J Norwood: "Lee Harvey Oswald: The Legend and the Truth"

[Jim Hargrove]

[Lauren Johnson]

Norwood used to post here. He wasn't very welcome. He's in with the Jim Fetzer crew.

[Albert Doyle]

Norwood is correct about Armstrong but made the mistake of thinking you could praise Mockingbird authors like Dallek on DPF. All you have to do is read DiEugenio on Dallek (like I did thoroughly) to know why he isn't credible on Kennedy. Norwood was trying to pose me as unread.


Shortly before my father died we watched a show on probably PBS with I think it was Caro explaining Johnson and Kennedy. It was one of those sunny eves where the sun comes into the den with a perfect light that creates a temporary tranquil stillness. This was shortly after reading on Caro and his failings. I took great pleasure in explaining the falsehoods and omissions Caro was trying to get away with. My father listened.



Norwood:

Marlene,

Thank you for your intervention and for your important reminder about free speech.

I honestly believe that Robert Dallek is a good presidential historian. He has made important inroads into our understanding of JFK's Vietnam policy. He is a cut above such popular historians as Robert Caro and Doris Kearns Goodwin, who are guilty of omitting from the historical record the criminal activities of Lyndon Johnson. By contrast, Dallek's book An Unfinished Life is a substantial work of scholarship that adds to our knowledge of JFK's presidency. It is deplorable that Dallek does not address the assassination with integrity. But that lapse does not invalidate his other research contributions. I expressed my views on Dallek on another thread, and Albert Doyle ridiculed me on that thread and now uses my opinions on Dallek to discredit my views on the Zapruder film. All the while, he offers no evidence of having read a single line written by Dallek. This is wrong.

When you don't tell the truth on the Assassination it doesn't really matter what else you did...And no matter how you qualify it, false coverage of the Assassination does vitiate an author and his Deep Political credibility...



.

[Jim Hargrove]

I didn't know about this history. Dr. Norwood approached me with an article about the Oswald mythology, and I liked it and send it to John Armstrong and he liked it and so we put it up on the website.


If you actually read the article, you might find it interesting. John Armstrong pegs the start of the Oswald Project to 1947, and Dr. Norwood looks at that very period and asks some fascinating questions about Marguerite and her new found wealth. From the article....

Yet by the late 1940s, her situation had turned around so completely that she was now residing in middle-class neighborhoods and was even purchasing properties solely in her name. In July, 1947, Marguerite purchased a small house at 101 San Saba in Benbrook; in August, 1948, she purchased a new home at 7408 Ewing in Fort Worth; and in November, 1951, she purchased a small house at 4833 Birchman in Fort Worth. During the period of 1947-51, there were three purchases of homes and a grand total of six different addresses at which Marguerite was residing. It is no small accomplishment to be a homeowner in the early twenty-first century. But it was also difficult in the post-Depression years of the 1940s. So, what explains Marguerite's change in fortunes?

The change may be explained by the Oswald Project. In allowing the government to use the name of one of her boys for a surrogate "Lee Harvey Oswald," as well as her own name that would be shared with another woman, Marguerite Claverie Oswald likely made a Faustian bargain, first with the OSS and subsequently the CIA. To a large degree, her life and the lives of her children were controlled by the government undoubtedly in return for monetary compensation.

I can't think of a more likely explanation. Ekhahl, who seemed to have at least some money, was gone by these years. Where did Marguerite get all that money to buy three homes?

[Jim DiEugenio]

Dallek's books are not good ones at all. But since this article has nothing to do with that, then that should not be a problem

The San Saba address and the testimony of Bell, are both fascinating.

I wish Norwood would have gone into that more.

[Albert Doyle]

Norwood was naive on Dallek but if he got Armstrong right and added good information then more power to him.




Who had an extra house in Florida after escaping being interviewed? Gordon Novel?

[Jim DiEugenio]

Kerry Thornley.

Novel was at a safehouse in Columbus , Ohio.

[Jim Hargrove]

[FONT=&amp]Dr. Norwood has just added the following paragraph to his Legend article, emphasizing how Marguerite's financial situation improved dramatically and inexplicably in the late 1940s....
[/FONT]

[FONT=&amp]Between 1947-51, Marguerite purchased three different homes in the Fort Worth area. By early 1951, she was apparently making payments on and maintaining the three properties concurrently. During this period, she also experienced a financial setback from a divorce in which, according to John Pic's Warren Commission testimony, Marguerite came out on the losing end of the court's decree, despite the alleged philandering and physical abuse of Edwin Eckdahl. Pic recalled that "I was told by her that she was contesting the divorce so that he would still support her. She lost, he won." (WCH, XI, 29) With no monthly payments from Eckdahl, Marguerite was completely on her own in financing the three homes during this four-year stretch. This raises the concern about how she could have made the down payments, met monthly financial obligations, and sustained the upkeep of the three properties, while continuing to pay rent at other residences. The timing of the earliest evidence of the two Oswald boys and the two Marguerites during the pre-New York years begs the question of how Marguerite came into the funds to enable her to play Monopoly on this scale.


[/FONT]

[Albert Doyle]

A similar separation of spouses happened between Ruth and Michael Paine in order to facilitate their handler capacity in the Oswald Project. He who spooks alone spooks easiest...

[LR Trotter]

[FONT=&amp]Dr. Norwood has just added the following paragraph to his Legend article, emphasizing how Marguerite's financial situation improved dramatically and inexplicably in the late 1940s....

[/FONT]

[FONT=&amp]Between 1947-51, Marguerite purchased three different homes in the Fort Worth area. By early 1951, she was apparently making payments on and maintaining the three properties concurrently. During this period, she also experienced a financial setback from a divorce in which, according to John Pic's Warren Commission testimony, Marguerite came out on the losing end of the court's decree, despite the alleged philandering and physical abuse of Edwin Eckdahl. Pic recalled that "I was told by her that she was contesting the divorce so that he would still support her. She lost, he won." (WCH, XI, 29) With no monthly payments from Eckdahl, Marguerite was completely on her own in financing the three homes during this four-year stretch. This raises the concern about how she could have made the down payments, met monthly financial obligations, and sustained the upkeep of the three properties, while continuing to pay rent at other residences. The timing of the earliest evidence of the two Oswald boys and the two Marguerites during the pre-New York years begs the question of how Marguerite came into the funds to enable her to play Monopoly on this scale.


[/FONT]

Assuming that the Marguerite mentioned is Marguerite Frances Claverie/Pic?/Oswald/Eckdahl, I tend to wonder, as I wander, if in fact she retained ownership of 3 homes, how the additional homes were financed without selling the previously purchased homes? But, if so, I would also tend to assume that the homes not occupied by her family, just maybe were rented to other occupants, which would not be unusual, but would certainly enhance economic viability. And, I am curious as to when the homes were sold, assuming she did not retain ownership after the mentioned 4 year period. However, if she retained ownership, was she still maintaining all 3 properties the rest of her life?