Question About Harvey, Lee, and the "Two Marguerites"

[Cory Santos]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

That is not at all what he said. He said, after not having seen Lee in 10 years, that his appearance was quite different -- that he had lost weight and had started to go bald. He never once said or even intimated that the person he was in the presence of was NOT his brother.

Furthermore, there are so many logical fallacies one would have to accept with a Marguerite doppelganger theory. For one thing, why on earth would the evil government plotters allow ANY Marguerite to give interview after interview for another 18 years after the assassination, much less testify to the Warren Commission? Do you believe Robert Oswald just happily went along with the conspiracy that his mother was actually two different people? It defies credulity.

Obviously the question you need to ask was “which Robert Oswald was being asked”.   Wait, you didn’t know there were two?   I heard they needed an extra to cover up the extra John Pic.   

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

I'm glad to see that this latest outbreak of double-doppelganger nonsense is being treated with the seriousness it deserves. My Collins English Dictionary defines 'debunk' as: "to expose the pretensions or falseness of, esp. by ridicule." 

W. Niederhut writes:

Quote

Nobel Laureate Luis Armstrong promulgated his bogus cellophane-wrapped melon propulsion theory about JFK's head

Quite a polymath, that fellow. Won a Nobel Prize in physics, invented a preposterous theory about doppelgangers, and walked on the Moon,* all while playing the trumpet in a groovy jazz style.

On a more serious note (if you'll pardon the musical pun), Jonathan has pointed out the problem with the 'John Pic didn't recognise Lee' talking point. I'd strongly recommend looking at the links I provided earlier; pretty much every other H&L talking point that might sound persuasive at first glance has been debunked, somewhere.

--

* Or did he? The moon landings were faked, according to Jack White, co-inventor of the 'Harvey and Lee' theory:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/5911-jack-whites-aulis-apollo-hoax-investigation-a-rebuttal/

[Sandy Larsen]

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

8 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Meanwhile, how do explain John Pic's testimony that the man we all know as Lee Harvey Oswald was not his younger half-brother Lee Oswald?

 

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

That is not at all what he said. He said, after not having seen Lee in 10 years, that his appearance was quite different -- that he had lost weight and had started to go bald.

 

Jonathan just made that up.

Here is John Pic's WC testimony:

Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that?
Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.

According to Mr. Jenner, John Pic saw his brother Lee Harvey Oswald the very same year that picture was taken. Yet Pic didn't recognize the boy in the photo as his brother.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

W.

Regarding the mole, I don't know which moles have been been drawn in on photographs and which haven't. But I have seen photos of a young Marguerite where the mole can be seen just touching the edge of her lower eyelid. Yet the mole seen on the old Marguerite is noticeably lower.... 2 or 3 mm lower.

Skin of course does droop as it ages, but marks on the skin stay in the same place relative to other features. A mole touching the edge of the eyelid cannot have moved away from the edge.

It is my belief that the real Marguerite did have a mole touching the edge of her eyelid and that she likely used makeup in an attempt to conceal it. I believe that the fake Marguerite drew her mole on with eyeliner.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

19 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

As for the alleged "debunking" of John Armstrong's doppelganger research about Oswald, I'm underwhelmed. [Emphasis is Sandy's.]

 

As you should be, W.

This thread gives a a good example of what a so-called H&L debunking is, as promulgated by the anti-H&L group.

First, W brings up the topic of John Pic, in his WC testimony, not recognizing his brother LHO in the Bronx zoo photo.

Then we have Jonathan supposedly debunking Armstrong's "interpretation" of the testimony by saying:

[John Pic] said, after not having seen Lee in 10 years, that his appearance was quite different -- that he had lost weight and had started to go bald. He never once said or even intimated that the person he was in the presence of was NOT his brother.

Then we have Jeremy embracing Jonathan's debunking without even checking it out, saying:

Jonathan has pointed out the problem with the 'John Pic didn't recognise Lee' talking point.'

But, as I showed above, Jonathan, and now also Jeremy, are wrong about this.

Jeremy also said:

I'd strongly recommend looking at the links I provided earlier; pretty much every other H&L talking point that might sound persuasive at first glance has been debunked, somewhere.

I strongly recommend the same thing. Because people who do follow those links will find out that little of what John wrote has truly been debunked.

 

[W. Niederhut]

Well said, Sandy.

Jonathan Cohen, obviously, struck out on the John Pic testimony issue.  There's, obviously, more to Armstrong's. doppelganger data than some people imagine.

As for this debate about Armstrong's  H & L research and my original hypothetical question, hats off to Tony Krome and Henry Frost for presenting some valuable evidence about the subject.

I learn something every day on this forum.

I started this discussion with questions, not answers.  Tony answered one of my questions.

There's an old Chinese proverb that used to make the rounds at the Massachusetts General Hospital when I was a medical student.

"He who asks a question is a fool for one minute.  He who doesn't ask a question is a fool forever."

[Sandy Larsen]

W,

Here is Marguerite Oswald in 1957 and 1960 respectively:

 

Here she is in circa 1956 and 1963 respectively:

 

Oh my, she must have had yo-yo weight problem, being heavy in 1956, slender in 1957 through 1960, then heavy again in 1963. (And she sure did age from 1960 to 1963.)

Below is a 1954 photo.

 

Which Marguerite do you think this one resembles? The slender one or the heavy one? Here's a clue... see her deeply sloping eyebrows? Which of the Marguerites above has sloping eyebrows?

Now, having pointed out the inconsistencies, I do have to admit one consistent thing that makes me pause. And that is that there is a line running down the left side of her neck (her left) in every photo. A dimple in her neck fat or something?

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jonathan just made that up.

Here is John Pic's WC testimony:

Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that?
Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.

According to Mr. Jenner, John Pic saw his brother Lee Harvey Oswald the very same year that picture was taken. Yet Pic didn't recognize the boy in the photo as his brother.

 

I didn't make up anything. Your reading comprehension is poor, as usual. Pic's testimony is below, regarding his first encounter with Oswald after not having seen him for more than a decade. Just because he said he didn't recognize pre-teen Oswald in one solitary photo in no way means he thought his brother had been replaced by a doppelganger, and it's that type of fact-free assumption that makes "Harvey and Lee" the laughingstock of the assassination research community.

 

Mr. JENNER. You noticed, did you. a material change, physically first, let’s take his physical appearance?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Physically I noticed that.

Mr. JENNER. What did you notice?

Mr. PIC. He was much thinner than I had remembered him. He didn’t have as much hair.

Mr. JENNER. Did that arrest your attention ? Was that a material difference? Did that strike you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir ; it struck me quite profusely.

Mr. JENNER. What else did you notice about his physical appearance that arrested your attention?

Mr. PIC. His face features were somewhat different, being his eyes were set back maybe, you know like in these Army pictures, they looked different than I remembered him. His face was rounder. Marilyn had described him to me when he went in the Marine Corps as having a bull neck. This I didn’t notice at all. I looked for this, I didn’t notice this at all, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He seemed more slender?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNEB. He had materially less hair?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. His eyes seemed a little sunken?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Jonathan Cohen

[Sandy Larsen]

28 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I didn't make up anything. Your reading comprehension is poor, as usual. Pic's testimony is below, regarding his first encounter with Oswald after not having seen him for more than a decade.

Mr. JENNER. You noticed, did you. a material change, physically first, let’s take his physical appearance?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir. Physically I noticed that.

Mr. JENNER. What did you notice?

Mr. PIC. He was much thinner than I had remembered him. He didn’t have as much hair.

Mr. JENNER. Did that arrest your attention ? Was that a material difference? Did that strike you?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir ; it struck me quite profusely.

Mr. JENNER. What else did you notice about his physical appearance that arrested your attention?

Mr. PIC. His face features were somewhat different, being his eyes were set back maybe, you know like in these Army pictures, they looked different than I remembered him. His face was rounder. Marilyn had described him to me when he went in the Marine Corps as having a bull neck. This I didn’t notice at all. I looked for this, I didn’t notice this at all, sir.

Mr. JENNER. He seemed more slender?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNEB. He had materially less hair?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER. His eyes seemed a little sunken?

Mr. PIC. Yes, sir.

 

What does that have to do with Pic not recognizing LHO in the Bronx Zoo photo?

 

28 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Just because [Pic] said he didn't recognize pre-teen Oswald in one solitary photo in no way means he thought his brother had been replaced by a doppelganger, and it's that type of fact-free assumption that makes "Harvey and Lee" the laughingstock of the assassination research community.

 

I never said that Pic "thought his brother had been replaced by a doppelganger." I've never seen anybody saying that.

 

28 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Your reading comprehension is poor, as usual.

 

Hey, you're the one who confused "I don't recognize him as my brother" with "my brother looked different after ten years."

 

[W. Niederhut]

7 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

I'm glad to see that this latest outbreak of double-doppelganger nonsense is being treated with the seriousness it deserves. My Collins English Dictionary defines 'debunk' as: "to expose the pretensions or falseness of, esp. by ridicule." 

W. Niederhut writes:

Quite a polymath, that fellow. Won a Nobel Prize in physics, invented a preposterous theory about doppelgangers, and walked on the Moon,* all while playing the trumpet in a groovy jazz style.

On a more serious note (if you'll pardon the musical pun), Jonathan has pointed out the problem with the 'John Pic didn't recognise Lee' talking point. I'd strongly recommend looking at the links I provided earlier; pretty much every other H&L talking point that might sound persuasive at first glance has been debunked, somewhere.

--

* Or did he? The moon landings were faked, according to Jack White, co-inventor of the 'Harvey and Lee' theory:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/5911-jack-whites-aulis-apollo-hoax-investigation-a-rebuttal/

I want to point out that this glib, inaccurate post by Jeremy Boczjuck offers nothing of real value to our discussion here of Armstrong's Oswald research.  It also includes a deliberate misquotation attributed to an Education Forum member, and an inaccurate statement about John Pic's testimony that he didn't recognize his brother Lee as the child in the Bronx Zoo photo.

There's too much of this kind of nonsense on the subject, and not enough honest discussion of the evidence.

In contrast, Tony Krome and Henry Frost have presented some useful photographic evidence for our discussion, rather than simply repeating the blather about Armstrong's work allegedly being "debunked."

[Sandy Larsen]

On 9/4/2022 at 2:33 AM, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

A good deal of Armstrong's evidence is not accurate (wilfully misinterpreted interviews with witnesses 40 years after the event; wilfully misinterpreted documents; amateurishly misinterpreted photographs, etc).

 

And this statement -- untrue as far as I can tell --  is potentially libelous.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

24 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

In contrast, Tony Krome and Henry Frost have presented some useful photographic evidence for our discussion, rather than simply repeating the blather about Armstrong's work allegedly being "debunked."

 

Don't give Tony Krome too much credit. He came into the thread saying that H&L is "totally debunked," which is completely untrue.

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Hey, you're the one who confused "I don't recognize him as my brother" with "my brother looked different after ten years."

Dead wrong, again. This aspect of the thread began when W. Niederhut referenced "John Pic's testimony that the man we all know as Lee Harvey Oswald was not his younger half-brother Lee Oswald." John Pic never said it "was not" Oswald. He simply said he didn't recognize him in one of many photos shown to him while testifying. I then provided further evidence from Pic's testimony that he noticed significant changes in Oswald's appearance after not having seen him in person for more than a decade. Not a shred of what Pic said supports the notion that there was more than one Oswald or that Pic ever thought there was.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Dead wrong, again. This aspect of the thread began when W. Niederhut referenced "John Pic's testimony that the man we all know as Lee Harvey Oswald was not his younger half-brother Lee Oswald." John Pic never said it "was not" Oswald. He simply said he didn't recognize him in one of many photos shown to him while testifying. I then provided further evidence from Pic's testimony that he noticed significant changes in Oswald's appearance after not having seen him in person for more than a decade. Not a shred of what Pic said supports the notion that there was more than one Oswald or that Pic ever thought there was.

Jonathan,

      I wasn't using quotation marks, but merely paraphrasing John Pic's claims about not recognizing Oswald as his younger brother.

     What is your opinion about "Harvey" Oswald's alleged ability to read and discuss Turgenev and Dostoevsky in Russian?

     It, certainly, struck me as something quite unusual for a formerly dyslexic Texas teenager who dropped out of high school at a young age to join the Marines.  I can't picture Lee Oswald reading and discussing the philosophical musings of Ivan Karamazov in Russian!

      Are you familiar with Armstrong's discussion of that subject?

Edited September 5, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Dead wrong, again.

 

Jeez Jonathan, you need to review the conversation carefully.

 

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

This aspect of the thread began when W. Niederhut referenced "John Pic's testimony that the man we all know as Lee Harvey Oswald was not his younger half-brother Lee Oswald."

 

Right. W was referring to John Pic's testimony where he said he didn't recognize the boy in the picture taken at Bronx Zoo. W asked why it was Pic didn't know the boy was his younger half-brother.

 

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

John Pic never said it "was not" Oswald. He simply said he didn't recognize him in one of many photos shown to him while testifying.

 

Pic said he didn't recognize the boy as his younger half brother. Which W understood as Pic's essentially saying that the boy wasn't his half-brother.

If you don't like the way W understood the testimony, take that up with him. But I knew what W was talking about and so did Jeremy.

 

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I then provided further evidence from Pic's testimony that he noticed significant changes in Oswald's appearance after not having seen him in person for more than a decade.

 

Your evidence had nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

 

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Not a shred of what Pic said supports the notion that there was more than one Oswald or that Pic ever thought there was.

 

Pic was with his half-brother Lee during the same period of time that the picture of the boy at Bronx Zoo was taken. The boy was (supposedly) Lee, and yet Pic didn't recognize him in the picture? That supports the notion that there were two LHOs. The one in the Bronx Zoo photo was the one that wasn't Pic's half-brother.