Greg Parker Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 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.. Thanks for posting those, Bernice. I recognise both, as they're in Marina & Lee. If you have Marina and Lee, could you take a look at the fishing photo and tell me if you see any difference between that and the one you posted? I'm not a photo expert, so I'm not about to start throwing the word "alteration" around just yet... I see no problem with the other photo. Next to that "farewell" photo in Marina and Lee is another taken a couple of weeks prior to that. The "farewell" photo Lee is, imo, the same person as in the other. The neck, fullness of face and double chin are all explicable by virtue of his chin on the frame bearing the weight of his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Hi Greg, My friend William Weston talked to Kudlaty and told him the same story . Since he was found (hunted down) and not coming out with the story == I just dont get a reason for being untruthful ???? I'll try not to bend your head toooooo hard. The great researcher Jerry D. Rose said either most or stated the majority of Oswald records had anomalies (something odd). I recall he wrote this when discussing Oswalds SS#. OK, if Rose correct ,WHY ?? a) error// Steve's rule =believe stupidity first before conspiracy to hide that Oswald CIA asset c) to hide that there were 2 or more Oswalds . Well after talking to to Palmer McBride a number of times I believe now in more than uno OZ== answer c). Maybe someone can scan up Rose's work on Oswalds SS#. THANKS sg BERNICE THANK YOU FOR PHOTO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted February 8, 2007 Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 (edited) Hi Greg, My friend William Weston talked to Kudlaty and told him the same story . Since he was found (hunted down) and not coming out with the story == I just dont get a reason for being untruthful ???? I'll try not to bend your head toooooo hard. The great researcher Jerry D. Rose said either most or stated the majority of Oswald records had anomalies (something odd). I recall he wrote this when discussing Oswalds SS#. OK, if Rose correct ,WHY ?? a) error// Steve's rule =believe stupidity first before conspiracy to hide that Oswald CIA asset c) to hide that there were 2 or more Oswalds . Well after talking to to Palmer McBride a number of times I believe now in more than uno OZ== answer c). Maybe someone can scan up Rose's work on Oswalds SS#. THANKS sg BERNICE THANK YOU FOR PHOTO Steve, not saying this applies to William, as I simply don't know, but all too often, researchers accept stories too easily if it supports their research or theory. I'd be much happier seeing people like Kudlaty have their stories tested by cross-examination, and where possible, by record searches (in this case, something like a trace on who lived at the house pointed out by the former student). We may not have reference to the same set of anomolies in his records, but I believe some existed as deliberate flags and in some instances to meet a needed profile (and I make a distinction between that and creating a legend, though the difference may be moot) eg false background information supplied by Lee and Marguerite in NYC, and by Lee in NO and on his Albert Schweitzer application, and numerous anomolies in his USMC records. Do you have a copy of Marina & Lee? If so, will you have a look at the fishing photo and compare with the copy Bernice supplied here? Is there anyone who wants to check it out? To my eyes, Oswald is shorter in the copy Bernice uploaded than in the same photo from M & L. I'd appreciate any opinions on that. Edited February 9, 2007 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 (edited) 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.. Thanks for posting those, Bernice. I recognise both, as they're in Marina & Lee. If you have Marina and Lee, could you take a look at the fishing photo and tell me if you see any difference between that and the one you posted? I'm not a photo expert, so I'm not about to start throwing the word "alteration" around just yet... I see no problem with the other photo. Next to that "farewell" photo in Marina and Lee is another taken a couple of weeks prior to that. The "farewell" photo Lee is, imo, the same person as in the other. The neck, fullness of face and double chin are all explicable by virtue of his chin on the frame bearing the weight of his head. ************************** Greg: ....I just reloaded the fishing photo again, from the CD...I will post, I see no difference , after comparing........the other is still one page 1.. Perhaps you are not about to start throwing the word, "alteration " around just yet , but you already have. ??? I am also including another photo taken that same day, as the one you mention, re his head bearing the weight of his head, showing a close up of LHO's face, another photo taken from the H & L,CD, he still appears mighty healthy to me...including full cheeks and all..... Will you now, please upload from your H & L, CD, the same photos, and post for all the members satisfaction ,so that the mention of your using the word "alteration" will be put to rest.... Thanks B Edited February 9, 2007 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted February 9, 2007 Author Share Posted February 9, 2007 Thanks for posting those, Bernice. I recognise both, as they're in Marina & Lee. If you have Marina and Lee, could you take a look at the fishing photo and tell me if you see any difference between that and the one you posted? I'm not a photo expert, so I'm not about to start throwing the word "alteration" around just yet...I see no problem with the other photo. Next to that "farewell" photo in Marina and Lee is another taken a couple of weeks prior to that. The "farewell" photo Lee is, imo, the same person as in the other. The neck, fullness of face and double chin are all explicable by virtue of his chin on the frame bearing the weight of his head. ************************** Greg: ....I just reloaded the fishing photo again, from the CD...I will post, I see no difference , after comparing........the other is still one page 1.. Perhaps you are not about to start throwing the word, "alteration " around just yet , but you already have. ??? Bernice, I indicated I'm not a photo expert, but to me, there looked to be difference in Oswald's height between the two copies. If you don't see it, then maybe I'm wrong. I am also including another photo taken that same day, as the one you mention, re his head bearing the weight of his head, showing a close up of LHO's face, another photo taken from the H & L,CD, he still appears mighty healthy to me...including full cheeks and all..... Not as full as in the other photo, though. Will you now, please upload from your H & L, CD, the same photos, and post for all the members satisfaction ,so that the mention of your using the word "alteration" will be put to rest.... Thanks Should I read this as a clue you've taken some sort of umbrage? If so, I promise you, there was no intent on my part to suggest you have altered anything. I am curious about where your copy came from, though. As to H & L CD, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I have the book, not a CD. I have scanned the photo from the book and will try and upload it and a comparison capture from your version. 1st photo is a section of the one you posted. 2nd is a section of the same pic from Marina & Lee. In the M & L version, the top of LHO's head seems (to me anyway) to be at least level with the top of the female's head. This does not appear to be the case in the your copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Thanks for posting those, Bernice. I recognise both, as they're in Marina & Lee. If you have Marina and Lee, could you take a look at the fishing photo and tell me if you see any difference between that and the one you posted? I'm not a photo expert, so I'm not about to start throwing the word "alteration" around just yet...I see no problem with the other photo. Next to that "farewell" photo in Marina and Lee is another taken a couple of weeks prior to that. The "farewell" photo Lee is, imo, the same person as in the other. The neck, fullness of face and double chin are all explicable by virtue of his chin on the frame bearing the weight of his head. ************************** Greg: ....I just reloaded the fishing photo again, from the CD...I will post, I see no difference , after comparing........the other is still one page 1.. Perhaps you are not about to start throwing the word, "alteration " around just yet , but you already have. ??? Bernice, I indicated I'm not a photo expert, but to me, there looked to be difference in Oswald's height between the two copies. If you don't see it, then maybe I'm wrong. I am also including another photo taken that same day, as the one you mention, re his head bearing the weight of his head, showing a close up of LHO's face, another photo taken from the H & L,CD, he still appears mighty healthy to me...including full cheeks and all..... Not as full as in the other photo, though. Will you now, please upload from your H & L, CD, the same photos, and post for all the members satisfaction ,so that the mention of your using the word "alteration" will be put to rest.... Thanks Should I read this as a clue you've taken some sort of umbrage? If so, I promise you, there was no intent on my part to suggest you have altered anything. I am curious about where your copy came from, though. As to H & L CD, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I have the book, not a CD. I have scanned the photo from the book and will try and upload it and a comparison capture from your version. 1st photo is a section of the one you posted. 2nd is a section of the same pic from Marina & Lee. In the M & L version, the top of LHO's head seems (to me anyway) to be at least level with the top of the female's head. This does not appear to be the case in the your copy. John Armstrong flew to Argentina and interviewed the Ziger sisters, seen in the fishing photo with LHO in Minsk. They told him that the Lee that they knew in Minsk was very short...ONLY FIVE-FOOT-TWO. That is about the height of the "boy" in the fishing photo. John did not put this in his book because he did not want to further confuse the issue by citing the possibility of A DIFFERENT OSWALD IN RUSSIA. He stuck to Harvey and Lee, who are documentable. My opinion is that there were possibly four Oswalds, not counting imposters. It was an intelligence operation in progress. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 (edited) Thanks for posting those, Bernice. I recognise both, as they're in Marina & Lee. If you have Marina and Lee, could you take a look at the fishing photo and tell me if you see any difference between that and the one you posted? I'm not a photo expert, so I'm not about to start throwing the word "alteration" around just yet...I see no problem with the other photo. Next to that "farewell" photo in Marina and Lee is another taken a couple of weeks prior to that. The "farewell" photo Lee is, imo, the same person as in the other. The neck, fullness of face and double chin are all explicable by virtue of his chin on the frame bearing the weight of his head. ************************** Greg: ....I just reloaded the fishing photo again, from the CD...I will post, I see no difference , after comparing........the other is still one page 1.. Perhaps you are not about to start throwing the word, "alteration " around just yet , but you already have. ??? Bernice, I indicated I'm not a photo expert, but to me, there looked to be difference in Oswald's height between the two copies. If you don't see it, then maybe I'm wrong. I am also including another photo taken that same day, as the one you mention, re his head bearing the weight of his head, showing a close up of LHO's face, another photo taken from the H & L,CD, he still appears mighty healthy to me...including full cheeks and all..... Not as full as in the other photo, though. Will you now, please upload from your H & L, CD, the same photos, and post for all the members satisfaction ,so that the mention of your using the word "alteration" will be put to rest.... Thanks Should I read this as a clue you've taken some sort of umbrage? If so, I promise you, there was no intent on my part to suggest you have altered anything. I am curious about where your copy came from, though. As to H & L CD, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I have the book, not a CD. I have scanned the photo from the book and will try and upload it and a comparison capture from your version. 1st photo is a section of the one you posted. 2nd is a section of the same pic from Marina & Lee. In the M & L version, the top of LHO's head seems (to me anyway) to be at least level with the top of the female's head. This does not appear to be the case in the your copy. ************* Greg: No not as full, because he was bent over but full..not at all gaunt, or pasty or thin looking....imo I am, not a photo expert either but have studied them.....as best I can...and followed them that are.. See his top lip in each photo, on the left, I see a faint black line, ?? They line up, in both with the back ground..that is what I see, anyway.. and I took the tops of their heads by comparison, for their heights....and they appeared to be the same distances..apart..and I checked the backgrounds and such.... I took no umbrage, but the word "alteration" has been way overdone, and the accusation has been made by some to the point, of no return. So yes imo, ones ears do perk up....and I will ask for clarification...always.. imo. In my copy of Harvey & Lee which I obtained from the jfkresearch forum, where John's book is available, there is an envelope with a CD inside the front cover. The CD contains the documents referred to within, in relation, to his findings, the photos are also on the CD...... That is where my copy came from.. I do not know about any other copies of the book that are available other than from where I obtained mine.? I will check the photo in Marina & Lee and compare.. Below I am posting the one photo comparison, that always makes me stop personally and look...and study.I realise there is a 4 years difference approximately, between, but it is such a startling comparison, that I cannot believe my eyes. Even the shape of the face, the chin, almost every aspect of this being has imo changed, in some regard' To me this does appear to be two separate men..the one from his passport to Russia, the other taken upon his arrest.. It is a fascinating subject, and as John himself said, "we don't know" all the answers.... Graig I had to reduce in size the one on the first page, fishing,ran out of upload space,same photo. Thanks B.. *********************** Jack : Ziger sisters, and their great height difference. I could not recall their name, when I made the post, never surprising... but did the height, and did not want to mention anything that I could not give the information in relation to.. Thanks.... B.......PS I have no idea why this posted twice in one....?? two for one sale, I presume....?? Now the second one is gone, always an adventure..... Edited February 9, 2007 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Out of curiosity (remembering I have no knowledge of the JFK theories), the two images labeled 'Oswald' and 'Hidell'... are they of two different people? The one labeled "Hidell" looks like the 'traditional' photo of LHO, while the one on the left looks different. Perhaps a younger version? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted February 9, 2007 Author Share Posted February 9, 2007 Sorry about last post. Things went badly awry trying to upload images. Not sure they've gone any better this time. The first image below (if it has worked) is a section of the copy uploaded by Bernice, which apparently came from a CD available with Armstrong's book. The second image is the same photo as found in "Marina & Lee". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Greg has asked me to upload these images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 (edited) Out of curiosity (remembering I have no knowledge of the JFK theories), the two images labeled 'Oswald' and 'Hidell'... are they of two different people?The one labeled "Hidell" looks like the 'traditional' photo of LHO, while the one on the left looks different. Perhaps a younger version? I am the author of that comparison. I did it in the late 70s as part of my slide lecture. I wanted to show it to the HSCA, but was told I would be HELD IN COMTEMPT OF CONGRESS if I attempted to do so. They did not want any mention of multiple Oswalds. The photo labeled OSWALD is from the LHO PASSPORT when he just got out of the Marines and went to Russia. The photo labeled HIDELL is the DALLAS POLICE MUG SHOT of the patsy under arrest. Certainly the first is chronologically different, but it is impossible for photos of the same man to be morphologically different. Skulls do not change shape. This is not a "theory" but a side by side comparison of two photos alleged to be the same man. In my lectures all I did was present the slide as Bernice has posted, and ask the question....DO THESE TWO PHOTOS SHOW THE SAME MAN? Jack Edited February 9, 2007 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Ah! Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 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. I find it extremely presumptious to blast Armstrong's research in this shoddy manner. I was present for many of his interviews given above in "example 1". The accusations are totally unfounded. None of the interviewees were seeking any fame or reward. Frank Kudlaty, the assistant principal at Stripling has been a friend of mine since the 1940s, when he was a college classmate. He later rose to be superintendant of schools at Waco Texas before retiring. He is a man of impeccable honesty. To question the veracity of Fran Schubert is ludicrous. She told us in great detail about her remembrances of Oswald at Stripling, and details of the house across the street on Thomas Place where he walked home to lunch. And she was not the ONLY one who told the same thing. And investigate the records? Don't be silly. John spent HOURS at the courthouse looking up all the many properties where Marguerite lived. John and I then went to each location and photographed them. Oddly, the Thomas Place house had been demolished...the only house on that block missing. The above posting is way out of bounds. READ THE BOOK. Everything was verified from multiple sources before being published. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Thomas Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Jack White wrote: Skulls do not change shape. Please see my thread on "Oswald's cranium" and tell me what you think. Steve Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 (edited) Hi Greg: Quote:Greg Parker :"Do you have a copy of Marina & Lee? If so, will you have a look at the fishing photo and compare with the copy Bernice supplied here? Is there anyone who wants to check it out? To my eyes, Oswald is shorter in the copy Bernice uploaded than in the same photo from M & L. I'd appreciate any opinions on that. "" Quote:Greg Parker: ""As to H & L CD, I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I have the book, not a CD. I have scanned the photo from the book and will try and upload it and a comparison capture from your version. "" I believe what you may mean above, re the book, H & L, having no CD.....may pertain to the below information of the small editions..that Jerry Robertson published..on John Armstrongs work. With his permission.. I am referring to John Armstrong's "Harvey & Lee : How the CIA Framed Oswald" hardcover complete edition, with CD inserted in a pocket, within the front inside cover.. It is 983 pages, with 800 plus documents and photos, contained on the CD....there are no photos or documents within the book itself, but the CD contains all. Perhaps your book, is pertaining to his presentation at the Lancer Conference in 1997, and or what Jerry pubished,..If so ,there is so much more information within the hard cover 2003 edition..which is available for $44.95 plus postage.. Below is some information on John's 97 presentation at the Lancer Conference... Review of John Armstrong's presentation, "Harvey and Lee" November In Dallas Conference 1997 by TOM DeVRIES Unfortunately, the length and depth of the "Harvey and Lee" information did not permit adequate time for clarification. Conference moderator, Debra Conway and Peter Dale Scott, the next speaker, graciously allowed Armstrong an extra 30 minutes (over the scheduled two hours forty minutes) to finish when the crowd began chanting, "let him finish!" Copies of the presentation's 40 page script, selling for $8.00 each by Lancer at the adjacent book store, caused a small stampede when announced toward the end of the presentation. (More are now available with the presentation video.) But unfortunately, it doesn't contain the more than 150 documents and there's often no attempt made to describe sources or answer important "who," "what," "when," 'why," "where," and "how" questions. However, the presentation video, available from Lancer for $40.00, answers many questions because the camera focuses mainly on the documents with Armstrong reading script and adding details on the video and vocal tracks. There are many leads to follow, and of course speculation based on what this work indicates could run wild. Like Armstrong, many good researchers dislike speculation, particularly when it's not labeled as such. But most explorers, scientists, and researchers form hypotheses and make guesses when determining which roads to explore and how to go about it. http://www.jfklancer.com/KWinter97-2.html HARVEY AND LEE John Armstrong's Documented Study of Two Oswalds Indiana researcher Jerry Robertson has reprinted and self-published John's Harvey and Lee speech together with carefully reproduced images of his documentation. This work has been prepared with Mr. Armstrong's approval. In many cases, Jerry went to the effort of reordering documents from the National Archives to get the clearest copies in existence. For serious researchers, this is currently the best source available anywhere to help understand both John Armstrong's analysis of the two Oswalds and to see excellent reproductions of many of the documents that gave rise to it. For a year or so, Jerry gave away entirely free copies of his work to interested researchers, but resellers are now charging $20 for the latest version of the two-volume set. Some years ago, Mr. Robertson self-published a significant book about the Kennedy assassination called DENIAL. His first work disseminating John Armstrong's research was called DENIAL #2: The Research of John Armstrong and was recently retitled as Harvey and Lee 1997. In July 1999, Jerry completed a second title--Harvey and Lee 1998--based on John Armstrong's November 1998 Dallas presentation. This work continues the theme first fully presented in 1997, includes evidence unavailable just a year earlier, demonstrates how much we know now that was not known in 1964, and makes a more detailed analysis of how witness testimonies and physical evidence were, in John’s own 1999 categorizations, "suppressed, destroyed, ignored, altered, and fabricated," both immediately after the assassination and later. http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/ Walt Brown http://www.jfkresearch.com/critique/critique-view.html This above that Walt critiques is the book I was referring to.... ********************************* Now back to fishing...... I have examined the copy of the fishing photo, in Marina & Lee, and compared the one on the CD, from H & L...imo they are the same....they are not of the same texture, one being fainter to some degree than the other....and bit shadowy that I see. I have placed them upper and lower, for an easier comparison, I think, and I do not see any degree of difference.. Note also, the LHO the Zigers met was very short....this is what they. the Ziger sisters told John Armstrong, when he met with them..in Argentina......about 5'2"... Now a small quote from page 112.."Marina and Lee"... " When the Zigers returned, Mrs. Ziger a short plump, woman, greeted Marina with great warmth and kissed her tenderly"..end quote. You will have noticed that McMillan in her book has described her as short ....and yet, Lee Harvey appears to be approximately the same height as she is.....in both photos taken in Minsk the summer of 1960..so it would appear that they are both short.... Re: the photos below, the top one is from the CD from "Harvey & Lee: How the CIA Framed Oswald".........the lower from "Marina and Lee." Thanks B Edited February 10, 2007 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now