+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? (/thread-5051.html)
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Albert Doyle - 24-04-2015
David Josephs Wrote:On the 9th of November Oswald was in Irving at the Paines. So it is NOT possible that the person playing Oswald at the shooting range was the same man who went to the car dealership?
That's why Parker needs to make it the 16th. But there's obviously too many unanswered questions to make his claim, that it was Oswald himself, work. Parker is like Fetzer, so caught up in his out of control ego that he is now trying to dictate evidence to make it fit his megalomania. It just doesn't make sense that Oswald would try to set himself up by claiming he was going to come into a large amount of money. It is also very flimsy to suggest Oswald, with his keeping a low and poor profile routine, would suddenly tie himself down with an expensive car. Not to mention his inability to drive. There's too many wrinkles Parker ignores and makes no effort to answer.
Bogard said that he was in a hurry because he was about to go out of town. I assume this was an isolated trip that Bogard made only that specific weekend so therefore it would be unlikely he would forget the day since he remembered a very specific event. Not good enough for Parker however who will bully Bogard and correct the person who was actually there 50 years later.
Of course there is one obvious solution for this that would fit Parker's claim. That would be Lee setting up Harvey.
On a side note, theoretically, Marina might place the Walker Letter in a safe place because she was afraid Oswald was nuts and would do it again, therefore she would need that vital information. I think Marina was smart enough to know an American wife is legally protected from bearing witness against her husband. However Lifton is too trusting of Marina and doesn't consider that the Walker evidence showed a different bullet and a different 30 odd 6 rifle. So the alleged claim from Marina that Oswald hid his rifle doesn't fit the evidence and shows Marina might be lying. Marina also brought the camera to her eye when asked to show how she took the backyard picture even though the camera was a look-down into the viewfinder type. More evidence of Marina being a coached liar and not brainwashed as Lifton accepts. And I wouldn't trust anything from Ruth Paine. The shortest route would be an intense handwriting analysis of the Walker Letter.
.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Drew Phipps - 24-04-2015
Interesting side note: The November 9, 1963 election was about (in Texas) repealing the Poll Tax, which kept poor folks from the ballot box, which had been in effect for 60 years. Texas voters voted to keep the Poll Tax, which was declared unconstitutional by the Warren Court a few years later.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - David Josephs - 24-04-2015
Drew Phipps Wrote:Interesting side note: The November 9, 1963 election was about (in Texas) repealing the Poll Tax, which kept poor folks from the ballot box, which had been in effect for 60 years. Texas voters voted to keep the Poll Tax, which was declared unconstitutional by the Warren Court a few years later.
Nov 9th is also the date on the type written letter to the Soviet consulate....
Mrs. PAINE - That is one incident. Another refers to a rough draft of a letter that Lee wrote and left this rough draft on my secretary desk.
Mr. JENNER - Would you describe the incident? In the meantime, I will obtain the rough draft here among my notes.
Mrs. PAINE - All right. This was on the morning of November 9, Saturday. He asked to use my typewriter, and I said he might.
Mr. JENNER - Excuse me. Would you please. state to the Commission why you are reasonably firm that it was the morning of November 9? What arrests your attention to that particular date?
Mrs. PAINE - Because I remember the weekend that this note or rough draft remained on my secretary desk. He spent the weekend on it. And the weekend was close and its residence on that desk was stopped also on the evening of Sunday, the 10th, when I moved everything in the living room around; the whole arrangement of the furniture was changed, so that I am very clear in my mind as to what weekend this was.
Mr. JENNER - All right, go ahead.
Mrs. PAINE - He was using the typewriter. I came and put June in her high-chair near him at the table where he was typing, and he moved something over what he was typing from, which aroused my curiosity.
Mr. JENNER - Why did that arouse your curiosity?
Mrs. PAINE - It appeared he didn't want me to see what he was writing or to whom he was writing. I didn't know why he had covered it. If I had peered around him, I could have looked at the typewriter and the page in it, but I didn't.
https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10786&relPageId=325 is the FBI report from 2/11/64 about Paine discussing this letter from the 9th where she finds the rough draft.
The FM-8 that he claims he had good for only 15 days was actually from an FM-5 application with Oswald's name on it from 9/17 and is good for 180 days.... I guess Ruth just didn't know everything...
From part 6:
There remains a few strange things about this typed letter. It is typed, which was something Oswald had never done when sending the Russians a letter. The Russians claim that the tone is much too personal and not in line with the letters they had received to date they felt it was a forgery. The postmark on the envelope is November 2nd while the date of the letter is November 9th.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Don Jeffries - 24-04-2015
Greg Parker's tenacious efforts to prove there was only one Lee Harvey Oswald are reminiscent of what we see from lone nutters. Indeed, his magical re-growing tonsils are comparable to magic bullets and bunched-up coats.
Parker is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I don't really understand this crusade of his. Did he have a run-in with Armstrong at some point? This really seems personal.
Even without Armstrong's theory, the Oswald impersonations represent some of the clearest examples of conspiratorial behavior. There is no rational reason to launch this Warren Commission-style debunking effort.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - David Josephs - 24-04-2015
Don Jeffries Wrote:Greg Parker's tenacious efforts to prove there was only one Lee Harvey Oswald are reminiscent of what we see from lone nutters. Indeed, his magical re-growing tonsils are comparable to magic bullets and bunched-up coats.
Parker is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I don't really understand this crusade of his. Did he have a run-in with Armstrong at some point? This really seems personal.
Even without Armstrong's theory, the Oswald impersonations represent some of the clearest examples of conspiratorial behavior. There is no rational reason to launch this Warren Commission-style debunking effort.
Anyone that can show him for the shill he is will be attacked.
Anyone with actual evidence that shows him to be wrong - attacked
When/If he ever gets to Oswald in his books about Oswald - we'll have ourselves a field day...
Writing about Korea and warfare under the guise of an Oswald history is just his convuluted way.
I don't think it has to do with JA but that he thought all along that noone knew enough about H&L to argue with him...
I do. and I will continue to show Parker for the cretin he is... Thanks for having my back Don and the handful of others who easily see thru Parker's fog.
DJ
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Albert Doyle - 25-04-2015
I think the way to approach Parker is to force him to account for the real doubles like the ones Ralph Yates and Bernard Haire saw. Force him to work backwards. Nothing wrong with a little challenge. His response to Anna Lewis isn't credible and shows his weak spot. You can tell a cheap coward by the way he cites the content of other sites in his bully domination tactics but fails to cite or answer to valid criticisms of his material from the same site. Just like he trimmed the Bogard evidence.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Jose Corral - 25-04-2015
David Josephs Wrote:Don Jeffries Wrote:Greg Parker's tenacious efforts to prove there was only one Lee Harvey Oswald are reminiscent of what we see from lone nutters. Indeed, his magical re-growing tonsils are comparable to magic bullets and bunched-up coats.
Parker is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I don't really understand this crusade of his. Did he have a run-in with Armstrong at some point? This really seems personal.
Even without Armstrong's theory, the Oswald impersonations represent some of the clearest examples of conspiratorial behavior. There is no rational reason to launch this Warren Commission-style debunking effort.
Anyone that can show him for the shill he is will be attacked.
Anyone with actual evidence that shows him to be wrong - attacked
When/If he ever gets to Oswald in his books about Oswald - we'll have ourselves a field day...
Writing about Korea and warfare under the guise of an Oswald history is just his convuluted way.
I don't think it has to do with JA but that he thought all along that noone knew enough about H&L to argue with him...
I do. and I will continue to show Parker for the cretin he is... Thanks for having my back Don and the handful of others who easily see thru Parker's fog.
DJ
Greg Parker is showing you to be the cretin. If you can't see that for yourself then you should give this game up. He owns you. Everyone at the EF knows this except maybe your like minded buddies that have your back.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Lauren Johnson - 25-04-2015
Quote:Greg Parker is showing you to be the cretin. If you can't see that for yourself then you should give this game up. He owns you. Everyone at the EF knows this except maybe your like minded buddies that have your back.
GP was hear because he wouldn't be civil. Jose, there are some very strong disagreements that go on here. But name calling and rude behavior is not tolerated. Acting like a Greg Parker stand in isn't a good idea.
Just state your position without name calling, and let's see how things go.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Jose Corral - 25-04-2015
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Quote:Greg Parker is showing you to be the cretin. If you can't see that for yourself then you should give this game up. He owns you. Everyone at the EF knows this except maybe your like minded buddies that have your back.
GP was hear because he wouldn't be civil. Jose, there are some very strong disagreements that go on here. But name calling and rude behavior is not tolerated. Acting like a Greg Parker stand in isn't a good idea.
Just state your position without name calling, and let's see how things go.
Lauren, I borrowed the term cretin directly from David Josephs. If it is civil enough for him to use it then it should be civil enough for me too.
Please don't call me a Greg Parker stand in. I take offence to your suggestion that I am. My name is Jose. I am much better looking than Greg.
Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE? - Drew Phipps - 25-04-2015
Hmm.. now we have "proof" of double Ruth Paines, too. One Ruth Paine is taking one Oswald to get a driving test, and the other Ruth Paine is trying to get a peek at what the other Oswald is typing.