Enid Gray explains Oswald's appearance

[Greg Parker]

Thank you to Robert Howard for the pointer to Enid Gray's DPE article, "The Australian Connection". I have started a new thread however, since what I wanted to discuss was a different part to that which Robert was discussing.

I have said on other forums in the past that Oswald's appearance post-Russia can be explained by poor diet - an entirely rational position - yet to date, Enid, god bless he cotton socks, seems to be the only other person to ever suggest this as an answer.

No doubt it is far less exciting a scenario than having two Oswald...

Here is what she said in the article:

Is there any explanation for the dramatic change between Lee Oswald's appearance which the Australian girls described and the passport photo which he displayed to them? The disparity is profound. The most logical reason, in my opinion, would be one of malnutrition brought about by food shortages which are still prevalent in Russia today. After spending one month visiting that country and eating food of such poor quality that we in the west would only throw it in the garbage, I can defiantly attest to that. Although Oswald's lack of nutrition would not be enough to manifest itself like we see in some potbellied waifs, it would be bad enough that symptoms of muscle wasting along with thinning, crinkly hair would be apparent to a medical doctor.

Incidently, the incredible shrinking man syndrome is not unique to Lee Harvey Oswald. It also happens to people who in an effort to lose weight, place themselves on such a stringent low calorie diet that along with losing pounds in weight, they lose inches in height.

Enid Gray article

[Ron Ecker]

Interesting article. It should be pointed out, however, that the post-Russia disparity in appearance is not the only evidence of two Oswalds. Armstrong's research has shown that little Harvey Lee Oswald was seemingly going to two different schools in two different cities at the same time, and there was a disparity in their sizes.

[Steve Thomas]

Greg,

Incidently, the incredible shrinking man syndrome is not unique to Lee Harvey Oswald. It also happens to people who in an effort to lose weight, place themselves on such a stringent low calorie diet that along with losing pounds in weight, they lose inches in height. [/i][/color]

On his June, 1963 application for a passport, Oswald listed his height as 5'11".

In September, 1963, when LHO wanted to get a Cuban transit visa, Sylvia Duran told him that he would have to supply some photographs.

Does anyone have a copy of those photos? I've seen them in a sort of film strip fashion.

Steve Thomas

[Ron Ecker]

On his June, 1963 application for a passport, Oswald listed his height as 5'11".

Maybe he didn't know he had shrunk two inches. He may have thought Marina was just getting taller (or more uppity).

[Greg Parker]

Interesting article. It should be pointed out, however, that the post-Russia disparity in appearance is not the only evidence of two Oswalds. Armstrong's research has shown that little Harvey Lee Oswald was seemingly going to two different schools in two different cities at the same time, and there was a disparity in their sizes.

Ron, it shows what you say if you're blind in one eye, can't see out of the other, have had a lobotomy and possess the faith of a Jim Jones acolyte.

Example 1. He takes Robert's testimony that LHO attended W.C. Stripling Junior High School in Fort Worth during the '51-52 school year (ie the last school LHO attended prior to going to NYC), and instead of assuming Robert got the school wrong, he claims he got the year wrong. Why? Apparently so he can then claim "Harvey" attended Stripling in '54 while Lee was at Beauregard in NO. He then trots out a "witness" who "remembers" Oswald being at Stripling. Was she in the same class? No. Not even the same year. She apparently told Armstrong she used to watch him "walking home". That must have been thrilling for her since she also claimed he lived opposite the godamn school, and even showed Armstrong which house it was. Did Armstrong check records to see who lived in/owned the house at the time? Apparently not. He also trotted out the assistant principle of Stripling at the time of the assassination. This person said that the FBI contacted him, and the he handed over Oswald's school records. The problem here is that school records are requested through appropriate school governing authorities. There are reasons at law why such requests are made that way, and I would expect someone like an assistant principle to be aware of such procedures and laws. Yet we are expected to believe this guy handed the records over without any formality, and without the knowledege, let alone consent, of his employers?

Example 2. He claimed the records from PS 44 in NYC showed no absences - despite LHO being in Youth House for a couple of weeks during this period. In fact, what the record shows is 15 days absence.

Example 3. Regarding alleged disparity in height as a youngster, he relies rather heavily on Dr Kurian. Kurian claimed he examined Oswald in the Court Clinic on Mar 27, 1953 - Kurian's last day of work there. Trouble with that is that LHO was not referred to the Court Clinic until around Oct/Nov. Moreover, according to John Carro, a referral to the Court Clinic was a last resort. And indeed, by Oct/Nov, it was becoming clear that other agencies could not/would not take LHO into their programs. Even then, LHO never made it to the clinic due to Marguerite hightailing it back to NO.

Example 4. The Bolton Ford incident. Armstrong claims that one of the two trying to buy trucks identified himself to the dealership as "Lee Oswald". This is utterly false. The only name used was "Oswald" according to the FBI interviews of Boltan staff. Even the paperwork used by the salesman only has "Oswald" written on it. According to Dick Billings, Garrison believed the "Oswald" involved here was a relative of LHO. Right or wrong about that, there is zero evidence that this person was "Harvey" (or should that be "Lee" who really wasn't "Lee" anyway but someone named "Donald Norton"?) or any other person deliberately impersonating LHO. Geeze, anyone would think Lee Harvey was the only Oswald in existence.

[Thomas Graves]

Interesting article. It should be pointed out, however, that the post-Russia disparity in appearance is not the only evidence of two Oswalds. Armstrong's research has shown that little Harvey Lee Oswald was seemingly going to two different schools in two different cities at the same time, and there was a disparity in their sizes.

Ron, it shows what you say if you're blind in one eye, can't see out of the other, have had a lobotomy and possess the faith of a Jim Jones acolyte.

Example 1. He takes Robert's testimony that LHO attended W.C. Stripling Junior High School in Fort Worth during the '51-52 school year (ie the last school LHO attended prior to going to NYC), and instead of assuming Robert got the school wrong, he claims he got the year wrong. Why? Apparently so he can then claim "Harvey" attended Stripling in '54 while Lee was at Beauregard in NO. He then trots out a "witness" who "remembers" Oswald being at Stripling. Was she in the same class? No. Not even the same year. She apparently told Armstrong she used to watch him "walking home". That must have been thrilling for her since she also claimed he lived opposite the godamn school, and even showed Armstrong which house it was. Did Armstrong check records to see who lived in/owned the house at the time? Apparently not. He also trotted out the assistant principle of Stripling at the time of the assassination. This person said that the FBI contacted him, and the he handed over Oswald's school records. The problem here is that school records are requested through appropriate school governing authorities. There are reasons at law why such requests are made that way, and I would expect someone like an assistant principle to be aware of such procedures and laws. Yet we are expected to believe this guy handed the records over without any formality, and without the knowledege, let alone consent, of his employers?

Example 2. He claimed the records from PS 44 in NYC showed no absences - despite LHO being in Youth House for a couple of weeks during this period. In fact, what the record shows is 15 days absence.

Example 3. Regarding alleged disparity in height as a youngster, he relies rather heavily on Dr Kurian. Kurian claimed he examined Oswald in the Court Clinic on Mar 27, 1953 - Kurian's last day of work there. Trouble with that is that LHO was not referred to the Court Clinic until around Oct/Nov. Moreover, according to John Carro, a referral to the Court Clinic was a last resort. And indeed, by Oct/Nov, it was becoming clear that other agencies could not/would not take LHO into their programs. Even then, LHO never made it to the clinic due to Marguerite hightailing it back to NO.

Example 4. The Bolton Ford incident. Armstrong claims that one of the two trying to buy trucks identified himself to the dealership as "Lee Oswald". This is utterly false. The only name used was "Oswald" according to the FBI interviews of Boltan staff. Even the paperwork used by the salesman only has "Oswald" written on it. According to Dick Billings, Garrison believed the "Oswald" involved here was a relative of LHO. Right or wrong about that, there is zero evidence that this person was "Harvey" (or should that be "Lee" who really wasn't "Lee" anyway but someone named "Donald Norton"?) or any other person deliberately impersonating LHO. Geeze, anyone would think Lee Harvey was the only Oswald in existence.

________________________________

Excellent stuff, Greg.

--Thomas

________________________________

[Chuck Robbins]

Interesting article. It should be pointed out, however, that the post-Russia disparity in appearance is not the only evidence of two Oswalds. Armstrong's research has shown that little Harvey Lee Oswald was seemingly going to two different schools in two different cities at the same time, and there was a disparity in their sizes.

Ron, it shows what you say if you're blind in one eye, can't see out of the other, have had a lobotomy and possess the faith of a Jim Jones acolyte.

Example 1. He takes Robert's testimony that LHO attended W.C. Stripling Junior High School in Fort Worth during the '51-52 school year (ie the last school LHO attended prior to going to NYC), and instead of assuming Robert got the school wrong, he claims he got the year wrong. Why? Apparently so he can then claim "Harvey" attended Stripling in '54 while Lee was at Beauregard in NO. He then trots out a "witness" who "remembers" Oswald being at Stripling. Was she in the same class? No. Not even the same year. She apparently told Armstrong she used to watch him "walking home". That must have been thrilling for her since she also claimed he lived opposite the godamn school, and even showed Armstrong which house it was. Did Armstrong check records to see who lived in/owned the house at the time? Apparently not. He also trotted out the assistant principle of Stripling at the time of the assassination. This person said that the FBI contacted him, and the he handed over Oswald's school records. The problem here is that school records are requested through appropriate school governing authorities. There are reasons at law why such requests are made that way, and I would expect someone like an assistant principle to be aware of such procedures and laws. Yet we are expected to believe this guy handed the records over without any formality, and without the knowledege, let alone consent, of his employers?

Example 2. He claimed the records from PS 44 in NYC showed no absences - despite LHO being in Youth House for a couple of weeks during this period. In fact, what the record shows is 15 days absence.

Example 3. Regarding alleged disparity in height as a youngster, he relies rather heavily on Dr Kurian. Kurian claimed he examined Oswald in the Court Clinic on Mar 27, 1953 - Kurian's last day of work there. Trouble with that is that LHO was not referred to the Court Clinic until around Oct/Nov. Moreover, according to John Carro, a referral to the Court Clinic was a last resort. And indeed, by Oct/Nov, it was becoming clear that other agencies could not/would not take LHO into their programs. Even then, LHO never made it to the clinic due to Marguerite hightailing it back to NO.

Example 4. The Bolton Ford incident. Armstrong claims that one of the two trying to buy trucks identified himself to the dealership as "Lee Oswald". This is utterly false. The only name used was "Oswald" according to the FBI interviews of Boltan staff. Even the paperwork used by the salesman only has "Oswald" written on it. According to Dick Billings, Garrison believed the "Oswald" involved here was a relative of LHO. Right or wrong about that, there is zero evidence that this person was "Harvey" (or should that be "Lee" who really wasn't "Lee" anyway but someone named "Donald Norton"?) or any other person deliberately impersonating LHO. Geeze, anyone would think Lee Harvey was the only Oswald in existence.

Not saying you are wrong about the principle, but, JFK's body was snatched away from Dallas even when the party was told to stay until the autopsy was done.

What I'm saying is that protocol seemed to go out the window as far as evidence collection was concerned re: JFK's murder.

[Greg Parker]

Not saying you are wrong about the principle, but, JFK's body was snatched away from Dallas even when the party was told to stay until the autopsy was done.

What I'm saying is that protocol seemed to go out the window as far as evidence collection was concerned re: JFK's murder.

Chuck, you're right about the body snatch. Quite illegal. But there are some differences between that and what supposedly happened at Strippling. The body snatch was done in the immediate aftermath of the assassination, when everyone was running on pure adrenalin. Rose did not meekly accede to the request to take the body - he knew the law and tried to stop them. Rose also never kept quiet about what had happened for 30 or 40 years.

But let's assume the FBI did in fact take records from Strippling. What does the information we have about it tell us? Firstly, it had to have happened well before Robert Oswald gave his testimony, as it would be too risky to leave the records there once it was known LHO's immediate family would all be testifying. We can also assume that the FBI did not find out about Strippling because of Robert, otherwise he would have been told not to mention that school. If I have it correctly, it is Armstrong's contention that LHO and whole two Oswald thing was a CIA operation - not FBI. So the question then becomes: how did the FBI know about the strippling records - and the importance of them?

We are also told that the FBI contacted the assistant principal of the school, but we're not told why the assistant and not the actual principal? Was the principal even informed of the records being handed over? Was the assistant contacted because he had an existing relationship with the FBI?

Just too many unanswered and unanswerable questions, and on the "facts" presented, not terribly plausable when looked at from varying angles.

But maybe it's just me...

[Ron Ecker]

We are also told that the FBI contacted the assistant principal of the school, but we're not told why the assistant and not the actual principal? Was the principal even informed of the records being handed over?

I haven't gone back to reread on the school days in Armstrong, but I can answer this part. It was a Saturday morning, the FBI contacted the principal, and the principal called the assistant principal and told him to go to the school and get the records for the agents.

Edited February 7, 2007 by Ron Ecker

[Greg Parker]

We are also told that the FBI contacted the assistant principal of the school, but we're not told why the assistant and not the actual principal? Was the principal even informed of the records being handed over?

I haven't gone back to reread all this, but I can answer this part. It was a Saturday morning, the FBI contacted the principal, and the principal called the assistant principal and told him to go to the school and get the records for the agents.

Ron, if that's correct, then the author of the School Daze article has got it wrong. It states, In another videotaped interview, the W.C. Stripling assistant principal at the time of the assassination, Frank Kudlaty, recalled how he was contacted by the FBI and how he handed over to them Oswald's Stripling school records.

Not that I think it matters much either way to the credibility of the story.

That said, I respect your opinion. Do you have one on this?

[Ron Ecker]

Greg,

I read a good deal of Armstrong's book (have been unable to finish it, but use it as a reference for all its info on Oswald), and believe that he has at least superficially made a good case for there being two Oswalds from an early age. I say "superficially" because I have not dug into Armstrong's story as you obviously have. So I can't say I accept it as true, but I found the idea of there being two Oswalds (not just a string of miscellaneous imposters) to be intriguing based on the many photographs of "Oswald," the height disparity, etc., before I ever read Armstrong.

I think that the SMT (Shrinking Man Theory) is more believable than the SBT (in that the SMT at least has some precedent apparently, whereas the SBT is physically impossible), but that's not saying a lot. I'm not sure that Occam's Razor doesn't fit a CIA operation, involving raising two kids as one (and there was at least one KGB precedent, as I recall), better than the SMT. That said, I don't think we'll ever know the answer, as with so much else in the JFK case.

Ron

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

I read a good deal of Armstrong's book (have been unable to finish it, but use it as a reference for all its info on Oswald), and believe that he has at least superficially made a good case for there being two Oswalds from an early age. I say "superficially" because I have not dug into Armstrong's story as you obviously have. So I can't say I accept it as true, but I found the idea of there being two Oswalds (not just a string of miscellaneous imposters) to be intriguing based on the many photographs of "Oswald," the height disparity, etc., before I ever read Armstrong.

I think that the SMT (Shrinking Man Theory) is more believable than the SBT (in that the SMT at least has some precedent apparently, whereas the SBT is physically impossible), but that's not saying a lot. I'm not sure that Occam's Razor doesn't fit a CIA operation, involving raising two kids as one (and there was at least one KGB precedent, as I recall), better than the SMT. That said, I don't think we'll ever know the answer, as with so much else in the JFK case.

Ron

Thanks Ron, I agree that the idea itself is not entirely preposterous. What I object to is the over-reaching with the evidence, at times to the point of twisting it, to make his case.

A couple of quick responses to your points. The photos used are like the "before" and "after" photos used in gym equipment and diet ads. In the Marines, he bulked up and developed something of a bull neck due to three regular, reasonably nutritious squares a day, and a lot of physical exercise/activity. It's what joining the Marines does to everyone. There is also the fact that youths in this age group are still developing. In Russian, an occasional dance was as active as he got, and he lived on cabbage and borsch - this for approx two and a half years. I could show you a series of photos of myself between the ages of 17 and 24 and I'd be confident you'd have a lot of trouble believing they're all pics of the same person. Different hair styles, various levels of fitness, changing lifestyles and diet, all would contribute to the differences. Different angles, different lighting, and quality of photo wouldn't exactly enhance your chances of recognition, either.

The precedent Armstrong uses is not really a precedent at all. It involved using the identity of a deceased Canadian child. Using stolen ID or taking the identity of a deceased person was the usual MO. I believe when this "precedent" came under fire, he started citing a Cuban operation which used twins. I'm not sure that any details of that were ever forthcoming, but if there was such a Cuban operation, at least using (preferably identical) twins makes some sense - though again, it's not really a precedent when you're theorising about two unrelated children of differing height (and accents?).

The CE's concerning requests for Fort Worth school district records seem to suggest to me that old records such as Oswald's were kept in a central location - not at the individual schools. If I've interpreted those documents correctly (and I readily admit, I may not have), then the Stripling account has to be a fabrication. I refer to the series of CE 1873 docs. The New York records were most certainly obtained by FBI and WC through proper channels - as indicated by CE 1384 and a 1964 newspaper interview with Judge Florence Kelley. To attempt to obtain records directly from the school (if in fact, the records did remain at the school) seems almost foolhardy, and likely to cause more problems then it solved if the Principal (or Assistant Principal) actually had... principles...

[Steven Gaal]

Greg, Maybe Jack White can add to this thread. Someone E-mail JACK and ask him to POST the photo of the OZ in Russia who is fishing. This to me is a very small Oswald....very, very ,very, small......boy like, and not a CARBO-Protein restricted individual. thanks sg

[Greg Parker]

Greg, Maybe Jack White can add to this thread. Someone E-mail JACK and ask him to POST the photo of the OZ in Russia who is fishing. This to me is a very small Oswald....very, very ,very, small......boy like, and not a CARBO-Protein restricted individual. thanks sg

Steve, bear with me as I try and get my head around what you think this means.

Since the Oswald who returned from Russia was not "boy like" in stature, did he grow between the taking of the photo and his return to US, or did yet another imposter take over from the imposter who went there in the first?

Is there some other explanation... apart from the photo only making him seem very very small?

[Bernice Moore]

Greg, Maybe Jack White can add to this thread. Someone E-mail JACK and ask him to POST the photo of the OZ in Russia who is fishing. This to me is a very small Oswald....very, very ,very, small......boy like, and not a CARBO-Protein restricted individual. thanks sg

Steve, bear with me as I try and get my head around what you think this means.

Since the Oswald who returned from Russia was not "boy like" in stature, did he grow between the taking of the photo and his return to US, or did yet another imposter take over from the imposter who went there in the first?

Is there some other explanation... apart from the photo only making him seem very very small?

*****************

Hi Greg:

I believe this is the photo that Steve mentions here..I am also posting another taken of Marina and Lee the day they left

the USSR.

He still, by the photo, appears to have his bull neck, and has not got a wasted appearance ..a full head of hair

and full cheeks, and a double chin....??

B..

Edited February 9, 2007 by Bernice Moore