Jump to content
The Education Forum

Question for Wim Dankbaar


Recommended Posts

Mr. Dankbaar, do you believe in the theory that there were 2 men using the identity of "Lee Harvey Oswald"? Namely, Harvey and Lee. Have you read John Armstrong's book, Harvey and Lee? And if you have read it, what is your opinion? Do you know anything about Donald O. Norton?

Kathy

Not speaking for Wim of course, but he's already addressed that in this thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9242

""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!""

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Dankbaar, do you believe in the theory that there were 2 men using the identity of "Lee Harvey Oswald"? Namely, Harvey and Lee.

Hello, I believe that more than 1 man used the identity of "Lee Harvey Oswald". I believe that he was impersonated several times before the assassination to prepare him as the patsy. Chauncey Holt made several ID cards for Guy Banister, with Oswald's name but not his photograph. I do not believe the story as in "Harvey and Lee"

Have you read John Armstrong's book, Harvey and Lee?

No, I have read excerpts and ample discussions about the content. There are still many books that I plan to read. Harvey and Lee is not on top of the list. Currently I am reading The Carlos Contract , The man who knew too much and Shadow Warrior

And if you have read it, what is your opinion? Do you know anything about Donald O. Norton?

If you mean the guy below that's what I know.

There was a musician named Donald Norton who showed up in Vancouver with the story of two "CIA missions" involving Garrison's suspects. He claimed to have met Shaw in August 1962, in Alabama, and to have received from a man accompanying Shaw an attaché case containing $50,000 which Norton delivered to "Harvey Lee" in Monterrey, Mexico, in exchange for certain "documents." The Harvey Lee had turned out to be Lee Harvey Oswald. In an earlier "CIA operation", he said, his agency contact had been David Ferrie. Although a polygraph test by a newspaper indicated deception on Norton's story, Garrison sent an aide to Vancouver to interview him and brought him to New Orleans for further questioning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Dankbaar, do you believe in the theory that there were 2 men using the identity of "Lee Harvey Oswald"? Namely, Harvey and Lee. Have you read John Armstrong's book, Harvey and Lee? And if you have read it, what is your opinion? Do you know anything about Donald O. Norton?

Kathy

Not speaking for Wim of course, but he's already addressed that in this thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9242

""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!""

The whole point of the research of Armstrong is to show that the LHO in Russia was the russian-speaking person who was

sent in place of the true Oswald.

Hoover himself contacted the State Dept., in an effort to obtain information regarding Oswald, because he had information concerning an imposter who was using Oswald's birth certificate.

Since he contacted the State Dept. for information regarding this imposter it stands to reason he believed the Oswald in Russia was the imposter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra,

""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!""

It's kind of interesting, I'm reading Anthony Summers', "Conspiracy."

In it, he says that all of the job applications filled out in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 by a person claiming to be Lee Oswald listed his height as 5'9" tall.

Oswald's Marine records listed him as 5'11" tall.

I just read Oswald's autopsy report in the DPD Archives. LHO's height was given as 5'9".

DPD Archives Box 2 Folder# 5, Item#'s 2 and 3.

Interesting.

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra,
""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!""

It's kind of interesting, I'm reading Anthony Summers', "Conspiracy."

In it, he says that all of the job applications filled out in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 by a person claiming to be Lee Oswald listed his height as 5'9" tall.

Oswald's Marine records listed him as 5'11" tall.

I just read Oswald's autopsy report in the DPD Archives. LHO's height was given as 5'9".

DPD Archives Box 2 Folder# 5, Item#'s 2 and 3.

Interesting.

Steve Thomas

Hi Steve,

The quote you attributed to me isn't mine. I think Wim said it.

Regardless, I agree with the quote. And I also agree that there were many LHO impostors running around filling out job applications, trying to buy cars, going to Mexico... and so on. I just don't believe in the premise that there was a second LHO for the duration of the first LHO's life.

Instead I think the CIA sent some random hacks to use the real LHO's name at significant times in the months prior to their murder of the President, to set him up as the patsy. For example, to take target practice.

Myra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra,

The quote you attributed to me isn't mine. I think Wim said it.

Regardless, I agree with the quote. And I also agree that there were many LHO impostors running around filling out job applications, trying to buy cars, going to Mexico... and so on. I just don't believe in the premise that there was a second LHO for the duration of the first LHO's life.

Instead I think the CIA sent some random hacks to use the real LHO's name at significant times in the months prior to their murder of the President, to set him up as the patsy. For example, to take target practice.

I think you're right, and sorry about the quote thingy.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead I think the CIA sent some random hacks to use the real LHO's name at significant times in the months prior to their murder of the President, to set him up as the patsy. For example, to take target practice.

Myra

Hello Myra

I believe the impersonation of Oswald by someone in Mexico City

at the Cuban consulate is a very important clue with respect to the

conspiracy.

As you know, both Sylvia Duran and Eusebio Azcue of the Cuban

consulate dealt with "Oswald," and would later make statements that the

man in the consulate was NOT the same Oswald who was arrested in Dallas.

Their descriptions of the consulate "Oswald" is not close to what the Dallas

Oswald looked like.

Bill C

Edited by Bill Cheslock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if you have read it, what is your opinion? Do you know anything about Donald O. Norton?

If you mean the guy below that's what I know.

There was a musician named Donald Norton who showed up in Vancouver with the story of two "CIA missions" involving Garrison's suspects. He claimed to have met Shaw in August 1962, in Alabama, and to have received from a man accompanying Shaw an attaché case containing $50,000 which Norton delivered to "Harvey Lee" in Monterrey, Mexico, in exchange for certain "documents." The Harvey Lee had turned out to be Lee Harvey Oswald. In an earlier "CIA operation", he said, his agency contact had been David Ferrie. Although a polygraph test by a newspaper indicated deception on Norton's story, Garrison sent an aide to Vancouver to interview him and brought him to New Orleans for further questioning.

The man you described was gay and a piano player/entertainer. He wasn't too tall and he went by the name Donald P. Norton. He said he was blackmailed into doing things for the CIA. Maybe in the polygraph test there was a lot he didn't want to tell.

Donald O. Norton lives 2 hours away from me in Florida. I had read a rumor that he had left Avon Park. Instead I found 2 residences for him and 1 doctor's office. All 3 buildings have 1006 as their address, like 1006 W. Pleasant St and 1006 Lake Anoka Ave, etc. I find he's in the fly-fishing and boat chartering business. It seems he's trying to fit into his community. But years ago he came up to conspiracy theorist Mae Brussel and asked her in front of witnesses if she knew who he was. She said, "Yes, you're Lee Oswald."

The Norton Bros both have red hair. The brother was in Army Intelligence. I think they asked Donald O. to impersonate someone named Lee Harvey Oswald. Maybe his looks didn't matter and maybe he didn't know what he was getting himself into. John Armstrong has done an amazing amount of research on this guy. But none of it's released. Do you have an opinion on why he has 3 addresses in one town, all bearing the number 1006? The buildings are not near one another, so it's not like sharing an address with Guy Banister and LHO, for example. What is he doing?

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra,
""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!""

It's kind of interesting, I'm reading Anthony Summers', "Conspiracy."

In it, he says that all of the job applications filled out in New Orleans in the summer of 1963 by a person claiming to be Lee Oswald listed his height as 5'9" tall.

Oswald's Marine records listed him as 5'11" tall.

I just read Oswald's autopsy report in the DPD Archives. LHO's height was given as 5'9".

DPD Archives Box 2 Folder# 5, Item#'s 2 and 3.

Interesting.

Steve Thomas

Hi Steve,

The quote you attributed to me isn't mine. I think Wim said it.

Regardless, I agree with the quote. And I also agree that there were many LHO impostors running around filling out job applications, trying to buy cars, going to Mexico... and so on. I just don't believe in the premise that there was a second LHO for the duration of the first LHO's life.

Instead I think the CIA sent some random hacks to use the real LHO's name at significant times in the months prior to their murder of the President, to set him up as the patsy. For example, to take target practice.

Myra

Well, thank you Myra. I looked at it with a different point of view. But Armstrong has done meticulous research. Everytime Norton was supposed to be someplace, he was gone by the time Armstrong got there. I understand Armstrong has stopped his research. I hope this stuff about Donald O. Norton being in FL and having the same number addresses gets back to Armstrong and he'll take up his research again. Donald O. Norton is an arm's length away. If you go to my blog thecloakofdarkness.blogspot.com starting in the Feb 06 archives, you'll find more about Norton.

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Dankbaar, do you believe in the theory that there were 2 men using the identity of "Lee Harvey Oswald"? Namely, Harvey and Lee. Have you read John Armstrong's book, Harvey and Lee? And if you have read it, what is your opinion? Do you know anything about Donald O. Norton?

Kathy

Not speaking for Wim of course, but he's already addressed that in this thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9242

""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!""

I believe that the main thesis is that there were two Oswalds---Lee and Harvey.

Harvey went to Russia, and also was the one shot by Ruby. It is the same person.

Lee helped set Harvey up. (Lee, it is speculated, is Donald Norton. I don't think that was written about in the book--I have the Lancer presentation) Jack White said that Armstrong did alot of research on Norton.

You can read about H&L here.

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/

Edited by Kathy Beckett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, thank you Myra. I looked at it with a different point of view. But Armstrong has done meticulous research. Everytime Norton was supposed to be someplace, he was gone by the time Armstrong got there. I understand Armstrong has stopped his research. I hope this stuff about Donald O. Norton being in FL and having the same number addresses gets back to Armstrong and he'll take up his research again. Donald O. Norton is an arm's length away. If you go to my blog thecloakofdarkness.blogspot.com starting in the Feb 06 archives, you'll find more about Norton.

Kathy

Thanks Kathy. But the fact is I'm simply not interested in any dual LHO angle, aside from the ad hoc Lee-framing impersonations (at car dealerships and shooting ranges and...embassies) I've already mentioned.

My stance was given in another thread where the subject of the alleged Oswald twins came up:

"I agree about the dual Oswald premise. I consider it pretty absurd, one of the few places I draw the credibility line. Furthermore, I don't care if it's true because it doesn't change the bigger truth. A great president was murdered by and for war profiteers in the CIA; patsies and back up patsies were in place. I'm after bigger fish than the patsies."

The dual LHO thing is more granularity that I need even if it's true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Myra

I believe the impersonation of Oswald by someone in Mexico City

at the Cuban consulate is a very important clue with respect to the

conspiracy.

Hugely important Bill. Lyndon Johnson and his partner in crime Hoover seem to agree with you, given the fact that they were discussing it hours after the President's murder:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...er_11-23-63.htm

"Less than 24 hours after the assassination of President Kennedy, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover reported to the new President Johnson on the state of the investigation. Noting that the evidence against [Oswald] is "not very very strong", Hoover reported on the tracing of the rifle to an alias of Oswald and other details implicating him in the shooting.

But when LBJ then asked "Have you established any more about the visit to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico in September," an event of no little interest to the inner circles of government, Hoover replied "No, that's one angle that's very confusing for this reason. We have up here the tape and the photograph of the man who was at the Soviet Embassy, using Oswald's name. The picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there." In other words, an imposter had implicated Oswald in a relationship with Soviet agents, less than two months before the assassination.

The quotes given above are taken from a transcript of the conversation made contemporaneously in 1963. The tape itself appears to have been erased at some time since then. The accompanying audio consists of 14 minutes of noisy silence. See "The Fourteen Minute Gap" essay for more information."

As you know, both Sylvia Duran and Eusebio Azcue of the Cuban

consulate dealt with "Oswald," and would later make statements that the

man in the consulate was NOT the same Oswald who was arrested in Dallas.

Their descriptions of the consulate "Oswald" is not close to what the Dallas

Oswald looked like.

Bill C

And Duran was imprisoned by the CIA until she changed her story or something, right? I'm not at all familiar with the Eusebio Azcue episode however. Guess I'll have to research that one. Thanks.

One thing that confuses me is that it seems like the real LHO did go to Mexico at some point. Yet the one who appeared at the embassy (Cuban? Soviet? I read a lot of contradictions about the nationality of the embassy he visited) was, as you said, an impostor. So... when/why did the real Oswald go to Mexico? He didn't ever actually go to Cuba did he? That would be the reason to visit the Cuban embassy in Mexico.

On edit:

Ok, good summary of the embassy episodes at http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_...sue/lho.mc.html

" Oswald returned to the Cuban Consulate between 5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., which was after normal working hours....

At this point, Ms. Tirado informed Consul Eusebio Azcue of the situation. Azcue had been in his private office which he shared with the man who would soon replace him, Alfredo Mirabal Diaz. Azcue politely explained the requisites for an intransit visa to Oswald. When he realized that Oswald was a stubborn man he told Oswald that he was obviously not a friend of the Cuban revolution because he would otherwise understand that Cuba had to be extremely careful with the people it allowed in the country. Azcue and Oswald yelled at each other. Then Azcue went to the door, opened it and asked Oswald to leave. Oswald did not revisit or telephone the Consulate. Ms. Tirado described the man identifying himself as Lee Harvey Oswald as approximately five feet six, with sparse blond hair, weighing about 125 pounds.[14]

The real Oswald had brown hair and was not a member of the Communist party and thus had no Communist Party membership card. In 1979 Ms. Duran spent several hours with Anthony Summers viewing footage of the real Lee Harvey Oswald. She concluded that the real Oswald was "not like the man I saw here in Mexico City."[15]

...

Eusebio Azcue, who argued with Oswald, claimed that Oswald "was not the same individual who had visited the Cuban Consulate in 1963." He described the man as "a white male, between 5'6" and 5'7", over 30 years of age, very thin long face, with straight eyebrows and a cold look in his eyes. He also said the man had blond hair.[17] Azcue alleged that he would never have identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man who visited the Cuban Consulate in 1963."[18]

So two out of three of the Cuban Consulate personnel claim that the man who visited the embassy was not Oswald. The one man who says it was only got a few fleeting glimpses of him.

After the assassination, the CIA Mexico City Station requested the Mexican government to arrest Sylvia Duran.[19]

They did and released her on November 24. On November 27 they arrested her again. The next day the CIA Headquarters sent a cable to the Mexico City Station ordering them "to insure that neither Sylvia Duran nor the Cubans would have any basis for believing that the Americans were behind her rearrest." The cable stated, "We want the Mexican authorities to take responsibility for the whole affair."[20]"

Edited by Myra Bronstein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Armstrong's book Harvey & Lee consists of almost one thousand well-documented pages. Whether or not one chooses to subscribe to Armstrong's conclusion of two Oswalds, his book contains much valuable information and research, in my opinion.

In fact, the subtitle of the book is: How the CIA framed Oswald. Armstrong's book can easily serve as a reference tool when it comes to the Agency's involvement in President Kennedy's murder.

After presenting a lot of evidence and documentation Armstrong concludes:

Written memoranda shows that
George Herbert Walker Bush
was particularly interested in the HSCA's probe into what information the CIA withheld from the Warren Commission and to what extent the Agency was involved in Kennedy's assassination.

In the author's opinion
Allen Dulles
was almost certainly one of the high-level conspirators in the assassination of President Kennedy, and was also instrumental in the cover-up.

In the author's opinion
Richard Helms
was almost certainly one of the high-level conspirators in the assassination of President Kennedy.

In the author's opinion
James Angleton
was most certainly one of the high-level conspirators.

In the author's opinion
David Atlee Phillips
was most certainly one of the conspirators.

In the author's opinion
Howard Hunt
was most certainly one of the conspirators.

Armstong provides much information about these and other Agency players. There is much about Ford, Hoover and LBJ. The list goes on and on. The main names are of course familiar to all Forum members, but Armstrong provides fascinating detail on many lesser known participants as well. I believe that anyone interested in the events surrounding the murder of President Kennedy will come away from reading Armstrong's book with a greater knowledge than they had before, regardless of how much they have studied this case.

I can't help but adding that almost without fail, the ones that seem to be most dismissive of Armstrong's work have never read his book in its entirety.

Edited by Michael Hogan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Armstrong's book Harvey & Lee consists of almost one thousand well-documented pages. Whether or not one chooses to subscribe to Armstrong's conclusion of two Oswalds, his book contains much valuable information and research, in my opinion.

In fact, the subtitle of the book is: How the CIA framed Oswald. Armstrong's book can easily serve as a reference tool when it comes to the Agency's involvement in President Kennedy's murder.

After presenting a lot of evidence and documentation Armstrong concludes:

Written memoranda shows that
George Herbert Walker Bush
was particularly interested in the HSCA's probe into what information the CIA withheld from the Warren Commission and to what extent the Agency was involved in Kennedy's assassination.

In the author's opinion
Allen Dulles
was almost certainly one of the high-level conspirators in the assassination of President Kennedy, and was also instrumental in the cover-up.

In the author's opinion
Richard Helms
was almost certainly one of the high-level conspirators in the assassination of President Kennedy.

In the author's opinion
James Angleton
was most certainly one of the high-level conspirators.

In the author's opinion
David Atlee Phillips
was most certainly one of the conspirators.

In the author's opinion
Howard Hunt
was most certainly one of the conspirators.

Armstong provides much information about these and other Agency players. There is much about Ford, Hoover and LBJ. The list goes on and on. The main names are of course familiar to all Forum members, but Armstrong provides fascinating detail on many lesser known participants as well. I believe that anyone interested in the events surrounding the murder of President Kennedy will come away from reading Armstrong's book with a greater knowledge than they had before, regardless of how much they have studied this case.

I can't help but adding that almost without fail, the ones that seem to be most dismissive of Armstrong's work have never read his book in its entirety.

Ah, that helps to know that the book has a wider scope than just the dual Oswald angle. Thanks for the summary.

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...