive, counter-productive, paranoiac, conspiracy-minded thinking, be it on the Left or on the Right, is bad"?

LOL

Edited April 13, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

10 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

The image I uploaded here, if enlarged, has sufficient resolution to read the 
print beneath each shot. People should read the captions and study the issue for 
themselves instead of asking me to do all their work for them.

Jim,

I enlarged that collage and had a hard time reading much of it.

I wonder if Dropbox (the host for the photo) compressed it further.

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Tommy,

If the photos could be accurately dated, then they could be classified as "Harvey" or "Lee." They have a pretty tight timeline so it would be possible.

[Thomas Graves]

16 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Tommy,

If the photos could be accurately dated, then they could be classified as "Harvey" or "Lee." They have a pretty tight timeline so it would be possible.

Tracy,

Yeah.  LOL

That's the only way they can "do" it.

"Well, I'm not sure which one this is, quite frankly, but since it was taken on such-and-such a date, and in such-and-such a place, it MUST be Harvey!  (Or it must be Henry.  Heck, it MIGHT EVEN BE that evil, evil, assassin, LEE!  Wait, I know how we can tell!  Was he with smiling Marguerite, or non-smiling Marguerite?")

--  Tommy

Edited April 13, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 minute ago, Thomas Graves said:

Tracy,

Yeah.  LOL

That's the only way they can "do" it.

"Well, I'm not sure which one this is, quite frankly, but since it was taken on such-and-such a date, and in such-and-such a place, it MUST be Harvey!  (Or it MUST be Henry.  Heck, it MIGHT EVEN BE that evil, evil, assassin, LEE!  Wait, I know how we can tell!  Was he with smiling Marguerite, or non-smiling Marguerite?")

--  Tommy

As we've all pointed out, their test for what evidence to believe seems to be if it fits the H&L theory or not. Jim H. just said the photos have been "seriously messed with" and he doesn't trust the FBI, HSCA or the WC. Yet the theory relies on all of those.

[Michael Walton]

No Tom of course it's not you.  It's the guy with the Greg Norman floppy hat on and dark glasses.  The last time I used a name I was accused of being an xxxxxxx. So now when I don't use a name I'm an xxxxxxx all over.  I can't win here but maybe I just am one.

PS - you don't strike me as a conspiracy is everywhere kind of guy.

Edited April 14, 2017 by Michael Walton