John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee

[Jim Hargrove]

[David Josephs]

Let's complete the TAX RETURN / SSI circle on this one...

Marina is given a SS benefits report as I posted above - for the years 1951 - 1963... with only the income from 62 and 63.....


So let's have your explanation for why the Social Security Office did not include this and many other year's income in their calculations...


[ATTACH=CONFIG]5299[/ATTACH]


On his job applications Lee HARVEY would put down that he attended Ridglea JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL... (7th - 9th grade)
yet those of us who have looked know he was in PS44 in NY (7th-8th) and Beauregard JHS in NOLA (8th-9th)

why would he lie on his job applications we wonder.... especially about a time period that is most difficult to reconcile ??

In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then.
Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades. And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School.
Mr. JENNER. As soon as he finished the sixth year at Ridglea Elementary School, he entered W. C. Stripling High School, as a seventh grader?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir--junior high school.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5296[/ATTACH]


and finally a summary of the Tax info related to Oswald.... a mishmosh of conflicting reports and lack of accuracy at every turn...

What's going on here John?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5297[/ATTACH]

[Jim Hargrove]

Hi, David,

Let me help John out a little with your financial collage above.

It all seems to indicate that the Social Security Administration failed to include any of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" income prior to and including his service in the Marine Corps. And so income from Pfisterer's, Tujagues, and Dolly Shoes all disappeared, as well as the USMC income. What's truly weird is when the HSCA asked the SSA about that, the letter they got back from SSA suggested they consult The Warren Commission Report!

Of course, the HSCA could have merely called the State of Louisiana to get "Oswald's" withholding records, but they didn't, because they couldn't figure out the phone number, or maybe because the information might have shown that there were serious problems with "Oswald's" tax records.

I hope John can explain this better than I did, because my explanation makes me think these "investigations" were mostly about hiding the truth.

Jim

[David Josephs]

Hi, David,

Let me help John out a little with your financial collage above.

It all seems to indicate that the Social Security Administration failed to include any of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" income prior to and including his service in the Marine Corps. And so income from Pfisterer's, Tujagues, and Dolly Shoes all disappeared, as well as the USMC income. What's truly weird is when the HSCA asked the SSA about that, the letter they got back from SSA suggested they consult The Warren Commission Report!

Of course, the HSCA could have merely called the State of Louisiana to get "Oswald's" withholding records, but they didn't, because they couldn't figure out the phone number, or maybe because the information might have shown that there were serious problems with "Oswald's" tax records.

I hope John can explain this better than I did, because my explanation makes me think these "investigations" were mostly about hiding the truth.

Jim

Precisely Jim....

It's as if there was ANOTHER OSWALD who earned money that could not be included in the Marina calculation due to the years involved and the conflicts that would be uncovered...

hmmmm... WHERE have we heard THAT before...

::headbang:: Am I the only one feeling like this?

Cheers Jim...

(btw - I'm reading thru the Ruby and Oswald folder - 189 pages or so...
it appears there were MORE PEOPLE who knew/saw Ruby and Oswald (and Tippit & Ferrie) together than pointed the the 6th floor as the source of the shots!)


=========
just for a grin, here is Brennan NOT looking up after the limo passes him (z140-z207) and a shot is fired... and telling the WC what he did and didn't see...
followed by what the WCR states as FACT.

Mr. BRENNAN. Well, as the parade came by, I watched it from a distance of Elm and Main Street, as it came on to Houston and turned the corner at Houston and Elm, going down the incline towards the railroad underpass. And after the President had passed my position, I really couldn't say how many feet or how far, a short distance I would say, I heard this crack that I positively thought was a backfire.

Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had any kind of a scope on it?
Mr. BRENNAN. I did not observe a scope.

Mr. BELIN. How much of the gun do you believe that you saw?
Mr. BRENNAN. I calculate 70 to 85 percent of the gun.

Mr. BELIN. Now, is there anything else you told the officers at the time of the lineup?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, I told them I could not make a positive identification.

Mr. BELIN. Did you observe the window at all until after you heard that first sound which was a backfire or firecracker, at least you thought it was?
Mr. BRENNAN. No.
Mr. BELIN. So you did not observe the window and would not know whether or not there was any man in the window during that period?
Mr. BRENNAN. No.

WCR Ch.4 p.144In the 6- to 8-minute period beforethe motorcade arrived,?"' Brennan
saw a man leave and return to thewindow "a couple of times.(NOT!)" 252
After hearing the first. shot, whichhe thought was amotorcyclebackfire,
Brennan glanced up at the window.(NOT!)



Mr. BRENNAN. I positively thought that the first shot was a backfire of a motorcycle. And then something made me think that someone was throwing firecrackers from the Texas Book Store, and a possibility it was the second shot. But I glanced up or looked up and I saw this man taking aim for his last shot.

He testified that "this man I saw previously was aiming for his last shot (GOT ONE RIGHT!) * * * as it appeared tome he was standing up and resting against the left window sill * * *.25s


Mr. McCLOY. Did you see the rifle explode? Did you see the flash of what was either the second or the third shot?
Mr. BRENNAN. No.
Mr. McCLOY. Could you see that he had discharged the rifle?
Mr. BRENNAN. No. For some reason I did not get an echo at any time. The first shot was positive and clear and the last shot was positive and dear, with no echo on my part.
Mr. McCLOY. Yes. But you saw him aim?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. McCLOY. Did you see the rifle discharge, did you see the recoil or the flash?
Mr. BRENNAN. No.
Mr. McCLOY. But you heard the last shot.
Mr. BRENNAN. The report; yes, sir.

Brennan saw the man fire the last shot (NOT!) and disappear from the window.
Within minutes of the assassination, Brennan described the man to the police.254

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5300[/ATTACH]
So he is looking up AT THE WINDOW as this MAN aims for the third shot (after NOT SEEING WHERE THE FIRST SHOT COMES FROM)... he HEARS the report of the rifle.... yet does not see the rifle he is staring at discharge a shot.

Is this not supporting evidence for the last shot - or at least "A" shot not coming from the window Brennen is staring at at the time of one of the shots - yet from that general direction?
and this is the STAR WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION!

[size=12]
WCR: Oswald was 5'9", slender and 24 years old.

Yet only three years earlier - at 21 - he is 5'11".... seems to me Brennen's evidence REMOVES LHO from suspicion... but hey, what do I know.

During the evening of November 22, Brennan identified Oswald
as the person in the lineup who bore the closest resemblance to the man
in the window but he said he was unable to make a positive identification.

Prior to the lineup, Brennan had seen Oswald's picture on
television and he told the Commission that whether this affected his
identification "is something I do not know." 280

[/SIZE]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5301[/ATTACH]

[John Mooney]

David, the point about the seven witnesses is that Armstrong never bothered to speak to them. Instead he homed in on the 40 year old memory of one person.

I noticed no one commented on the circular logic in the Pfisterer video. Can't anyone see the Armstrong sleight of hand in that one?

And no one answered my question.

I'll help.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because.... ___________________________"

Fill in the blanks.

Because I can not think of a single good way a convoluted hairbrained scheme like this could be of use to anyone. My bullsit radar is pinging like there is no tomorrow.

And that is the fulcrum of the problem I have with this whole doppelganger thing... just why?

As an aside, I challenge the people who advocate Harvey and Lee to take Jack White's 77 picture photo montage and divide it into two sections - one for Oswald 1 and one for Oswald 2. The photos is where I came in.

No one commented on the "joker" picture, one of two in the list that looks odd but which is clearly Oswald once you remove the obvious tampering someone did to it.

[Magda Hassan]

And no one answered my question.

I'll help.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because.... ___________________________"

Fill in the blanks.

Because I can not think of a single good way a convoluted hairbrained scheme like this could be of use to anyone. My bullsit radar is pinging like there is no tomorrow.

Twins and doubles, doppelgangers are useful in all sorts of intelligence and criminal situations. Just a tool to be used from a whole box of tricks suitable for many occasions.

[John Mooney]

Twins and doubles, doppelgangers are useful in all sorts of intelligence and criminal situations. Just a tool to be used from a whole box of tricks suitable for many occasions.

I agree.. but twins are already available and so are look-alikes - that is a trick of substitution.

But that wasn't my question.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because.... ___________________________"

[Magda Hassan]

Twins and doubles, doppelgangers are useful in all sorts of intelligence and criminal situations. Just a tool to be used from a whole box of tricks suitable for many occasions.

I agree.. but twins are already available and so are look-alikes - that is a trick of substitution.

But that wasn't my question.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because.... ___________________________"

Basically because it might come in handy some where some time for some thing.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Twins and doubles, doppelgangers are useful in all sorts of intelligence and criminal situations. Just a tool to be used from a whole box of tricks suitable for many occasions.

I agree.. but twins are already available and so are look-alikes - that is a trick of substitution.

But that wasn't my question.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because.... ___________________________"

Read the thread.

Reasonable answers exist in plain daylight.

Meanwhile, here are some clues.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because they could....

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because the likes of Cameron, West, Heath and Estabrooks were drunk on power...

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because those evil gooks and commies were doing something similar...

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because the creation and exploitation of dissociative states in children was a key area of covert experimentation..

[John Mooney]

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because they could....

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because the likes of Cameron, West, Heath and Estabrooks were drunk on power...

These are not reasons so I'll ignore them.

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because those evil gooks and commies were doing something similar...

They were? For what reason though?

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because the creation and exploitation of dissociative states in children was a key area of covert experimentation..

In what way was this exploiting dissociative states in children? I don't see how dissociative states applies to this dual identity plan.

I'm sorry.. but you're still not answering the question.

Try again please (and point me to the answer you say is already plain as day in this thread)

Back in 1952 the CIA said "We need to take these 13 year old children and create a dual Oswald identity because.... ___________________________"