Deep Politics Forum

Jim Hargrove Wrote:If anyone lurking here is tired of all these cheap insults, why not go to HarveyandLee.net and consider John Armstrong's work for yourself?

Take a look at the Real Deal instead of taking anyone else's word for it.

Cheap insults? The book wasn't cheap, Jim. I paid good money for my insults.

Jim Hargrove Wrote:If anyone lurking here is tired of all these cheap insults, why not go to HarveyandLee.net and consider John Armstrong's work for yourself?

Take a look at the Real Deal instead of taking anyone else's word for it.

Great advice Jim, and ignore the naysayers. Arguing with people who present no evidence and in fact out right ignore the evidence is a total waste. Especially now that we know Jose, by his own admission, came here just to argue against JA.

Dawn Meredith Wrote:

Jim Hargrove Wrote:If anyone lurking here is tired of all these cheap insults, why not go to HarveyandLee.net and consider John Armstrong's work for yourself?

Take a look at the Real Deal instead of taking anyone else's word for it.

Great advice Jim, and ignore the naysayers. Arguing with people who present no evidence and in fact out right ignore the evidence is a total waste. Especially now that we know Jose, by his own admission, came here just to argue against JA.

I wouldn't go as far as ignore the naysayers, Dawn, or say that I came here just to argue against JA. What is the point of free expression if at the same time you are encouraging others to ignore it? I'll encourage anybody to read Armstrong's Harvey & Lee. At their own peril, of course.

Take a hike Jose. You aren't contributing, just deriding. A troll by any other name is still a troll.

Jose Corral Wrote:

Dawn Meredith Wrote:

Jim Hargrove Wrote:If anyone lurking here is tired of all these cheap insults, why not go to HarveyandLee.net and consider John Armstrong's work for yourself?

Take a look at the Real Deal instead of taking anyone else's word for it.

Great advice Jim, and ignore the naysayers. Arguing with people who present no evidence and in fact out right ignore the evidence is a total waste. Especially now that we know Jose, by his own admission, came here just to argue against JA.

I wouldn't go as far as ignore the naysayers, Dawn, or say that I came here just to argue against JA. What is the point of free expression if at the same time you are encouraging others to ignore it? I'll encourage anybody to read Armstrong's Harvey & Lee. At their own peril, of course.

Problem is Jose... you haven't expressed anything but your opinion based on reading 20% of the book, none of the back up materials, and seen none of the CD I gather?

So you made it up to 1958 and you still have not offered a single instance from the book with which you disagree and the reason behind it. All we got was "Tripe"... which is your entitled opinion but says little of what you've done to actually attempt to understand those 200 pages...

Here is the Table of Contents for the first 200 pages:

JFK-101 ……..1-12
Thru 1952 ……12-45
1952 New York…….. 46-49
1953 …………50-80
1954 ………….81-107
1955 ………..108-135
1956 ………..136-152
1957 …………153-183
1958 …………184-218/

Like the evidence which illustrates the Conspiracy in the WCR, it does not just JUMP off the page - you need to know a bit about the context and the corroborating conspiracy evidence.

Maybe explain who Georgia Bell is and why she is important to the summer of 1947 when Harvey is at San Saba
Better yet... while supposedly living at 1505 8th Marguerite is driven to 2220 Thomas across from Stripling to retrieve items belonging to her to bring back to 101 San Saba... what's that all about?

In the 200 pages, you read about NYC and 1952-53. You know about the NYC school records and how they have Oswald attending over 125 days of school from March 23 to the end of May with no mention of the 3 weeks at
Youth House in April-May of 1953. As well as the conflicts in the records themselves - the PERM records having been recopied at least 3 different times all while in NYC... wonder why?

How the records reflect a 5'4" 115lb entering 7th grader in Sept 1952... yet by Aug 1953 he is 4'10" and barely 100 lbs.

Jose - there is a lot of info here. If quiting and insulting the work is how you do things... ok.
It took me two years working virtually daily with John Armstrong to track down and authenticate the greatly detailed footnotes, documents and images so I do understand where the conflicts are and can discuss them.

It's really okay to fold up and go regarding H&L... it's not for the easily overwhelmed... just as uncovering the evidence of the conspiracy is also painstakingly slow.
But it's there... it's everywhere.





The same with H&L. If it was only 1 or 2 things do you supposed an entire book could be written on the subject? When Palmer McBride writes a letter to David Lifton (excerpts below) saying he was there, he remembers the dates, times and occassions while DSL speculates... you can believe whomever you want. But it helps to know what you're agruing about before you do so, no?

I too spoke with the people at Pfisterer and they also confirmed the year. If you read the beginning of the book you'd know about Palmer and that Hoover sent agents to Pfisterer's the week after the assassination - one has to wonder why the FBI was so concerned with Oswald's grade school, middle school and high school years/records in relation to his being accused of the murder of JFK & Tippit. No other person in history has had their childhood picked apart by the FBI as did Oswald... as if there was something from 1953 which would help determine the facts regarding the murder of these men? Hoover sent FBI agents to Stripling Jr High's Vice-Principal and took Oswald's Stripling records on the morning of Saturday Nov 23rd... less than 8 hours after Oswald is finally accused of JFK's murder.

What could be so important at a school the FBI says he never attended in 1954, to send agents the day after the assassination to take?

Jose - I think I've been civil and offered a number of speicifc examples which you can refute with the evidence that convinces you this is all TRIPE.... yet at some point you actually have to engage in intelligent discussion with something more than your impressions or opinions based on such limited exposure to the info...

or you will never engage and continue on with the tone you've chosen... either way your intentions and their results will be painfully obvious to all.

good day
DJ

David Josephs Wrote:

Jose Corral Wrote:

Dawn Meredith Wrote:

Jim Hargrove Wrote:If anyone lurking here is tired of all these cheap insults, why not go to HarveyandLee.net and consider John Armstrong's work for yourself?

Take a look at the Real Deal instead of taking anyone else's word for it.

Great advice Jim, and ignore the naysayers. Arguing with people who present no evidence and in fact out right ignore the evidence is a total waste. Especially now that we know Jose, by his own admission, came here just to argue against JA.

I wouldn't go as far as ignore the naysayers, Dawn, or say that I came here just to argue against JA. What is the point of free expression if at the same time you are encouraging others to ignore it? I'll encourage anybody to read Armstrong's Harvey & Lee. At their own peril, of course.

Problem is Jose... you haven't expressed anything but your opinion based on reading 20% of the book, none of the back up materials, and seen none of the CD I gather?

So you made it up to 1958 and you still have not offered a single instance from the book with which you disagree and the reason behind it. All we got was "Tripe"... which is your entitled opinion but says little of what you've done to actually attempt to understand those 200 pages...

Here is the Table of Contents for the first 200 pages:

JFK-101 ……..1-12
Thru 1952 ……12-45
1952 New York…….. 46-49
1953 …………50-80
1954 ………….81-107
1955 ………..108-135
1956 ………..136-152
1957 …………153-183
1958 …………184-218/

Like the evidence which illustrates the Conspiracy in the WCR, it does not just JUMP off the page - you need to know a bit about the context and the corroborating conspiracy evidence.

Maybe explain who Georgia Bell is and why she is important to the summer of 1947 when Harvey is at San Saba
Better yet... while supposedly living at 1505 8th Marguerite is driven to 2220 Thomas across from Stripling to retrieve items belonging to her to bring back to 101 San Saba... what's that all about?

In the 200 pages, you read about NYC and 1952-53. You know about the NYC school records and how they have Oswald attending over 125 days of school from March 23 to the end of May with no mention of the 3 weeks at
Youth House in April-May of 1953. As well as the conflicts in the records themselves - the PERM records having been recopied at least 3 different times all while in NYC... wonder why?

How the records reflect a 5'4" 115lb entering 7th grader in Sept 1952... yet by Aug 1953 he is 4'10" and barely 100 lbs.

Jose - there is a lot of info here. If quiting and insulting the work is how you do things... ok.
It took me two years working virtually daily with John Armstrong to track down and authenticate the greatly detailed footnotes, documents and images so I do understand where the conflicts are and can discuss them.

It's really okay to fold up and go regarding H&L... it's not for the easily overwhelmed... just as uncovering the evidence of the conspiracy is also painstakingly slow.
But it's there... it's everywhere.





The same with H&L. If it was only 1 or 2 things do you supposed an entire book could be written on the subject? When Palmer McBride writes a letter to David Lifton (excerpts below) saying he was there, he remembers the dates, times and occassions while DSL speculates... you can believe whomever you want. But it helps to know what you're agruing about before you do so, no?

I too spoke with the people at Pfisterer and they also confirmed the year. If you read the beginning of the book you'd know about Palmer and that Hoover sent agents to Pfisterer's the week after the assassination - one has to wonder why the FBI was so concerned with Oswald's grade school, middle school and high school years/records in relation to his being accused of the murder of JFK & Tippit. No other person in history has had their childhood picked apart by the FBI as did Oswald... as if there was something from 1953 which would help determine the facts regarding the murder of these men? Hoover sent FBI agents to Stripling Jr High's Vice-Principal and took Oswald's Stripling records on the morning of Saturday Nov 23rd... less than 8 hours after Oswald is finally accused of JFK's murder.

What could be so important at a school the FBI says he never attended in 1954, to send agents the day after the assassination to take?

Jose - I think I've been civil and offered a number of speicifc examples which you can refute with the evidence that convinces you this is all TRIPE.... yet at some point you actually have to engage in intelligent discussion with something more than your impressions or opinions based on such limited exposure to the info...

or you will never engage and continue on with the tone you've chosen... either way your intentions and their results will be painfully obvious to all.

good day
DJ

I didn't quit reading it, David. I just stopped reading it because I was getting dizzy. Like you're making me now.

You poor thing...


All those big words and concepts to keep straight... you really don't have a chance here do you...

You come guns ablazing and you're really nothing more than a wannabe child hoping to be asked to the Adult table for a taste of dessert before you go off to bed

We can't ask you anything specific cause I doubt you got past page 5 if my post confuses you so much...

Maybe it would be better if you stuck to the honey-booboo / Kardashians chat rooms and leave thinking to those with the tools to do so.

Rock on, dude

::coolrock::

David Josephs Wrote:You poor thing...


All those big words and concepts to keep straight... you really don't have a chance here do you...

You come guns ablazing and you're really nothing more than a wannabe child hoping to be asked to the Adult table for a taste of dessert before you go off to bed

We can't ask you anything specific cause I doubt you got past page 5 if my post confuses you so much...

Maybe it would be better if you stuck to the honey-booboo / Kardashians chat rooms and leave thinking to those with the tools to do so.

Rock on, dude

::coolrock::

I didn't come here "guns ablazing', David and nor would I leave that way. If you don't like my personal opinion then leave it. No need to have shoot out over it.

Live and let live, dude.::peaceflag::

Michael Cross Wrote:Take a hike Jose. You aren't contributing, just deriding. A troll by any other name is still a troll.

I know I am not liked on this thread but do you have to make it more obvious than it already is? Its like you want to spit on me too.
I never called you any names or asked you to take a hike, Michael so I expect the same courtesy from you.

David,


Thanks for showing that Palmer McBride letter. I had a feeling it was something like that. Researcher ego syndrome I guess on Lifton's behalf.


Lifton said Armstrong called McBride and talked him back into his original story. McBride's letter shows there's more to it than that.



.