John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee

[David Josephs]

I never heard of Greg Parker until a few days ago when I stumbled across a lengthy, year or two old debate between him and David Josephs.

Parker declared victory every time he posted, but David ate him up in the debate! EVIDENCE is a funny thing, and joking about it doesn't change it.

Jim

Hello Jim,

I think you are mistaken about who ate who up.

Was Greg right about Palmer McBride? Was he right about the school registration form? (Which DJ admitted he was in the end).

He had a whole list of things like the 7 witnesses who were ignored who saw Oswald in 52/53 in favor of one witness who fitted the Armstrong theory.

The debate was excellent except for the argument between Greg and David Lifton about who found the McBride information first (Lifton "I already knew that but didn't tell anyone"). I read through it again last night.

Greg sadly seems to have disappeared from JFK Education forum.

Nicely done once again John...

DONT bother going to the links of the infamous 7 Greg offers up for 1953... or even read the one example I posted.... (if you were to bother going to these links you'd see each and every "statement" is identical save for the name of the person, not a single one is signed by the supposed witness interviewed... and not one is called to testify..

no one is asked about the 53-54 year.... why do you suppose that is John?
Myra DeRouse is not called, her statements ignored... why John?
Dr. Kurian's reports and descriptions of the small HARVEY - not interesed?

With regards to Beauregard...
when I did finally find the Asst Principal HEAD explanation of the school days, AS I ALSO POSTED, I find that Greg's analysis was incorrect and my agreeing with him premature.

Help us understand how Oswald attends a complete SPRING semester in 1954 and yet has a full attendance record for BOTH semesters... ::
or how they can both be living at 126 Exchange AND at Lillian's that Spring...

As for Lifton's "30 years after the fact cross examination" of Palmer... I am truly sorry you fail to see Palmer as one small piece of this HUGE PIE...

One last request... when Marina files for her SS benefits... maybe you'd delve into why most of LHO's income is not included... when the years of income that apply range from 1951-1963...


Didn't Oswald earn income in the Marines? - prior to 1963? yet this is the sum total of the SSA's income history for one LEE HARVEY OSWALD: 1962/63
What could possibly be wrong with the years 1951-1961 and the income related to this SS# that it may not match the employment history recalled by surviving witnesses...

[TABLE="class: MsoNormalTable"]
[TR]
[TD]

Employer:

[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

Earnings:

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]William B. Reily & Co.
[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

422.25

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]

"

[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

191.25

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, Inc.
[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

727.80

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]

"

[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

945.69

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]

"

[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

121.67

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]Leslie Welding
[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

636.50

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]Texas Book Depository
[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

261.68

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"][/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 69%, bgcolor: transparent"]Grand Total
[/TD]
[TD="width: 31%, bgcolor: transparent"]

$3306.85

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Greg has his own forum where I am sure he would welcome your support and your comments... it has a wealth of very good information as long as you stick to the SOURCE EVIDENCE and AUTHENTICATE IT.

That's all any of us are doing here John... asking/proving which evidence builds on other evidence and whether ANY of that evidence is worth the paper it was printed on...

I apppreciate the efforts you are going thru to discuss this - yet you still have not taken the time to look at the FREE source materials at Baylor (and now the FREE harveyandlee.net site) and decide for yourself...
My goal is not to convince YOU but to illuminate the evidence, in its entirety, and assist others to make educated comments, create educated opinions...

When one does nothing but post opinions without backing, it becomes very obvious very quickly.
When one does so with evidence that can be shown to be fraudulent or unassociated with the question at hand - it ought to be pointed out.

For example - one of the docuemnts about Oswlad in Taiwan (Formosa) is the HSCA CIA document denying Oswald's involvement with the CIA - a STAFF MEMO... not evidence but the CIUA's interpretation of it...

With reards to the magnificent 7 and 1953-54... here are the pages GREG provided as supporting material about HARVEY attending BJHS in the FALL 1953 - FIFTY-THREE.
Please tell us what information you can find in these documents related to LHO and the FALL of 1953... (as the 54-55 school year starts in SEPT 1954)

THIS is the quality of supporting evidence Mr Parker used to - how'd you put it? - "eat me up"... and the type of evidence you're willing to accept as definitive...

You want to post GREG's rebuttals as your own support - I guess that's up to GREG and you... yet if you're not even going to check his sources before you declare some hollow victory,
what's the point of having this discussion at all?




[ATTACH=CONFIG]5293[/ATTACH]

[Tracy Riddle]

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.

Hi, Tracy,

Perhaps, but what do you think about the wallet containing LEE Harvey Oswald's Texas drivers license that was found at the Tippit murder scene, noted by FBI SA Barret and was filmed by WFAA? Whether LEE Oswald dropped it after murdering Tippit, or Capt. Westbrook brought it there (as JA suspects), it certainly does make LEE Oswald a suspect, no?

I always thought that one Oswald with a driver's license and another without one was pretty good evidence of Two Oswalds.

Jim

We also have the wallet the Warren Report says Oswald left at the Paine house that morning. So that's three. Or maybe the lawyers who wrote the Report just made a mistake. It's enough to drive a person mad.

Like I said, Jim, Armstrong is onto something, I'm just not sure he's right about everything. No researcher is right about everything. I think Armstrong is trying to create a Grand Unified Theory to explain every facet of this case, and I don't think that's possible.

[Jim Hargrove]

We also have the wallet the Warren Report says Oswald left at the Paine house that morning. So that's three. Or maybe the lawyers who wrote the Report just made a mistake. It's enough to drive a person mad.

Like I said, Jim, Armstrong is onto something, I'm just not sure he's right about everything. No researcher is right about everything. I think Armstrong is trying to create a Grand Unified Theory to explain every facet of this case, and I don't think that's possible.

From the harveyandlee website:

NOTE: There were a total of five Oswald wallets: a black plastic wallet (CE 1798); a red billfold found at Ruth Paine's (CE 2003 #382); a brown billfold found at Ruth Paine's (CE 2003 #114); a billfold taken from LHO upon arrest--initialed by HMM (Henry Moore), wallet and contents inventoried and photographed; and the Westbrook wallet, which was not initialed by police, not listed in inventory, not photographed, not mentioned by a single witness to the WC, HSCA, ARRB, etc. and disappeared, but not before it was filmed by WFAA TV and seen by FBI agent Barrett.

Jim

[Jim Hargrove]

DONT bother going to the links of the infamous 7 Greg offers up for 1953... or even read the one example I posted.... (if you were to bother going to these links you'd see each and every "statement" is identical save for the name of the person, not a single one is signed by the supposed witness interviewed... and not one is called to testify..

no one is asked about the 53-54 year.... why do you suppose that is John?
Myra DeRouse is not called, her statements ignored... why John?
Dr. Kurian's reports and descriptions of the small HARVEY - not interesed?

With regards to Beauregard...
when I did finally find the Asst Principal HEAD explanation of the school days, AS I ALSO POSTED, I find that Greg's analysis was incorrect and my agreeing with him premature.
THIS is the quality of supporting evidence Mr Parker used to - how'd you put it? - "eat me up"... and the type of evidence you're willing to accept as definitive...

[.....]

You want to post GREG's rebuttals as your own support - I guess that's up to GREG and you... yet if you're not even going to check his sources before you declare some hollow victory,
what's the point of having this discussion at all?

Thank you for this absolutely stunning post, David! It never occurred to me that Mr. Parker would be so loose with his evidence, or that others would promote it without even looking at it, and so I didn't check it. Sure glad you did!

Jim

[David Josephs]

Back up your claim that reasonable answers have already been given.

Back up your claim to be a researcher.

Do your own work.

Charles it's a fair question.

What was the reason for creating two Oswalds in 1952?

How can I find something that isn't there?

Someone could put me straight though and make me look stupid very easily?

The goal here is not to make anyone look stupid John... maybe therein lies the problem? You think this is about winning and losing arguments when this is about defining the conspiracy(ies), the players and their roles.

We EXPECT you can read into a subject, use GOOGLE, ask peers, go to a library, BUY a book - whatever it takes - to compile the information to offer an INFORMED OPINION that YOU arrive at
and then SUPPORT IT with the information you used...

otherwise you appear as a parrot - one gladly assuming the task of making you look stupid without any outside assistance.


There is an entire HISTORY OF THE COLD WAR, CIA & MILITARY INTELLIGENCE that you have obviously missed...
Entire programs designed to take advantage of the influx of refugees after WWII.... and build networks to combat the "communist threat"


Charles and the others have you nailed John... a bit of preparation for these discussions is in order...
and at least the token understanding of what CONTEXT means in these discussions.

[Tracy Riddle]

We also have the wallet the Warren Report says Oswald left at the Paine house that morning. So that's three. Or maybe the lawyers who wrote the Report just made a mistake. It's enough to drive a person mad.

Like I said, Jim, Armstrong is onto something, I'm just not sure he's right about everything. No researcher is right about everything. I think Armstrong is trying to create a Grand Unified Theory to explain every facet of this case, and I don't think that's possible.

From the harveyandlee website:

NOTE: There were a total of five Oswald wallets: a black plastic wallet (CE 1798); a red billfold found at Ruth Paine's (CE 2003 #382); a brown billfold found at Ruth Paine's (CE 2003 #114); a billfold taken from LHO upon arrest--initialed by HMM (Henry Moore), wallet and contents inventoried and photographed; and the Westbrook wallet, which was not initialed by police, not listed in inventory, not photographed, not mentioned by a single witness to the WC, HSCA, ARRB, etc. and disappeared, but not before it was filmed by WFAA TV and seen by FBI agent Barrett.

Jim

You see? It's absolutely insane. ::headbang::
Maybe the whole assassination plot was designed as a psychological warfare experiment to mess up the minds of the public.

[David Josephs]

We also have the wallet the Warren Report says Oswald left at the Paine house that morning. So that's three. Or maybe the lawyers who wrote the Report just made a mistake. It's enough to drive a person mad.

Like I said, Jim, Armstrong is onto something, I'm just not sure he's right about everything. No researcher is right about everything. I think Armstrong is trying to create a Grand Unified Theory to explain every facet of this case, and I don't think that's possible.

From the harveyandlee website:

NOTE: There were a total of five Oswald wallets: a black plastic wallet (CE 1798); a red billfold found at Ruth Paine's (CE 2003 #382); a brown billfold found at Ruth Paine's (CE 2003 #114); a billfold taken from LHO upon arrest--initialed by HMM (Henry Moore), wallet and contents inventoried and photographed; and the Westbrook wallet, which was not initialed by police, not listed in inventory, not photographed, not mentioned by a single witness to the WC, HSCA, ARRB, etc. and disappeared, but not before it was filmed by WFAA TV and seen by FBI agent Barrett.

Jim

You see? It's absolutely insane. ::headbang::
Maybe the whole assassination plot was designed as a psychological warfare experiment to mess up the minds of the public.

The assassination? maybe....

The evidence created/altered/destroyed/hidden related to it - yes indeed Tracy.... the exposing of deep intelligence operational procedures and strategies will appear foreign to the lay person.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Clarke

The "technology" of espionnage does not make logical sense unless one knows the keys to decrypting it... the "minds of the public" are simply not able to connect these plans to the real world...
It is only here and there that we can band together and peel the onion back... while the assassination process was significant, the fine line between ALL the interlocking evidence and that which applies to THIS cover-up is very difficult to reconcile.

Case in point... what does the Clinton trip with Shaw and Ferrie have to do with the assassination other than to infuse some DEEP MEANING after the fact and ultimately show the extent of denial in the WCR?
That there MAY be a connection beyond creating confusion keeps us from abandoning the event as insignificant... that this could have been LEE while HARVEY was creating his own evidence trail elsewhere brings up possible facts that again, cannot be understood within the context of the real world - and can only be understood from the inside looking out...

The American people, sinceWorld War II, or World War I, or the Spanish American War -- take your choice-- have witnessed the tip of many criminal icebergs. The officialinvestigations of the criminal icebergs almost always stopped at the waterline.The other 90 percent of the criminal icebergs were never hauled onto the beachfor complete examination, prosecution and correction.

The criminal cases of 1980 tothe present are in perfect harmony with this honored tradition. This is, ofcourse, why Americans are the most profoundly ignorant people on planet earth.The illusion of knowledge is far worse than knowing you don't know. - Zinn

[Tracy Riddle]

This is from Russ Baker's Family of Secrets:

"Allen Dulles once called CIA documents 'hieroglyphics.'...Dulles used to expound on such elements of tradecraft to his fellow Warren Commission members. On one occasion, he told them that no one would be able to grasp an intelligence memo except for those involved in its creation and their colleagues...When Thomas J. Devine, Poppy Bush's business partner and a former CIA agent, coyly suggested to me that the problem with journalists like myself is that 'you believe what you read in government documents,' he was referring to such deeply coded disinformation."

[David Josephs]

USIntelligence Community Reform Since 1947

This is a very interesting look at the documents and studies the Government made of its Intelligence organization since the National Security Act...

The heavy military influence is hard to avoid... imo some excellent background material to understand the context of the times

DJ

[Phil Dragoo]

Tracy

Your anecdote is accurately descriptive:

When Thomas J. Devine, Poppy Bush's business partner and a former CIA agent, coyly suggested to me that the problem with journalists like myself is that 'you believe what you read in government documents,' he was referring to such deeply coded disinformation.

Senator Patrick Leahy was tutored by Director of Central Intelligence Robert Gates:

Senator, all governments lie to each other; it's how business gets done.

When the meaning is too clear, someone is shot in the head.