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

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

I’m sorry, but now you’re just being silly.

Every time one of the crack H&L squad posts something, which is then immediately questioned, you all back away gingerly.

“13 inch head?”  Well, of course DJ didn’t mean to imply there was such a person, right?  Then why the continuing fetish over a photograph that is obviously out of proper photographic perspective?  It seems perspective is among the things one is required to abandon in order to become a H&L acolyte.

“Jim didn’t mean anything by mentioning 41 former Stripling teachers.”  Well, I’m sure he didn’t.  Because smart people who post here just throw in meaningless stuff all the time, right?  I mean, that’s why it’s an EDUCATION forum, so that people can be misinformed on matters of importance by people who quote numbers for no apparent reason. 

Pull the other one; it has bells.

Then there’s the context argument, which reads to an impartial eye as though you’re admitting no single piece of evidence can stand alone, “It’s not JUST Stripling.  You have to see the pattern.”  Whereas the truth is that it’s not EVEN Stripling, so the kaleidoscope pitches a few degrees off your intended destination.   

You get caught every time, by somebody here who’s had it up to the eye teeth with the nonsense that gets peddled here in the name of H&L.

And then it’s the critics' fault for being, how you say?, critical?  When Jim bandies about a meaningless number, is then asked for relevance, and has no answer.... Then you have to trot out a few half-hearted lines in his defense.   How good do you think that makes all of you look?  If you don’t care, you should.  As should Armstrong.  He’s not being done any favors here.

Bobby Pitts lived next door to LHO?  If so, let’s recall Bobby Pitts did not attend Stripling either.  Proximity to a school is not the sole determinant in where a child attends school. 

Forty year old memories, no photos, no yearbooks, no pertinent vaccination or medical records... and certainly no school records.  But of course those wouldn’t exist, would they?  The FBI took ‘em.

Wonder how the WC managed to get LHO’s school records in early '64 if the Bureau had already confiscated them?  

But of course they’re not the same records, says the crack H&L crew.  

You would know this how?  Because you’ve seen the FBI-confiscated records and compared that exemplar against what the WC had?  No, you haven’t.  Because they don’t exist.  

The only person I’ve heard claim knowledge of those records is Kudlaty.  Thirty-some years later.  With a “surprising number of former Stripling teachers” who did NOT tell John Armstrong they remembered Oswald.  But several advised he contact Kudlaty.  And thirty-plus years later we can rely upon him to recall the difference between Lee Harvey Oswald and Robert Lee Oswald?  I impute no bad intent to Kudlaty’s story.  Being wrong and being a prevaricator are not the same thing.

But you do have several people who claim, for reasons fair and foul, they have clear recall of a person who either lived in the neighbourhood for six weeks, or attended school for six weeks, forty years earlier.

The fact that there was imposture of Lee Harvey Oswald at various points in his adult life does not require a Boys From Brazil get-‘em-while-they’re-young, mix & match scenario to explain it.
    
And Sandy, I do admire your willingness to express cold feet about some of the H&L assertions.  I have complimented you on this even-handedness before, and do so again today.  For you, I believe there may be some hope.  Perhaps some of your studied moderate influence will have an impact on others in your camp.

 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Robert Charles-Dunne
fix stupid mistake

[Jim Hargrove]

14 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Even more incidentally, a friend of Jim's reminds us (https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2209p25-dear-jim#33915) that the account of Hoover's memo on the home page of Jim's website is inaccurate. It claims that "FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover wrote a memo stating that someone was using Lee Harvey Oswald's birth certificate". Hoover wasn't "stating" it; he merely noted the "possibility". Naughty Jim! The moral of the story: if someone tries to sell you a far-fetched super-conspiracy theory involving doppelganger boys and their doppelganger mothers, don't believe a word of it without checking the sources.

Mr. Bojczuk calls me “naughty” for prominently displaying a Hoover document stating that “there is a possibility that an imposter is using Oswald’s birth certificate.”  How naughty of me to show the actual document so that readers can see for themselves what it said.

How naughty of Mr. Bojczuk to fail to point out that I showed the actual Hoover imposter document prominently linked near the top of the Harvey and Lee home page. Why did Mr. Bohczuk fail to mention that fact?  Personally, it seems to me that Mr. Bojczuk is far more interested in picking fights here than in actually examining evidence, but let’s look at some more evidence for the two Oswalds.

The Warren Commission was fully aware of enormous problems in the official biography of “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  It even managed to put in writing that the autobiographical sketch of known facts about LHO and Marguerite Oswald put together by John Ely would “require MATERIAL ALTERATION and, in some instances, OMISSION."  (See the bottom paragraph in the memo page below).

14 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

It does look as though Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City (the best online account of this is Bill Simpich's State Secret at https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret.html). Oswald may well have been impersonated at the encounter with Silvia Odio in late September 1963 (for my view, see http://22november1963.org.uk/silvia-odio-visitors; for an alternative view, see https://gregrparker.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Sylvia-Odio.pdf). Each of these incidents can be explained without requiring a top-secret long-term doppelganger scheme.

Apart from that, there's nothing that can't be explained by the well-known phenomenon that big news events often generate large numbers of honest but mistaken sightings of the central characters.

Of course, Mr. Bojczuk forgets to mention some very credible accounts of second Oswald appearances, all of which follow a familiar pattern of making the patsy-to-be appear Very Guilty.  (It’s what we experts call a “set up.”)

Mr. Bojczuk forgets to mention that on Labor Day weekend of 1963, with one LHO and his wife Marina en route by bus to the home of the Murrets in New Orleans, another LHO was in Kemah, Texas repeatedly trying to buy guns from Fidel Castro's friend and gun supplier Robert McKeown.  Had this LHO been successful, the entire assassination of JFK could have been blamed on Castro.

Mr.  Bojczuk forgets to mention that two different young men, both claiming to be “Lee Harvey Oswald,” appeared before Texas Employment Commission employee Laura Kittrell, the first on October 3 and again a few days later, the second on October 22.   Ms Kittell told the HSCA’s Gaeton Fonzi that the second Oswald “looked the same,” and had “the same general outline and coloring and build, but there was something so different in his bearing.”

He forgets that “Oswald” visits the Sports Drome Rifle Range on Oct. 26, Nov. 9, Nov. 10, and again on Nov. 17, several times creating a scene and once shooting at another guy's target;

He forgets that, on Nov. 2, “Oswald” visits Morgan's Gun Shop in Fort Worth.

Also on Nov. 2 “Oswald” visits the Downtown Lincoln Mercury dealership where he test drives a car at wrecklessly high speeds saying he would soon come into enough money to buy a new car.

On Nov. 6 or 7 “Oswald” visits the Irving Furniture Mart for a gun part and is referred to the shop where Dial Ryder works.

On Nov. 15, “Oswald” goes to the Southland Hotel parking garage (Allright Parking Systems) and applies for a job and asks how high the Southland Building is and if it had a good view of downtown Dallas.

On Nov. 20 “Oswald” hitch-hikes on the R.L. Thornton Expressway while carrying a 4 foot long package wrapped in brown paper and introduces himself to Ralph Yates as “Lee Harvey Oswald,” discusses the President's visit, and asks to be dropped across the street from the Texas School Book Depository (where Russian-speaking “Lee Harvey Oswald” is already working).

He forgets all these things and more.  But not to worry....

The case for two Oswalds includes a lot of documentary evidence.  One that Mr. Bojczuk has been ducking for months now involves school records, published in the Warren volumes, showing that in the fall semester of 1953, one LHO attended a full semester of school in New York City while the other attended the full semester in New Orleans.

In the fall semester of 1953, one LHO attended Public School 44 in the Bronx borough of 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.

Also in the fall semester of 1953, the other LHO was present at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans for 89 school days.

The only argument Mr. Bojczuk has managed to muster so far is that these records are a “distraction.”  Not much of a try.

But there is much, much more evidence for two Oswalds.  There is enough, in fact, to fill a thousand page book or even to comprise a massive website, such as this one:

HarveyandLee.net

[Sandy Larsen]

On 7/16/2020 at 12:34 PM, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

In the course of his conversations with “a surprising number of former Stripling teachers,” [John Armstrong] doesn’t disclose how many he was able to reach, or if any of them independently recalled LHO @ Stripling.

 

Yes, Armstrong DOES disclose which of the teachers he talked to who recalled LHO attending Stripling.

He said that a Mark Summers recalled Oswald attending his gym class.

As for the precise "surprising number" of teachers Armstrong was able to contact, that is irrelevant. It would be nice to know, for curiosity's sake. But it makes no difference.

 

Quote

You seem to think that this is minor quibbling.

 

Yup.

 

Quote

Others see glaring gaps in which we should be finding “evidence,” rather than vague wording about a “surprising number” of such teachers, only one (or two) of whom remembered LHO.  One or two out of a list of 41 - even with half being dead - still doesn’t constitute “common knowledge.”

 

Ooooh!  LOL, you're back to that "common knowledge" silliness.

Okay, the principal of Stripling, Ricardo Galindo, told John Armstrong it was "common knowledge" that Oswald attended Stripling. And Jim uses that as evidence that Oswald indeed did attend Stripling.

And you object to that, pointing out that the one teacher Armstrong found -- who reportedly remembered Oswald at Stripling -- doesn't constitute "common knowledge."

There are a number of problems with your objection:

First, while it is true  that one teacher remembering Oswald at Stripling doesn't constitute "common knowledge," it is equally true that Oswald's attendance still may have been "common knowledge."

Second, when Galindo said "common knowledge," he wasn't saying that a lot of teachers personally knew or remembered Oswald as a Stripling student. He was saying that a lot of teachers were aware of the fact that Oswald -- the alleged assassin -- had attended Stripling. (There's a big difference between the two.) So using Armstrong's number of teachers who remembered Oswald attending, as you are doing, makes no sense.

Third, it was in circa 1992 that Armstrong spoke with Ricardo Galindo. So when he said "common knowledge," he wasn't referring to the Stripling teachers during Oswald's time.... he was referring to the teachers of the 1990s! So using the 1950s teachers Armstrong talked to, as you are doing, makes no sense.

Mark Steven's objections to "common knowledge" are even more problematic. Which is why nobody attempted to address them IMO.

 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[Jim Hargrove]

Just two days ago, I summarized and provided links to an enormous amount of evidence that one LHO attended Stripling School in THIS POST. 

As hard as they try, the H&L critics simply can't make this evidence go away, and it is clearly driving them crazy.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

23 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

It is striking that, out of perhaps 300 people who might have recalled a mysterious eastern European doppelganger who went by the name of Oswald, the majority of whom would still have been alive 40 years later, only one person had anything like a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling.

 

Jeez Jeremy, you say some of the dumbest things. The above, for example. How do you know that only one person had a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling?

It's also dumb because, even if it were true, it shouldn't be "striking" at all. Kudlaty said that Oswald attended for a short period of time, like 6 weeks I think. How many people are going to remember him decades later?

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

40 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Jeez Jeremy, you say some of the dumbest things. The above, for example. How do you know that only one person had a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling?

It's also dumb because, even if it were true, it shouldn't be striking at all. Kudlaty said that Oswald attended for a short period of time, like 6 weeks I think. How many people are going to remember him decades later?

 

Are you sure you realize what you’ve just said, Sandy?

Because the entire Armstrong hypothesis requires people who remember LHO 30+ and 40+ years after the fact.  These are the only witnesses you have.

And you’re advising us not to pay too much attention to people who don’t remember, because, really, who does?

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Priceless.

But you think Jeremy says "dumb" things?

I think that might be H&L HQ on your Batphone.

Do continue.

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jeez Jeremy, you say some of the dumbest things. The above, for example. How do you know that only one person had a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling?

It's also dumb because, even if it were true, it shouldn't be striking at all. Kudlaty said that Oswald attended for a short period of time, like 6 weeks I think. How many people are going to remember him decades later?

Are you sure you realize what you’ve just said, Sandy?

Because the entire Armstrong hypothesis requires people who remember LHO 30+ and 40+ years after the fact.  These are the only witnesses you have.

 

Robert,

I chastised Jeremy for saying that only one person had a clear recollection of Oswald at Stripling. How could he know that? There could have been one. There could have been ten. Or some other number.  He pulls "one" out of the air.

Then I chastised him for being surprised if there was only one. Why would that surprise him? It was a long time ago and people forget. We're fortunate that Armstrong found as many as he did.

 

Quote

And you’re advising us not to pay too much attention to people who don’t remember, because, really, who does?

 

No. I'm advising you all to think before you write.

 

Quote

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

 

Please explain where I made contradictory or illogical statements.

 

Quote

Priceless.

 

Not priceless. Honest.

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Sandy Larsen writes:

Quote

How do you know that only one person had a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling? ... How many people are going to remember him decades later? ... It was a long time ago and people forget.

The 'Harvey and Lee' believers have put forward for our consideration only one person who appears to have a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling.

In an attempt to explain away the lack of witness evidence, Sandy has brought up the very reason why we should not place too much trust in the witnesses' testimony: they were recalling things that may or may not have happened four decades earlier. People don't just forget things over the years; people inadvertently invent things too.

As Robert points out, weak witness testimony is all there is.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

Back in 1997, during his famous speech in Dallas, John [Armstrong] said ...

Famous speech, indeed!

And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your doppelganger can do for you; ask what you can do for your doppelganger.

We shall invent doppelgangers on the beaches, we shall invent doppelgangers on the landing grounds, we shall invent them in the fields and in the streets, we shall invent them in the hills; we shall never admit that it's all a load of made-up nonsense.

Four score and seven years ago, a crazy guy who thought the moon landings were faked helped to bring forth on this continent a theory involving doppelgangers. The world will little note, nor long remember what this crazy guy said here, but it can never forget what the doppelgangers did here.

I have a dream that one day, down in Texas, with its vicious racists, one day right there in Stripling Junior High School, imaginary doppelgangers will be able to join hands with actual human boys and girls. I have a dream today!

I knew those famous speeches. Those famous speeches were friends of mine. Jim, that was no famous speech.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

James Norwood writes:

Quote

Once again, you are taking the words that I have written out of context, distorting what I have written, selectively misrepresenting the words that I used, missing the bigger picture of the importance of Stripling, and failing to answer the questions that I have repeatedly asked you.

Let's see if I was misrepresenting the words you used. These are the words that you seem to think I have been misrepresenting:

Quote

In addition to the testimony of Robert Oswald, a total of six eyewitnesses (Frank Kudlaty, Fran Schubert, Richard Galindo, Mark Summers, Bobby Pitts, and Douglas Gann) clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

[http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26529-was-it-really-just-a-mole-hunt-about-oswald/?do=findComment&comment=422996]

It's a straightforward sentence, with no ambiguity. What you were saying was:

Quote

Frank Kudlaty clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

Fran Schubert clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

Richard Galindo clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

Mark Summers clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

Bobby Pitts clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

Douglas Gann clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.

The one member of this group that we eventually got you to deal with was Bobby Pitts. I pointed out that Pitts appears to have recalled nothing about "Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School." Here, again, is the relevant passage from Scripture (The Gospel According to Armstrong, pp.102-3):

Quote

I located Bobby Pitts, who lived next door at 2224 Thomas Place during the 1954-55 school year. Bobbie [sic] was in the 10th grade at Arlington Heights High School but his younger brother, Jackie (2 years younger), attended Stripling. Bobbie [sic] remembered that when he and some of the neighborhood boys played touch football in his front yard, Lee Harvey [bold in the original] Oswald would stand on the porch at 2220 Thomas Place and watch.

Diligent exegesis of this passage of holy text reveals a remarkable thing. There is no mention of Oswald attending Stripling. But this cannot be! James has stated that Pitts did indeed recall Oswald attending Stripling, and that Pitts recalled it clearly. Where did James get his information from? Did he make it up? But that is a preposterous notion, for James is a 'Harvey and Lee' believer, and 'Harvey and Lee' believers never make things up!

If Bobby Pitts "recalled Oswald attending Stripling", he evidently did not do so "clearly". Almost certainly, he did not recall Oswald attending Stripling at all. If he had, we can expect him to have mentioned it, because Armstrong would certainly have asked him about it, and we can certainly expect Armstrong to have mentioned that Pitts mentioned it. The unavoidable conclusion is that Bobby Pitts did not recall Oswald attending Stripling, which is hardly surprising since Pitts did not attend the school himself, a fact he did see fit to mention.

Sadly, I think we may have to consider the possibility that James did indeed make it up. Pitts is not, as James claimed, a witness to "Oswald attending Stripling" but merely a witness to an event in which someone who may or may not have used the name Oswald watched some boys playing football from the porch of someone else's house, four decades earlier.

Having been caught out, James has backtracked significantly, and is now claiming that "Taken alone, Bobby Pitts' testimony does not seem significant.  Its importance becomes apparent when examined in conjunction with other eyewitness testimony." Pitts' revised recollection now merely corroborates one small aspect of a different four-decades-old recollection: someone named Oswald lived at a house near Stripling school. It forms a small part of a flimsy tapestry of weak evidence. In 'Harvey and Lee' world, quantity beats quality.

Let's look at what James ought to have written about his six Stripling eyewitnesses:

Quote

Frank Kudlaty did not recall Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School. He was, however, a buddy of Jack "the moon landings were faked" White, who helped to think up the 'Harvey and Lee' theory. White introduced Kudlaty to John Armstrong, who went on to mislead his readers by neglecting to tell them about a fact that contradicted a central element of the theory thought up by him and Jack "no planes hit the World Trade Center" White.

Fran Schubert clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School, albeit four decades after the event. Hallelujah! A witness we can rely on!

Richard Galindo did not recall Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School, not having been at the school at the same time as Oswald, but he did claim that it was "common knowledge" that Oswald attended the school, although the number of other people who also felt it was "common knowledge" is hovering dangerously close to zero.

Mark Summers taught Robert Oswald and recalled someone who may have been Robert's doppelganger brother attending Stripling Junior High School, but can't have done so clearly since the year he specified was not the year proclaimed in Scripture.

Bobby Pitts recalled nothing whatsoever about Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School, but he did have a four-decades-old memory of Oswald watching some boys playing football once, somewhere not too far from the school.

Douglas Gann recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School, but not clearly as he only "believes it was 9th grade." Gann did, however, recall the boy playing basketball somewhere.

It isn't looking quite so good now, is it?

When Armstrong was looking for people who had attended Stripling at the same time as the imaginary doppelganger, there would have been something like a couple of hundred possible witnesses still alive. Look at how many he managed to find. Now consider the complete absence of any of the solid evidence that we might expect to exist, such as photographs, yearbooks, student directories and report cards.

We might also wonder how clear most of the identifications of Oswald actually were. Did the conversation go like this:

"I remember him clearly, Mr Armstrong!"

"You sure about that? I don't want to put anything in my book that isn't 100% certain. I have only the very highest standards. I'm not some unscrupulous huckster, you know."

"Definitely, Mr Armstrong! It was Oswald all right!"

Or like this:

"I remember a boy, and he may have looked a bit like that guy we saw on the TV after the assassination."

"That boy, his name was Oswald, wasn't it? Come on! It was Oswald! Tell me it was Oswald!"

"Well, I'm not sure, but I suppose it could have been."

"Great! Another clear recollection of Oswald at Stripling!"

"By the way, Mr Armstrong, are you planning to mention that mastoidectomy defect in your book?"

"Shut up about the mastoidectomy defect!"

Edited July 18, 2020 by Jeremy Bojczuk

[Sandy Larsen]

7 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Quote

How do you know that only one person had a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling?

The 'Harvey and Lee' believers have put forward for our consideration only one person who appears to have a clear recollection of Oswald attending Stripling.

 

But there may have been others, of course. Armstrong didn't interview every single teacher and student who attended Stripling that term.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

13 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Sandy has brought up the very reason why we should not place too much trust in the witnesses' testimony: they were recalling things that may or may not have happened four decades earlier.

 

But it wasn't as simple as "four decades later." It was nine years later (1963 - 1954) when the former Stripling students would have seen on TV their former classmate, Oswald, being accused of murdering the president. Those who recognized Oswald at that time would have likely remembered his being a Stripling student for the rest of their lives.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

25 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

I knew those famous speeches. Those famous speeches were friends of mine. Jim, that was no famous speech.

[Jim Hargrove]

8 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Frank Kudlaty did not recall Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School. He was, however, a buddy of Jack "the moon landings were faked" White, who helped to think up the 'Harvey and Lee' theory. White introduced Kudlaty to John Armstrong, who went on to mislead his readers by neglecting to tell them about a fact that contradicted a central element of the theory thought up by him and Jack "no planes hit the World Trade Center" White.

In his latest screed, Jerry Bojczuk claims that everyone is lying about LHO attending Stripling School, and, as always, he argues against only a small part of the total evidence.  

Mr. Bojczuk surely wants us to believe that Jack White was a time-traveling genius who managed to plant two stories about LHO attending Stripling School in the local Fort Worth newspaper YEARS BEFORE JFK WAS ASSASSINATED.  

That Jack White must have been one clever fellow!

Two different articles in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (FWST) published before the assassination of JFK indicate Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling a year or so before joining the Marines (marking the 1954-55 school year most likely), which is what actually happened.  

Two days after the assassination, a third FWST article stated LHO attended Stripling but didn’t say when.  

During Robert Oswald’s 1964 WC testimony, he swore that LHO DID attend Stripling.  

A 2002 FWST article said, “Yet a 1956 student would become the school’s best-known.  For a few weeks—his mother moved several times across Fort Worth—a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

The 2017 FWST article merely says, without giving a date, “Teachers and classmates remember him as attending Stripling, though there is no official record.”  

These articles clearly have different sources because they provide different details and, in at least one case, disagree on the year LHO attended Stripling, though all clearly agree that he did attend that school.

Despite the five newspaper articles, and Robert Oswald’s sworn testimony confirming LHO’s Stripling attendance, and Marguerite’s newspaper interview indirectly confirming it, and filmed interviews with a 1954 Stripling classmate and the Stripling assistant principal in 1963 who gave LHO’s records to the FBI, the H&L critics simply cannot accept any of this.

Why?  Because they know if LHO attended Stripling even briefly in 1954, then there were two LHOs, and, above all else, they cannot accept this.  That leads directly to the U.S. Intel project the Russian-speaking LHO was trained for.

And, as always, Mr. Bojczuk hopes readers will believe that Americans don’t recall much about the assassination of JFK 30, 40, or even fifty years later.  He hopes we’ll believe they wouldn’t recall their encounters with “Lee Harvey Oswald,” even decades earlier. What nonsense!

[James Norwood]

9 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Pitts' revised recollection now merely corroborates one small aspect of a different four-decades-old recollection: someone named Oswald lived at a house near Stripling school. It forms a small part of a flimsy tapestry of weak evidence. In 'Harvey and Lee' world, quantity beats quality.

Jeremy,

Thank you for catching a mistake that I made in an earlier post.  I have returned to what I wrote, and it was sloppy writing on my part to suggest that Bobby Pitts actually recalled Oswald attending Stripling.  The point that I was attempting to express was that the composite testimony of the eyewitnesses identified (in parentheses) in the sentence you have identified clearly point to Oswald as a student at Stripling in 1954-55.  But I acknowledge my error in syntax, and I'm glad that you pointed it out.  I stand corrected on a poorly written sentence.

At the same time, you are aware that on multiple occasions on this thread, I have clarified the exact testimony provided by Bobby Pitts, namely that he resided next door to Oswald on Thomas Place in Forth Worth in a location directly across from Stripling Junior High School.  While he was not a fellow student at Stripling, Pitts' recall is important for two reasons:  (1) he explicitly recalled Oswald living at 2220 Thomas Place and (2) the time frame was during the academic year 1954-55.  Those revelations are corroborated by other eyewitnesses.

You are correct when you write above that Pitts' testimony is part of a large tapestry of evidence.  But you are badly mistaken in suggesting that the evidence is "flimsy."  To the contrary, it is a substantial body of evidence that has been set forth in great detail on this thread.

I simply cannot understand why you feel so threatened by the Harvey and Lee evidence that you would spend this much time with your screeds.  You may not be aware of it, but your tract writing actually calls more attention to the thoughtful posts of Jim Hargrove, Sandy Larson, and David Josephs, wherein the ocular proof in documents and images is thoughtfully presented.  The views of this thread now exceed 13,000.  In your writing, you come across as an embittered, unhappy, and angry person.  You need to be more respectful of fellow JFK researchers because we all share the same goal:  the pursuit of the truth. 

James