Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

I think it was Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald all along who had the procedure done to him, ...

So the Hungarian refugee (or Russian orphan, or whatever other made-up origin this fictional character had) must have been settled in the USA with his fictional doppelganger mother by the age of six, when the mastoidectomy operation was performed. What consequences does this have for the rest of the 'Harvey and Lee' fictional narrative?

Switching events around so that event A, which was originally allocated to doppelganger X, is now allocated to doppelganger Y, is easy to do if there isn't any actual evidence and it's all speculation.

If there is actual evidence involved, this switching around is likely to generate contradictions further down the line, as other events which had been allocated to doppelganger X would also need to be allocated to doppelganger Y, and vice versa.

Which other events in the life of the real, historical Lee Harvey Oswald need to be switched from doppelganger X to doppelganger Y, or from doppelganger Y to doppelganger X? It's all made up, isn't it?

Quote

... that Hoover found out about it ... and altered a document or two, ...

Which documents, exactly, must Hoover have altered?

In 'Harvey and Lee' world, all you need to do is speculate that something happened, and, hey presto, it must have happened. In the real world, a bit more evidence is needed. Perhaps Jim could let us know which documents must have been altered, so that we can see how likely it is that this actually happened.

Quote

... just as he provably falsified so much else.

Yes, there are credible claims that some witness statements were interfered with, and that certain witnesses were threatened to change their story or to keep quiet. But the purpose of that was to shore up particularly weak aspects of the lone-nut narrative. You can't go from that to using fakery as an excuse to explain away all the evidence that contradicts the 'Harvey and Lee' fantasy.

It's worth noting that some of the most credible instances of tampering with witnesses' statements had the effect of supporting, not contradicting, 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine. Victoria Adams's statements, for example, were apparently tampered with to place Oswald on the sixth floor during the assassination.

'Harvey and Lee' doctrine, like its close relative, Warren Commission doctrine, requires Oswald to have been on the sixth floor, firing a rifle at JFK. These days it's really only Warren Commission believers and 'Harvey and Lee' believers who think Oswald was anywhere near the sixth floor (see https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/p1016452-lee-harvey-oswald-s-alibi).

That nice Mr Hoover was faking evidence to support the 'Harvey and Lee' theory!

Quote

Mr. Bojczuk ... simply hopes the mastoidectomy will prove his point, steadfastly ignoring the fact that there are a number of explanations for it.

There are indeed a number of explanations for the existence of a mastoidectomy defect on the body in the grave. But the ones Jim has put forward are, to put it politely, not very strong.

For example, a housekeeper recalled decades after the event that Oswald was given mental tests at a hospital that hadn't been built yet. In 'Harvey and Lee' world, this is transformed into evidence that a secret and unnecessary mastoidectomy operation was performed on an imaginary doppelganger boy just in case his body might need to be dug up several decades later. Hmm ... nothing far-fetched or desperate about that!

By the way, it might be an idea for the 'Harvey and Lee' believers to put their heads together and decide, officially, which excuse to go for. Was the operation performed on both doppelgangers, or just on one of them? Were any of these operations performed in hospitals that actually existed at the time, or were the hospitals just as imaginary as the doppelgangers themselves? If there were two operations, where is the documentary evidence for the second one? If John Butler is correct, and there were at least three Oswalds, how many of them were operated upon, and where, and when?

By far the strongest explanation for the mastoidectomy defect is the obvious one: the body in the grave was that of the one and only, real-life, historical Lee Harvey Oswald.

None of Jim's rather far-fetched and desperate explanations appear to have occurred to John Armstrong when he was writing his book. He must have known about the mastoidectomy defect, and he must have known that it made the carefully worked-out biographies of his two imaginary doppelgangers self-contradictory. The wrong doppelganger was buried in the grave!

Far more importantly, Armstrong neglected to mention this fact to his readers. In his 1000-page book, he was emphatic that the doppelganger who had the mastoidectomy was not the doppelganger who was buried in the grave. But he knew that solid scientific evidence existed which contradicted this claim. He didn't try to explain the contradiction. He simply failed to tell his readers that the mastoidectomy defect existed. Why did he do this? It doesn't make him look good, does it? In fact, it makes him look slippery and dishonest, doesn't it?

Quote

And one more thing….

A number of people claimed to have seen Oswald with Jack Ruby in Dallas when he was in fact in New Orleans.

Let's skim over the notion that the all-powerful evil geniuses who ran the top-secret long-term doppelganger project would allow one of the top-secret doppelgangers to associate publicly with the man who would go on to shoot the other top-secret doppelganger on live TV, thereby blowing wide open the whole top-secret long-term doppelganger project.

Blowing the top-secret plot wide open wouldn't cause any problems, would it? After all, the plot was going to be blown wide open on the day of the assassination anyway, when, according to 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine, both of the top-secret long-term doppelgangers got themselves arrested in the Texas Theater within minutes of each other and each told the cops that his name was Oswald, even though for some reason no-one in the Dallas police department ever remarked on the rather unlikely coincidence that they had arrested two virtually identical young white men with the same name in the same building at the same time, despite the fact that one of those men became world-famous that very afternoon. Before you laugh, we know this happened, because 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine tells us so.

Some witnesses made a claim some time after the event. In 'Harvey and Lee' world, that's all the evidence you need. It's solid, 100% proof that there was a top-secret long-term doppelganger project involving not only two virtually identical boys, one of whom vanished into thin air immediately after the assassination, but also their two virtually identical mothers, one of whom also vanished into thin air immediately after the assassination! And one of the two virtually identical boys had a 13-inch head!

In 'Harvey and Lee' world, witnesses are never wrong, just as amateurish measurements of 13-inch heads are never wrong and vague accounts of missing teeth are never wrong. These witnesses saw a young white man in Dallas and assumed that he was the same generic-looking young white man who would go on to be all over the news. The man they saw must have been Oswald! Unless it was someone else, of course.

Can Jim think of a young white man who we know for a fact associated with Jack Ruby, and who could plausibly have been mistaken after the assassination for the real-life, one and only, historical Lee Harvey Oswald?

While he is trying to remember the man's name, perhaps he could answer the following question. What reason can he think of for Armstrong's apparently dishonest behaviour in not mentioning the mastoidectomy defect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 599
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Yes, there are credible claims that some witness statements were interfered with,

Credible claims?  The FBI altered, destroyed, and invented PHYSICAL EVIDENCE as well as witness testimony.  Unlike you or me, John A. spent weeks at the National Archives examining all the so-called possessions of “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  Wearing white evidence gloves, he held in his own hands the Minox “spy camera” allegedly found in the Paine’s garage (you know, the one the FBI tried to change to a light meter) and noted how it was much heavier than an identical model of the camera that John had purchased.  It had been filled with a substance making it impossible to slide open the camera, required to check the serial number.  Impossible to trace that camera!

And then there is that infamous 1956 IRS Form 1040.

1956_tax_.jpg


The FBI wanted us to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald kept with him for seven years his 1956 tax return which was not discovered or initialed by the Dallas cops but magically appeared while the Bureau secretly took possession of “Oswald’s  possession” hours after the assassination.  The bogus 1040 form altered the employment specifics recalled by coworkers and employers interviewed by John.  Listen, for example, to this YouTube interview John conducted with Linda Faircloth, President of Pfisterer Dental Labs, who said “Oswald” worked for her firm not in 1956 but in late 1957 and early 1958, when Classic Oswald® was in the Marines.

Speaking of the Marines, we’re told that Oswald, in October, November, and December of 1956 was a proud member of the U.S. Marine Corps.  Isn’t it remarkable, then, that no Marine Corps income is shown on his 1956 tax form?

Why?

Because the U.S. Navy took so long to untangle the Legend of Lee Harvey Oswald that it couldn’t “certify” his military pay records “starting 24 October 1956” until September 15, 1964, long after the bogus 1956 tax form was created. 

Military%20pay%20records%209-15-64.png

And what about those fine 1956 W-2 forms for “Lee Harvey Oswald?”   Here are two of the three:

 

Dolly_W2.gif

 

Tujague_w-2.png

Data on these forms match the employer data on the 1956 form 1040, so John and I must be wrong, eh?  At John’s suggestion, in the late 1990s I sent high quality copies of these forms to Dawn Stanford, an IBM archivist and a specialist in typewriter fonts and I spoke to her at length on the telephone a week or so later.  Ms. Stanford indicated she kept thousands of samples of typewriter impressions and that, on close inspection, the W-2 forms data was entered with an unusual font that she did not have in her collection.  In her opinion, the W-2 forms were typed on the same machine!

What are the chances of three different employers using the same unusual typewriter to create these forms?  Like the bogus 1040 form they were created to support,  they are FBI creations!  Why were they created?  Because a true record of the teenage employment of “Lee Harvey Oswald” would expose the fact that two youngsters were sharing that identity.

From the Magic Bullet® itself to the uncashed Magic Money Order® that allegedly paid for the Magic Carcano® that fired it, this case is filled with false evidence oftentimes created directly by the FBI or at least uncritically accepted by it.

It is well-known that, for decades, the FBI faked the entire field of hair follicle analysis.  

Pseudoscience in the Witness Box: The FBI faked an entire field of forensic science.

In this 3-minute video, watch the FBI lie about three witnesses to the murder of JFK.  

I could go on and on for pages, but I’m running out of time this morning.  Do you really think it is “far-fetched” to think the Hoover’s outfit would fake evidence for a mastoidectomy? Really?  I mean, they were so honest, right?

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

 Wearing white evidence gloves, he held in his own hands the Minox “spy camera” allegedly found in the Paine’s garage (you know, the one the FBI tried to change to a light meter) and noted how it was much heavier than an identical model of the camera that John had purchased.

Jim,

Every time you mention the Minox spy camera I think of the one I had in Korea.  I've finally remembered where I bought it.  The Koreans were legendary thieves and the old timers told many stories of things stolen under guard by GIs.  I'm fairly sure this camera was stolen from some army base or intelligence base.  It ended up in a kimchi shop, known as Frankie's Store in Chang Pa Ri, Korea.  That's where I bought it.  It was rumored that you buy anything there.  Want a tank?  If you had enough money.  Want a slave?  If you had enough money.  This is a photo taken with the Minox.  It is not that good because I am the one who developed it with no training or experience.

Frankies-store-chang-pa-ri-a.jpg

6 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

The FBI wanted us to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald kept with him for seven years his 1956 tax return which was not discovered or initialed by the Dallas cops but magically appeared while the Bureau secretly took possession of “Oswald’s  possession” hours after the assassination.  The bogus 1040 form altered the employment specifics recalled by coworkers and employers interviewed by John.  Listen, for example, to this YouTube interview John conducted with Linda Faircloth, President of Pfisterer Dental Labs, who said “Oswald” worked for her firm not in 1956 but in late 1957 and early 1958, when Classic Oswald® was in the Marines.

Speaking of the Marines, we’re told that Oswald, in October, November, and December of 1956 was a proud member of the U.S. Marine Corps.  Isn’t it remarkable, then, that no Marine Corps income is shown on his 1956 tax form?

Why?

Because the U.S. Navy took so long to untangle the Legend of Lee Harvey Oswald that it couldn’t “certify” his military pay records “starting 24 October 1956” until September 15, 1964, long after the bogus 1956 tax form was created. 

I think this had to do with two sets of military records, One for Harvey and another for Lee.  Lee's would have been from about March, 1956 to March, 1959, (he was discharged in March, 1959) and Harvey's from October to the end of the year. (October to December, 1956) 

One of these records could have shown that Lee Oswald trained at Paris Island, SC rather than in California as Harvey did.  There is some information to support this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

From the Magic Bullet® itself to the uncashed Magic Money Order® that allegedly paid for the Magic Carcano® that fired it, this case is filled with false evidence oftentimes created directly by the FBI or at least uncritically accepted by it.

It is well-known that, for decades, the FBI faked the entire field of hair follicle analysis.  

Pseudoscience in the Witness Box: The FBI faked an entire field of forensic science.

In this 3-minute video, watch the FBI lie about three witnesses to the murder of JFK.  

I could go on and on for pages, but I’m running out of time this morning.  Do you really think it is “far-fetched” to think the Hoover’s outfit would fake evidence for a mastoidectomy? Really?  I mean, they were so honest, right?

This squares with a lot of the things I see, particularly in the photo and film evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

the Minox “spy camera” allegedly found in the Paine’s [sic] garage ... had been filled with a substance making it impossible to slide open the camera, required to check the serial number.  Impossible to trace that camera!

The FBI messed about with a camera which may have been owned by Oswald or may have been owned by Michael Paine or may not have been owned by either of them. That proves that there was a top-secret long-term doppelganger scheme involving two boys from two different countries, native speakers of two different languages, who were selected for the scheme at an early age in the hope that they would turn out to look identical!

And it proves that the two boys magically did turn out to look identical, except that one of them had a 13-inch head and one of them had a missing tooth! And each boy had a doppelganger mother named Marguerite!

And both doppelganger boys were arrested in the Texas Theater within minutes of each other and each told the cops his name was Oswald but no-one in the Dallas police department noticed! And one of the doppelganger boys had been given an unnecessary mastoidectomy operation in a hospital that hadn't been built yet!

Back in the real world, there's good evidence that the historical, one and only Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in some way with one or another intelligence organisation. But the idea that he was actually two people, who were members of a long-term doppelganger scheme from an early age, is probably the most ridiculous way to explain this evidence, just as it's the most ridiculous way to explain the evidence that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City and perhaps also in Dallas. Well, it's the most ridiculous explanation that doesn't involve little green men and shape-shifting lizards.

Quote

The bogus 1040 form altered the employment specifics recalled by coworkers and employers interviewed by John. ... Linda Faircloth, President of Pfisterer Dental Labs, who said “Oswald” worked for her firm not in 1956 but in late 1957 and early 1958

There's a discrepancy between a document and the memories of people who were interviewed several decades after the event by someone with a bizarre agenda to promote. That proves that there was a top-secret long-term doppelganger scheme which involved ... well, you can add all the crazy details for yourselves. You've no doubt also worked out the most likely reason for the discrepancy.

Not only is the notion of a long-term doppelganger scheme a very poor explanation for events in the life of the historical Lee Harvey Oswald, but it is contradicted by the solid scientific evidence of a mastoidectomy defect on the body in Oswald's grave. The real, historical Oswald had undergone a mastoidectomy operation; obviously, his was the body that was in his own grave. According to 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine, however, Oswald's grave was occupied by the body of the imaginary doppelganger who had not undergone the operation. The author of the Harvey and Lee book was adamant about this.

Unless the few remaining 'Harvey and Lee' believers can produce a reasonable explanation for this discrepancy, that's the end of the road for the far-fetched 'Harvey and Lee' nonsense.

But it looks as though they can't agree among themselves on which explanation to go for. In fact, they can't even agree among themselves on how many fake Oswalds there were. Jim Hargrove goes with officially sanctioned doctrine: there were two fake Oswalds. John Butler, who seems to think that almost all the photographs and home movies taken in Dealey Plaza were faked in some unexplained way, daringly claims that there may have been three or more fake Oswalds.

Let's see if we can pin them down. Which of the two or three or more fake Oswalds actually underwent the mastoidectomy operation? One of them, both of them, or all three of them?

If it was just one of them, which one was it? If you're switching the operation from doppelganger X to doppelganger Y, as Jim seems inclined to do, how do you reconcile this with all the other events that have been allocated to each doppelganger's biography? If, as Jim now seems to think, it was the non-American doppelganger who had the operation at the age of six, where is the documentary evidence that this doppelganger entered the USA before the age of six?

Where did the operation or operations take place? Had the relevant hospitals actually been built? Most importantly, where's the documentary evidence for any of this? It's all make-it-up-as-you-go-along speculation, isn't it?

On the subject of documentary evidence, let's return to a point I made in my last post. Jim wrote:

Quote

I think it was Russian-speaking Lee HARVEY Oswald all along who had the procedure done to him ... Hoover found out about it ... and altered a document or two

Which specific documents must Hoover have altered? And what evidence is there that they were altered, apart from the fact that they apparently contradict 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine?

Perhaps Jim could finally let us know whether he has come up with a reasonable explanation for Armstrong's failure to even mention the existence of the mastoidectomy defect. This behaviour makes Armstrong look like a charlatan, doesn't it? How else would Jim explain it?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Data on these forms match the employer data on the 1956 form 1040, so John and I must be wrong, eh?  At John’s suggestion, in the late 1990s I sent high quality copies of these forms to Dawn Stanford, an IBM archivist and a specialist in typewriter fonts and I spoke to her at length on the telephone a week or so later.  Ms. Stanford indicated she kept thousands of samples of typewriter impressions and that, on close inspection, the W-2 forms data was entered with an unusual font that she did not have in her collection.  In her opinion, the W-2 forms were typed on the same machine!

I started my career with Olivetti typewriters, and we were shown how to compare different fonts and the resultant print. Every typewriter, because of the way they were built had individual differences in the output they produced.

Look at the numeral 1 on each document. The number  is lower than the rest of the type, 

Especially noticeable in the address "126 Exchange Street."

I agree with Dawn Stanford, It would appear that both W2 forms were produced on the same machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ray Mitcham said:

I started my career with Olivetti typewriters, and we were shown how to compare different fonts and the resultant print. Every typewriter, because of the way they were built had individual differences in the output they produced.

Look at the numeral 1 on each document. The number  is lower than the rest of the type, 

Especially noticeable in the address "126 Exchange Street."

I agree with Dawn Stanford, It would appear that both W2 forms were produced on the same machine.

Thanks, Ray.

I was pressed for time yesterday and only posted two of the three bogus W-2 forms allegedly for 1956.  Here are all three:

Dolly_W2.gif

nov_24-16.jpg

nov_24-18.jpg

 

Years ago, when John A. got high quality images of these W-2s directly from the National Archives, he had professional transparencies made of them.  I have those transparencies now and lined up all three as best as I could around the “126 Exchange” notation you mentioned.  Although there is a bit of blooming on the “126” due to less than perfect registration, you can see how the numerals align in this scan I just made of the transparencies.

3-W2s.jpg

One of the reasons the FBI created all the false 1956 tax information for Lee Harvey Oswald is that they had learned from Palmer McBride, who also worked at Pfisterer Dental Lab, that the Oswald he worked with was there in late 1957 and early 1958, when the other Oswald was in the Marines, not 1956. 

This, of course, threatened to expose the two Oswald project.  Mr. McBride, who for decades worked as a NASA mechanic,  summarized this information on the second page of a 1999 letter he wrote to David Lifton.

McBride5.jpg

As I said above, Linda Faircloth, President of Pfisterer Dental Labs, confirmed that “Oswald” worked for her firm not in 1956 but in late 1957 and early 1958, when the other LHO was serving in the Marine Corps.  See and hear Ms. Faircloth’s interview here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, John Butler said:

I think this had to do with two sets of military records, One for Harvey and another for Lee.  Lee's would have been from about March, 1956 to March, 1959, (he was discharged in March, 1959) and Harvey's from October to the end of the year. (October to December, 1956) 

One of these records could have shown that Lee Oswald trained at Paris Island, SC rather than in California as Harvey did.  There is some information to support this.

John,

Yeah, that is surely the most likely explanation.  The USG absolutely embarrassed itself when the HSCA had the audacity to ask them how LHO could have been in Ping-Tung Taiwan and Japan simultaneously!  Making an entire life disappear is tricky business.

I know you mentioned this before, but could you explain the Paris Island, SC reference to me again?

Also, I know this goes way back, but do you recall when you were in the service if the your superiors encouraged you to fill out IRS reports whenever you were not in a combat zone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Making an entire life disappear is tricky business

In order to use David Josephs timeline in a better fashion I went through and listed all the references to Lee Oswald when Harvey could be listed as being somewhere else or in the same location.  There are 15 pages in a Word doc with such occurrences.  David has compiled a record that can't be challenged.  One might challenge an entry or two, but the entire thing is irrefutable.  I learned that there are at least 10 references to Harvey and Lee being in New Orleans at the same time.

As far as the Paris Island reference, Steve Landesberg (student) mentions that during the summer of 1956 he was at Paris Island with Lee Oswald.  I find this to be reasonable and it explains much concerning the service of Lee Oswald, particularly his discharge in March, 1959. 

57 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Also, I know this goes way back, but do you recall when you were in the service if the your superiors encouraged you to fill out IRS reports whenever you were not in a combat zone?

No, I don't recall that the admin of any company I was serving with in the Army ever encouraging or suggesting one fill out their IRS forms.  I received hostile fire pay while in Korea, but was not classified as being in a combat zone.  Many of the incidents and events that happened in Korea from 1967 to 1969 were covered up and hidden by the US Army.  They were not reported to the public or the incident information was lessened or changed.  Reason being, Johnson did not want a second war front or combat area recognized while combat was occurring in Viet Nam.  It had to do with money.           

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/29/2020 at 1:34 PM, John Butler said:

Jim,

Every time you mention the Minox spy camera I think of the one I had in Korea.  I've finally remembered where I bought it.  The Koreans were legendary thieves and the old timers told many stories of things stolen under guard by GIs.  I'm fairly sure this camera was stolen from some army base or intelligence base.  It ended up in a kimchi shop, known as Frankie's Store in Chang Pa Ri, Korea.  That's where I bought it.  It was rumored that you buy anything there.  Want a tank?  If you had enough money.  Want a slave?  If you had enough money.  This is a photo taken with the Minox.  It is not that good because I am the one who developed it with no training or experience.

That's interesting, John, and I meant to comment on this earlier.

It's always a possibility that the Russian-speaking Oswald acquired his Minox camera through similar channels, but, if so, you have to wonder why the FBI tried so hard to turn it into a light meter.  Even more significantly, why would the Bureau go through the obviously suspicious action of filling it with glue--or whatever made that camera in the National Archives so heavy--just to make it impossible to see the serial number?  Something about that number must have been pretty disturbing.

Quote

In order to use David Josephs timeline in a better fashion I went through and listed all the references to Lee Oswald when Harvey could be listed as being somewhere else or in the same location.  There are 15 pages in a Word doc with such occurrences.  David has compiled a record that can't be challenged.  One might challenge an entry or two, but the entire thing is irrefutable.  I learned that there are at least 10 references to Harvey and Lee being in New Orleans at the same time.

Don't forget to give John A. some credit.  DJ based his timeline mostly on John's book, although he questioned him incessantly on the phone while preparing it.

Quote

As far as the Paris Island reference, Steve Landesberg (student) mentions that during the summer of 1956 he was at Paris Island with Lee Oswald.  I find this to be reasonable and it explains much concerning the service of Lee Oswald, particularly his discharge in March, 1959. 

Doubly interesting, and I can't recall a thing about it.  I searched John's write-up on the Landesbergs on my website and didn't find "Paris."  Can you point me to the source?

EDIT: Oh, wait!  Is that the Marine Corps Recruit Depot at Parris Island, SC?  If so, I still can't find John's reference to it on my website.

Edited by Jim Hargrove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Doubly interesting, and I can't recall a thing about it.  I searched John's write-up on the Landesbergs on my website and didn't find "Paris."  Can you point me to the source?

EDIT: Oh, wait!  Is that the Marine Corps Recruit Depot at Parris Island, SC?  If so, I still can't find John's reference to it on my website.

I have to correct myself.  Paris Island out and Parris Island in for the correct spelling.  Going back and reviewing my notes it seems I have a bad habit of misspelling Parris Island.  As we use to say in Ed. environment "Learn it wrong and it stays wrong." 

My next error is that I was merging Parris Island with Camp Lejeune.  Camp Lejeune, SC should be the location where Steve Landesburg (student) says he was there with Lee Oswald.  Not being a Marine those kind of things don't stick in my mind.  I don't believe I would have mixed up Army forts. 

Good catch on my sometimes erratic memory.  According to my notes, Steve Landesburg (student) said he was in Camp Lejeune with Lee Oswald during the summer of 1956.  Here's my note on this:

Jim Rizzuto (Steven H. Landesberg, the student) said that he met Steve L'eandes (Steven R. Landesberg, the actor) and Lee Oswald in the Marine Corps at Camp Lejune in the summer of 1956.

I believe this statement by Rizzuto has a more than likely chance to be true based on FBI performance.  So, the statement above allows me to conclude with other information from the Harvey and Lee site (Lee Oswald’s PFC rank in the fall of 1956) that Harvey and Lee entered military service at different times and left the service at different times.

To me this clears up the problem of Lee and Harvey leaving the Marine Corps at different times.  They joined at different times.  Lee Oswald at age 16 and Harvey at age 17.

Lee Oswald:  About March or slightly later, 1956 to March, 1959.

Harvey Oswald:  October 24, 1956 to September 11, 1959.

and,

I believe this is from the Harvey and Lee site:

Jim Rizzuto (Steven H. Landesberg, the student) said that he met Steve L'eandes (Steven R. Landesberg, the actor) and Lee Oswald in the Marine Corps at Camp Lejune in the summer of 1956.”

 

Edited by John Butler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

That's interesting, John, and I meant to comment on this earlier.

It's always a possibility that the Russian-speaking Oswald acquired his Minox camera through similar channels, but, if so, you have to wonder why the FBI tried so hard to turn it into a light meter.  Even more significantly, why would the Bureau go through the obviously suspicious action of filling it with glue--or whatever made that camera in the National Archives so heavy--just to make it impossible to see the serial number?  Something about that number must have been pretty disturbing.

I don't believe you can conflate these two incidents into one with any probability of relationship.  What happened with Harvey Oswald was close to 10 years prior (late 50s and early 60s) to whatever I was doing in 1968.  It is my opinion Harvey got his from a government agency and not through some other means.  I suspect, with no evidence, that this type of camera was carefully monitored.  Mine disappeared after sending a roll of film to be processed two times.  It vanished from a locked foot locker with no evidence of tampering.

When I bought my Minox I did not know it was a spy camera.  It was different from the ones usually pictured that Harvey Oswald had.  Mine had an aluminum case and no external features.  You had to slide open the camera to access controls for putting in film and pushing a button to take the film.  Sliding open the camera armed it for taking the next photo.  Closing and then reopening the camera advanced the film and allowed one to take another photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, John Butler said:

Jim Rizzuto (Steven H. Landesberg, the student) said that he met Steve L'eandes (Steven R. Landesberg, the actor) and Lee Oswald in the Marine Corps at Camp Lejune in the summer of 1956.

I believe this statement by Rizzuto has a more than likely chance to be true based on FBI performance.  So, the statement above allows me to conclude with other information from the Harvey and Lee site (Lee Oswald’s PFC rank in the fall of 1956) that Harvey and Lee entered military service at different times and left the service at different times.

To me this clears up the problem of Lee and Harvey leaving the Marine Corps at different times.  They joined at different times.  Lee Oswald at age 16 and Harvey at age 17.

Lee Oswald:  About March or slightly later, 1956 to March, 1959.

Harvey Oswald:  October 24, 1956 to September 11, 1959.

and,

I believe this is from the Harvey and Lee site:

Jim Rizzuto (Steven H. Landesberg, the student) said that he met Steve L'eandes (Steven R. Landesberg, the actor) and Lee Oswald in the Marine Corps at Camp Lejune in the summer of 1956.”

John,

It’s been a long time since I looked at the Landesbergs page, but it remains fascinating.  The first JFK researcher to write in any depth about Landesberg, L’eandes, Oswald and the rest of the crew was apparently Joachim Joesten, who wrote The Case Against J. Edgar Hoover more than half a century ago.  

It's pretty telling that way back then he described what he called “a false Oswald” operating as a political provocateur on the East Coast at the very time Classic Oswald® was in the Soviet Union.  Fascinating, too, that he decided the “false Oswald” was Larry Craford, just as Laura Kittrell theorized. Click here for an excerpt from Mr. Joesten’s book.

If “Rizzuto” (Landesberg the student) did indeed meet Lee Oswald at Camp Lejeune in the summer of 1956,  any surviving records of that apparently escaped John A’s detection.  The problem, though, is that John may not have had his radar attuned to references to Lejeune during his years of most intensive research.  Harvey and Lee has only two or three pages devoted to the Landesbergs, and they don’t mention Lejeune.  John’s more extensive research into the Landesbergs came after the publication of his book and the completion of all his research at the National Archives, Dallas Archives, etc.

Tragically, Baylor U. basically ruined the search facilities at it’s online JFK/John Armstrong Collection when it redesigned it’s entire online database service, and so now we can no longer search it in detail for any possible references to Camp Lejeune in the extensive USMC records John assembled.

The dates you set for Lee’s USMC service sound pretty reasonable to me but I forget--does Lee’s PFC rank in fall 1956 help establish an enlistment date for him around March of that year?

Below is the Village Voice article on the L’eandes/Oswald and the FBI that John included on the H&L CD:

Leandes.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my notes put on the forum once before:

Lee Oswald And Harvey Oswald And Their Rank Anomalies

 

 

From David Josephs timeline for Oct. 24, 1956.  This is the day that Harvey Oswald enters the Marine Corps.

 

While Harvey Oswald was at Boot Camp in San Diego, there are indications that Lee Oswald was also in the Marine Corps and assigned to the Marine Corps Air Facility (MCAF) at El Toro. Sergeant David Wallace Ransberger recalled that during his initial tour of duty at El Toro in 1956, he became acquainted with a Private First Class Oswald.”

 

On this day, Oct. 24, 1956 Harvey enters the Marine Corps with the rank description of Private/E1.  He won’t earn that rank until completing training.  Obviously, there was some kind of status for pay.  On Oct. 24, 1956, is at or on his way to boot camp at the training center for the Western U. S. at San Diego. 

 

This is impossible situation for a single individual named Lee Harvey Oswald.  The situation is best explained by the Harvey and Lee theory.  It is one of the many “smoking guns” of the Harvey and Lee story. 

 

Why is this impossible?  Here is the Marine Corps policy on rank currently in force.  It is the same as that in 1956.

 

From the Internet:

Upon graduating from basic training young Marines earn the rank of Private (E-1). Most enlisted Marines hold this rank for 6 months before they are promoted to Private First Class. I am assuming that is actually an 8 month period- about 2 in Basic Training and another 6 months as an PVT/ E1.

Moving up the Marine Corps Ranks: Company commanders have the authority to promote active duty enlisted Privates (E-1) to the rank of PFC (E-2) once they have completed six months of service. This promotion is virtually automatic for those who meet the basic promotion criteria.

Private First Class (PFC)/E2:  This was Lee Oswald’s rank in Oct. 1956 at El Toro

Private (PVT)/E1:  This was the rank of Harvey Oswald in Oct. 1956 in Basic Training at San Diego.

Private first class is the second enlisted rank in the Marine Corps. The rank of PFC was established in 1917 to mirror a similar rank added to the Army structure.

Moving up the Marine Corps Ranks: Like the promotion to process to PFC, Marine Corps company commanders have the authority to promote active duty enlisted Marines to the rank of LCpl (E-3) when they have completed nine months, Time-in-Service, and eight months, Time-in-Grade.

Lance Corporal is the third enlisted rank (E-3) in the Marine Corps. The rank of Lance Corporal was permanently established in 1958, but the term dates back to the early 1800's.

This rank structure suggests that Lee Oswald entered the Marine Corps at least 6 months before Harvey.  This would be sometime in May or April of 1956.  This could be as early as March of 1956 because Lee Oswald was discharged in March, 1959.  His term of enlistment was for 3 years.

May 1, 1957: Harvey Oswald is promoted to Private First Class/E2.  If you calculate the months between Oct. 1956 and May, 1957 you come out with about 5 months.

 

This date is more suitable for Harvey’s promotion to Private First Class/E2, since at this time he has been in the Corps for at least 6 months. October 24, 1956 to May 1, 1957 is about 6 months.  Lee Oswald is supposedly a PFC in the fall of 1956.  

 

Lee Oswald may have obtained an early out to go to a foreign college. On March 4th, 1959, Lee applies to the Albert Schweitzer College in Switzerland.  This application could have been used as an early out for school, but the term is for the following year.

 

There is more information that suggest a Part 2 to the “smoking gun” rank differences.

 

On March 9, 1959, Lee is promoted to Private 1st Class/E2 again.  Harvey’s discharge papers say he was a Private.  So, Lee is promoted 10 days before he leaves the service, but Harvey isn’t and remains a Private/E1 until he leaves the service.

 

On March 19, 1959 Lee Oswald discharged from the Maines with rank of PFC.  On September 11, 1959, Harvey is released from active duty in the Marine Corps.  His rank is Private/E1.

 

What other evidence is there that Lee Oswald entered military service at least 6 months before Harvey Oswald? 

 

Before getting into other information one needs to know where a new recruit will be trained.  New recruits living east of the Mississippi River will be sent Parris Island, SC.  New recruits living west of the Mississippi River will be sent to the recruit training center at San Diego, CA.

 

Why is this important?  It may suggest where Lee Oswald entered the Marine Corps and why his records are different from Harvey’s.  HSCA Vol. 9, pp 99-100, paragraph 444 has information on Lee Oswald’s attempt to enter the Marine Corps.  The information provided says that Marguerite Oswald contacted a long-time friend and attorney in New Orleans, Clem Sehrt. 

 

Lee had been pressuring Marguerite to falsify his birth certificate so that he could enter the Marines before his 17th birthday.  She asked Sehrt if this was possible.  He refused to advise her, but indicated a lot of boys join the service before their legal entrance age.

 

This may refer to Lee’s failed attempt to enter the service at age 16.  Later he may tried again and succeeded.  Lee Oswald was connected to high level Mafia figures in New Orleans such as Carlos Marcello and his uncle, Dutz Murret.  Sehrt’s law firm represented Carlos Marcello.  These people, through Marguerite, could have been influential in getting Lee Oswald into the Marines at 16 years of age.  It is a possibility that Lee Oswald entered the Marines in New Orleans and was assigned to Parris Island, SC for training in the summer of 1956.

 

An early enlistment for Lee is in accord with his higher rank in the Marines than Harvey in the fall of 1956.  Why Parris Island, SC for training.  He may have listed in New Orleans and was sent to Parris Island.  There is a second piece of controversial evidence concerning the actor Steve Landesberg that suggests this may be so.

 

Steve R. Landesburg, an actor on the Barney Miller TV show, was claimed to have known Lee Harvey Oswald at Parris Island, SC in the summer of 1956.  This was the claim of Steve Landesberg (student)  going by the name of Jim Rizzuto. The FBI got wind of the story and picked up Steve Landesberg (student), alias Rizzuto.

 

Essentially, Rizzuto said that he met Steve L'eandes (Steven R. Landesberg (actor) and Lee Oswald in the Marine Corps at Camp Lejune in the summer of 1956.  This is essentially the story he told the FBI.

After his Marine service he kept in touch with L’eandes by post card.  L’eandes sent post cards from Stockholm, Leningrad, and Moscow in 1960.  L’eandes was accompanied by Lee Harvey Oswald and Earl Perry in their journeys around Europe and Russia in 1960.  Rizzuto was told by L’eandes that Oswald was back in the states and had gone to Texas.

Rizzuto said that around October, 1961 L’eandes, Perry, and Lee Harvey Oswald had gotten back together and by December were creating disturbances at a Mark Lane rally.  In early 1962, L’eandes and Earl Perry were creating a violent disturbance at the American Jewish Congress.  He stated that Lee Oswald was taking pictures at the event.  He believed that L’eandes and Oswald lived together on East Eight Street.

Another controversial aspect of this story puts Lee Oswald in Russia in 1960.

Is this true?  Could be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...