George Sawtelle Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 W. Tracy It´s only logical that all charges be dropped against a suspect who dies. I´m not disputing that. Immediately after the assassination some people, important people like Salandria, Lane, especially after Ruby killed Oswald, felt a conspiracy killed JFK. The Texas attorney general, Waggoner Carr (???), wanted to do an investigation into the assassination. LBJ talked him out of it. The conspiracy angle was very strong in Washington and Dallas. The attorney general of Texas should have conducted an investigation and a grand jury should have decided that a trial was or was not warranted. LBJ, wanting to do the investigation in Wash DC does not make it lawful. That is why I said what I said about Norwood. He was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: Tracy, I don't know what kind of tricks you are trying to play, but like with DiMaio and with your Church Committee Report mislabeled as an HSCA report, it won't fly. I was referring to the fact that the people you mention don't back the Kudlaty story of the FBI taking the records. They do think LHO went to Stripling. But all of these people are probably just remembering Robert and there is no hard evidence to say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 8 hours ago, Thomas Graves said: Dear George, Tracy is a so-called LNer, whereas I'm a CTer. The only thing we have in common is that we both think the theory involving a long-term doppelganger project popularly called called Harvey and Lee is ridiculous. -- Tommy Yes, I hereby absolve Tommy of any guilt by association with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Just now, W. Tracy Parnell said: Yes, I hereby absolve Tommy of any guilt by association with me. Tracy, Given what I said above, and given the large number of Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites types who are attracted to this forum, we have a tremendous amount in common. -- Tommy PS Another thing we have in common is that neither of us consciously support Paul Trejo's "CT" ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Tommy dearest Do you believe there were two Oswalds? If not, how do you account for two Oswalds identified in Dealey Plaza on 22 Nov 1963? What about pictures showing two Oswalds who look very similar but are not the same man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 (edited) 56 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said: Tommy dearest Do you believe there were two Oswalds? If not, how do you account for two Oswalds identified in Dealey Plaza on 22 Nov 1963? What about pictures showing two Oswalds who look very similar but are not the same man. George. Dear. I don't mean to sound insulting, but you just don't seem to "get" it. There's a big difference between a really, really long term "doppelganger" project, and a short-term impersonation deal. Forum member and former Army counter-intelligence officer, Jon G. Tidd (who seems to have recused himself from posting on the forum due to a threatened lawsuit against him by another former contributor here who just happened to be a lawyer), has come up with an interesting compromise by opining that there was an "Oswald Double" project, but that it didn't start until "Harvey" (Marina's future husband) joined the Marines in October, 1956, not way back in 1947, or something, and that this four-year project artificially created the paperwork, etc., for the respective cover-story "childhoods" of Harvey and Lee. I am much more willing to accept this than the (imho) Paranoic, "Deep State"- Mindset -Engendering (and ultimately Obfuscating) very, very long term Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites cult-theory. Capiche? -- Tommy Edited April 1, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 Thomas G Sounds interesting. Mr Tidd may be on to something. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 (edited) TP: I was referring to the fact that the people you mention don't back the Kudlaty story of the FBI taking the records. They do think LHO went to Stripling. But all of these people are probably just remembering Robert and there is no hard evidence to say otherwise. One of the most ironically funny statements I can recall. TP apparently did not look up my footnote. It was Robert who said LHO went to Stripling! And he said it three times at three different intervals. Is TP now going to say Robert confused Lee with himself? How could that be? Maybe TP can explain it. Edited April 1, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: TP: I was referring to the fact that the people you mention don't back the Kudlaty story of the FBI taking the records. They do think LHO went to Stripling. But all of these people are probably just remembering Robert and there is no hard evidence to say otherwise. One of the most ironically funny statements I can recall. TP apparently did not look up my footnote. It was Robert who said LHO went to Stripling! And he said it three times at three different intervals. Is TP now going to say Robert confused Lee with himself? How could that be? Maybe TP can explain it. Yes, Jim I am aware that Robert said that. People say many things. Robert is an important witness to history but he didn't get everything right. He assumed LHO went to Stripling because he did, but there is no time frame when that could have happened unless you believe the H&L nonsense which is scientifically disproven. Now let's go back to my previous question. What don't you believe about the H&L theory and why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 (edited) No comment on this; he is saying what I thought no one could. Edited April 1, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: [...] Tracy Parnell: "Now let's go back to my previous question. What don't you believe about the H&L theory and why?" James DiEugenio: "No comment on this, he is saying what I thought no one could." LOL -- Tommy Dear James, You're better than Conway and Spicer. Hilarious! Edited April 2, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 (edited) That is something that the WC would do TG. You are deliberately cutting out the context above to put words in my mouth. And anyone can see that by just noting that you did not pull any quote. What I am commenting on is this: TP is actually saying that Robert is not a good witness as to where his brother went to school. And he actually could not tell if LHO was at Stripling or if he was there instead. Previously TP said that everyone was confused between Robert and Lee being there. Even though Robert was a prime witness for Lee begin at Stripling. A truly remarkable comment. Robert couldn't figure out Lee from himself. Edited April 1, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 1, 2017 Share Posted April 1, 2017 14 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: That is something that the WC would do TG. You are deliberately cutting out the context above to put words in my mouth. And anyone can see that by just noting that you did not pull any quote. What I am commenting on is this: TP is actually saying that Robert is not a good witness as to where his brother went to school. And he actually could not tell if LHO was at Stripling or if he was there instead. Previously TP said that everyone was confused between Robert and Lee being there. Even though Robert was a prime witness for Lee begin at Stripling. A truly remarkable comment. Robert couldn't figure out Lee from himself. Dear James, So, let ME ask you -- "What is it about Harvey and Lee that you disagree with, and why?" Thank you, -- Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: That is something that the WC would do TG. You are deliberately cutting out the context above to put words in my mouth. And anyone can see that by just noting that you did not pull any quote. What I am commenting on is this: TP is actually saying that Robert is not a good witness as to where his brother went to school. And he actually could not tell if LHO was at Stripling or if he was there instead. Previously TP said that everyone was confused between Robert and Lee being there. Even though Robert was a prime witness for Lee begin at Stripling. A truly remarkable comment. Robert couldn't figure out Lee from himself. Robert THOUGHT LHO attended Stripling in 1951-52. From his testimony: And, at that time, I take it your brother Lee was attending Arlington Heights High School? That would be 1952? Mr. OSWALD. Just a minute, please. In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then. Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades. And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School. But Robert was mistaken. LHO attended Ridgelea as a sixth grader in the 1951 to 1952 school year. He WOULD HAVE attended Stripling if they had stayed in Fort Worth but they moved to NYC in August, 1952 so that never happened. When Robert was at Stripling in 1948-49 (which was the last year he went there, he enrolled at Arlington Heights the following year) LHO was in third grade and he could not have “remembered” him at Stripling since he was too young to be in Junior High which, as Robert pointed out, was from seventh to ninth grades. Robert was simply wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 2, 2017 Share Posted April 2, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said: Robert THOUGHT LHO attended Stripling in 1951-52. From his testimony: And, at that time, I take it your brother Lee was attending Arlington Heights High School? That would be 1952? Mr. OSWALD. Just a minute, please. In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then. Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades. And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School. But Robert was mistaken. LHO attended Ridgelea as a sixth grader in the 1951 to 1952 school year. He WOULD HAVE attended Stripling if they had stayed in Fort Worth but they moved to NYC in August, 1952 so that never happened. When Robert was at Stripling in 1948-49 (which was the last year he went there, he enrolled at Arlington Heights the following year) LHO was in third grade and he could not have “remembered” him at Stripling since he was too young to be in Junior High which, as Robert pointed out, was from seventh to ninth grades. Robert was simply wrong. Tracy, Don't you understand it's absolutely impossible that Robert Oswald could have been confused about something that had (supposedly) happened just twelve-plus years earlier! -- Tommy Edited April 2, 2017 by Thomas Graves 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