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

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Mark Stevens said:

Armstrong seems pretty clear here that Kudlaty and White are friends. This is apparently after the interview was filmed, and he was still claiming they were friends

 

Mark,

From what Armstrong wrote, I didn't get the impression that he thought of Kudlaty and White as friends. The impression I got was that White told him (Armstrong) that he and Kudlaty attended the same college in the 1940s. Armstrong specifically wrote that White told him that he didn't really know Kudlaty personally, which I take to mean that White was aware of Kudlaty at college, but didn't hang with him. Then Armstrong wrote that he didn't know if White and Kudlaty developed a relationship later, after the Kudlaty interview. (They DID indeed develop a relationship after the interview, according to White, but Armstrong apparently was unaware of it.)

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

30 minutes ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

Moreover, Kudlaty was not lying when he said that he was instructed to give the FBI the school records of a student named Oswald.  That student’s first name was Robert, not Lee.  Why?  Because the entire Oswald family - and acquaintances - were now under the Bureau’s microscope.

 

Here's the fly in your ointment....

Kudlaty most certainly would have known shortly after the assassination that the suspect who killed Kennedy was named Lee Harvey Oswald. So if the FBI came and got the records for Robert Oswald, there is no way he'd confuse the two. He likely would have guessed that Robert was the suspect's brother.

That is not the sort of thing that a smart man like Kudlaty would forget, even after 70 or 80 years. That is to say, he wouldn't later think it was Lee's records he'd given the FBI.

And BTW there's a heck of a lot more evidence for two Oswalds than the Stripling issue, so maybe you should cut down on the smug chuckles till you know what you're up against. For example, how did Oswald attend two schools simultaneously, as the school records show? This time at Beauregard School in New Orleans and Public School 44 in NYC. Good luck with solving that one.

 

[Mark Stevens]

30 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Mark,

From what Armstrong wrote, I didn't get the impression that he thought of Kudlaty and White as friends. The impression I got was that White told him (Armstrong) that he and Kudlaty attended the same college in the 1940s. Armstrong specifically wrote that White told him that he didn't really know Kudlaty personally, which I take to mean that White was aware of Kudlaty at college, but didn't hang with him. Then Armstrong wrote that he didn't know if White and Kudlaty developed a relationship later, after the Kudlaty interview. (They DID indeed develop a relationship after the interview, according to White, but Armstrong apparently was unaware of it.)

 

Sandy,

I'm not referring to the letter you posted. I'm referring to an entirely different letter, which I quoted. In it, Armstrong clearly states Kudlaty and White are friends.

Quote

"Mr. Kudlaty's memory of that event is on the enclosed tape recording. He currently resides in Waco, Texas and, coincidentally, is a friend and former classmate of Jack White's at TCU."

 

[Sandy Larsen]

30 minutes ago, Mark Stevens said:

Sandy,

I'm not referring to the letter you posted. I'm referring to an entirely different letter, which I quoted. In it, Armstrong clearly states Kudlaty and White are friends.

 

 

Oh, okay. Thanks. I can only speculate as to why Armstrong seems unsure about White and Kudlaty being friends.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

12 hours ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

Moreover, Kudlaty was not lying when he said that he was instructed to give the FBI the school records of a student named Oswald.  That student’s first name was Robert, not Lee.  Why?  Because the entire Oswald family - and acquaintances - were now under the Bureau’s microscope.  

Kudlaty provided the records, as claimed, on the date claimed, I have little doubt.  But who has sought out ROBERT Oswald’s school records, if only to rule out my hypothesis?  Do I hear crickets?  

Hi, Robert,

It’s always good to hear from you, even when we disagree.  According to John Armstrong’s accounting of his initial telephone conversation with Mr. Kudlaty, the Stripling assistant principal said that he found school records for both Robert Oswald and Lee Oswald that Saturday morning at the school.  See below (emphasis added). 

I telephoned Mr. Kudlaty, introduced myself as a JFK researcher, and asked if he knew whether or not "Lee Harvey Oswald" had attended Stripling. Without hesitation Frank said, "Yes, he attended Stripling." Somewhat surprised I asked, "How do you know that." Frank replied, "Because I gave his Stripling records to the FBI."

I was momentarily stunned by Frank's answer, and asked him to tell me what he remembered in detail. He explained, "Early on the morning following the assassination, Saturday morning, I was telephoned by my boss, Mr. (Weldon) Lucas (Principal of Stripling), and told to go to school and meet two FBI agents. I lived close to the school at that time and arrived at the school before they (FBI Agents) got there. I went into the school and located Oswald's records. In fact I found both Lee Harvey and Robert Oswald's records for Stripling.  I opened Lee Harvey Oswald's folder and briefly looked over his records and noted that he had attended less than a full semester at Stripling…." [H&L, p. 98]

It always seemed strange to me that the FBI sent agents to gather (and confiscate!) the elementary school and teen-aged employment records of Lee Harvey Oswald within hours of the assassination.  By this time, Hoover could not possibly have determined (at least honestly) that there were no other co-conspirators or that no other government officials had been targeted for assassination.

And yet you want us to believe that less than 24 hours of the assassination of JFK, the FBI was gathering junior high school records for the designated patsy’s brother?  Do you also believe that the man who would soon become the superintendent of Waco Schools  didn’t know the difference between the putative assassin of JFK and his brother?
 

EDIT: 

Here is another clear indication that Mr. Kudlaty had LHO’s school records, and not Robert’s.  Robert Oswald testified to the WC that he attended Stripling School for a year:

Mr. JENNER. And Lee was 9 years old.
You continued at Arlington Heights Junior High School for how long?
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir--W. C. Stripling Junior High School. For 1 year, the ninth grade.
If I may, sir, perhaps correct something--I don't know for sure which way it was. When I said Lee attended West Ridglea Elementary School, I think perhaps the first year he attended Arlington Heights Elementary School, because I don't believe the West Ridglea Elementary School was completed at that time.
Mr. JENNER. We might take you in sequence so that at least I don't get confused.
You spent a year at W. C. Stripling High School?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER. So we now have we are now into '49-'50, is that correct?
Mr. OSWALD. That is correct, sir.
Mr. JENNER. And after a year at W. C. Stripling High School, you enrolled where?
Mr. OSWALD. At Arlington Heights High School.

But in the first minute of his 1997 interview, Mr. Kudlaty indicated that LHO’s records showed he “didn’t attend for a full year.”

At around the 2:28 mark in the interview, he had this exchange with John:

JA; Now, just to clarify, we’re talking about the records of Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin of JFK?
FK: That’s right, uh-huh.
JA: And, to your knowledge, he did attend Stripling?
FK: Yes, he had to have attended.  I didn’t know Lee Harvey Oswald.  I didn’t know he was a student there, but we wouldn’t have had a record for him he hadn’t attended, even one day, we would have had a record.  To the best of my recollection, his records were incomplete in that they did not show a full year of attendance…. I believe he had grades for one 6-week period.

click here for 1997 interview with Frank Kudlaty

Edited June 27, 2020 by Jim Hargrove

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

On 6/26/2020 at 8:00 PM, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

At this point we will hear from the cheerleaders “But if you weren’t persuaded by the first 16 factoids we’ve presented, maybe the 17th will turn the trick.  Never mind the quality, feel the width.”

 

On 6/27/2020 at 12:31 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

And BTW there's a heck of a lot more evidence for two Oswalds than the Stripling issue, so maybe you should cut down on the smug chuckles till you know what you're up against. For example, how did Oswald attend two schools simultaneously, as the school records show? This time at Beauregard School in New Orleans and Public School 44 in NYC. Good luck with solving that one.

 

Bingo! As predicted.  Unable to reply to various questions - asked by several Forum members - regarding Stripling, we now simply move along to other anomalies, as though Stripling is now solved to anybody's satisfaction. 

Sandy, no offense, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. Twenty-ish years ago, I was asked by JA to proofread and critique a portion of his manuscript. I did so. So, spare me your rarefied condescension. Apparently there's somebody else who doesn't know what he's up against. And perhaps don't use words like “smug” while you're exemplifying it.

Armstrong's work ethic is prodigious and admirable. He spared no expense, and did his level best to put forth a persuasive case. These are all to his credit. Although it contained many fascinating oddities and anomalies re: LHO, I didn’t find John's hypothesis convincing then, and nothing in the interim has altered that opinion. Your mileage may vary.

As for Jim H., I appreciate the clarification, but there is no actual, verifiable evidence that backs up Kudlaty’s claims. Unlike others, I do not accuse Kudlaty of lying; merely mis-remembering. A 30 year interim between an event, and being interviewed about it, dulls one’s memory. The other witnesses had a forty year interim. Unlike fine wine, their memories didn’t improve with age.

I suggest that your time is likely better spent in responding to the much-asked, never-answered questions posed by Mark Stevens. The reliance upon memories of people four decades after the fact is poorly reasoned. I look forward to the back-and-forth between you.

[James Norwood]

1 hour ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

A 30 year interim between an event, and being interviewed about it, dulls one’s memory. The other witnesses had a forty year interim. Unlike fine wine, their memories didn’t improve with age.

Robert,

Your commentary is not persuasive.  In one stroke, you dismiss legitimate eyewitnesses due to the passing of time and their faulty memories.

Then, typically of members on this site, you resort to ad hominem.  There is nothing that Sandy wrote that is "condescending."  He is only presenting evidence.

Your post reads like a screed, as opposed to a well-reasoned argument.

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

On 6/26/2020 at 10:31 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

And BTW there's a heck of a lot more evidence for two Oswalds than the Stripling issue, so maybe you should cut down on the smug chuckles till you know what you're up against. For example, how did Oswald attend two schools simultaneously, as the school records show? This time at Beauregard School in New Orleans and Public School 44 in NYC. Good luck with solving that one.

 

Bingo! As predicted.  Unable to reply to various questions - asked by several Forum members - regarding Stripling, we now simply move along to other anomalies, as though Stripling is now solved to anybody's satisfaction. 

 

I DID reply to your post's proposition that Kudlaty said he handed over Lee's school records, when in reality they were Robert's. I showed how you were likely mistaken. (And BTW, why should I be required to answer everybody's questions before moving on?)

I think you are just angry that I pointed out the error in your logic.

And then I took issue with the smugness of your post, which I did because of statements you made like these:

• "All the 'witnesses' who remembered going to [Stripling] school with Lee were mistaken."  [A definitive statement for which you have no proof. i.e. it's merely your opinion.]
• "....the use to which [Armstrong] puts [the documents he'd unearthed] is hogwash."  [Another definitive statement for which you have no proof. i.e. it's merely your opinion.]

Which is why I suggested you try explaining away other, more difficult anomalies before you go spouting off.

 

Edited June 28, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[Mark Stevens]

12 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Which is why I suggest you try explaining away other, more difficult anomalies before you go spouting off.

Sandy, I have attempted to discuss some anomalies, at least as they pertain to the witnesses, and no one will answer any of my questions.

Would you care to reply to them, I may have directly asked you some of them.

[Sandy Larsen]

This is what Robert Charles-Dunne would have us believe:

Vice Principal Kudlaty was asked by the FBI for Robert Oswald's Stripling School records. Kudlaty recognizes the Oswald name, but not the first name as it is not the name of the accused assassin he'd seen in the news. He wonders how the two are related. (Perhaps the FBI tells him.)

Not long later he probably discovers that the records he'd handed over were for the accused assassin's brother, Robert.

Kudlaty tells his wife (and probably others) that he'd handed over the records of the accused assassin's brother, Robert.

Over the years, Kudlaty forgets whose records he'd handed over, and instead thinks he'd handed over the records for the accused assassin Lee himself.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

43 minutes ago, Mark Stevens said:

57 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

[Addresses to Robert Charles-Dunne:]

Which is why I suggest you try explaining away other, more difficult anomalies before you go spouting off.

Sandy, I have attempted to discuss some anomalies, at least as they pertain to the witnesses, and no one will answer any of my questions.

Would you care to reply to them, I may have directly asked you some of them.

 

You indeed have directly asked me about the witnesses,  Mark. And you do deserve a response from me since I was the one who brought them up.

I will try to respond. But please understand that when I post something, I favor items that I have a greater understanding of because they require little effort on my part. I have a medical condition that greatly limits my energy level. I tend to skip things that require research on  my part. Though I do have "good days" when I'm able to do more.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

Countering the arguments the H&L critics make regarding the Stripling evidence strikes me as a waste of time.  For just one example, in THIS POST Mark Stevens quoted me as saying:

“... on December 27, 1993, John Armstrong wrote to Ricardo Galindo, the then current principal of Stripling School, asking if there were any records for Lee Harvey Oswald's attendance at the school.  Mr. Galindo telephoned John back and said that, although there were no records, it was 'common knowledge' that LHO had attended the school. [Harvey and Lee, p. 97]”

Mr. Stevens responded with this: 

“Again, what exactly constitutes 'common knowledge?' If for instance, 300 students and faculty were at Stripling, daily, and Harvey & Lee proponents have offered, at best, 6 documented witnesses which can attest to Oswald's presence at Stripling; would 2% constitute a population which could be considered 'common knowledge?'"

A “debate” like this seems worthless to me.  Stripling School principal Ricardo Galindo told John Armstrong that it was “common knowledge” that LHO attended his school. Demanding a discussion of what “common knowledge” should mean to a linguist or a statistician or a philosopher is absurd.  Mr. Galindo’s statement obviously meant that many people knew about it.  End of a discussion that should have never started.

I have said several times now that the only real puzzle in the small mountain of Stripling evidence is this:  Why would Robert Oswald have told the Warren Commission that LHO attended Stripling in 1952, which was obviously an incorrect year?  On closer examination, though, the answer is quite simple.  That probably isn’t what Robert said at all, unless he was coached to be deliberately inaccurate.  This is easy to prove.

Here’s what Robert told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram for the edition of June, 8, 1962, more than a year before JFK was killed and the Warren Commission was organized:  “The brother said the younger Oswald attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School about a year before he enlisted in the Marines.”

LHO’s Marine Corp. enlistment interview was held on October 15, 1956, about 2 years after his attendance at Stripling School.  Robert’s statement to the Fort Worth paper before the assassination of JFK seems to be much closer to the truth than the version the Warren Commission gave us.

Roughly two years after Robert spoke to the Star-Telegram, the Warren Commission alleged that he said LHO attended Stripling School in 1952, not the 54-55 school year as Robert’s earlier newspaper statement clearly suggested.

Understanding all we know now concerning the Warren Commission, would you believe Robert’s earliest known recollection of the time LHO went to Stripling, or what he allegedly told the WC, which was obviously inaccurate?

This later estimate for LHO's Stripling attendance also agrees with Marguerite’s FWST statement.  In a November 15, 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram story entitled “My Values Different, Defector Told Mother,” Marguerite was quoted as saying: "He quit school at 14 …. he quit in the eighth grade ….. but was so set on getting an education, he quit and returned three times."

That, of course, hardly matches the WC education records of Classic Oswald®. But it makes perfect sense if we understand that the Russian-speaking Oswald attended, and later quit, Stripling JHS, Warren Easton High School, and Arlington Heights High School, all soon before joining the Marines, just as Robert Oswald told the FWST BEFORE the Warren Commission convened and hired all those high-priced lawyers to hide the truth about the assassination and the Oswald Project.

The simple fact is that we have evidence from a Stripling School principal and a Stripling assistant principal that LHO attended Stripling, along with clear pre-assassination statements from both Robert Oswald and Marguerite that back up that claim, as well as a YouTube video from a classmate who saw him walk from the school to 2220 Thomas Place, and five articles from the local daily newspaper saying that LHO attended Stripling.  The H&L critics always call the following a "distraction," but we also have clear evidence published in the Warren volumes that shows Classic Oswald attended schools in NYC and New Orleans simultaneously just a year before the Stripling episode.  It all fits a familiar pattern.

None of the H&L critics seem remotely impressed by this evidence, nor do they express the slightest curiosity about questioning whether there is something terribly wrong in the official biography of LHO.   They just make excuses for the evidence and claim everyone is lying or mistaken.  
 

[James Norwood]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

None of the H&L critics seem remotely impressed by this evidence, nor do they express the slightest curiosity about questioning whether there is something terribly wrong in the official biography of LHO.   They just make excuses for the evidence and claim everyone is lying or mistaken.  

Jim,

I concur that it is a waste of time to try to respond to the critics on this thread.  If there were genuine questions raised or a legitimate interest in debating the Stripling evidence, then I would be eager to participate.  Instead, the critics wear their biases on their sleeves and seem incapable of weighing and synthesizing different kinds of evidence.  The links the critics provide are to other biased, opinion-based blogs and forums.  The questions raised are irrelevant and expose the deficiencies of minds incapable of clear thinking.  The last resort of the critics is the use of ad hominem to deflect the conversation away from the evidence.

Thanks to you and Sandy, the body of evidence about Stripling has been clearly presented above.  The three key pieces of evidence are (1) Frank Kudlaty's recall of surrendering school records to the FBI, documenting that Lee Harvey Oswald (not Robert) attended Stripling; (2) Fran Schubert's confident recall of Oswald attending the school during the academic year 1954-55; and (3) the evidence suggesting that Oswald resided across the street from the school.  

The ball is in the critics' court to refute those three pieces of evidence, plus a substantial body of secondary evidence.  And it will not be sufficient merely to write it all off by suggesting that the witnesses had faulty memories.   

  

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

it was 'common knowledge' that LHO had attended the school.

The "common knowledge" could have simply consisted of the newspaper reports quoting Robert's mistaken belief that LHO attended Stripling.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

17 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

The ball is in the critics' court to refute those three pieces of evidence, plus a substantial body of secondary evidence.  And it will not be sufficient merely to write it all off by suggesting that the witnesses had faulty memories.

No, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And coached witnesses speaking 30-40 years later do not meet such a definition.