John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee

[Tracy Riddle]

I have some questions.

What was the (presumably) CIA idea in 1952 in regarding creating two Oswalds?

Was the plan in 1952 to eventually swap them in 1959 when one of them defects to Russia?

And what was to be gained from this very long term plan?

Wasn't seven years enough time to teach someone to understand Russian and be a lot less complicated?

Was it just lucky they these two grew up over seven years looking almost identical?

I have a lot of questions about Armstrong's theory as well. I've read the book twice (and taken notes), and while he has definitely assembled a lot of evidence that things are wrong with the official story of Oswald's life, I don't go all the way with this theory (at least I'm an agnostic about it). For example, his scenario of the Tippit murder is highly selective in the witnesses and evidence he presents to the reader.

I still find his book valuable; I learned a lot from it. I highly recommend that you read it; his detailed history of the Carcano rifle and how the authorities created a fake paper trail "proving" that Oswald ordered it through the mail is worth the price alone.

But a person can have 80% or 90% of their facts right and still leap to the wrong conclusion. We ALL need to keep a skeptical, critical mind about ALL researchers and theories in this case. Jack White did some great work, and I don't question his sincerity, but I don't agree with all of his conclusions. I watched the Youtube video of his presentation at Fetzer's symposium on the Z-film, and found it pretty weak.