Michael Walton Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 This whole theory just feels and smells like whack a mole. I'm sorry Sandy but it's true. This is not an attack on you (just want to be clear on that so you understand what I'm saying here). There's just no way around the fact that those exhumation photos clearly show real teeth embedded into the skull. As soon as we hear that the skulls were switched to explain why the teeth are there, well, that's where the head slapping and eye rolling start. I'm sorry Sandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 26 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: This whole theory just feels and smells like whack a mole. I'm sorry Sandy but it's true. This is not an attack on you (just want to be clear on that so you understand what I'm saying here). There's just no way around the fact that those exhumation photos clearly show real teeth embedded into the skull. As soon as we hear that the skulls were switched to explain why the teeth are there, well, that's where the head slapping and eye rolling start. I'm sorry Sandy. Michael, I agree with the exhumation finding. Just like I agree with the dental record. It is you guys who don't agree with one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Michael, I agree with the exhumation finding. Just like I agree with the dental record. It is you guys who don't agree with one or the other. Oh, that's right. Sorry it slipped my mind as it is hard to keep up with the Hardly story (hence the whack a mole vibe). So in other words, the skull with teeth in them that was in the exhumation coffin was one of the Oswalds...and the the smiling Oswald with the missing tooth in the classroom and the dental record saying Failure...that belonged to the other Oswald. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 16 minutes ago, Michael Walton said: Oh, that's right. Sorry it slipped my mind as it is hard to keep up with the Hardly story (hence the whack a mole vibe). So in other words, the skull with teeth in them that was in the exhumation coffin was one of the Oswalds...and the the smiling Oswald with the missing tooth in the classroom and the dental record saying Failure...that belonged to the other Oswald. Right? Now you've got it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 38 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Now you've got it! OK got it - and I wonderful where this other Oswald ran off to and where his Marguite look alike Mom went? Oh and one more thing - why did the conspirators have to do this? Why did they have to find an Oswald clone 10 years before 11/22, have him live in Oswald's shadow, have him stick around until 11/22, and then disappear forever after his clone was shot in the Dallas jail? Any idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 1 minute ago, Michael Walton said: OK got it - and I wonderful where this other Oswald ran off to and where his Marguite look alike Mom went? Oh and one more thing - why did the conspirators have to do this? Why did they have to find an Oswald clone 10 years before 11/22, have him live in Oswald's shadow, have him stick around until 11/22, and then disappear forever after his clone was shot in the Dallas jail? Any idea? Yes, of course. The Oswald project had nothing to do with the JFK assassination. Harvey just happened to be picked later on to be the patsy. Even those who don't believe in H&L, but believe LHO was a CIA fake defector, view it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 46 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: Even those who don't believe in H&L, but believe LHO was a CIA fake defector, view it that way. Uh huh. Right, right. OK, got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) 22 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said: Mytton is famous for creating misinformation. He photoshopped the teeth behind the upper lip in the or don't you understand, Tracy? Sure, he Photoshopped the teeth. But he is showing how the lip is covering the teeth and the general area could be in shadow or simply be concealed by something in the photographic process. The point is that there is an alternate explanation for just about everything. Edited February 16, 2018 by W. Tracy Parnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 21 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Sandy, As I keep telling you...LHO's 1958 dental exam DOES NOT state that he needed a prosthesis. That is only your unprofessional interpretation of the word, "FAILED" in that box. That is really all you have to go on anymore -- and it's tissue thin. You need SOME corroboration. Where is it? Regards, --Paul Trejo Exactly. And he calls it "indisputable" evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 On 2/15/2018 at 5:39 AM, Jim Hargrove said: Paul and Mervyn sure are anxious to make us believe that the dental evidence that there were two different “Lee Harvey Oswalds” is unreliable. Why do they care so much? They want us to believe that two molars tipping toward a gap left by a missing tooth shown in this Marine Corps x-ray of Oswald .... …. could, in just a few years, slide sideways and straighten themselves up in this x-ray from the exhumation: They want us to believe that Oswald’s best friend in the 9th grade, Ed Voebel, was hallucinating when he testified under oath, “I think he even lost a tooth from that. I think he was cut on the lip, and a tooth was knocked out.” Paul and Mervyn want us to believe that Voebel’s camera was also hallucinating when it shot this photo of Oswald’s missing tooth: They want us to believe that Lillian Murret took Lee Oswald to a dentist to treat a split lip, rather than a missing tooth. No doubt Ms. Murret was was hallucinating about how dentists treat lips. Paul and Mervyn, especially Mervyn, want us to believe that it is SO UNFAIR to show this detail from a U.S. Marine dental form indicating that Oswald had a prosthesis that failed on or by 5-5-1958. They don’t want us to know that a dental prosthesis is a false tooth. Instead, Mervyn wants to talk about the fact that the form indicates Oswald needed his teeth cleaned (“Prophylaxis needed: Yes”). The teeth cleaning is much more important to Marvyn than Oswald’s false tooth. Why? Because according to the Norton Report and images taken from the exhumation, “Lee Harvey Oswald” was not missing a front tooth and had straight molars. This seems to indicate that the “Lee Harvey Oswald” in the Marines dentist chair was not the same Lee Harvey Oswald who is buried in Fort Worth. Paul and Marvyn seem to really, really hate that conclusion. Why? With the anti-H&L group so hard at work here, I just wanted remind lurkers how strong this evidence really is. And this is a short version of the evidence Sandy covered so well in his original post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 17 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said: With the anti-H&L group so hard at work here, I just wanted remind lurkers how strong this evidence really is. There is no "evidence." Evidence would be a report from a forensic dentist that supports your theory. The report comes from Sandy Larsen who is biased I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hargrove Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) evidence [ev-i-duh ns] Spell Syllables Synonyms Examples Word Origin See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com noun 1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof. 2. something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign: His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever. 3. Law. data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and whichmay include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects. verb (used with object), evidenced, evidencing. 4. to make evident or clear; show clearly; manifest: He evidenced his approval by promising his full support. 5. to support by evidence: He evidenced his accusation with incriminating letters. Idioms 6. in evidence, plainly visible; conspicuous: The first signs of spring are in evidence. ======================================================== As for definition #3 above, the problem with getting so much evidence for conspiracy is that the FBI, principally, destroyed and altered evidence that implicated elements of the U.S Government in the assassination of JFK. For EVIDENCE backing up this statement, just spend five minutes reading this: Edited February 16, 2018 by Jim Hargrove Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said: With the anti-H&L group so hard at work here, I just wanted remind lurkers how strong this evidence really is. And this is a short version of the evidence Sandy covered so well in his original post. The so-called "evidence" is only four pieces of questionable data: 1. A 60-year old photograph that might be LHO with 2.5 missing teeth, or might be LHO clowning around with Ed Voebel. 2. The testimony of LHO's aunt Lillian Murrett, which consists of a few generic statements, never saying, "missing tooth." 3. A dental FORM which is vague, and interpreted with bias by the H&L team. 4. Ed Voebel's WC testimony, with all his "I think" phrases, trying to play up his photograph for all it might be worth to magazines. This is EVIDENCE? No, this is speculation on full-tilt BIAS. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited February 16, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Fernandez Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Is there .. anybody .. who can bring rationality to these conversations ? Perhaps an admin can perceive motivations or "deep sources" that we mortals are unable to access. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 30 minutes ago, Bruce Fernandez said: Is there .. anybody .. who can bring rationality to these conversations ? You talkin' to me? 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