14-08-2013, 03:59 PM
(This post was last modified: 14-08-2013, 04:15 PM by Karl Kinaski.)
Quote Greg Burnham: Judyth Vary Baker in Exile Thread Ed-Forum, page 51.
(The thread mutated in a Armstrong vs Baker threat on that pages)
A LNter, can proof a CTer wrong on certain aspects. Parnell did so (if he is a LNter at all):
Quote Parnell:
KK
(The thread mutated in a Armstrong vs Baker threat on that pages)
Quote: ...if we are to accept Armstrong's account, the Oswald that Judyth knew was HARVEY not LEE. And the one Judyth claims to have known was (according to Armstrong) HARVEY (who could not drive) -- but who was known to Judyth (according to Judyth) as Lee (who could drive). Mind boggling--
Personally, I have a very difficult time accepting that any Soviet double-agent, or false defector, or infiltrator, or--in other words--SPY-- would not have been taught to drive for purposes of "cover story" if nothing else.
A LNter, can proof a CTer wrong on certain aspects. Parnell did so (if he is a LNter at all):
Quote Parnell:
Quote:The October 15, 1956 induction of "Lee" Oswald creates a huge problem for the Armstrong team. On that day "Lee" was fingerprinted and assigned serial number 1653230. In December of the same year he was photographed (popularly known as the 13-inch head photo which BTW also has been debunked) with his serial number displayed at the bottom of the picture. These two records disprove the Armstrong theory since the HSCA matched the fingerprints from October 1956 to prints taken of LHO in custody in Dallas and New Orleans in 1963. The problem is, those are supposed to be the prints of "Harvey" Oswald. Similarly, the December photo is said to be that of "Lee" while the HSCA photo panel proved using morphological data that it matched photos of "Harvey".
KK