The Far-Reaching Influence of “Harvey and Lee”

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Let's recap, and see if we can prise answers from the 'Harvey and Lee' believers to the latest bunch of questions that they have avoided answering.

James Wilcott

James Wilcott's 'Oswald project' contradicts three items of 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine:

- He implied that Oswald was one person. 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine claims that Oswald was a pair of doppelgangers.

- He claimed that his 'Oswald project' began when Oswald was in the Marines. 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine claims that the doppelganger scheme began much earlier, several years before Oswald entered the Marines.

- He claimed that Oswald was taught Russian while in the Marines. 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine claims that the Oswald who spoke Russian (either flawlessly or merely well enough to understand what was being said around him, depending on the state of the theory on any particular day) was a native speaker.

How would the believers resolve these contradictions?

Oswald's Mastoidectomy

We have one set of medical records, one exhumed body, and one mastoidectomy defect. Sandy claims that these refer to two people, who each underwent a mastoidectomy operation. In that case, we should have two sets of medical records and two bodies showing two mastoidectomy defects. But we don't.

- Where is the missing set of medical records?

- Where is the missing body with its mastoidectomy defect?

Alternatively, if Sandy is mistaken and these items of evidence actually refer to one person, how do the believers resolve the problem of the wrong doppelganger being buried in Oswald's grave?

Quote

It was Lee Oswald who had the mastoidectomy operation ... Harvey Oswald's body ... was buried in Rose Hill Cemetery ... The remains examined by Dr Norton were of Harvey Oswald. ... This man was not Lee Oswald.

(John Armstrong, Harvey and Lee, pp.946-7; bold-face in the original)

Also, why did John Armstrong mislead his readers by not mentioning in his book the existence of the mastoidectomy defect on the body in Oswald's grave, a fact that was confirmed by reputable scientists and that debunked Armstrong's theory two decades before his book was published?

[Sandy Larsen]

3 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Oswald's Mastoidectomy

We have one set of medical records, one exhumed body, and one mastoidectomy defect. Sandy claims that these refer to two people, who each underwent a mastoidectomy operation. In that case, we should have two sets of medical records and two bodies showing two mastoidectomy defects. But we don't.

- Where is the missing set of medical records?

- Where is the missing body with its mastoidectomy defect?

 

This is yet another example of how being an ideologue forces a person to say dumb things.

Where is the missing set of medical records? They're lost. Duh. That doesn't mean they never existed.

Where is the missing body with its mastoidectomy defect? It's buried or in a nursing home somewhere. Okay, there is some possibility it is still walking around somewhere.

My guess is that LEE Oswald was either disappeared, sent on numerous foreign intel missions, and/or was entered into a witness protection program (WPP). The federal government didn't have a formal WPP till 1970, so LEE's would have been a makeshift one if done before that time.

If Jeremy were open-minded he would have figured these things out himself.

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[Jim Hargrove]

Since Mr. Bojczuk perpetually points out that the LHO killed by Jack Ruby was shown by the exhumation to have had a mastoidectomy, let’s again see what else the exhumation showed.

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

Ed Voebel told the FBI “that he was taking photographs for inclusion in the Beauregard Yearbook and had been stopping in various classrooms, unannounced, and taking pictures of the classes in session.  He stated that OSWALD’s clown-like attitude in the photograph appeared spontaneous on the part of Oswald and was not posed at the suggestion of VOEBEL.”

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

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

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

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

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

[John Butler]

I just noticed that the pen in Lee's hand looks more like a pencil:

I guess that does away with the pen top in Lee's mouth for the lack of teeth.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

According to Sandy, the dog ate one set of medical records, and one of the Oswald doppelgangers might be living in the FBI's Home for Retired Gangsters in Arizona. Hmmm. That sounds plausible.

Sandy doesn't know what happened to his missing hypothetical doppelganger. He doesn't know where or when a hypothetical mastoidectomy operation was performed on his hypothetical doppelganger.

No-one else seems to know, either. Why does no-one know? Because there is no physical evidence for either of these things. There are no medical records showing that a second Oswald doppelganger underwent a mastoidectomy operation. There is no record of a second Oswald doppelganger who ended up in the witness protection program, or in a shallow grave, or in a nursing home on the planet Zog.

What follows is the sum total of the physical evidence we have about mastoidectomy operations carried out on people named Lee Harvey Oswald:

1 - One set of medical records regarding an operation carried out in Harris Hospital in February 1946.

2 - One body, containing a mastoidectomy defect, that was exhumed from Oswald's grave in 1981, proving that that person had undergone the operation.

The only conclusion an open-minded, rational person would draw from that evidence is that item 1 and item 2 refer to the same person.

Less open-minded and less rational people, on the other hand, might explain the evidence in far-fetched ways, using improbable inventions such as imaginary doppelgangers, creatures from distant planets, and shape-shifting lizards.

They could invent a creature from the planet Zog, named Lee ZOG. They could claim that the only set of medical records in fact refers to a mastoidectomy carried out on Lee ZOG.

They could invent a shape-shifting lizard, named Harvey LIZARD, whose body, complete with mastoidectomy defect, was exhumed from the grave of the real-life, historical, one and only Lee Harvey Oswald.

They could invent a couple of imaginary mother doppelgangers: the dumpy Marguerite ZOG and the slender Marguerite LIZARD. The possibilities are endless!

If they had a rationality-challenged friend who thought the moon landings were faked and that no planes hit the World Trade Center, they could write a 1000-page book about their inventions, and call the book Lizard and Zog.

The book might earn them a remunerative deal with a TV company for a JFK assassination-related science-fiction cop-buddy series of that name, a sort of paranoia-friendly Starsky and Hutch. Once they've got their remunerative TV deal, they could leave the JFK assassination alone, so that rational people could try to get the case resolved without the risk of guilt by association.

Unfortunately for our less rational friends, the default state of affairs is that a human being is one person and not a pair of doppelgangers or a combination of shape-shifting lizards and creatures from distant planets. Until anyone produces proof to the contrary, such as a second set of medical records or a second Oswald with a mastoidectomy defect, one person named Lee Harvey Oswald underwent a mastoidectomy operation in 1946, and his was the body exhumed in 1981.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

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

Roll up! Roll up! It's time for another trip on the 'Harvey and Lee' merry-go-round! Jim asked exactly the same rhetorical question a couple of months ago on a different 'Harvey and Lee' propaganda thread. Since he is such a big fan of copying and pasting, here is a slightly amended version of my reply from last time:

There are plenty of reasons to doubt that Oswald lost a tooth.

That's what the infamous http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26512-arguments-against-the-harvey-lee-theory-the-missing-tooth/ thread was all about. That's the thread in which Jim gloated on page 1:

Quote

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

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

Unfortunately, it quickly turned out that all the evidence for the apparently "missing tooth" had a perfectly ordinary explanation (in fact, in the case of Oswald's Marine dental records, two perfectly ordinary explanations) that did not require Oswald to have had a missing tooth. You can find out more by reading the thread I just mentioned, or this one:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Jim Hargrove]

Mr. Bojczuk’s explanation for the American-born LHO’s missing tooth requires that you disbelieve what you see with your own eyes.  Look at the photo.  Look at the testimony of the man who took the photo and who helped clean up LHO after the fight that resulted in the tooth loss. Look at the Marine Corps dental records showing a prosthesis that “FAILED 5-5-58.”  

Game, set, and match.

Even though he knows there are several logical explanations for the mastoidectomy (mine is that it was the Russian-speaking LHO all along who had it, not the American-born LHO), Mr. Bojczuk nearly every day for years has used the mastoidectomy to declare his case closed.  To do so, of course, he must declare that only the mastoidectomy is relevant to the case of two Oswalds, that there are no other explanations for the mastoidectomy, and that all the other evidence is irrelevant, a “distraction.”

Let’s consider just a handful of other examples of the evidence for two Oswalds.

1.  Way back in 1948, one LHO was living at 101 San Saba in Benbrook while the other was at 3330 Willig St. (and then 7408 Ewing) in Fort Worth.

2. In 1953 the Russian-speaking LHO (Harvey) was sent to Youth House for truancy, fled to Stanley, North Dakota to avoid further entanglement with the NYC legal system, and started attending Beauregard JHS in New Orleans that fall, all the while the American-born LHO (Lee) had good attendance both semesters at PS 44 in NYC.

3.  During the fall semester of 1954, Harvey attended Stripling School in Fort Worth while Lee attended Beauregard School in New Orleans,.

4. By the mid-1950s, both Oswalds had various sometimes conflicting jobs, which eventually required the FBI to destroy all the original employment (and school) records for both young men and to create a false employment and education legend.  The Social Security Administration refused to corroborate the Official Story® of "Oswald's" pre-1962 income, offering instead "Copies of three pages of the Warren Commission Report regarding employment of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to service in the Marine Corps."

5. The Marine Corps records are a gold mine: My favorite chronicles Harvey Oswald's trip to Formosa (Taiwan) while Lee was being treated for VD in Japan.  Other examples from USMC unit diaries and testimony show how the two LHOs associated with completely different groups of Marines both early and late in their enlistment periods.

6. While Russian-speaking HARVEY was in the Soviet Union, American-born LEE was active briefly as an agent provocateur in NYC, working with Marita Lorenz and anti-Castro Cubans in and around Florida, visiting Bolton Ford dealership in New Orleans, and much more.

7.  One Oswald never had a driver’s license and could not drive while the other had a valid Texas driver’s license and could drive, including doing work for Jack Ruby in 1963 involving cars.

8.   American-born LEE Oswald appeared in Baytown, TX on Labor Day weekend in 1963 attempting to purchase rifles from Fidel Castro’s friend and gun supplier Robert McKeown.  At the time, Russian-speaking HARVEY Oswald and his family were on holiday with the Murrets at Lake Pontchartrain in Louisiana.

9. In October 1963, 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.”

10. While the other Oswald was elsewhere, LEE Oswald visited 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;

11. On Nov. 2 one LHO visited Morgan's Gun Shop in Fort Worth.

12. Also on Nov. 2 LEE Oswald visited the Downtown Lincoln Mercury dealership where he test drove a car at recklessly high speeds saying he would soon come into enough money to buy a new car.  (Remember that Russian-speaking HARVEY Oswald did not have a driver’s license.)

13. On Nov. 6 or 7 LEE Oswald visited the Irving Furniture Mart for a gun part and was referred by the ladies there to the shop where Dial Ryder worked.

14. On Nov. 15, LEE Oswald went to the Southland Hotel parking garage (Allright Parking Systems) and applied for a job and asked how high the Southland Building was and if it had a good view of downtown Dallas.

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

16. On Nov. 22, both LHOs were in Dealey Plaza.  One left in a bus and then a taxi; the other got into a Nash Rambler station wagon.

Each of the 16 topics above, and others, can be discussed in more detail.  Details for all are provided HarveyandLee.net, and in even greater detail in the Harvey and Lee book.  Of course, the H&L critics want everyone to believe this is all a distraction.  It is not a distraction.  It is EVIDENCE!

 

[James Norwood]

There was a recent Ed Forum thread on Laura Kittrell posted by Doug Caddy that included a short youtube lecture focusing on Murray Chotiner.

The lecture began with the speaker stating the following about Laura Kittrell: 

"She worked for the Texas Employment Commission, and she said that she interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination on multiple occasions."

When we take a close look at Kittrell's manuscript, we learn right away that the purpose of her recalling the interviews was that she recognized at the time and felt compelled to alert the authorities, including Robert Kennedy, that she had interviewed two different men claiming to be Oswald.

Forum member Joe Bauer made an astute observation when he wrote that “I don't see the Oswald we know who was married to Marina here in the states and the one we saw on TV the weekend of November 22-24, 1963 as wearing a black leather motorcycle gang jacket and pounding his open hand on the Employment Department counselor's desk twice, while shouting ‘DAMN, I know that guy!’”  Precisely because of these details, I was led to conclude that the man slamming his hand on the desk and knocking over a flower pot was an imposter, leaving the impression of a violent malcontent that Kittrell would recall after the assassination.

Another point made in the video is that Oswald had an association with Republican political strategist Murray Chotiner.  But in her manuscript, Kittrell recounts that Oswald denied ever working Chotiner.  He only recognized the name when he overheard the conversation between Kittrell and the client ahead of him, who acknowledge that she had worked for Chotiner as a maid.  When he exclaimed, "DAMN, I know that guy!", it was likely a figure of speech and that he meant "I know who that guy is."  It is far too big a leap to speculate that Chotiner had anything to do with the JFK assassination based on the Kittrell manuscript.

There was also a lively discussion of this topic on p. 3 of Jim Hargrove's thread entitled "Was It Really Just a MOLE HUNT about 'Oswald'.'"

Edited August 8, 2020 by James Norwood

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

3 hours ago, James Norwood said:

There was a recent Ed Forum thread on Laura Kittrell posted by Doug Caddy that included a short youtube lecture focusing on Murray Chotiner.

The lecture began with the speaker stating the following about Laura Kittrell: 

"She worked for the Texas Employment Commission, and she said that she interviewed Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination on multiple occasions."

When we take a close look at Kittrell's manuscript, we learn right away that the purpose of her recalling the interviews was that she recognized at the time and felt compelled to alert the authorities, including Robert Kennedy, that she had interviewed two different men claiming to be Oswald.

Evidence exists for the imposture of an adult Oswald.  One need not ascribe each such account to witness error.  

But in no way does adult imposture require the swapping out of interchangeable preteen Oswalds.  This is where H&L jumps the shark, and all of the crack H&L squad jump that shark too, with greater glee than even the Fonz.  (If you’re young, you can look up that obscure reference.  It’s from an old TV show from whence came the term “jump the shark.”)  

3 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Forum member Joe Bauer made an astute observation when he wrote that “I don't see the Oswald we know who was married to Marina here in the states and the one we saw on TV the weekend of November 22-24, 1963 as wearing a black leather motorcycle gang jacket and pounding his open hand on the Employment Department counselor's desk twice, while shouting ‘DAMN, I know that guy!’”  Precisely because of these details, I was led to conclude that the man slamming his hand on the desk and knocking over a flower pot was an imposter, leaving the impression of a violent malcontent that Kittrell would recall after the assassination.

Yes, and yet the crack H&L squad cite a witness who recalls Oswald being both a shy, quiet and bookish boy, and a leather jacket wearing hellion who indulged in fisticuffs.  And, had she thought so, one would expect her to declare that she recalled two different boys.  Yet, she didn’t.

Kittrell’s similar observations are clearly different, in that this LHO witness actually thought they were two different men.  And the behaviour exhibited by the doppelganger in her account dovetails with other, similar LHO sightings, designed to portray an unstable and potentially violent man.

3 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Another point made in the video is that Oswald had an association with Republican political strategist Murray Chotiner.  But in her manuscript, Kittrell recounts that Oswald denied ever working Chotiner.  He only recognized the name when he overheard the conversation between Kittrell and the client ahead of him, who acknowledge that she had worked for Chotiner as a maid.  When he exclaimed, "DAMN, I know that guy!", it was likely a figure of speech and that he meant "I know who that guy is."  It is far too big a leap to speculate that Chotiner had anything to do with the JFK assassination based on the Kittrell manuscript.

There you go impeaching your own witness again. 

If Richard Nixon could be in Dallas on the big day, why do you reject this item about Murray Chotiner out of hand?  Because you have studied this in depth before dismissing it? 

Is it because the previous client Kitrrell saw also mentioned Chotiner?  Two in a row is just too fantastic to be believed?  If it hadn’t been mentioned by the woman ahead of LHO, there would have been no reason for LHO to mention him. 

By all means, post all the reasons you think Kittrell, your witness, is unreliable.

Just so we’re clear, you are ok with a preteen LHO clone, but doubt that an adult one might have known Murray Chotiner?  

"Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

3 hours ago, James Norwood said:

There was also a lively discussion of this topic on p. 3 of Jim Hargrove's thread entitled "Was It Really Just a MOLE HUNT about 'Oswald'.'"

Why only page 3, Doc?

I think it might be edifying for readers to start on page one, and read through to the terminus point at which the crack H&L squad decided to cut their losses and abandon their own thread.

Which is a fate soon to be shared by a thread called "1953-54: Harvey and Lee in Three Consecutive School Semesters."  Apparently.

The superlative H&L spokespersons seem to lose interest at a certain point.

Run out of emoticons?

Do continue.

Edited August 8, 2020 by Robert Charles-Dunne

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

On 8/6/2020 at 7:12 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

This is yet another example of how being an ideologue forces a person to say dumb things.

Yes, and you even supply the evidence for the contention.

On 8/6/2020 at 7:12 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

Where is the missing set of medical records? They're lost. Duh. That doesn't mean they never existed.

Is it your practice to believe in things existing for which there is no extant evidence?

So, H&L is a religion after all?

Explains a lot.

On 8/6/2020 at 7:12 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

My guess is that LEE Oswald was either disappeared, sent on numerous foreign intel missions, and/or was entered into a witness protection program (WPP). The federal government didn't have a formal WPP till 1970, so LEE's would have been a makeshift one if done before that time.

Your evidence for any of this is.......?

Oh, right, it's just a guess. 

An educated one?  Because it smells of nothingburger to me.

On 8/6/2020 at 7:12 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

If Jeremy were open-minded he would have figured these things out himself.

Yeah, imagine the nerve of that Jeremy guy, refusing to believe in things for which you cite no evidence.

But a guess will have to suffice, in the absence of a clue.

[James Norwood]

25 minutes ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

"Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

Robert Charles-Dunne,

In your writing above in response to my commentary on Laura Kittrell, there is nothing to suggest that you have even read the Kittrell document.  You are engaging in stream-of-consciousness writing, just like your comic sidekick, Mark Stevens.

Failing to offer any concrete evidence, you then resort to the use of the cliché, as in the quoted passage above.

I recommend that you look up in the dictionary the terms stream-of-consciousness and cliché.  An understanding of those expressions will offer you the help that you need in addressing the many shortcomings of your posts on this site.

Doc

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

41 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

  1 hour ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

"Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel."

 

41 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

In your writing above in response to my commentary on Laura Kittrell, there is nothing to suggest that you have even read the Kittrell document.  You are engaging in stream-of-consciousness writing, just like your comic sidekick, Mark Stevens.

I don't know anything about Mark Stevens other than what I've read here written by him.

Your literary advice might be worth considering if you wrote anything worth reading.   But, in fact, you can't hold a candle to Mark Stevens.  And know it.

You seem to be quite ignorant of a few things, so let me just say I was up to my arm pits in Laura Kittrell  well before you started minding the Kitchen Cinque.

If anyone is late the party, it's you.  By a couple of decades.

But where are my manners?  You were saying?

43 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

Failing to offer any concrete evidence, you then resort to the use of the cliché, as in the quoted passage above.

Yeah don't you just hate cliches that come from the Bible?  So over-rated.

Or were you intending to insult billions of Christians?  Or did you not know one of the Bible's most famous quotes?

But I forget, your good book is different.  H&L, right?

49 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

I recommend that you look up in the dictionary the terms stream-of-consciousness and cliché.  An understanding of those expressions will offer you the help that you need in addressing the many shortcomings of your posts on this site.

Funny thing is, nobody ever says that to me except followers - and I do mean followers - of H&L.

I wonder why that is.  But not much.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

Mr. Bojczuk’s explanation for the American-born LHO’s missing tooth requires that you disbelieve what you see with your own eyes.  Look at the photo.  Look at the testimony of the man who took the photo ... Look at the Marine Corps dental records showing a prosthesis that “FAILED 5-5-58.”

Game, set, and match.

To continue the sporting metaphors, Jim's reply is par for the course:

(a) He ignores the alternative explanations that have been given.

(b) He repeats his claim as though the alternative explanations didn't exist, and ... what's the other thing Jim keeps doing?

Quote

Let’s consider just a handful of other examples of the evidence for two Oswalds.

(c) Ah, yes. When he doesn't have an answer, he tries to change the subject by throwing in a few unrelated 'Harvey and Lee' talking points.

These are the actions of a propagandist, not someone who genuinely wants to find out whether the 'Harvey and Lee' theory is viable. The two 'Harvey and Lee' tricks missing on this occasion are:

(d) Try to get the critics banned (admittedly, that's usually James Norwood's department).

(e) When in trouble, cut your losses, abandon the thread and start a new one, starting again from tactic (b). I fear a brand new 'Harvey and Lee' propaganda thread may be on its way very soon!

As for Jim's "missing tooth" claim, I gave links to two threads in which several plausible alternative explanations have been given for the evidence Jim cited. How about actually dealing with the points that were made?

Here, for any casual readers who want to find out what happened the last time Jim tried to push his "missing tooth" claim, are the other threads:

- http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26512-arguments-against-the-harvey-lee-theory-the-missing-tooth/
- https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t227-armstrong-s-magic-tooth-and-the-facts-about-harvey-at-beauregard

Jim shows no inclination even to acknowledge, let alone deal with, the alternative explanations. Until he or another member of the 'Harvey and Lee' cult comes up with a convincing reason to doubt these alternative explanations, we are left with one conclusion: there was no missing tooth.

Edited August 10, 2020 by Jeremy Bojczuk
Corrected a couple of trivial typos

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim also writes:

Quote

there are several logical explanations for the mastoidectomy

Indeed there are. By far the most logical explanation is that the one set of medical records applies to the one person who was exhumed from Oswald's grave bearing a mastoidectomy defect.

What makes this explanation the most logical is that it does not require the invention of a preposterous long-term doppelganger scheme in which:

- two unrelated boys from different parts of the world, native speakers of two different languages, were chosen at a young age in the hope that when they grew up they would turn out to look virtually identical;

- and the two unrelated boys somehow did turn out to look virtually identical a decade or so later, apart from the fact that one of them had a 13-inch head;

- and each of the unrelated but virtually identical boys had a mother named Marguerite, each of whom was unrelated but virtually identical to the other;

- and one of the unrelated but virtually identical Oswalds followed the other unrelated but virtually identical Oswald around Dallas on the day of the assassination, framing him for the murders of JFK and Tippit;

- and the unrelated but virtually identical Oswald who framed the other unrelated but virtually identical Oswald blew the lid on the long-term doppelganger scheme, not only by getting himself arrested in the same place at the same time, but by telling the cops that his name, too, was Oswald;

- and one of the unrelated but virtually identical Oswalds, together with one of the unrelated but virtually identical Marguerites, vanished without a trace immediately after the assassination.

Take away all that ridiculous nonsense, and you have one person, Lee Harvey Oswald, who underwent a mastoidectomy operation in 1946, was buried in 1963, and was exhumed in 1981, complete with a mastoidectomy defect.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

We disposed of Sandy's explanation for the existence of the mastoidectomy defect on the body in Oswald's grave. What's Jim's explanation?

Quote

mine is that it was the Russian-speaking LHO all along who had it, not the American-born LHO

After two decades of pimping Armstrong's nonsensical theory, Jim has finally noticed that it's nonsense. Well done, Jim! Unfortunately, getting out of this particular bramble patch isn't straightforward. Jim can't just click his fingers and transfer biographical details from one imaginary doppelganger to another.

Armstrong's biographies of his fictional characters may have been complete inventions, but he did at least try to create a consistent scheme. He traced the progress of the imaginary doppelganger who, he claims, underwent the mastoidectomy operation at the age of six, from before the operation all the way to the day of the assassination (after which the imaginary doppelganger vanished, but that's another matter).

Would Jim be kind enough to explain where, exactly, in each doppelganger's biography John Armstrong (praise his name!) went wrong? How would Jim reconstruct those two fictional biographies to make his own scheme work?

According to the single set of medical records,* a mastoidectomy operation was carried out at Harris Hospital in Fort Worth in February 1946, on a six-year-old boy named Lee Harvey Oswald, who lived at Grandbury Road, Route no.45, Benbrook, Texas, and who was the step-son of Edwin A. Ekdahl of that address. Armstrong goes into detail about this period of doppelganger A's life in the first 30 pages or so of Harvey and Lee. How would Jim go about transferring this biographical detail to doppelganger B? What was happening to doppelganger A while all of this was going on?

According to Jim, the boy who had the operation was a Russian-speaking eastern European, perhaps a Hungarian refugee, perhaps a Russian war orphan; no-one really knows because the boy entered the US without leaving a trace in the immigration records, as fictional characters tend to do. If this imaginary doppelganger entered the US before 1946, how much time did this allow him to have learned Russian before he arrived?

* Source:
Warren Commission Exhibit 2218 (Hearings, vol.25, p.118): https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=148