Jump to content
The Education Forum

Donald Norton


Recommended Posts

I suppose I'm just going to have to cave and buy Armstrong's book. This stuff if just too bloody interesting not to follow up on it.

A wise decision John. Harvey & Lee is an indispensable work in my opinion. Plus, its likely to be a good investment.

A copy of Armstrong's 1997 Dallas presentation is selling for $275.

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResu...26+lee&x=68

The book comes in a box or sleeve. Also, there is a CD that shows all kinds of legal records from FBI, etc. And photos of Oswald. Which is Lee (who got away) or Harvey?

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Donald O. Norton:

Here are 2 buildings at the addresses of Anoka Ave and a doctor's office at W. Pleasant St in Avon Park, FL via Google Earth.

Kathy

That roof on this Google Earth is not a real roof, but a computer generated one...why?

I don't know what you mean -- computer-generated. Google Earth is free. Sometimes it may be off a bit and show a different building nearby. Earth whites out buildings in big cities like NY. But you can see their shapes and still look at them and the area. A lot of countries don't want to be depicted, so all you'll find there is blurry green or sand color.

Surprisingly, they show Area 51, which amazed me. Because they'd kill you if you went past the No Trespassing sign, but you can see them from above? They even show the entrance into the mountain! Then I read somewhere that Area 51 had moved. This individual stated they went further into the desert. By the way, Area 51 was radioactive.

Anyway, do you have a theory why the roof of the doctor's building is computer-generated?

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald O. Norton:

Here are 2 buildings at the addresses of Anoka Ave and a doctor's office at W. Pleasant St in Avon Park, FL via Google Earth.

Kathy

That roof on this Google Earth is not a real roof, but a computer generated one...why?

I went back and looked again, and the roof does appear to be faked. Whey would anybody

put a fake roof on this building?

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald O. Norton:

Here are 2 buildings at the addresses of Anoka Ave and a doctor's office at W. Pleasant St in Avon Park, FL via Google Earth.

Kathy

That roof on this Google Earth is not a real roof, but a computer generated one...why?

I went back and looked again, and the roof does appear to be faked. Whey would anybody

put a fake roof on this building?

Jack

Google bought the 3D program Sketch-Up and issued Sketch-Up Free, then created a plug-in that allows people to create 3D structures and "place" them in Google Earth. It appears to me that that's what is being seen in the image. Whether there is a way to overide such user-placed 3D creations or not is something I haven't bothered finding out.

It talks about placing such things in Google Earth at the bottom of the left column on this page.

Ashton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't expect to find anything on Norton in Harvey and Lee. John had to pare 2000 pages down

to 900 pages, and left out the Norton research, even though he spent months on it, including

trips to Ohio and Florida. A reason for it was that he could find no independent materials on

Norton beyond his own research. He did not want anything in the book which in the future

someone might debunk with materials not yet uncovered. In other words, the Norton investigation

is not yet complete.

Jack,

The 900 pages that John Armstrong chose to publish is remarkable in and of itself, but to know there is so much more evidence (1100 pages worth), perhaps of a more speculative or unconfirmed nature that he unearthed is tanatalizing, to say the least.

Do you know what some of his other findings that remain unpublished are? Has he shared them with many other researchers?

In otherwords, are there others that are following the leads that he generated? In light of how much of his time, money, heart and soul that Armstong invested, why do you think he never completed his investigation of Norton? Or did he simply take it as far as he could?

Do you think John Armstong is disappointed, or even a little bitter that his research was not more widely accepted than it was? Do you still keep in contact with him? Will the remainder of his unpublished research ever reach the public?

Sorry to pepper you with questions that you have probably answered many times before, but John Armstrong's work has fascinated me from the time I first heard about it. Thank you Jack.

Mike

Edited by Michael Hogan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald O. Norton:

Here are 2 buildings at the addresses of Anoka Ave and a doctor's office at W. Pleasant St in Avon Park, FL via Google Earth.

Kathy

That roof on this Google Earth is not a real roof, but a computer generated one...why?

I went back and looked again, and the roof does appear to be faked. Whey would anybody

put a fake roof on this building?

Jack

It's like we all download Google Earth and then we're able to put things in our own program where they aren't. I'm not sure.

But they protect major cities with white roofs and structures. They don't put things there that aren't there. I'm sure I've used Earth offline. So I think it's a personal thing.

Kathy

Google bought the 3D program Sketch-Up and issued Sketch-Up Free, then created a plug-in that allows people to create 3D structures and "place" them in Google Earth. It appears to me that that's what is being seen in the image. Whether there is a way to overide such user-placed 3D creations or not is something I haven't bothered finding out.

It talks about placing such things in Google Earth at the bottom of the left column on this page.

Ashton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald O. Norton:

Here are 2 buildings at the addresses of Anoka Ave and a doctor's office at W. Pleasant St in Avon Park, FL via Google Earth.

Kathy

That roof on this Google Earth is not a real roof, but a computer generated one...why?

I went back and looked again, and the roof does appear to be faked. Whey would anybody

put a fake roof on this building?

Jack

It's like we all download Google Earth and then we're able to put things in our own program where they aren't. I'm not sure.

But they protect major cities with white roofs and structures. They don't put things there that aren't there. I'm sure I've used Earth offline. So I think it's a personal thing.

Kathy

Google bought the 3D program Sketch-Up and issued Sketch-Up Free, then created a plug-in that allows people to create 3D structures and "place" them in Google Earth. It appears to me that that's what is being seen in the image. Whether there is a way to overide such user-placed 3D creations or not is something I haven't bothered finding out.

It talks about placing such things in Google Earth at the bottom of the left column on this page.

Ashton

You are right. First of all, it has to be online to update it. And I found just what you said. Someone put a building at 26 degrees 57'13.58 North and 80 degrees 50'46.34 West. If you click on the i there, it tells about this man who wanted to put things on Google Earth that are artistic. And he planted one. I don't like this idea. If he wants to paint a picture, find a canvas.

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google bought the 3D program Sketch-Up and issued Sketch-Up Free, then created a plug-in that allows people to create 3D structures and "place" them in Google Earth. It appears to me that that's what is being seen in the image. Whether there is a way to overide such user-placed 3D creations or not is something I haven't bothered finding out.

It talks about placing such things in Google Earth at the bottom of the left column on this page.

Ashton

You are right. First of all, it has to be online to update it. And I found just what you said. Someone put a building at 26 degrees 57'13.58 North and 80 degrees 50'46.34 West. If you click on the i there, it tells about this man who wanted to put things on Google Earth that are artistic. And he planted one. I don't like this idea. If he wants to paint a picture, find a canvas.

Kathy

Kathy, I don't disagree that it's at least of some peculiar interest that this particular address, out of the millions available, has had a 3D structure plunked down on it. I just wanted to clear up the mystery of why it appeared as it did in Google Earth.

Ashton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't expect to find anything on Norton in Harvey and Lee. John had to pare 2000 pages down

to 900 pages, and left out the Norton research, even though he spent months on it, including

trips to Ohio and Florida. A reason for it was that he could find no independent materials on

Norton beyond his own research. He did not want anything in the book which in the future

someone might debunk with materials not yet uncovered. In other words, the Norton investigation

is not yet complete.

Jack,

The 900 pages that John Armstrong chose to publish is remarkable in and of itself, but to know there is so much more evidence (1100 pages worth), perhaps of a more speculative or unconfirmed nature that he unearthed is tanatalizing, to say the least.

Do you know what some of his other findings that remain unpublished are? Has he shared them with many other researchers?

In otherwords, are there others that are following the leads that he generated? In light of how much of his time, money, heart and soul that Armstong invested, why do you think he never completed his investigation of Norton? Or did he simply take it as far as he could?

Do you think John Armstong is disappointed, or even a little bitter that his research was not more widely accepted than it was? Do you still keep in contact with him? Will the remainder of his unpublished research ever reach the public?

Sorry to pepper you with questions that you have probably answered many times before, but John Armstrong's work has fascinated me from the time I first heard about it. Thank you Jack.

Mike

You must understand that John is not like you and me. He is wealthy enough

that he could afford to "take off" for twelve years to satisfy his curiosity about

Oswald. He spent a year "vacationing" in China in order to self-publish his book

economically. He flew all over the world many times in pursuit of information,

such places as Switzerland, Argentina, Ohio, Florida, Washington, etc. He is NOT

a JFK researcher; he IS an OSWALD researcher. He pursued MANY FACTS that

are not in his book. Left out of his book are many important interviews with

people who knew Oswald. Left out are many of his conclusions about things

he found, particularly about the Oswald family. Left out are his conclusions

about the Oswald in Russia. Left out is his massive research on Norton. He

settled on keeping the story SIMPLE by SELECTING THE TWO MOST OBVIOUS

OSWALDS, Harvey and Lee...though research seemed to show ADDITIONAL

Oswalds. For instance you won't find much in the book about his trip to

Argentina to interview the Ziger sisters...WHO TOLD HIM THAT THE OSWALD

THEY KNEW WAS VERY SHORT, PERHAPS 5'2". This clearly was neither Lee

nor Harvey. He limited himself to timelines of only provable Harvey and Lee

documentation. He realized the story was already SO COMPLICATED that

he chose not to mention indications of OTHER LHOs, OTHER MARGUERITES.

He thoroughly investigated all of the LHO IMPOSTER sightings, but avoided

speculating who the imposters were. He spent close to $100,000 out of his

pocket to have the book published, and self-published it mainly because

he did not want an uninformed "editor" telling him how to do it. Once

finished, he feels that he has "done his part" to solve the mystery.

John is not disappointed. He did his research TO SATISFY ONLY HIMSELF

about who Oswald was. Once it was complete, he has returned to his

former life. He now builds luxury homes in Hawaii and California, and

distances himself from the "research" community.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack, Please urge him at some time soon to consider putting all the 'rest' of his information into some form for distribution!.....it is too important to not be 'out' there...even if it needs more confirmation to be iron-clad!!! We need it to follow-up on those leads....or he needs to.

Peter, Save your breath, Armstrong isn't listening.

I first met him in the back dinning room of the Egyptian Lounge in Dallas over a COPA conference weekend and sat across the table from him. I supported his thesis and made mention of Trotski's assassin Raymond Mercader and his brothers as a family of agents put together by the KBB as a good example of what he was trying to prove about Oswald.

Shortly before his book went to press, I met an ex-USMC who had served with Oswald in Japan who said that the Oswald Ruby killed in Dallas wasn't the same Oswald he served with at Atsugi. I wrote a story about it for the local paper and sent a copy to John via Jack and it was included in a short note in the book.

I know a few others researchers who were closer to Armstrong and have been to his house and were impressed with the volume of documents he had stacked.

I would suggest that Armstrong follow Tony Summer's example and donate his research material to the Assassination Archives and Research Center in DC or another college collection like Baylor has been collecting Penn Jones and the College in Maryland that has Harold Weisberg's material.

But others who know JA better say he is also an egotistical jerk who has no interest in supporting other research.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't expect to find anything on Norton in Harvey and Lee. John had to pare 2000 pages down

to 900 pages, and left out the Norton research, even though he spent months on it, including

trips to Ohio and Florida. A reason for it was that he could find no independent materials on

Norton beyond his own research. He did not want anything in the book which in the future

someone might debunk with materials not yet uncovered. In other words, the Norton investigation

is not yet complete.

Jack,

The 900 pages that John Armstrong chose to publish is remarkable in and of itself, but to know there is so much more evidence (1100 pages worth), perhaps of a more speculative or unconfirmed nature that he unearthed is tanatalizing, to say the least.

Do you know what some of his other findings that remain unpublished are? Has he shared them with many other researchers?

In otherwords, are there others that are following the leads that he generated? In light of how much of his time, money, heart and soul that Armstong invested, why do you think he never completed his investigation of Norton? Or did he simply take it as far as he could?

Do you think John Armstong is disappointed, or even a little bitter that his research was not more widely accepted than it was? Do you still keep in contact with him? Will the remainder of his unpublished research ever reach the public?

Sorry to pepper you with questions that you have probably answered many times before, but John Armstrong's work has fascinated me from the time I first heard about it. Thank you Jack.

Mike

You must understand that John is not like you and me. He is wealthy enough

that he could afford to "take off" for twelve years to satisfy his curiosity about

Oswald. He spent a year "vacationing" in China in order to self-publish his book

economically. He flew all over the world many times in pursuit of information,

such places as Switzerland, Argentina, Ohio, Florida, Washington, etc. He is NOT

a JFK researcher; he IS an OSWALD researcher. He pursued MANY FACTS that

are not in his book. Left out of his book are many important interviews with

people who knew Oswald. Left out are many of his conclusions about things

he found, particularly about the Oswald family. Left out are his conclusions

about the Oswald in Russia. Left out is his massive research on Norton. He

settled on keeping the story SIMPLE by SELECTING THE TWO MOST OBVIOUS

OSWALDS, Harvey and Lee...though research seemed to show ADDITIONAL

Oswalds. For instance you won't find much in the book about his trip to

Argentina to interview the Ziger sisters...WHO TOLD HIM THAT THE OSWALD

THEY KNEW WAS VERY SHORT, PERHAPS 5'2". This clearly was neither Lee

nor Harvey. He limited himself to timelines of only provable Harvey and Lee

documentation. He realized the story was already SO COMPLICATED that

he chose not to mention indications of OTHER LHOs, OTHER MARGUERITES.

He thoroughly investigated all of the LHO IMPOSTER sightings, but avoided

speculating who the imposters were. He spent close to $100,000 out of his

pocket to have the book published, and self-published it mainly because

he did not want an uninformed "editor" telling him how to do it. Once

finished, he feels that he has "done his part" to solve the mystery.

John is not disappointed. He did his research TO SATISFY ONLY HIMSELF

about who Oswald was. Once it was complete, he has returned to his

former life. He now builds luxury homes in Hawaii and California, and

distances himself from the "research" community.

Jack

Jack, Please urge him at some time soon to consider putting all the 'rest' of his information into some form for distribution!.....it is too important to not be 'out' there...even if it needs more confirmation to be iron-clad!!! We need it to follow-up on those leads....or he needs to.

As I said, Peter...John is not like you or me. He does as he pleases and does not respond to urging.

He has done his part and has moved on. Lots of what he knows is only in his head, and he has a

fantastic memory...but not the time or interest to write it down.

The only thing which would lure him back is a stunning new development requiring his input, such

as Bill Kelly's Grand Jury, which would need an expert on Oswald. He knows more about LHO than

any researcher. His book apparently was the reason two prominent authors shelved years of Oswald

research and cancelled their books.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack, Please urge him at some time soon to consider putting all the 'rest' of his information into some form for distribution!.....it is too important to not be 'out' there...even if it needs more confirmation to be iron-clad!!! We need it to follow-up on those leads....or he needs to.

Peter, Save your breath, Armstrong isn't listening.

I first met him in the back dinning room of the Egyptian Lounge in Dallas over a COPA conference weekend and sat across the table from him. I supported his thesis and made mention of Trotski's assassin Raymond Mercader and his brothers as a family of agents put together by the KBB as a good example of what he was trying to prove about Oswald.

Shortly before his book went to press, I met an ex-USMC who had served with Oswald in Japan who said that the Oswald Ruby killed in Dallas wasn't the same Oswald he served with at Atsugi. I wrote a story about it for the local paper and sent a copy to John via Jack and it was included in a short note in the book.

I know a few others researchers who were closer to Armstrong and have been to his house and were impressed with the volume of documents he had stacked.

I would suggest that Armstrong follow Tony Summer's example and donate his research material to the Assassination Archives and Research Center in DC or another college collection like Baylor has been collecting Penn Jones and the College in Maryland that has Harold Weisberg's material.

But others who know JA better say he is also an egotistical jerk who has no interest in supporting other research.

BK

I regret that Bill sees fit to write his closing sentence. I probably am better acquainted with John

than any other researcher, and he is the opposite of egotistical and certainly not a jerk. He is

a quiet thoughtful person who prefers to avoid the limelight. The few I know who dislike John

are the limelight seekers whose playhouses have been messed up by John's research. Only

those who are jealous don't like him.

The proper description of John includes: FOCUSED, DRIVEN, ORGANIZED, INTELLIGENT.

He is properly IMPATIENT with researchers without those attributes. His SHYNESS could be

interpreted by detractors as arrogance. He has a computer-like MEMORY for FACTS, and

a knack for separating truth from bullxxxx.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the Frorum software doing strange things on anyone else's computer..or just mine...?

I've had very strange things happening and unable to post messages or attachments.

Anyway, I was just saying [or trying] that I'm in the 'camp' not hostile to him at all...only would like to know more of what he knows!....it is important and he has done more than anyone on LHO . L+H O! If the Norton material is just one of many other things he had to cut out of his book, I'd like to see the scaps on the 'cutting room floor'!

Lee was, of course, not the assassin, but the pastsy, but a study of him and how we were [and still are] lied to about him and how he is exemplary of so many low level black operatives, agents, dangles, etc.....is very important and enlightening. I hope at some time in the future he returns to this matter to share with the rest of us. FWIW you can pass that on to him next time you hear from him. Tell him knowledge implies the responsibility to share it so it can be contructively used as a weapon.

Correction, Peter...It was HARVEY that was the patsy, not LEE.

The importance of John's research is not what it tells us about these low level operatives,

but what it tells us about the way the CIA operates.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack, Please urge him at some time soon to consider putting all the 'rest' of his information into some form for distribution!.....it is too important to not be 'out' there...even if it needs more confirmation to be iron-clad!!! We need it to follow-up on those leads....or he needs to.

Peter, Save your breath, Armstrong isn't listening.

I first met him in the back dinning room of the Egyptian Lounge in Dallas over a COPA conference weekend and sat across the table from him. I supported his thesis and made mention of Trotski's assassin Raymond Mercader and his brothers as a family of agents put together by the KBB as a good example of what he was trying to prove about Oswald.

Shortly before his book went to press, I met an ex-USMC who had served with Oswald in Japan who said that the Oswald Ruby killed in Dallas wasn't the same Oswald he served with at Atsugi. I wrote a story about it for the local paper and sent a copy to John via Jack and it was included in a short note in the book.

I know a few others researchers who were closer to Armstrong and have been to his house and were impressed with the volume of documents he had stacked.

I would suggest that Armstrong follow Tony Summer's example and donate his research material to the Assassination Archives and Research Center in DC or another college collection like Baylor has been collecting Penn Jones and the College in Maryland that has Harold Weisberg's material.

But others who know JA better say he is also an egotistical jerk who has no interest in supporting other research.

BK

Curious. John Armstrong is more of a phantom than Donald Norton.

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack, Please urge him at some time soon to consider putting all the 'rest' of his information into some form for distribution!.....it is too important to not be 'out' there...even if it needs more confirmation to be iron-clad!!! We need it to follow-up on those leads....or he needs to.

Peter, Save your breath, Armstrong isn't listening.

I first met him in the back dinning room of the Egyptian Lounge in Dallas over a COPA conference weekend and sat across the table from him. I supported his thesis and made mention of Trotski's assassin Raymond Mercader and his brothers as a family of agents put together by the KBB as a good example of what he was trying to prove about Oswald.

Shortly before his book went to press, I met an ex-USMC who had served with Oswald in Japan who said that the Oswald Ruby killed in Dallas wasn't the same Oswald he served with at Atsugi. I wrote a story about it for the local paper and sent a copy to John via Jack and it was included in a short note in the book.

I know a few others researchers who were closer to Armstrong and have been to his house and were impressed with the volume of documents he had stacked.

I would suggest that Armstrong follow Tony Summer's example and donate his research material to the Assassination Archives and Research Center in DC or another college collection like Baylor has been collecting Penn Jones and the College in Maryland that has Harold Weisberg's material.

But others who know JA better say he is also an egotistical jerk who has no interest in supporting other research.

BK

Curious. John Armstrong is more of a phantom than Donald Norton.

Kathy

Not so. John lives in Hawaii now, and spends part time in China purchasing building

materials. He carries his laptop with him everywhere, and I can email him any time

and get a quick response.

Jack

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...