John Armstrong [Hold the Harvey and Lee?]

[Robert Howard]

Owen wrote:

As for Armstrong, I'm almost totally agnostic on his central theory. I'm just saying that it appears to have lots (and lots) of useful material for research.

Jack writes:

Armstrong has few theories. He shows evidence that there were multiple

Oswalds and multiple Marguerites. Most of his evidence is indisputable...

different Oswalds in different places at the same time.

One of his few "theories" is that both Harvey and Lee were present in the

TSBD on 11-22, when evidence is not too strong.

A necessary conclusion from his work (but not presented as a theory) is

that Marina was acquainted with both Lee and Harvey. One of her

most intriguing quotes says "I had two husbands..."

Jack

I will say this for John Armstrong and his book, whether Robin Ramsay is correct or not in his review concerning the books shortcomings. John Armstrong did make extensive use of footnotes, so that if one find's the theory too unbelievable, then by sourcing the citations and examining the circumstancial aspects of his scenario, one can draw one's own conclusions. I also believe extensive credit should be given to someone who traveled to various countries at his own expense, and basically ended up recieving a great deal of scorn for his efforts.

[Jack White]

Owen wrote:

As for Armstrong, I'm almost totally agnostic on his central theory. I'm just saying that it appears to have lots (and lots) of useful material for research.

Jack writes:

Armstrong has few theories. He shows evidence that there were multiple

Oswalds and multiple Marguerites. Most of his evidence is indisputable...

different Oswalds in different places at the same time.

One of his few "theories" is that both Harvey and Lee were present in the

TSBD on 11-22, when evidence is not too strong.

A necessary conclusion from his work (but not presented as a theory) is

that Marina was acquainted with both Lee and Harvey. One of her

most intriguing quotes says "I had two husbands..."

Jack

I will say this for John Armstrong and his book, whether Robin Ramsay is correct or not in his review concerning the books shortcomings. John Armstrong did make extensive use of footnotes, so that if one find's the theory too unbelievable, then by sourcing the citations and examining the circumstancial aspects of his scenario, one can draw one's own conclusions. I also believe extensive credit should be given to someone who traveled to various countries at his own expense, and basically ended up recieving a great deal of scorn for his efforts.

Thanks for the comments...but Armstrong does not present theories. He presents

documented facts. The reader is left to theorize what the facts may mean.

Please quote any theory found in Harvey and Lee.

Jack

[Stephen Courts]

Silly I'm sure, but I have to ask. Were LBJ and the First Lady asked to be sworn in, and actually said no, or was this a courtesy offerd them because of their position(s).

Terry

Not silly at all. LBJ controlled the establishment of the Warren Commission, and the Who What When of their investigation. By not testifying under oath, this was just one more way for LBJ to show the world his complete and utter contempt for the laws of God and Man.

[Stephen Courts]

John Armstron's long and well researched book was one of the most difficult to wade through. I have 40 pages to go and to be candid, do not know what to believe. I don't doubt that the CIA & FBI were duplicitious in this "dual" Oswald gig from the get go. I can't think of another book that points to "two" Oswalds in the TSBD on that miserable day 48 years ago tomorrow. John does not answer what became of the real mother of "LEE" Oswald or the alledged children he had. I found the book very interesting and a valuable resourse to prove the CIA/FBI involvement PRIOR to the murder of President Kennedy. I would welcome any feedback. I am not into unpleasant name calling and character attacks. I just want to know what more seasoned investigators think of this book and the CIA/FBI set up. Thanks, Stephen Courts

[Stephen Courts]

John Armstron's long and well researched book was one of the most difficult to wade through. I have 40 pages to go and to be candid, do not know what to believe. I don't doubt that the CIA & FBI were duplicitious in this "dual" Oswald gig from the get go. I can't think of another book that points to "two" Oswalds in the TSBD on that miserable day 48 years ago tomorrow. John does not answer what became of the real mother of "LEE" Oswald or the alledged children he had. I found the book very interesting and a valuable resourse to prove the CIA/FBI involvement PRIOR to the murder of President Kennedy. I would welcome any feedback. I am not into unpleasant name calling and character attacks. I just want to know what more seasoned investigators think of this book and the CIA/FBI set up. Thanks, Stephen Courts

Hi Stephen

Welcome to the forum.

Armstrong's work is hardly a page turner in the strictest sense of the word. Unlike Jim Douglass' incredibly well written JFK and the Unspeakable. But Armstrong's effort is an incredible resource that sometimes can be unbelievably frustrating due to his sources sometimes leading you into a dead end.

The amount of documents he accumulated to back up his central theory (i.e. two Oswald's living parallel lives) is quite something but once again when toiling through them at the Baylor archive I personally have been frustrated at what he left out in his pursuit in trying to prove the Lee and Harvey story.

I think it obvious to anyone with an open mind that Oswald was set up through individuals within CIA/ONI and one doesn't have to buy into the Harvey and Lee thesis to understand this. Phillip Melanson's Spy Saga and John Newman's Oswald and the CIA are the works that slowly unravel the shenanigans that went on before, during and after the assassination in setting up young Mr. Oswald.

Regards

Lee

[Stephen Courts]

John Armstron's long and well researched book was one of the most difficult to wade through. I have 40 pages to go and to be candid, do not know what to believe. I don't doubt that the CIA & FBI were duplicitious in this "dual" Oswald gig from the get go. I can't think of another book that points to "two" Oswalds in the TSBD on that miserable day 48 years ago tomorrow. John does not answer what became of the real mother of "LEE" Oswald or the alledged children he had. I found the book very interesting and a valuable resourse to prove the CIA/FBI involvement PRIOR to the murder of President Kennedy. I would welcome any feedback. I am not into unpleasant name calling and character attacks. I just want to know what more seasoned investigators think of this book and the CIA/FBI set up. Thanks, Stephen Courts

Hi Stephen

Welcome to the forum.

Armstrong's work is hardly a page turner in the strictest sense of the word. Unlike Jim Douglass' incredibly well written JFK and the Unspeakable. But Armstrong's effort is an incredible resource that sometimes can be unbelievably frustrating due to his sources sometimes leading you into a dead end.

The amount of documents he accumulated to back up his central theory (i.e. two Oswald's living parallel lives) is quite something but once again when toiling through them at the Baylor archive I personally have been frustrated at what he left out in his pursuit in trying to prove the Lee and Harvey story.

I think it obvious to anyone with an open mind that Oswald was set up through individuals within CIA/ONI and one doesn't have to buy into the Harvey and Lee thesis to understand this. Phillip Melanson's Spy Saga and John Newman's Oswald and the CIA are the works that slowly unravel the shenanigans that went on before, during and after the assassination in setting up young Mr. Oswald.

Regards

Lee

[Stephen Courts]

John Armstron's long and well researched book was one of the most difficult to wade through. I have 40 pages to go and to be candid, do not know what to believe. I don't doubt that the CIA & FBI were duplicitious in this "dual" Oswald gig from the get go. I can't think of another book that points to "two" Oswalds in the TSBD on that miserable day 48 years ago tomorrow. John does not answer what became of the real mother of "LEE" Oswald or the alledged children he had. I found the book very interesting and a valuable resourse to prove the CIA/FBI involvement PRIOR to the murder of President Kennedy. I would welcome any feedback. I am not into unpleasant name calling and character attacks. I just want to know what more seasoned investigators think of this book and the CIA/FBI set up. Thanks, Stephen Courts

Hi Stephen

Welcome to the forum.

Armstrong's work is hardly a page turner in the strictest sense of the word. Unlike Jim Douglass' incredibly well written JFK and the Unspeakable. But Armstrong's effort is an incredible resource that sometimes can be unbelievably frustrating due to his sources sometimes leading you into a dead end.

The amount of documents he accumulated to back up his central theory (i.e. two Oswald's living parallel lives) is quite something but once again when toiling through them at the Baylor archive I personally have been frustrated at what he left out in his pursuit in trying to prove the Lee and Harvey story.

I think it obvious to anyone with an open mind that Oswald was set up through individuals within CIA/ONI and one doesn't have to buy into the Harvey and Lee thesis to understand this. Phillip Melanson's Spy Saga and John Newman's Oswald and the CIA are the works that slowly unravel the shenanigans that went on before, during and after the assassination in setting up young Mr. Oswald.

Regards

Lee

Hi Lee. Thank you for wlcoming me to this forum. I appreciate your feedback. I have read numerous books that discuss multiple Oswald's and I did read John Newman's book a long time ago (before there was an internet!). I am just astonished regarding the detailed documentation of the multiple Oswald's, literally "twins" in some ways. I guess I should not be surprised at the creativity of our 4th branch of government though. In the past few weeks I have become more serious about the murder of President Kennedy, and I still think about JFK and the Unspeakable by Jim Douglass and LBJ The Mastermind of The Assassination of JFK by Phillip Nelson (along with 4 or 5 more books that are related). It finally hit me with book five of Doug Horne's series. We were led into a "who done it" for years, when, had we payed closer attention, it would have been obvious that it was a state sponsored coup. A friend in California made a comment that resonated with me. America had never had a coup. It was difficult enough with the media controlled environment to grasp the murder, but we could not conceive at the time that we indeed had experienced our first coup. Thank you again for your thoughts and for welcoming me to the forum. Best Wishes, Stephen