12-05-2010, 09:52 PM
I had run across John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee: The Case for Two Oswalds online as an essay or lecture and found it fascinating, compelling and convincing, as well as very helpful in explaining the seeming contradictions of “multiple Oswald sightings”.
In my 2003 The Assassinations edited by Jim DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, Harvey and Lee: The Case for Two Oswalds is presented as Part I (pages 91-112) and Part II (pages 113-135) serving to place the intelligence asset in perspective as a long-term project.
Together with John Newman's Oswald and the CIA (I have the 1995 edition) the use of Oswald by intelligence is clarified via stereopticon.
[size=12]Harvey and Lee and Tippit: A New Look at the Tippit Shooting http://www.ctka.net/pr198-jfk.html provides the best explanation to date of the numerous contradictions and anomalies of the incident.[/SIZE]
ONI, CIA, FBI all have used Oswald; John Armstong's work has shown much of how and when this was done, demystifying the magicians' heretofore baffling illusion.
In my 2003 The Assassinations edited by Jim DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, Harvey and Lee: The Case for Two Oswalds is presented as Part I (pages 91-112) and Part II (pages 113-135) serving to place the intelligence asset in perspective as a long-term project.
Together with John Newman's Oswald and the CIA (I have the 1995 edition) the use of Oswald by intelligence is clarified via stereopticon.
[size=12]Harvey and Lee and Tippit: A New Look at the Tippit Shooting http://www.ctka.net/pr198-jfk.html provides the best explanation to date of the numerous contradictions and anomalies of the incident.[/SIZE]
ONI, CIA, FBI all have used Oswald; John Armstong's work has shown much of how and when this was done, demystifying the magicians' heretofore baffling illusion.