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

[Jonathan Cohen]

39 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

So I find it rather odd that some current forum members have repeatedly claimed that Greg Parker, W. Tracy Parnell, et.al., have "debunked" Armstrong's data.

And I find it rather odd that you, despite telling us you haven't even read Armstrong's book, are able to proclaim that none of the work done over the past 20-plus years by top researchers passes muster for you in offering plausible, logical alternative explanations for a decades-long secret government doppelganger project.

[W. Niederhut]

55 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

And I find it rather odd that you, despite telling us you haven't even read Armstrong's book, are able to proclaim that none of the work done over the past 20-plus years by top researchers passes muster for you in offering plausible, logical alternative explanations for a decades-long secret government doppelganger project.

This isn't about me, Cohen.

Study the original H & L thread I posted, which ran from 2004 to 2015.

Hargrove, Josephs, and Gaal debated Armstrong's evidence in great detail with Greg Parker, W. Tracy Parnell, and others.   I didn't see any evidence of the "debunking" that you and Bojczuk keep mentioning.

At one point, Greg Parker was even reproached by Don Jeffries for telling people that they shouldn't click on Hargrove's H & L links, because the site might have computer viruses!

Edited September 8, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Jonathan Cohen]

43 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

This isn't about me, Cohen.

Study the original H & L thread I posted, which ran from 2004 to 2015.

Hargrove, Josephs, and Gaal debated Armstrong's evidence in great detail with Greg Parker, W. Tracy Parnell, and others.   I didn't see any evidence of the "debunking" that you and Bojczuk keep mentioning.

At one point, Greg Parker was even reproached by Don Jeffries for telling people that they shouldn't click on Hargrove's H & L links, because the site might have computer viruses!

It's not about you? You started the thread! And have since proceeded to tell everyone that you don't "see any evidence" that there are plausible alternatives to the "Harvey and Lee" theory here on the Education Forum or anywhere else. So, what exactly is it that we're doing here now?

[Ron Bulman]

3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

It's not about you? You started the thread! And have since proceeded to tell everyone that you don't "see any evidence" that there are plausible alternatives to the "Harvey and Lee" theory here on the Education Forum or anywhere else. So, what exactly is it that we're doing here now?

Talking about two LHO's and two Marguritte's, the first a fact.

[W. Niederhut]

4 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

It's not about you? You started the thread! And have since proceeded to tell everyone that you don't "see any evidence" that there are plausible alternatives to the "Harvey and Lee" theory here on the Education Forum or anywhere else. So, what exactly is it that we're doing here now?

You misquoted  me.  What I said is that your claim (and Bojzcuk's) that Armstrong's H&L data has been "debunked" doesn't appear to be supported by the evidence discussed on the various Education Forum threads-- including the lengthy debate between Greg Parker, Jim Hargrove, and David Josephs (referenced above.)  If anything, Hargrove and Josephs debunked most of Greg Parker's arguments.

People here should judge that debate for themselves.

And the fact that I started this thread with some questions about Armstrong's H&L theory does not mean that the thread is about me.   That's ridiculous.   It's an ad hominem deflection from the subject of the thread-- the Oswald Project.

As for your final question, I, frankly, don't know what you are doing here now.

 I, myself, am trying to make sense of Oswald's bewildering history.

In the past two weeks I re-read Don DeLillo's novel Libra, John Newman's Oswald and the CIA, and Armstrong's Harvey and Lee essays in DiEugenio's The Assassinations anthology.

I still have more questions than answers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Ron Bulman]

Two O's first. 

Fat boy in Mexico City was not O.  Mailing the rifle order or at work?  Driving car on a test drive at 80 mph with no license.  Shooting at another man's target to piss him off.  Shirley, you jest. 

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

W. Niederhut writes:

Quote

What I said is that your [Jonathan's] claim (and Bojzcuk's) that Armstrong's H&L data has been "debunked" doesn't appear to be supported by the evidence discussed on the various Education Forum threads

But Jonathan actually supplied a link to an Education Forum thread in which an important part of the 'Harvey and Lee' fantasy was taken to pieces:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26571-oswalds-language-abilities-and-evidence-related-to-his-soviet-soujourn-1959-63/page/7/

If W. Niederhut has spotted any problems with the evidence and arguments presented there, perhaps he could let us know what they are, and we can discuss them. If he hasn't, then he must accept that a fundamental aspect of H&L doctrine (that the defector Oswald was a native speaker of Russian) is unfounded; in other words, it has been debunked.

There are numerous other Ed Forum threads (and ROKC forum threads) in which plausible non-doppelganger explanations have been supplied for evidence put forward by the double-doppelganger faithful. If an item of evidence has both a far-fetched explanation (two pairs of doppelgangers, maintained by the CIA for over a decade!) and a plausible explanation (no doppelgangers, just normal people!), it's irrational to prefer the far-fetched explanation over the plausible one. Isn't it?

Quote

I also noticed that Greg Parker actually referenced the work of the CIA propagandist John McAdams on some of his anti-H&L posts. A big red flag.

W. Niederhut is repeating the mistake he made earlier, when he dismissed Tracy Parnell's article about the Hoover memo on the grounds that Tracy supports the lone-nut theory.

Tracy's arguments should be evaluated on their merits, as should McAdams's and everyone else's. If Tracy or McAdams or any other lone-nut supporter makes a good argument against the double-doppelganger theory, so much the worse for the double-doppelganger theory. W. Niederhut, who seems keen to use the term ad hominem, should deal with the arguments, not with the people who put forward the arguments.

On that point, has W. Niederhut identified any problems with Tracy's article? If he has, could he let us know what they are, so that we can discuss them? If he hasn't, will he admit that at least one H&L claim has been debunked?

I'm intrigued by the phrase "A big red flag." What is W. Niederhut implying here?

1. McAdams criticised the H&L nonsense;
2. McAdams was a CIA propagandist;
3. Greg Parker criticised the H&L nonsense by referring to McAdmas;
4. therefore ... what, exactly?

Quote

It's an ad hominem deflection from the subject of the thread-- the Oswald Project.

The Oswald Project! W. Niederhut seems to think it's a real thing. The term was coined by James Wilcott, and was co-opted by the double-doppelganger folks to mean something different.

Wilcott's 'Oswald Project' simply referred to his claim that Oswald was a paid employee of the CIA. Wilcott's version contradicts several fundamental aspects of the 'Harvey and Lee' nonsense:

• Oswald was one person, not a pair of doppelgangers.
• By implication, Oswald's mother was also one person, not a pair of doppelgangers.
• Oswald was recruited by the CIA while in the Marines, not a decade or more earlier, while a child.
• Oswald the false defector was a native English-speaking American, not a native Russian-speaking Eastern European refugee.

Wilcott's claim that an 'Oswald Project' existed provides no support for the 'Harvey and Lee' fantasy; in fact, it undermines that fantasy.

[Sandy Larsen]

On 9/8/2022 at 3:05 AM, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Tracy is indeed a Warren Report supporter, but that is as relevant as his inside leg measurement, his taste in music, or what he ate for dinner last Tuesday.

 

You cherry-pick Tracy's arguments, accepting virtually ALL of those which are anti-H&L and rejecting most that are anti-CT (i.e. pro-WC).

That is why what W said is relevant.

 

On 9/8/2022 at 3:05 AM, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

As I have pointed out several times now, most of the questions a newcomer might raise have been answered already, usually several times over. Those answers are readily available, but that still requires the willingness to look for them.

 

I also urge newcomers to compare the pro-H&L evidence and arguments to the anti-H&L evidence and arguments.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Shirley, you jest. 

 

LOL, and don't call me Surely!

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

If an item of evidence has both a far-fetched explanation (two pairs of doppelgangers, maintained by the CIA for over a decade!) and a plausible explanation (no doppelgangers, just normal people!), it's irrational to prefer the far-fetched explanation over the plausible one. Isn't it?

 

Not if you have a mountain of evidence for the so-called far-fetched explanation that has to be neutralized with far-fetched alternative explanations.

I agree with you that, given a single piece of H&L evidence, often it can attributed to an innocent explanation. The problem is, there is far too much H&L evidence to believably be explained away that way.

I mean, how often do you think a junior high school record accidentally gets a full semester of grades from another student? How often does one's tipped-over molars spontaneously straighten up and move over to close a gap without the use of dental braces? How often is it that a high school dropout with dyslexia become proficient in a second language, capable of reading the kinds of books that Oswald did? How often is it that a whole family thinks a child among them attended a particular school when in fact he attended another? And on and on.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

The Oswald Project! W. Niederhut seems to think it's a real thing.

 

And you think the Oswald Project was not real? Why not?

Oh I know... because it adds one more clue and a little more evidence to the H&L theory.

 

1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Wilcott's 'Oswald Project' simply referred to his claim that Oswald was a paid employee of the CIA.

 

Which supports a part of the H&L theory.

 

1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Wilcott's version contradicts several fundamental aspects of the 'Harvey and Lee' nonsense:

• Oswald was one person, not a pair of doppelgangers.
• By implication, Oswald's mother was also one person, not a pair of doppelgangers.
• Oswald was recruited by the CIA while in the Marines, not a decade or more earlier, while a child.
• Oswald the false defector was a native English-speaking American, not a native Russian-speaking Eastern European refugee.

 

Wilcott knew only that Oswald was a part of the project, and that he got paid for it. What he knew does not contradict any of those things you say it does.

 

[Michael Griffith]

I've done no research about "two Marguerites," and the idea strikes me as outlandish on its face.

However, there may be something to the Two Oswalds theory. When journalist Joe Patoski decided to write an article about the Two Oswalds theory for Texas Monthly, he did so only because he thought it was ludicrous and crazy. But, after spending some time looking at the evidence, he came away stunned by some of it and concluded there might be something to it. Patoski was impressed by two pieces of evidence: Hoover's 1960 memo about someone possibly using Oswald's birth certificate and the account of Frank Kudlaty that Oswald attended a junior high school in Fort Worth and that he handed over Oswald's school records to the FBI. Patoski tracked Kudlaty, and Kudlaty confirmed the account (https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-two-oswalds/).

[Jonathan Cohen]

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Wilcott knew only that Oswald was a part of the project, and that he got paid for it. What he knew does not contradict any of those things you say it does.

Wilcott absolutely did not know anything at all about a doppelganger project and never said a word about such a thing. Once again you are conflating this imaginary government plot with Wilcott's (unsupported) claim that Oswald was in some way utilized by the CIA.

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

I've done no research about "two Marguerites," and the idea strikes me as outlandish on its face.

However, there may be something to the Two Oswalds theory. When journalist Joe Patoski decided to write an article about the Two Oswalds theory for Texas Monthly, he did so only because he thought it was ludicrous and crazy. But, after spending some time looking at the evidence, he came away stunned by some of it and concluded there might be something to it. Patoski was impressed by two pieces of evidence: Hoover's 1960 memo about someone possibly using Oswald's birth certificate and the account of Frank Kudlaty that Oswald attended a junior high school in Fort Worth and that he handed over Oswald's school records to the FBI. Patoski tracked Kudlaty, and Kudlaty confirmed the account (https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-two-oswalds/).

Michael, the Kudlaty issue has been debated here multiple times. His assertions are clouded by the fact that he appears to have been coached by Jack White. This is an interesting read as well from Tracy Parnell's site.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

I've done no research about "two Marguerites," and the idea strikes me as outlandish on its face.

However, there may be something to the Two Oswalds theory. When journalist Joe Patoski decided to write an article about the Two Oswalds theory for Texas Monthly, he did so only because he thought it was ludicrous and crazy. But, after spending some time looking at the evidence, he came away stunned by some of it and concluded there might be something to it. Patoski was impressed by two pieces of evidence: Hoover's 1960 memo about someone possibly using Oswald's birth certificate and the account of Frank Kudlaty that Oswald attended a junior high school in Fort Worth and that he handed over Oswald's school records to the FBI. Patoski tracked Kudlaty, and Kudlaty confirmed the account (https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/the-two-oswalds/).

The Kudlaty story seems particularly damning for the tag team of H&L deniers here on the Education Forum. 

Obviously, the FBI was trying to confiscate and suppress evidence about the Oswald Project after JFK's assassination.

And, as Sandy Larsen pointed out, there is a wide array of evidence of Oswald doppelgangers-- school, medical, residential, and employment records, "Oswald" deployments in the Marines Corps, Oswald's Russian fluency and knowledge of Russian literature, his different heights, etc.

I'm also curious about the alleged witness reports about Lee Oswald's involvement in anti-Castro ops in Florida at a time when he was also living in Minsk.  

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by W. Niederhut