Was it really just a MOLE HUNT about "Oswald?"

[John Butler]

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

From a post I made a few years ago....

Did the Warren Commission Publish Oswald’s Intelligence Report?

[On June 18, 1962] Oswald walked into Pauline Bates' office in the Burk Burnett
Building in Fort Worth.  He introduced himself and said, "I saw your
name in the phone book, can you do some typing for me?" Bates, a public stenographer,
asked Oswald what he wanted typed and he replied, "Notes I made in Russia of con­-
ditions there." Bates told him she would do the work for $1.00 per single-spaced page.
Oswald accepted her offer and handed Bates numerous handwritten notes.

Bates recalled that Oswald was very protective of his many notes, some of which were
written on scraps and pieces of paper and stuffed into a manila envelope. Oswald never
left Bates alone with his notes and took all typewritten pages and carbons with him when
he left her office.

Oswald sat in Bates's office for 3 days and helped her read the notes as she
typed. She remembered the notes reflected Oswald's account of his life in Russia where
he had worked 12 hours a day at a factory in Minsk, with no coffee breaks and no vaca­-
tions. He kept voluminous notes on everything, including the price of various foods
which he said tasted monotonous and were not very good.

On June 20, as Bates finished typing the lOth page, Oswald stopped her and
said, "Ten dollars is all I've got," and handed her a $10.00 bill. Bates offered to complete
the work and allow Oswald to pay her later, but he declined her offer and left. She es­-
timated that the project was only 1/3 complete.

Oswald then visited the Criner Career School, a business school located in the
Bewley Building in Fort Worth, and asked if someone could do some typing. Virginia
Valle was a former student who returned to the school to practice typing and shorthand,
and agreed to help. After a few hours Virginia had managed to type four or five sheets,
and Oswald gave her a small sum of money and then left.45

NOTE: The Warren Commission interviewed Bates but never gave her any typewritten
pages to identify as the work she produced for Oswald. They did, however, publish a 31-
page typewritten manuscript, with handwritten notations and corrections, on pages 287-
336 of Volume 16.

--from Harvey and Lee, pp. 395-396, Copyright © 2003 by John Armstrong

Many people here are no doubt aware of this document, but if there are any who aren't, it may come as a surprise.  In an era before widespread communication and spy satellites, before personal computers and the Internet, it's easy to imagine how helpful to American Intel the information in this report would have been.

The whole Bates story may have been part of a cover story, but Oswald's lengthy manuscript is nevertheless fascinating.  Here's the first part of Part I:

------------------------------------------------- 

    The lives of Russian workers is governed, first and foremost, by the "collective," the smallest unit of authority in any given factory, plant, or enterprise. Sectional and shop cells form a highly organized and well supported political organization. These shop committees are in turn governed by the shop and section party chiefs who are directed by the factory or plant party secretary. This post carries officially the same amount of authority as the production director or president of the plant, but in reality it is the controlling organ of all activities at any industrial enterprise, whether political, industrial, or otherwise personal relations. The party secretary is responsible for politiical indoctrination of the workers, the discipline of members of the Communist party working at the plant, and the general conduct and appearance of all members.
 
    The Minsk Radio and Television plant is known throughout the Union as a major producer of electronics parts and sets. In this vast enterprise created in the early 50's, the party secretary is a 6'4" man in his early 40's -- has a long history of service to the party. He controls the activities of the 1,000 communist party members here and otherwise supervises the activities of the other 5,000 people employed at this major enterprise in Minsk, the capital of the 3rd ranking Republic Belorussia. 

    This factory manufactures 87,000 large and powerful radio and 60,000 television sets in various sizes and ranges, excluding pocket radios, which are not mass produced anywhere in the U.S.S.R. It is this plant which manufactured several console model combination radiophonograph television sets which were shown as mass produced items of commerce before several hundreds of thousands of Americans at the Soviet Exposition in New York in 1959. After the Exhibition these sets were duly shipped back to Minsk and are now stored in a special storage room on the first floor of the Administrative Building -- at this factory, ready for the next international Exhibit.
 
    I worked for 23 months at this plant, a fine example of average and even slightly better than average working conditions. The plant covers an area of 25 acres in a district one block north of the main thoroughfare and only two miles from the center of the City with all facilities and systems for the mass production of radios and televisions; it employees 5,000 full time and 300 part time workers, 58% women and girls. This factory employs 2,000 soldiers in three of the five mainshops, mostly these shops are fitted with conveyor belts in long rows, on either side of which sit the long line of bustling women. 

    500 people, during the day shift, are employed on the huge stamp and pressing machines; here sheet metal is turned into metal frames and cabinets for televisions and radios.
 
    Another 500 people are employed in an adjoining building for the cutting and finishing of rough wood into fine polished cabinets. A laborer's process, mostly done by hand, the cutting, trimming, and the processes right up to hand polishing are carried out here at the same plant. The plant also has its own stamp making plant, employing 150 poeple at or assisting at 80 heavy machine lathes and grinders. The noise in this shop is almost deafening as metal grinds against metal and steel saws cut through iron ingots at the rate of an inch a minute. The floor is covered with oil used to drain the heat of metal being worked so one has to watch one's footing; here the workers' hands are as black as the floor and seem to be eternally. The foremen here looks like the Russian version of "John Henry," tall and as strong as an ox. He isn't frilly, but he gets the work out. 

    The plant has its electric shop, where those who have finished long courses in electronics work over generators, television tubes, testing experiment of all kinds. The green work tables are filled high here. Electric gadgets are not too reliable, mostly due to the poor quality of wires, which keep burning out under the impact of the ususal 220V____ voltage. In the U.S. it is 110V. 

    The plastics department is next. Here 47 women and three physically disabled persons keep the red hot liquid plastic flowing into a store of odd presses, turning out their quota of knobs, handles, non-conducting tube bases, and so forth. These workers suffer the worst condition of work in the plant, an otherwise model factory, for the Soviet Union, due to bad fumes and the hotness of the materials. These workers are awarded 30 days vacation a year, the maximum for workers. Automation is now employed at a fairly large number of factories, especially the war industry. However, for civilian use, their number is still small. 

    At this plant at least one worker is employed in the often crude task of turning out finished, acceptable items. Often, one worker must finish the task of taking the edge of metal off plastic and shaving them on a foot driver lathe. There is only so much potentiality in presses and stamps, no matter what their size. 

    The lack of unemployment in the Soviet Union may be explained by one of 2 things. Lack of automation and a Bureaucratic corps of 16 workers in any given factory. These people are occupied with the tons of paperwork which flow in and out of any factory. Also the number of direct foremen is not small to the ratio of workers in some case 1-10, in others 1-5, depending on the importance of the work. 

    These people are also backed by a small array of examiners, committees and supply checkers and the quality control board. These people number (without foremen) almost 300 people, total working force 5,000 -- 3-50 without foreman. 

    To delve deep into the lives of the workers, we shall visit most of the shops one after another and get to know the people. The largest shop employs 500 people; 85% women and girls; females make up 60% of the work force at this plant. 

    Here girls solder and screw the chassis to the frame attaching, transistors, tubes and so forth. They each have quotas depending upon what kind of work they are engaged in. One girl may solder 5 transistors in four minutes while the next girl solders 15 wire leads in 13 minutes. The pay scales here vary but slightly with average pay at 80 rubles without deductions. Deductions include 7 rubles, general tax, 2.50 rubles for bachelors and unmarried girls and any deductions for poor or careless work the inspectors may care to make further down the line. They start teams of two mostly boys of 17 or 18, turning the telvisions on the conveyor belts right side up, from where there has been soldering to a position where they place picture tubes onto the supports. These boys receive for a 39 hour week, 65-70 rubles, not counting deductions. Further on, others are filling tubes and parts around the picture tube itself, all along the line there are testing apparatus with operators hurriedly afix shape type testing currents, and withdrawing the snaps that fitting out a testers card, pass the equipment back on the conveyor, speed here is essential. 

The full text of this report can be read at John McAdams' website at this address:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/thecollective.htm

The information in this report has always read like a spy report.  No one would have known this information (including government agencies) in the US in the early 1960s except Harvey Oswald.  He was the lone American in Minsk other than tourists coming through.  The information provided is the kind of information spy agencies pay for to get.

That having been said we need to consider another question.  Would Harvey be 100% truthful or would the CIA allow him to be 100% truthful?

I don't think he would have been truthful in some respects and the CIA would not have allowed him to be truthful on what he actually did in the Soviet Union.

I'm with Mae Brussells on Harvey and the U2s.  Harvey was not sent to any place higgely-piggely in the Soviet Union.  He was sent rationally by order to the largest electronics factory in Russia, with 5000 workers, dealing with radio and TV components.  He was sent to the Experimental Shop as a regulator (a supervisor of quality control) for a reason on Jan. 13, 1960.  I speculate this reason was concerned with the U2s.

He was paid the same salary as the factory director.  For what reason would the Soviets do that? 

     

[Steve Thomas]

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

He was paid the same salary as the factory director.  For what reason would the Soviets do that?

John,

Propaganda.

Steve Thomas

[Jim Hargrove]

4 hours ago, John Butler said:

The information in this report has always read like a spy report.  No one would have known this information (including government agencies) in the US in the early 1960s except Harvey Oswald.  He was the lone American in Minsk other than tourists coming through.  The information provided is the kind of information spy agencies pay for to get.

That having been said we need to consider another question.  Would Harvey be 100% truthful or would the CIA allow him to be 100% truthful?

Thanks for the boost, John!

My guess is that Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald did his job well, submitted his Excellent Russian report to the appropriate Agency, but someone at that Agency in late 1963 got ticked off that their bosses killed JFK, and they made Harvey's report public, and all the rest is a Cover Story. Just my guess.... 

[John Butler]

4 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

John,

Propaganda.

Steve Thomas

Could be.  But, I think there is more involved.  If memory serves Robert Webster was paid far less by the Soviets. I think other defectors were paid less then Webster.   Harvey Oswald was paid almost as much as Kim Philby the most infamous British spy for the Soviets. 

There had to be something more then money for propaganda value. 

[John Butler]

46 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Thanks for the boost, John!

My guess is that Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald did his job well, submitted his Excellent Russian report to the appropriate Agency, but someone at that Agency in late 1963 got ticked off that their bosses killed JFK, and they made Harvey's report public, and all the rest is a Cover Story. Just my guess.... 

Guess and speculation is good.  It helps you recognize something of importance when you run across it.  For instance:  Jan. 13, 1960 Harvey Oswald is sent to the largest electronics plant in the Soviet Union that specializes in radio and tv products.  He is ordered to the Minsk factory as regulator in the Experimental Shop.  A quality control supervisor in a section of the Soviets foremost electronic plant's experimental shop where I would assume new products were made.  It spells radar and guidance system creation.  It spells doom for the U2.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

a member of the exhumation team, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, noted that “many World War II-era kids bore the same scar.”

It wasn't a scar that proved that Oswald's exhumed body had undergone a mastoidectomy, but a lack of bone, according to the pathologists' report (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/parnell/norton2.htm) :

Quote

The mastoid prominence of the left temporal bone revealed an irregularly ovoid 1.0 by 0.5 cm defect pene­trating to the interior of the mastoid bone with the defect edges rounded and smooth.

Jim also writes:

Quote

John Armstrong has proved that there were two men in the USMC at roughly the same time going by the name Lee Harvey Oswald.

No, he hasn't. Proof in 'Harvey and Lee' world is not like proof in the real world. Tendentious interpretations of apparent anomalies in the documentary record may be enough to satisfy 'Harvey and Lee' believers, but they do not amount to proof.

Quote

I think it was the Russian-speaking Oswald all along that had it [the mastoidectomy] ...

Correct: Lee Harvey Oswald, who spoke Russian to a reasonable level, had indeed undergone a mastoidectomy at the age of six, and at the age of 24 was shot dead by Jack Ruby and buried in Fort Worth, only to be dug up 18 years later and have his identity confirmed by a team of scientists.

Quote

... and that Hoover found out and faked a record or two

Every piece of documentary, photographic and witness evidence that contradicts 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine is, by definition, fake. If a piece of evidence can be interpreted to support the doctrine, it must be genuine. If it can't, it must be fake. Everyone knows this; it's a central tenet of 'Harvey and Lee' belief, just as the faked fossil record is a central tenet of creationist belief.

But which records, exactly, did Hoover fake in this instance? The pathologists' report? Their medical degree certificates? The original medical records which documented young Oswald's mastoidectomy operation? Oswald's dental records? The photographs from the exhumation? The photograph which shows him with a 13-inch head? And what evidence exists to suggest that the records in question were faked, apart from the fact that they contradict 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine?

Quote

I disagree with John Armstrong about the mastoidectomy.

What a very flexible theory it is, if the biographies of its main characters can be swapped around at will! But Armstrong went to a lot of effort to demonstrate that the imaginary doppelganger who had the operation was 'Lee', and that the imaginary doppelganger who was buried in Fort Worth, and who had not had the operation, was 'Harvey'.

He didn't succeed, of course; it was the historical, one and only Lee Harvey Oswald who had had the operation and was buried in Fort Worth. Nevertheless, it is fundamental to Armstrong's case that the body in the grave was that of someone who had not had a mastoidectomy. Unfortunately, we know from the pathologists' report that Armstrong was wrong.

The interesting thing is not that a far-fetched theory has been shown to be wrong, but that the far-fetched theory was shown to be wrong nearly two decades before Armstrong published his book.

As I mentioned earlier, Armstrong did not inform his readers that the pathologists had found a mastoidectomy defect on the body in the grave. He must have known that this evidence disproved a central element of his theory, but he didn't bother even to mention the existence of the mastoidectomy defect, let alone try to explain away the fact that it contradicted his poorly supported theory.

Why didn't he even mention it? Surely it was because he knew that his readers would immediately work out that his theory was self-contradictory. Much better to keep quiet and hope that no-one noticed! Not very honest, though, is it?

This behaviour makes Armstrong look like a snake-oil salesman, doesn't it? Or does Jim have a more plausible explanation?
 

Edited May 26, 2020 by Jeremy Bojczuk
Removed a smiley face which for some reason appeared instead of a closing bracket

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Denny Zartman writes:

Quote

If one aspect of a theory is disproved, it doesn't automatically invalidate all the other aspects.

Sometimes that's true, but not in this case. The central elements of Armstrong's theory are the biographies of his two imaginary doppelgangers. There's the American doppelganger, who had grown up in the USA, and there's the other doppelganger, who came to the USA perhaps around the age of 10, perhaps 12, perhaps from Hungary, perhaps from Russia, perhaps from the planet Zog, but no-one really knows because there's no documentary evidence of how, where and when he arrived (unsurprisingly, since it's all made up).

Armstrong's 1000-page book describes the course of each imaginary doppelganger's life. He makes it clear that it was the American doppelganger who underwent the mastoidectomy operation at the age of six, several years before the other imaginary doppelganger appears on the scene.

Of course, the attribution of events to each doppelganger's life was entirely invented, but that doesn't mean that it was entirely arbitrary or random. Armstrong may have been wildly imaginative, but he was at least consistent. He created a sequence of events that applies to each imaginary doppelganger, and that sequence goes all the way to the burial of one doppelganger in Fort Worth at the age of 24 and the exhumation of the doppelganger's body in 1981.

There's a big problem for anyone who wants to magically remove the non-American, Russian-speaking doppelganger from Oswald's grave and replace him with the American, non-Russian-speaking doppelganger. You will also need to replace him in most or all of the other events in his imaginary life.

Armstrong's theory relies on each imaginary doppelganger being in a particular place at a particular time. Swapping these events around won't always be possible, especially when the two fictional characters are supposed to have been thousands of miles apart at the same time.

Before you know it, the imaginary doppelganger who defected to the Soviet Union wasn't the Russian-speaking one, as per Armstrong's theory, but the non-Russian-speaking one, which defeats the whole point of his theory. If the right doppelganger can't be placed in the Soviet Union, bang goes Armstrong's theory.

And that's without resolving the contradictions with the two imaginary doppelgangers' heights. Instead of having the 5' 9" doppelganger in location A and the 5' 11" doppelganger in location B, it's the other way around. Or maybe the taller doppelganger must actually now be the shorter one, and vice versa. Either way, the theory requires some serious structural engineering to keep it from toppling over.

Even when creating works of fiction, you need to be consistent. Breaking Armstrong's carefully constructed (though imaginary) sequence, as the scientists' report does, demonstrates that the whole construction is self-contradictory.

Quote

When you say far-fetched, I assume you are talking specifically about the concept of a long term doppelganger project, and not about the idea that someone else was using Oswald's identity prior to the assassination, correct? We don't believe that one or more people were using Oswald's identity by accident or coincidence, do we? That right there seems to me to prove there was some sort of secret organized project that involved Oswald's identity was going on behind the scenes.

Yes, what is far-fetched is the idea that a long-term project existed which involved two boys from different parts of the world, native speakers of two different languages, who were selected at a young age in the expectation that they would grow up to look virtually identical, and that they did magically grow up to look virtually identical, and that their mothers just happened to look virtually identical too, apart from their eyebrows, and that both of the boys ended up being co-opted into the assassination of JFK, one of them following the other around Dallas in order to implicate the other doppelganger as a patsy, and that one of the doppelgangers and one of the two virtually identical Marguerites conveniently disappeared into the ether immediately after the assassination, and all the other highly implausible (to put it mildly) elements that make up the 'Harvey and Lee' theory.

It isn't far-fetched to propose that Oswald was being impersonated at some point in the run-up to the assassination, whether as part of the assassination plot or, as in the case of the Mexico City impersonation, for other reasons and that this impersonation was later incorporated into the assassination plot.

But we mustn't accept every apparent instance of impersonation without question, as the 'Harvey and Lee' believers do. We know that big news events invariably generate plenty of false sightings of the central characters. If the JFK assassination follows the usual pattern, a large majority of the apparent sightings of Oswald will be mistaken. Sometimes, this will be because witnesses are lying. More often, witnesses will be honest but mistaken (identifying Larry Crafard as Oswald, for example). So it's necessary to examine each instance carefully and critically.

The strongest evidence for impersonation in Dallas is probably Silvia Odio's account of meeting either the real Oswald or an imposter (as I point out at http://22november1963.org.uk/silvia-odio-visitors), though even that one is open to doubt (see https://gregrparker.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Sylvia-Odio.pdf).

If you examine each of the supposed impersonations, you'll see that most of them fall into the category of 'well, maybe, but maybe not.' Some don't stand up at all, such as the old 'Harvey and Lee' favourite, the notion that an Oswald imposter was arrested in the Texas Theater, which we now know was due to the usual combination of faulty memories and simple bureaucratic errors.

Whatever impersonation took place, it certainly didn't take place as part of an absurdly unlikely long-term scheme involving doppelganger boys with 13-inch heads and missing teeth, doppelganger mothers, and all the other far-fetched nonsense.
 

Edited May 27, 2020 by Jeremy Bojczuk
Clarified a clumsy sentence

[Jim Hargrove]

2 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

a member of the exhumation team, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, noted that “many World War II-era kids bore the same scar.”

It wasn't a scar that proved that Oswald's exhumed body had undergone a mastoidectomy, but a lack of bone, according to the pathologists' report (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/parnell/norton2.htm) :

Mr. Bojczuk begins his attempted rebuttal by claiming that Dr. Di Maio, when he wrote “many World War II-era kids bore the same scar” in this article, was not referring to bone.  It is obvious, though, that he was.  The same paragraph containing the quote above begins: “As we examined the skull, the small hole in the left mastoid process leapt out. Its manmade edges were rounded and smooth, healed but not natural.”

Why does Mr. Bojczuk misrepresent this simple fact? 

Since he, as always, brings up the 1981 exhumation, let me point out once again how it proves our point about two Oswalds.

Mr. JENNER. But you do remember that you attempted to help him when he was struck in the mouth on that occasion; is that right? 
Mr. VOEBEL. Yes; I think he even lost a tooth from that. I think he was cut on the lip, and a tooth was knocked out. 

Here is the famous photo, and some blow-up details, as it appeared in LIFE magazine 

As if this wasn’t enough proof, Sandy Larsen discovered confirmation of the missing tooth in a Marine Corps dental record indicating that the PROSTHESIS “FAILED 5-5-58.”  

Here is how www.medicine.net defines “Prosthesis:”

Prosthesis: An artificial replacement of a part of the body, such as a tooth, a facial bone, the palate, or a joint. A prosthesis may be removable, as in the case of most prosthetic legs or a prosthetic breast form used after mastectomy.

Can there be any doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald lost at least one tooth at an early age?  H&L critics have to try and create doubt, because the body exhumed in 1981 clearly had these teeth intact.  Below is a high quality copy of an ORIGINAL exhumation photo Marina Oswald Porter handed to John Armstrong during one of their meetings in the 1990s.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

Since Mr. Bojuczuk is opening up this thread for his usual attacks on some of the evidence for Harvey and Lee, I'll ask him, for the 11th time now, to finally debate here the following issues. Or will he just say, as always, that someone else has successfully debunked these points and hide behind a flurry of links?  None of the issues below are debunked by any of the links Mr. Bojczuk has previously provided.  

• For the fall semester of the 1953-54 school year,  one Oswald attended Beauregard JHS in New Orleans for 89 school days while the other was enrolled in Public School 44 in New York City, where he was present for 62 full days and 5 half days, was absent 3 full days and 8 half days, for a total accounting of 78 days.
• For the next semester, one Oswald was at Beauregard JHS in New Orleans while the other Oswald attended Stripling School in Texas.
• The Social Security Administration did not include ANY of “Lee Harvey Oswald’s” teen-aged employment income in his “Lifetime Earnings Report” indicating in a cover letter it was including “Copies of three pages of the Warren Commission Report re employment of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to service in the Marine Corps.”
• One Oswald departed for Taiwan aboard the USS Skagit on Sept. 14, 1958 and was stationed in Ping Tung, Taiwan on Oct. 6, 1958, at the very same time the other Oswald was being treated for venereal disease at Atsugi, Japan, nearly 1500 miles away.
• One Oswald appeared at the Bolton Ford dealership in New Orleans while the other was in the Soviet Union.
• One Oswald had a driver’s license and was seen by many witnesses driving a car, and the other Oswald could not drive.
• On November 22, 1963, one Oswald left the Texas School Book Depository on a bus and then a taxi, and the other left in a Nash Rambler.

Here, again, is what real evidence looks like.

1.  The IMPOSSIBLE 1953 school scenario: Lee HARVEY Oswald attending Beauregard JHS in New Orleans for 89 school days during the fall 1953 semester, all the while Lee has good attendance for the very same period at PS 44 in New York City.

The New York City Board of Education record below shows that LEE Harvey Oswald attended Public School 44  starting 3/23/53 and extending through mid-January 1954.

In New Orleans, the 1953 Beauregard JHS record below shows that Lee HARVEY Oswald attended 89 days of school during the fall semester of 1953, at the same time LEE Oswald attended PS 44 in New York City.

Both the documents above were published in the Warren Volumes.

2.  The refusal of the Social Security Administration to corroborate the official story of "Oswald's" pre-1962 income, offering instead "Copies of three pages of the Warren Commission Report regarding employment of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to service in the Marine Corps."

------------------

For all the evidence on this, click here.

3. The Marine Corps records are a gold mine: my favorite chronicles Harvey Oswald's trip to Formosa (Taiwan) while Lee was being treated for VD in Japan.

HARVEY Oswald Departed for Taiwan Aboard the USS Skagit (AKA 105) on Sept. 14, 1958. Note "AKA 105" Under "Record of Events" near top left of this document:

The Unit Diary below shows that HARVEY Oswald was in Ping Tung, Taiwan, on Oct. 6, 1958.

Here’s a 1953 image of the ship Harvey Oswald took .  Note the “K.A. 105” lettering by the bow.

 

During this very same time Harvey was aboard the USS Skagit and stationed in Taiwan, LEE  Oswald was being treated for V.D in Atsugi, Japan.  From September 14 through October 6 HARVEY Oswald was in Taiwan. At the same time, from September 16 through October 6, LEE Oswald was in Japan. Medical records for NAS Navy 3835 (Naval Hospital), located in Atsugi, Japan, show numerous medical entries for LEE Oswald recorded on Sept 16, 20, 22, 23, 29, and Oct 6. HARVEY Oswald's assignment in Taiwan, while LEE Oswald made numerous visits to the Naval Hospital in Japan, are an obvious "smoking gun."

4.  While Harvey Oswald was in Russia, Lee Oswald was working in Florida and Louisiana with anti-Castro Cubans and their handlers.  Perfect examples are the HSCA testimony of Marita Lorenz and the infamous Bolton Ford visit.

-----------------

For much more on this, see an article I wrote on my website:

The Bolton Ford Incident

5.  The impossible answer(s) to the simple questions: Could “Lee Harvey Oswald” drive a car? Did he have a Texas drivers license?

 

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

STATE OF LOUISIANA

PARISH OF ORLEANS

S T A T E M E N T
 

DATE:               February 14, 1968
      
STATEMENT OF:       ALETHA FRAIR
      
RESIDING AT:        8001 Benson
                    New Orleans, LA
                    Phone - 242-2126

My name is ALETHA FRAIR (MRS. JOHN FRAIR). I live at:

8001 Benson
New Orleans, La.
Phone - 242-2126

I worked for the Department of Public Safety in Austin, Texas from the early part of October 1963, through the early part of December 1963. While I was employed at the Department of Public Safety I worked in the License Records Department. This Dept. Was responsible for the IBM computer records of all driver's licenses in the state of Texas.

My husband, JOHN, was working for the United Press International during November of 1963 and on November 22, 1963 he was in Uvalde, Texas, covering the birthday of ex-Vice President JOHN NANCE GARNER.

I did not go to work on the 22 of November, 1963, but the following event occured (sic) the week after the assassination of President KENNEDY.

During the week following the murder of LEE HARVEY OSWALD, on either Wednesday the 27th, or Thursday the 28th of November, 1963 the Texas driver's license issued to LEE HARVEY OSWALD came into my division.

The record (IBM card) on OSWALD was pulled from the files. Several other employees (5 or 6) of the Department saw the driver's license which was dirty and worn as though it had been carried in a billfold. The license was the talk of the office that day since everyone knew who OSWALD was, and the reason his driver's license records were being pulled from the active file was the fact that he had been killed.

In October of 1966 my husband and I moved to New Orleans and in June of 1967 my husband went to work for WWL-TV, Channel 4.

I, ALETHA FRAIR, hereby affirm that all of the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge.

Signed February 14, 1968.

(Signature of Aletha Frair)

(Signature of witness Gary Sanders)
(Signature of witness Jody Duek)

For much more on this, see:

The Man Who Could--and Couldn't--Drive

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

Can there be any doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald lost at least one tooth at an early age?

Of course there is! That's what the infamous http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26512-arguments-against-the-harvey-lee-theory-the-missing-tooth/ thread was all about. You remember, it's the thread in which someone gloated on page 1:

Quote

the evidence for the missing tooth is game, set, and match proving there were two “Lee Harvey Oswalds.”

The evidence is so strong that it proves beyond any doubt that the real Oswald (or one of the imaginary doppelgangers) had a missing tooth!

Unfortunately, it quickly turned out that all the evidence for the apparently "missing tooth" had a perfectly ordinary explanation (in fact, in the case of Oswald's Marine dental records, two perfectly ordinary explanations) that did not require Oswald to have had a missing tooth. More here:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t227-armstrong-s-magic-tooth-and-the-facts-about-harvey-at-beauregard

There is now no good reason to suppose that the real Lee Harvey Oswald (or either of the fictional Oswald doppelgangers) had a missing tooth. One more piece of 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine bites, as it were, the dust.

'Harvey and Lee' doctrine also demands that the body in Oswald's grave was that of the fictional doppelganger 'Harvey', the one who had not undergone a mastoidectomy operation. Unfortunately, we have known for decades that the body in the grave, which was of course that of the real and historical Lee Harvey Oswald, had in fact undergone a mastoidectomy operation. The body cannot have been that of the fictional doppelganger 'Harvey', contrary to 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine.

A central element of the 'Harvey and Lee' theory is contradicted by solid scientific evidence.

But we've known that for decades. John Armstrong knew about the mastoidectomy defect nearly two decades before his 'Harvey and Lee' holy text was published. He knew his theory was wrong even as he was writing his infallible holy text.

Let's return to the question that Jim has so far refused to answer many, many times. Armstrong knew that the pathologists' report contradicted a central element of his theory, yet he failed even to mention the existence of the mastoidectomy defect on the body in the grave. Why did he do this?

It was so that his readers wouldn't realise that his theory had been seriously undermined nearly two decades before he published his book, wasn't it?

His behaviour makes him look an awful lot like a snake-oil salesman, doesn't it? Or does Jim have an alternative explanation for Armstrong's apparently dishonest behaviour?
 

[Jim Hargrove]

As I’ve told Mr. Bojczuk at least three or four times now, I disagree with my friend John about the mastoidectomy.  I think it was Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald all along who had the procedure done to him, that Hoover found out about it (perhaps when English translations were made of the Moscow Botkinskaya Hospital reports) and altered a document or two, just as he provably falsified so much else. 

Although this seems to me to be the most likely explanation, there are certainly others.  Again, one of the doctors who participated in the exhumation, Dr. Vincint Di Maio, admitted that “many World War II-era kids bore the same scar,” referring to the hole drilled into the mastoid process near the ear of the exhumed body.

Yet another possibility is that the procedure was done deliberately on the young Lee HARVEY Oswald under the direction of the LSD-mad CIA in late 1952 or early 1953 to make health records match between him and the American-born LEE Harvey Oswald.   It was "Marguerite's" housekeeper in New York City who said the child was getting mental tests at Jacobi Hospital, at the very time he was so often truant from PS 117. She, or the FBI agent describing her remarks, obviously meant the hospital that pre-dated Jacobi at the same location.

Do you think it is impossible that American Intel would order an unnecessary medical procedure on a child?  Try Googling “MKULTRA and children,” and see the results for yourself.  It is truly shocking.

Mr. Bojczuk, instead of directly debating any other evidence for two Oswalds,  simply hopes the mastoidectomy will prove his point, steadfastly ignoring the fact that there are a number of explanations for it.  Time and time again, he hides behind a series of links to sites that he claims debunk the Harvey and Lee evidence, but which do no such thing.  He won’t even briefly summarize the so-called debunkings here because he knows how lame they are.

And one more thing….

Since Mr. Bojczuk is apparently unable to step beyond the mastoidectomy and debate any other points of evidence for two Oswalds that I’ve summarized above, let me introduce a new one.  Perhaps he’ll actually debate this one here, though he’ll probably just say that someone somewhere else has debunked it.

In the summer of 1963, when the Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald was in New Orleans pretending to be a pro-Castro commie, a lot of people saw American-born LEE Harvey Oswald hanging around with Jack Ruby in Dallas.  Among these people were Dorothy Marcum, Francis Irene Hise, Helen Smith (“Pixie Lynn”) , Dixie Lynn, Kathy Kay, and others.

Journalist Dorothy Kilgallen wrote in the New York Journal American (June 6, 1964): “It is known that 10 persons have signed sworn depositions to the Warren Commission that they knew Oswald and Ruby to have been acquainted.”

A few months ago Gary Shaw sent John A. a 10-page FBI report on a 1977 interview with a Ruby employee named Odell “James” Estes.  Estes told the FBI he worked at the Carousel Club from the last week in June until Sept. 2, 1963. 

Estes said he saw “Lee Oswald” at the Carousel Club many times during his employment there, including in Jack Ruby’s office.  He said he once drove Oswald to Love Field and even took two overnight fishing trips with Oswald to a lakeside cabin near Mineral Wells.  He described lengthy talks with this Oswald.  Since he (Estes) stopped working at the club on Sept. 2, he was quite certain that the two fishing trips, just a week apart, were both in August 1963.

Of course, in August 1963, Classic Oswald® was still in New Orleans.  Despite this depiction of “Oswald” being in New Orleans and Dallas simultaneously, an FBI cover memo states that Estes was “willing to submit to a polygraph examination” and “talked very coherently and did not evidence the mannerisms frequently associated with a mentally disturbed individual.”  It should be noted that although the 1977 FBI report indicated Estes was “80 percent blind,” in 1963 he could see well enough to drive a car.

A 10-page report on Odell Estes’ FBI interview can be read on the Mary Ferrell site at the link below:

ODELL ESTES FBI REPORT

[John Butler]

Harvey Lee Oswald records thanks primarily to Steve Thomas who pointed out many of these. (See Steve's posts this thread)

These are incidents where the name Harvey Lee Oswald used.

31 July 1959- Harvey Lee Oswald, PFC at Santa Ana? (Military records?)  Supposedly their were 5 references for the military listed by Peter Dale Scott.  I could go back and find those.

October 5, 1959- February 25, 1964- Kenneth J. Wiesman- SS- Billy Joe Lord, Airman 3/C, interviewed at Bergstrom Air Force Base, Austin, Texas, and advises that he had no knowledge of Harvey Lee Oswald’s ultimate travel destination.  Lord was on same ship as Oswald SS Marion Lykes.  Shared cabin with Harvey Lee Oswald.  On Oct. 5, 1959 debarked ship at LaPalisse, France.  Never saw Oswald again.

Dec. 11, 1961- Harvey Lee Oswald hired as regulator in the Experimental Shop January 13, 1960.  Bad conduct report and poor performance.

8/9/63- Lt. Francis Martello interviewed “Harvey Lee Oswald” in a New Orleans jail.  August 10, 1963- About 10:00 am Martello instructed the jailer to bring Harvey Lee Oswald to him for an interview. 

Nov.-Dec., 1963 Lieutenant Revill listed his name as Harvey Lee Oswald and his address as 605 Elsbeth

November 22, 1963- At 2:40 PM, W.E. Potts, B.L. Senkel and Lt. E.L. Cunningham were dispatched to 1026 N. Beckley. Detective B.L. Senkel wrote in his after-action report (Dallas Police Archives Box 3, Folder# 12, Item#1) that they were dispatched to 1026 N. Beckley at 2:40 PM and arrived at 3:00PM.  Earlene Roberts told the WC that when the police arrived at 1026 N. Beckley, they asked for a Harvey Lee Oswald.

Fall 1963?- (No date)-John A. also reports that the name “Harvey Lee Oswald” appeared five times in the Spanish language version of Sylvia Duran’s statement, which was presented to the WC six months after her mistreatment/interrogation. (H&L p. 673)

November 22, 1963- Department of the Army- Staff Communications Office- The following is additional information of Oswald, Harvey Lee….5 feet 10 inches, 165 lbs, blue eyes, light brown hair, employed at Dallas County School Book Depository….

 

 Dec.11, 1963- Harvey Lee Oswald rejected for Citizenship in USSR.  Oswald’s motives for citizenship were not clear.

December 19, 1963- Reference is made to the attached copy of an incoming State Department telegram dated 19 December 1963, in conjunction with the Harvey Lee Oswald case (see Tab A). This telegram concerns a Mr. and Mrs. DeMohrenschildt who appear to have lived in Dallas, Texas, but on 2 June 1963 went to Haiti and have not since returned to the United States.

1963-1994- (Mexico)- Peter Dale Scott- The Review Board also sought to determine whether the FBI maintained a file in Mexico City on a “Harvey Lee Oswald” under the file number 105-2137.... Some of the documents in the (Mexico Ciity Legal Attache) Legat's file contain notations for routing records to a file numbered 105-2137, and were captioned “Harvey Lee Oswald”, but it did not find such a file.”

May 18, 1964- After the DFS and CIA made additional changes to Duran's statements, a final10-page statement was prepared, signed, and submitted to the Warren Commission on May 18, 1964, six months after her interrogation.  NOTE: It remains unknown whether the CIA or DF S prepared the 1 0-page statement. It is known that the name "Harvey Lee Oswald, as reported by Duran s friends, occurs five times in the Spanish language version.

Spring, 1964- After the FBI completed it's investigation in the late spring of 1964 the Mexican Police (DFS) needed to make changes to Silvia Duran's 10-page statement so that her statement did not conflict with other information about Oswald. The name "Harvey Lee Oswald" was changed to "Lee Harvey Oswald." Duran's description of Oswald as, "Blond, short, and poorly dressed," was removed.

1964?- Sheriff Decker's file on the assassination, given to the Warren Commission list the assailant's name as "Harvey Lee Oswald" (12H51) (CE 5323) Deposition of Sheriff Decker dark brown heavy folder with a label on the outside: Harvey Lee Oswald.

 

Jan. 29-Mar. 1, 1969- During the Clay Shaw trial headed by Jim Garrison, CIA agent Donald P. Norton testified that Shaw gave him a suitcase full of cash to deliver to “Harvey Lee” in Monterrey, Mexico.  (Which Monterrey is this?  Is there more than one?)

April 6, 1972:  Director says do not make any inquiries of any source or defectors concerning Harvey Lee Oswald.

I don’t see a pattern other than a more frequent use of Harvey Lee Oswald in 1963.  That doesn't really mean much other then I haven't looked closely.  It would be interesting to see which of these records apply to which Oswald or an Oswald double.

If I have missed some of the mentions of Harvey Lee Oswald, please add to the record.

Edited May 28, 2020 by John Butler

[Steve Thomas]

2 hours ago, John Butler said:

If I have missed some of the mentions of Harvey Lee Oswald, please add to the record.

John,

Probably the most famous one is the cable that was sent out in the evening of 11/22/63.

6.There have been references on several threads about a cable sent on the evening of 11/22 from Fort Sam Houston to Strike Command, McDill AFB in Florida. In the cable, reference was made to information obtained by Detective Don Stringfellow of the Dallas Police Department. I managed to locate a copy of the cable, which you can find here:

https://archive.org/details/nsia-ArmyIntelligenceJFK

I think this is in the Weisberg collection.

L.D. Stringfellow was a Detective in the Dallas Police Department's Special Service Bureau.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Batchelor_Ex_5002.pdf

1) Note the reference in this military intelligence file's cable to Harvey Lee Oswald

Steve Thomas

[John Butler]

Thanks Steve,

I will add the additional note to the other notes.  It is valuable to have such a reference note to help your memory later on when this may come back up again.

[Jim Hargrove]

4 hours ago, John Butler said:

Jan. 29-Mar. 1, 1969- During the Clay Shaw trial headed by Jim Garrison, CIA agent Donald P. Norton testified that Shaw gave him a suitcase full of cash to deliver to “Harvey Lee” in Monterrey, Mexico.  (Which Monterrey is this?  Is there more than one?)

April 6, 1972:  Director says do not make any inquiries of any source or defectors concerning Harvey Lee Oswald.

I don’t see a pattern other than a more frequent use of Harvey Lee Oswald in 1963.  That doesn't really mean much other then I haven't looked closely.  It would be interesting to see which of these records apply to which Oswald or an Oswald double.

If I have missed some of the mentions of Harvey Lee Oswald, please add to the record.

John,

Every one of the "Harvey Lee" items you list in the lengthy post three or four above this one is referring to Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald, with the probable exception of the Jan. 29-Mar. 1, 1969 entry (describing fall 1962 events) which may refer to American-born LEE Harvey Oswald or no one in particular.  This is hardly surprising since, after the assassination, every effort was made to erase the existence of LEE.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Jim Hargrove