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.

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.

David Josephs Wrote:Believe it or not... I've been put on a posting ban at EF...

::willynilly::


Guess I should see it as a blessing in disguise...

DJ

Magda Hassan Wrote:

David Josephs Wrote:Believe it or not... I've been put on a posting ban at EF...

::willynilly::


Guess I should see it as a blessing in disguise...

DJ

:hock:: You must be such a trouble maker over there because you've never been any thing but generous and collegial in your interactions here.

::evilpenguin::

Jim Hargrove Wrote:

Tracy Riddle Wrote:I think Douglas Horne and David Lifton are also opposed to Armstrong's theory. I don't know why. It has nothing to do with the body alteration theory.

That's correct on both counts.


From memory, and this was a long time ago, during his service at the ARRB, Doug Horne examined John Armstrong's evidence that there were three W-2 forms for Oswald that were faked, apparently by the FBI. There is a large amount of evidence here, and I will summarize just part of it. Let's look at one of the three pre-Marine Corps employers of "Lee Harvey Oswald," Dolly Shoe.

Here is one of the three W-2 forms John believes was forged.





Dolly Shoe Co. discontinued business in November 1957. The owner of the company was Maury Goodman. In 1995, Mr. Goodman was still alive and at John Armstrong's suggestion Goodman wrote to the IRS inquiring about its tax number creation date. Here is the response he received:




So, in a written response to Mr. Goodman on IRS letterhead, IRS official Della Sanford indicated that the tax ID numbers in questions were apparently issued in January 1964 (seven years after Dolly Shoe was dissolved and even longer since "Oswald" allegedly worked for the company). There were a number of other issues related to this, but I don't remember them all.

A ten or fifteen year old version of my web page describing all this can all be found here:

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_History/books/Armstrong/Forged/Forged_docs.htm

Now let's move ahead a year or so....

During the ARRB investigation, Mr. Horne wrote to the IRS asking if the tax records for Lee Harvey Oswald now in the National Archives were fakes. An IRS official named, from memory, Aileen Summerlin (sp?), provided the predictable response. Doug wrote a 200 page memo, based on this type of research, concluding that John Armstrong was wrong.


A quick reality check: John has advised me, again and again, that whenever you submit documents about "Lee Harvey Oswald" to any government agency for analysis, to be sure to black out the Oswald name, otherwise, according to John, "everything gets weird." With this in mind, I blacked out Oswald's name on the best copies I could get of the three W-2 forms in question and sent them to the leading type font specialist for IBM, a lady named Dawn Stanford. During our phone talk, Ms. Stanford advised me that, in her opinion, the three W-2 forms in question, from three different companies, were typed on the same machine, one with an odd font that she couldn't locate in her extensive files.

There is a very simple proof that the three W-2 forms John believes are fakes are indeed fakes, and that is that if you check the Social Security Administration "Lifetime Earnings Report" for "Lee Harvey Oswald," NONE of "Oswald's" pre-Marine Corps earnings are included. The HSCA was actually perplexed by this, and wrote a letter to the SSA asking about it. In it's response, Robert Bynum from the SSA wrote that he was including "Copies of three pages of the Warren Commission Report re employment of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to service in the Marine Corps." I'm not making this stuff up. Copies of all these document are reproduced here:

http://harveyandlee.net/Unraveling/Unravels.htm

During his November in Dallas 1998 conference, John was scheduled to talk immediately after either Mr. Lifton or Mr. Horne (I can't remember which). But as the start time for John's speech came and passed, David Lifton and Doug Horne began an endless colloquy that delayed John's talk into the late hours of the evening. John's presentation at NID 97 had created a sensation, and many in the audience were looking forward to his speech. John had also brought along Palmer McBride and several other "Oswald" eyewitnesses to the conference. These were, even by then, elderly men, and the late hour when John finally was allowed by Debra Conway to speak made their presentations less powerful than they could have been.

Please pay attention to John Armstrong's work. If and when the truth of this case was finally exposed, who here thinks there would be anything but an unearthly roar of criticism!

Dawn Meredith Wrote:

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.

I suggest you re-read the rules here Jose, or take your leave. It appears your purpose here is to shill for GP. Proxies, like trolls, are not tolerated on these pages.

Dawn

Jose Corral Wrote:

Dawn Meredith Wrote:

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.

I suggest you re-read the rules here Jose, or take your leave. It appears your purpose here is to shill for GP. Proxies, like trolls, are not tolerated on these pages.

Dawn

It seems like unfounded accusations of being a shill, proxy and/or troll are tolerated Dawn. Or is there a rule that states all members of this forum must rally behind David Josephs when he is being mercilessly pummeled for his lunacy? I must have missed reading that one.
I've done nothing against YOUR rules other than give my personal insight and opinion without offending, threatening or accusing anybody of anything. If that is not within the rules then may I suggest you take your leave and make sure that this basic human right is covered in your terms and conditions of your rules and regulations. It may increase your membership and inspire more participation in the future. Do you think you can tolerate doing that, Dawn?