Jump to content
The Education Forum

John Armstrong on Black Op Radio tonight


Jim Hargrove
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Lee Harvey Oswald was one person, and did not lose any of his teeth in a fight at school. This topic was discussed back in 2020, when we discovered, unsurprisingly, that yet another piece of 'Harvey and Lee' evidence possessed a plausible, everyday explanation. In fact, it possessed three plausible, everyday explanations:

If even one plausible, everyday explanation exists for a body of evidence, there is no good reason to invent a far-fetched explanation involving doppelganger Oswalds, doppelganger Marguerites, a team of expert photo-fakers, imaginary face masks, and strange earlobes.

As always, Mr. Bojczuk attempts to win his argument with a flurry of links that prove nothing!  Unfortunately for him, the February 21, 1964 edition of LIFE Magazine was printed, widely distributed, and can still be easily obtained.  And it shows what no number of links can.  Here, again, is the obvious truth:

In the fall of 1954, LEE Oswald was in the 9th grade at Beauregard JHS, where he became friends with a kid named Ed Voebel after Voebel witnessed him in a protracted fight with the Neumeyer brothers, Johnny and Mike.  Voebel and a couple of other kids attempted to patch Lee up.  This was in November. Voebel told the Warren Commission that Oswald lost a tooth in the fight.

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.

Soon after the fight, Voebel took a famous photograph of Oswald that he eventually sold to LIFE magazine after the assassination.  It appears to show LEE Oswald with a missing tooth.

life_magazine_missing_tooth.jpg

life_magazine_missing_tooth_closeup.jpg

missing_tooth_adjusted.jpg

About a half century later, after one of a number of meetings John Armstrong had with Marina (Oswald) Porter, she handed him all the original photos of the 1981 exhumation.  Here is one of them.

exhume.jpg

As you can see, there is no missing front tooth.

From this starting point, Sandy Larsen developed substantially more evidence.  John Butler also discovered recently that the 1955 Civil Air Patrol photo (which also depicts David Ferrie) seems to show American-born LEE Oswald with a missing tooth that is clearly present in the exhumation photo.

I personally have the Feb. 21, 1964 edition of LIFE Magazine which contains the big halftone reproduction of Voebel's photo that fills up all of page 70 and extends onto page 71. The images above (except Marina's exhumation graphic) were from my scanner, or processed from a scans I made, and I did my best to make the most accurate reproductions possible.

Edited by Jim Hargrove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Let’s get back to the subject of this thread….

The purpose of John’s Black Op Radio address was to present the evidence he has gathered indicating that Capt. William Westbrook and reserve officer Kenneth Croy probably conspired with an Oswald look-alike to murder J. D. Tippit, blame it and the Kennedy hit on Lee Harvey Oswald, and to help get Oswald silenced permanently.

We think Westbrook and Croy were the two police officers who boarded the Marsalis Ave bus soon after Oswald left it.

Croy was probably in car #207 with Westbrook when it honked in front of Oswald’s boarding house.

Croy was probably in the car with Westbrook that was seen by Mrs. Holan in the narrow driveway blocked by Tippit’s car near 10th and Patton.

Croy himself said he was the first officer at the Tippit murder scene.

Croy also claimed that he found the other “Oswald” wallet at 10th and Patton and gave it to Westbrook.  (Although he was probably lying to protect Westbrook.)
 

Croy_1.png

Evidence suggests it was reserve officer Ken Croy who led Jack Ruby—at precisely the right moment—to where Oswald could be killed on the parking lot ramp by the jail office.  It should be noted that only about five minutes expired between the time Ruby used Western Union to send money to a stripper and the time he shot Oswald.  The timing was stunning, and was surely no accident.

C1.png

See additional images near the bottom of this page to see how quickly Ruby followed Croy to the scene.

And now let’s consider the chart that John is working on.  Here is the latest version:

Parking_with_description_copy.png

The Warren Commission wanted us to believe that Ruby “found” Oswald by walking through the narrow parking ramp on Main and Commerce streets.  But why would he enter that narrow space that was guarded by police and filled with bystanders seeking to get a look at Oswald?  More likely, Ruby entered via the main entrance to the building and walked down the stairs to the parking lot area.  DPD Officer Brock was guarding that staircase, but only until 10:45 am, when he was reassigned to traffic duty.  According to a document discovered by David Josephs working with John on this, Officer Brock was replaced by a reserve officer—we suspect, who else, but Kenneth Croy.

It should be noted that both William Westbrook and Kenneth Croy had rather ridiculous stories claiming how they spent a considerable portion of the afternoon of Nov. 22, 1963.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll deal with Bill Fite's points in order.

First of all, it's important to remember that in this hypothetical scenario we are not dealing with the actual Lee Harvey Oswald, or his actual defection, or his actual competence in Russian. We're dealing with the 'Harvey and Lee' theory's version of each, and whether the use of doppelgangers would have made sense even in that fantasy world.

In 'Harvey and Lee' world, the CIA masterminds began their scheming in the late 1940s or early 1950s, around a decade before the real-life Lee Harvey Oswald's defection. Altogether, the imaginary scheme would have been running for maybe a decade and a half, until the real-life Oswald's death.

(1) The need for a serviceman who would be willing to defect and be able to pass security checks.

I'm not sure that the prospect of defecting then returning after a couple of years, as several of the real-life defectors did, would rule out huge numbers of the three million or so candidates, as Bill speculates. Surely almost all US servicemen would pass any security checks.

(2) The difficulty of learning Russian.

For a native English speaker such as the one and only Lee Harvey Oswald, Slavonic languages require more effort to learn than Romance languages (e.g. French or Italian) or other Germanic languages, because they have less in common with English than those languages do. Because they are related to English, Slavonic languages require less effort to learn than maybe 90% of the rest of the world's languages.

But none of that is relevant to the point at issue. In hypothetical 'Harvey and Lee' land, the CIA masterminds would have had around a decade, maybe longer, to get their defector up to speed in Russian. A decade is more than enough time for an intelligent, motivated person with an aptitude for languages to reach the level required.

(3) Learning languages gets difficult after a certain age.

Difficult, but perfectly possible. Plenty of adults learn foreign languages to a reasonable level. Remember, we are in 'Harvey and Lee' world here. According to the theory, the defector only required enough Russian to understand what was going on around him.

(4) "career service members who would be ruled out"

I'm not sure that large numbers of such people would be ruled out. They were, after all, motivated to serve what they thought of as their country, and they were conditioned to obey orders. If appeals to patriotism failed, offer them a nice incentive on their guaranteed safe return to the US, such as a cosy desk job at HQ or a lump sum in a Swiss bank account, which would surely be cheaper than running two households of imaginary doppelgangers for a decade or more.

(5) "48 weeks of intensive instruction for Russian" and "Some might drop out or flunk out"

Again, the 'Harvey and Lee' theory's imaginary masterminds would have had a decade or more at their disposal. There wouldn't have been any trouble getting a suitable candidate's Russian to the necessary level.

Bill makes a good point about drop-outs. I hadn't thought of that! No doubt, in 'Harvey and Lee' world, it would have been necessary to recruit two or even three candidates, to ensure that at least one would last the distance and be ready to defect a decade later.

But that increases the problem for the 'Harvey and Lee' theory, which requires not one but at least four people to be recruited for every defector. There would now be four points of weakness. If any of the four main characters packed it in, the scheme would fail.

If, say, three potential defectors were required, and the masterminds decided to go down the unnecessarily complex doppelganger route, they would have needed to recruit at least 12 people:

  1. the three potential defectors;
  2. plus the three potential defectors' mothers;
  3. plus the three potential defectors' doppelgangers;
  4. plus the three potential defectors' mothers' doppelgangers;
  5. not forgetting the other members of each of the three families who would also be in on the scam, as Robert and Marina Oswald supposedly were;
  6. and an expanded team of photo-fakers and document-forgers, who would have had three times as many photos to fake and documents to forge.

Instead, why not simply recruit three potential defectors?

Let's return to the question I asked Jim. Where, in Armstrong's work, can we find the missing link in the 'Harvey and Lee' theory?

What reasoning would the imaginary masterminds have used? Why would they have decided to recruit doppelgangers when a far simpler alternative would have been available?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Let's return to the question I asked Jim. Where, in Armstrong's work, can we find the missing link in the 'Harvey and Lee' theory?

Most of the early leaders of the CIA were ex-OSS people.  The OSS did just about anything they could to end WW2.  These tactics were carried on when our leaders decided that the new enemy was the Soviet Union.  They were the enemy, and anything could be used against them.

"Frank Wisner was a Wall Street lawyer and during WW II worked for the Office of Strategic Services (predecessor of the CIA). After World War II ended thousands of Eastern European refugees were brought to the United States under his supervision. National Security Council (NSC) records show that Wisner, the CIA's director of clandestine operations, oversaw the re-location of thousands of anti-Communist exiles to the United States as a means of rewarding them for conducting secret operations against the Soviets. Wisner became the CIA and State Department’s expert on European war refugees, and secretly subsidized the refugee relief organizations that brought these Eastern Bloc refugees to the United States throughout the 1940s and early 1950s.

Wisner and his group recognized they could use these Eastern European immigrant's knowledge, customs, and familiarity with their respective homelands. Wisner asked the National Security Council (NSC) to sanction the “systematic” use of such refugees, and they (the NSC) agreed. The NSC soon issued a top-secret intelligence directive (NSCID No. 14), which even today remains "classified," that authorized both the FBI and the CIA to find and jointly exploit the knowledge, experience, and talents of well over 200,000 Eastern European refugees resettled in the USA."

This quote doesn't recognize the work of Allen Dulles.  Dulles, the chief OSS agent in Switzerland, began the rescue of refugees for what information they had on the Germans.  They were eventually shipped to the US.  

Here's a speculation for JB and JC based on the quote above from Harvey and Lee.  I credit Allen Dulles of the OSS/CIA as the leader of this need to use refugees.  They would and could use these you people in the years to come as spies in many different countries.  They may have had many doppelganger teams.  Who knows.  Only one has come to light.  Would our beloved CIA stop at the use of just one refugee?  I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Butler writes:

Quote

I credit Allen Dulles of the OSS/CIA as the leader of this need to use refugees.  They would and could use these you people in the years to come as spies in many different countries.  They may have had many doppelganger teams.  Who knows.  Only one has come to light.  Would our beloved CIA stop at the use of just one refugee?  I don't think so.

That doesn't come close to answering the question I posed.

Why would Dulles or anyone else in the CIA have decided to set up a long-term scheme involving four people, including unrelated lookalikes (Lee Harvey Oswald and his doppelganger, and Marguerite Oswald and her doppelganger), when all they would have needed to do was recruit one person and get him to learn Russian?

They would have had more than enough time to get a native English speaker to learn Russian, and more than enough potential candidates. Why didn't they just do this? What exactly would their reasoning have been for using doppelgangers when they didn't need to?

Or, if Bill Fite's suggestion is correct and one or more back-up defectors were required, why would Dulles (or whoever) have decided to recruit eight people when they only needed to recruit two, or recruit twelve people when they only needed to recruit three (and so on)?

I asked Jim to show us how John Armstrong had resolved this obvious problem with his theory. It looks as though Jim's having trouble answering that one. Has John Butler noticed anything in Harvey and Lee that explains the masterminds' preference for such an unnecessarily complex scheme?

Doppelgangers are the central feature of the 'Harvey and Lee' theory. But no-one, including John Armstrong, seems to know why they were necessary.

Dulles and his fellow masterminds must have had a good reason for doing what they did, mustn't they? What was their good reason for using doppelgangers when there was no need to do so?

Edited by Jeremy Bojczuk
Corrected the spelling of Bill Fite's name
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

That doesn't come close to answering the question I posed.

Then re-read the first part that you omit.

"Frank Wisner was a Wall Street lawyer and during WW II worked for the Office of Strategic Services (predecessor of the CIA). After World War II ended thousands of Eastern European refugees were brought to the United States under his supervision. National Security Council (NSC) records show that Wisner, the CIA's director of clandestine operations, oversaw the re-location of thousands of anti-Communist exiles to the United States as a means of rewarding them for conducting secret operations against the Soviets. Wisner became the CIA and State Department’s expert on European war refugees, and secretly subsidized the refugee relief organizations that brought these Eastern Bloc refugees to the United States throughout the 1940s and early 1950s.

Wisner and his group recognized they could use these Eastern European immigrant's knowledge, customs, and familiarity with their respective homelands. Wisner asked the National Security Council (NSC) to sanction the “systematic” use of such refugees, and they (the NSC) agreed. The NSC soon issued a top-secret intelligence directive (NSCID No. 14), which even today remains "classified," that authorized both the FBI and the CIA to find and jointly exploit the knowledge, experience, and talents of well over 200,000 Eastern European refugees resettled in the USA.Frank Wisner was a Wall Street lawyer and during WW II worked for the Office of Strategic Services (predecessor of the CIA). After World War II ended thousands of Eastern European refugees were brought to the United States under his supervision. National Security Council (NSC) records show that Wisner, the CIA's director of clandestine operations, oversaw the re-location of thousands of anti-Communist exiles to the United States as a means of rewarding them for conducting secret operations against the Soviets. Wisner became the CIA and State Department’s expert on European war refugees, and secretly subsidized the refugee relief organizations that brought these Eastern Bloc refugees to the United States throughout the 1940s and early 1950s.

Wisner and his group recognized they could use these Eastern European immigrant's knowledge, customs, and familiarity with their respective homelands. Wisner asked the National Security Council (NSC) to sanction the “systematic” use of such refugees, and they (the NSC) agreed. The NSC soon issued a top-secret intelligence directive (NSCID No. 14), which even today remains "classified," that authorized both the FBI and the CIA to find and jointly exploit the knowledge, experience, and talents of well over 200,000 Eastern European refugees resettled in the USA."

Re-posting this bit is useless and a foolish endeavor.  Why?  No answer is good enough for JB.  His task is to ask the (to him) the question that can't be answered.  When answered he will reject the answer provided and demand that you answer the question that you didn't answer correctly (to him). 

HIs questions are rhetorical.  So, this is my last answer.     

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, John Butler has failed to address the question I asked.

I'm not sure if he even understands the question I asked. It had nothing to do with whether Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, Elvis Presley or the Dalai Lama had access to 200,000 eastern European refugees.

The question was: why use doppelgangers when there was no need to use doppelgangers?

I assume John and Jim accept that those hypothetical CIA masterminds would have had more than one method of achieving their hypothetical goal. Why would the masterminds have decided to use an obscure, complicated method when an obvious, straightforward method would have been available? Why wouldn't they have simply recruited one American and allowed him to learn Russian?

The masterminds must have had a good reason for deciding to implement a ridiculously elaborate double-doppelganger scheme rather a far simpler and more obvious scheme. What, according to the 'Harvey and Lee' theory, was their reason for making that decision?

How does John Armstrong explain the masterminds' decision? It was Armstrong who came up with the theory in the first place (along with someone who thought the moon landings were faked and that no planes hit the World Trade Center). He must have worked this out to his own satisfaction. What does he have to say about this in his 900-plus page book, Harvey and Lee?

Again, could John or Jim please provide me with a page reference, or a link to a web page, where Armstrong discusses this fundamental aspect of his theory?

Or is it safe to conclude that Armstrong didn't bother to do this?

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...