Another Armstrong blunder.

[Pete Mellor]

21 hours ago, John Kowalski said:

Hi Pete:

MK-Ultra sub-project # 103 was created to study European children to see if they could be used in future CIA operations.

https://www.newspapers.com/article/abilene-reporter-news-mkultra-and-childr/7536363/

https://humansbefree.com/2017/06/cia-using-mk-ultra-mind-control-on-children.html

Cheers John, you're still the master of the newspaper archives!  I have no trouble accepting the study & mind-control of children through project MK/Ultra.  Nothing would surprise me in that field by CIA.

I also respect Armstrong's depth of research, along with Jim's posts on this Forum, which I always read.  I admit there are records and photographs of this monumental switcheroo I have no explanation for.  It's the logic of this supposed intell. op., running for years with false brothers and mothers to have one assume the i.d. of the other to defect behind the iron curtain for CIA just to languish in a Minsk radio plant & then burn up on re-entry as a patsy in the JFK assassination.  Saying that, this isn't the only aspect of this case that I can't get my head around.  Probably why the fascination.

 

[Karl Kinaski]

@John Kowalski: Maybe there where such projects. But not in this case. No second mother no second kid Oswald involved.

Ignoring Robert Oswald first hand witness account, Armstrong claims in his book "Harvey and Lee", that neither Oswald nor his brother where in contact with the  Marguerite at Bristol Road 3006, who suffered a work related injury on Dec. 5th 1958, BECAUSE THIS LADY WAS NOT THEIR MOTHER. 

Now  ... some quotes of Robert Oswalds 1967 book LEE, A PORTRAIT OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD BY HIS BROTHER which Armstrong ignores completely to substitute the real and only Marguerite Oswald living at Bristol Road 3006 in Nov/Dec 1958  with a Marguerite Clone-( IMO  nothing but a figment of Armstrongs imagination) which Armstrong claims was NOT Roberts and Lee's mother. 

 

Quote, Robert Oswald, "LEE, PORTROAT OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD BY HIS BROTHER (The words in brackets are mine.)
 

Quote

 

 On September 14 (1958) he (his brother Lee Harvey Oswald)  sailed with his unit for the South China Sea area. They sailed around the islands for two weeks, reaching Ping Tung, North Taiwan, on September 30 and returning to the base at Atsugi on October 5. The next day he was transferred out of the unit and put on general duty for a month before returning to Stateside duty. 
He sailed for home on November 2 aboard the USNS Barrett and docked in San Francisco on the 15th. Four days later he 
was given a 30-day leave. 

He came to Fort Worth by bus, as I remember it. He stayed with Mother at her apartment (At 3006 Bristol Road), but he spent a lot of time with us at our house, 7313 Davenport Street. We went out to the farm at least twice and did a little hunting for squirrels and rabbits with our .22 rifles. 

()

He (Lee Oswald) had heard from Mother that she had been injured (...) while working at the candy counter of the Fair Ridglea store in Fort Worth. She had reached for a large glass jar of candy on a shelf above her head and the jar slipped, striking her across the nose as it fell. 

Vada and I (and obviously Lee who stayed with his mother, but spent most of his spare time with his brother Robert and his wife Vada) heard about the accident almost as soon as it happened, though we had been out of touch with Mother for at least six months. We did know that she was working at the Fair store, but only because Vada had been shopping in the store one day and saw her at the candy counter. There had been no visits or telephone calls. We had been keeping our distance. 

Then, the day of her accident, she telephoned us to say that she was disabled and could not continue working. After that she called Vada often, just to talk, but she never called me at the office.

One day, several weeks after the accident, I saw (his very same)Mother waiting for a bus, so I stopped and picked her up. At that time, she told me she had been to three or four doctors for X-rays but she couldn’t get any satisfaction out of any of them. They all said there was nothing wrong with her. She said, “I know there is.” Her nose looked all right to me, so I thought maybe she was exaggerating the seriousness of the injury in the hope of collecting money from the company which insured the Fair store against such claims. 

 

Close quote

 

Ignoring this first hand account, guess what Armstrong claims about that month of 19th Nov. to 22. Dec. 1958, when Lee Harvey Oswald was in Fort Worth and, quote Robert Oswald: came to Fort Worth by bus, as I remember it. He stayed with Mother at her apartment (At 3006 Bristol Road), but he spent a lot of time with us at our house, 7313 Davenport Street.

Armstrong claims, 
quote HARVEY AND LEE:
 

Quote

 

Quote

While Lee Oswald was on leave (November 19 to December 22) in Fort Worth his  whereabouts remain unknown, except for his short visit with  Robert  Oswald. Lee did not visit the short, dumpy, heavy-set "Marguerite Oswald" imposter, who was work­ing at the Fair Ridglea Department Store and residing at 3006 Bristol Road.98 She was working for the King Candy Company and operated a booth in the Fair Ridglea Depart­ment  store  selling  candy.  On  December 5,  1958  "Marguerite,"  who  worked alone, claimed to have suffered a work-related injury
()
Robert Oswald had been living at 7313 Davenport in Fort Worth since April23, 1957, yet there is no indication that "Marguerite" ever contacted Robert to inform him of her  "accident"  nor did she receive a visit, financial aid, assistance, or any  help from Robert.  Nor is there  any  indication  that  Lee   ever  visited  the  short,  dumpy, heavy-set "Marguerite Oswald" imposter at any  time during his military leaves.

 Why should Lee or Robert  Oswald visit or help  the short , dumpy, heavy­ set  "Marguerite  Oswald. P"  This woman was not their mother. 

 

Aha ...  NOT THEIR MOTHER. Now again, read what Robert Oswald writes about that time in Fort Worth Nov 19 to Dec 22. 1958.

 See how Armstrong's TWO MARGUERITES FAIRY TALE implodes? Everybody who takes Armstrong's Two Ossis two Marguerites scenario serious is IMO a victim of a crazy conspiracy theory designed to cover the real conspiracy.   

KK

Edited February 24 by Karl Kinaski

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Karl Kinaski said:

 See how Armstrong's TWO MARGUERITES FAIRY TALE implodes?

 

Nope. Because you keep confusing LEE for HARVEY and Marguerite/Mother with the Marguerite imposter.

The only thing you are right about is that John Armstrong was wrong when he said that the Marguerite imposter did not contact Robert when she got injured. According to Robert, she DID contact him.

But you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Armstrong's point was that neither LEE no Robert Oswald did anything to help the Marguerite imposter with her injuries. They didn't even visit her! Marguerite went to several doctor on her own. And why was that? BECAUSE THE MARGUERITE IMPOSTER WASN'T THEIR MOTHER.