Jump to content
The Education Forum

EVIDENCE FOR HARVEY AND LEE (Please debate the specifics right here. Don't just claim someone else has debunked it!)


Jim Hargrove
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Hi Tony,

It is far too easy to misrepresent photos, and I'm not good with faces, but my bet is that the young man you have depicted above is  American born LEE Harvey Oswald, not Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald.  My advice, though, is don't rely on pix.  It is far too easy to misrepresent them.  I'd like to hear from John Butler on this....

 

Hi Jim,

A lot of us old timers have insomnia.  Mine is a gift from the government.  I guess you can answer Tony's question best by talking about shirts.  How many shirts would a teenager from a not well to do family have?  Over what period of time would that teenager have to wear a particular shirt?  And, are these shirts and teenagers the same?  I would say yes.  Do they look alike.  Again, I would say yes.

harvey-row-3.png

But, if one goes back to my list of facial characteristics to identify Lee from Harvey one immediately sees two things.  First this teenager does not have the left ear characteristics of Harvey Oswald.  The other is a sure identifier.  That is Lee Oswald had a missing front tooth or teeth.  Both photos have that image for the teenager Lee Oswald.

Lee-Oswald-missing-tooth.jpg

For the "pen cap in the mouth" crowd, I would suggest that Lee Oswald kept a pen cap in his mouth on a continual basis.

He sure looks like Harvey as I have said many times.  Look a likes.  To tell them apart one must use identifiable facial characteristics.  Harvey did not have any missing front teeth.

 

Edited by John Butler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Armstrong claims: Robert Lee Oswald, (Oswalds older brother, born 1934) grew up knowing his real mother (Marguerite ONE) and brother (Lee).(You don't say) ... BUT AT SOME POINT IN THE 1950ties they (his real mother and his real brother) WHERE REPLACED BY THE OTHER MOTHER (Marguerite TWO) AND THE OTHER BROTHER Harvey) without him noticing.

ROFLMAO

 

The Life Summary of Robert Edward Lee who did not realize that in the 1950ties  his mother and his brother where secretly replaced by another mother and another brother ... 


When Robert Edward Lee Oswald Jr was born on 7 April 1934, in New Orleans, Orleans, Louisiana, United States, his father, Robert Lee Oswald, was 38 and his mother, Marguerite Francis Claverie, was 26. He lived in Denton Township, Roscommon, Michigan, United States in 1989. He died on 27 November 2017, in Wichita Falls, Wichita, Texas, United States, at the age of 83, and was buried in Wichita Falls, Wichita, Texas, United States.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

According to Armstrongs H&L the Oswald buried in Forth Worth was NOT the Oswald who has undergone a mastoidectomy in the 1940ties. When the body of Oswald was exhumed in 1981 the docs found out there was a bone defect that was having been caused by a mastoidectomy.

H&L was refuted 20 years before it was published --- 

 Key points

  • A mastoidectomy is an operation to take away part of the bone from behind the ear.
  • A mastoidectomy is done because of an infection or cholesteatoma that spreads to the mastoid bone.
  • Your child will need an operation to remove the diseased part of the mastoid bone.
Edited by Karl Kinaski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

No doubt Mr. Bojczuk will talk endlessly about the mastoidectomy (he’s made more than 200 posts about it)

Good grief, Jim!

Evidently, 200 posts is what it takes to prise anything resembling a straight answer from Jim about John Armstrong's blatant and apparently dishonest misrepresentation of the mastoidectomy evidence which debunked Armstrong's theory two decades before he published his book.

I'm happy to discuss the mastoidectomy again if Jim wants to, but I suspect he doesn't. Any readers who are interested can follow the last debate from here:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26529-was-it-really-just-a-mole-hunt-about-oswald/?do=findComment&comment=422390

Quote

, but none of you will talk about the EVIDENCE for Harvey and Lee! ... You simply WILL NOT argue the evidence here, on the JFK ASSASSINATION DEBATE website.

On the contrary, we have talked about that evidence here. We have talked about it, over and over again, in many threads on this very forum. The mastoidectomy, the Stripling witnesses, the Texas Theater arrest, and pretty much every other notable aspect of Jim's beloved (and internally incoherent) double-doppelganger theory have been done to death.

If Jim has anything new to say about any of those topics, he is welcome to do so on the appropriate thread. Unfortunately, he doesn't appear to have anything new to say.

There is, however, one aspect of his theory on which I would welcome Jim's input. I'll come to it shortly. We'll see how many posts it takes before we get a straight answer from Jim about this one.

Robert Charles-Dunne asks Jim:

Quote

Dude, how many million times have you posted on the same tired old nonsense over the past 20+ years?

Good grief, Robert!

Don't you realise that using words such as 'nonsense' to describe the 'Harvey and Lee' nonsense* is likely to genuinely offend those delicate souls who are on the look-out for things to complain about to the moderators?

* I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be no conceivable reason for those hypothetical 'Harvey and Lee' masterminds to have set up a long-term double-doppelganger scheme, when they had a perfectly good alternative.

I can't think of a reason. John Kowalski can't think of a reason. Denny Zartman can't think of a reason. Robert Charles-Dunne, Jonathan Cohen, Tracy Parnell, Bernie Laverick and Karl Kinaski can't think of a reason. Greg Parker, Alex Wilson and the rest of the gang at the ROKC forum can't think of a reason. Even John Butler can't think of a reason.

I'm beginning to suspect that no reason ever existed for the hypothetical decision to set up that hypothetical double-doppelganger scheme. But if the 'Harvey and Lee' theory is correct, those hypothetical masterminds must have had a good reason for making their decision.

There appears to be just one fully paid-up member of the 'Harvey and Lee' fan club still standing. Let's ask him, shall we, and see what he has to say?

Jim Hargrove has apparently spent more than twenty years promoting the double-doppelganger theory that was developed by John Armstrong and Jack 'the moon landings were faked' White. If there's one person who must have the answer to the mystery, it will be Jim.

Jim,

In your studies of the 'Harvey and Lee' concept over the last two decades or more, you must have given some thought to the question of exactly why a bunch of Bad Guy masterminds would have decided to set up a long-term scheme involving two pairs of doppelgangers.

The 'Harvey and Lee' theory tells us that the purpose of the scheme was to produce a false defector who understood Russian and possessed a plausible American background. We know that these masterminds, if they existed, would have had an obvious, straightforward solution available to them. All they had to do was:

  • Choose one American from the 2.5 million or more who were in the military at any one time in the early 1950s.
  • Allow him to learn Russian over several years.

Yet, according to you, those masterminds instead decided to:

  • Locate one American boy and his American mother.
  • Locate one eastern European boy, either a Hungarian refugee or a Russian World War Two orphan, who was unrelated to the American boy.
  • Locate a woman who looked virtually identical to the American boy's mother despite being unrelated to her, to act as the eastern European boy's mother.
  • Have the eastern European boy impersonate the American boy over several years.
  • Have the surrogate mother impersonate the American boy's mother over several years.
  • Hope that at the end of this process, the two unrelated boys would end up looking virtually identical.

If the 'Harvey and Lee' double-doppelganger scheme actually happened, the Bad Guy masterminds who devised it must have had a convincing and credible reason for preferring that very complex scheme over the very simple and obvious scheme I mentioned earlier. Unfortunately, no-one seems able to work out what that reason might have been.

What, in your expert opinion, was the convincing and credible reason that led the masterminds to prefer the complex scheme over the simple scheme? Having studied and promoted the theory for more than 20 years, you must have worked out an answer to this question.

What would have been the reasoning process that led to their decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Voebel was closest to Oswald at Beauregard. He later accurately recalled that his teen friend had dark wavy hair. The studio photo on the left shows in better detail, Lee's dark wavy hair;

oswald-wavy-dark-hair-voebel.png

Tony,

I have identified these photos in the past on several occasions.  Who do you think they are?  Here's another to identify with Marina.

lee-and-marina-minsk-1.jpg

Is this the original Lee Harvey Oswald or the double, Harvey Oswald, real name unknown.

Edited by John Butler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, John Butler said:

That is Lee Oswald had a missing front tooth or teeth.  Both photos have that image for the teenager Lee Oswald.

Thanks, John.  As we know, the LHO killed by Jack Ruby had no missing front teeth.  This photo from the exhumation was given to John A. directly by Marina.

exhume.jpg

Since Tony started talking about school pics, it just amazes me how clear the evidence is for two LHO’s during much of that time.  For example, John Pic testified that in the fall of 1952, LHO attended school near his apartment in Manhattan.

Mr PIC- …. It got toward school time and they had their foothold in the house and he was going to enroll in the neighborhood school, and they planned to stay with us, and I didn't much like this. We couldn't afford to have them, and took him up to enroll in this school.
Mr. JENNER - You did?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; my mother did. I think this is a public school in New York City located on about 89th, 90th Street between Third Avenue and Second Avenue. Lee didn't like this school. I didn't much blame him.

But there is no record of this attendance in the school records published by the WC.  Why?

Because the WC had LHO attending school in the Bronx at this time, not in Manhattan.

The very next fall semester, 1953, has one LHO attending  the full semester at PS 44 in NYC while the other attends the full semester at Beauregard JHS in New Orleans.

The fall semester after that has one LHO at Beauregard in New Orleans and the other at Stripling JHS in Fort Worth.

The H&L critics will tell readers all this has been debunked elsewhere and post lots of links, but they won’t argue those facts here, where all can see the real evidence.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I am slow and need it explained to me.  So, please help a guy out, would you?

13 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

No doubt Mr. Bojczuk will talk endlessly about the mastoidectomy (he’s made more than 200 posts about it), but none of you will talk about the EVIDENCE for Harvey and Lee!

Followed by, in the self-same post:

 

13 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

But all you will do is CLAIM to have debunked this info.  And post dozens of links.  You simply WILL NOT argue the evidence here, on the JFK ASSASSINATION DEBATE website.

So, how is a chap who posts 200 times on a particularly suspect H&L contention, NOT willing to “argue the evidence here....?”

In fact, there are dozens of Forum members who have been more than willing to argue the evidence, only to have you hive off into silence, and ignore the questions you can’t answer.  Or answer with something wholly irrelevant.

I ask about Ekdahl, you respond with Kittrell.

Hell of a way to run a railroad.

And then come back to claim that nobody’s willing to argue the evidence.

Which is rather backwards and counter-factual.

Jim will “CLAIM to have debunked” contentions from H&L detractors.  And post dozens of links.  But he simply WILL NOT argue the evidence that doesn’t suit him on the JFK ASSASSINATION DEBATE website.

What do you have on Ekdahl’s intelligence connections?  Because you assert and imply much, but actual evidence (and - dare I say - “proof) has not been forthcoming.

Stop begging to debate the H&L phantasm and answer a straight question.

Because I'll keep asking it until you do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/1/2021 at 8:34 AM, Tony Krome said:

Its Lee Harvey Oswald;

oswald-cap-compare.png

 

That is correct.  Nail on the head correct.  This departs from the traditional Harvey and Lee story by John Armstrong.  Harvey is the only one who went to Russian while Lee stayed in the US.

It is one of the things I use to say Lee Oswald also was in Russia.  I like your CAP photo.  I thought it was better than mine, but on mag and exam Lee's missing teeth don't show up as well.  I used the one out of Groden's book to show the gap in Lee Oswald's teeth.

Here's my interpretation of your earlier post:

Harvey-and-lee-in-high-school-a.jpg

There are several differences that separate the two.

1.  Harvey on the left hand has a different ear structure than Lee on the right hand.  Harvey has a double bend in the upper rim of his left ear.  This is missing in Lee.  In the two photos this is the biggest difference.  Harvey has earlobes and Lee's are missing or smaller.

2.  Other differences are Harvey's nose is narrower and Lee's is broader.  The chin of Harvey is narrower in Harvey than Lee.  This doesn't show very well in these photos.

PS

Found this at a later time, but is more of the same.

harvey-and-lee-montage-a.jpg

  

Edited by John Butler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Thanks, John.  As we know, the LHO killed by Jack Ruby had no missing front teeth.  This photo from the exhumation was given to John A. directly by Marina.

exhume.jpg

Since Tony started talking about school pics, it just amazes me how clear the evidence is for two LHO’s during much of that time.  For example, John Pic testified that in the fall of 1952, LHO attended school near his apartment in Manhattan.

Mr PIC- …. It got toward school time and they had their foothold in the house and he was going to enroll in the neighborhood school, and they planned to stay with us, and I didn't much like this. We couldn't afford to have them, and took him up to enroll in this school.
Mr. JENNER - You did?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; my mother did. I think this is a public school in New York City located on about 89th, 90th Street between Third Avenue and Second Avenue. Lee didn't like this school. I didn't much blame him.

But there is no record of this attendance in the school records published by the WC.  Why?

Because the WC had LHO attending school in the Bronx at this time, not in Manhattan.

The very next fall semester, 1953, has one LHO attending  the full semester at PS 44 in NYC while the other attends the full semester at Beauregard JHS in New Orleans.

The fall semester after that has one LHO at Beauregard in New Orleans and the other at Stripling JHS in Fort Worth.

The H&L critics will tell readers all this has been debunked elsewhere and post lots of links, but they won’t argue those facts here, where all can see the real evidence.
 

The teeth problem between the two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee, has been discussed many times on this forum.  But, one has to keep discussing them for new people and the anti-Harvey and Lee warriors.  To them everything we say is due to some misunderstanding, or some error, or some flight of fancy.

Not true.  The front tooth evidence is incontrovertible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Butler writes:

Quote

The teeth problem between the two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee, has been discussed many times on this forum.  But, one has to keep discussing them for new people and the anti-Harvey and Lee warriors.

As one of those "anti-Harvey and Lee warriors", I wonder if John would like to persuade me of my error, by clearing up what appears to be a serious problem with his theory.

It's a bit more fundamental than teeth and ear-lobes. It's about whether the double-doppelganger scheme could actually have been set up in the first place.

Why would those CIA guys have decided to set up a long-term project involving two virtually identical Oswalds and two virtually identical Marguerites, when they would have had a far simpler way to achieve their goal of producing a false defector who understood Russian and had a plausible American background?

What was their reason for choosing the very complex scheme over the very simple scheme?

If they did set up a long-term double-doppelganger project, they must have had a good reason for doing so, mustn't they? But what was that reason?

There was no reason, was there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

John Butler writes:

As one of those "anti-Harvey and Lee warriors", I wonder if John would like to persuade me of my error, by clearing up what appears to be a serious problem with his theory.

It's a bit more fundamental than teeth and ear-lobes. It's about whether the double-doppelganger scheme could actually have been set up in the first place.

Why would those CIA guys have decided to set up a long-term project involving two virtually identical Oswalds and two virtually identical Marguerites, when they would have had a far simpler way to achieve their goal of producing a false defector who understood Russian and had a plausible American background?

What was their reason for choosing the very complex scheme over the very simple scheme?

If they did set up a long-term double-doppelganger project, they must have had a good reason for doing so, mustn't they? But what was that reason?

There was no reason, was there?

Simpler is in this case is not better.  Simpler is easier to expose.  One needs to assume that any American defector to Russia would be heavily interrogated by the Soviets.  The defector's story would need to be convincing.  He would need to know the technical secrets he said he would give to Russian.  A hidden ability to speak a language, Russian, would be exposed.  Therefore the double man/spy.  The one with language ability would be switched later.  After the techno radar secrets were delivered to shoot down a U2.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...