Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE?

[Jim Hargrove]

I think Douglas Horne and David Lifton are also opposed to Armstrong's theory. I don't know why. It has nothing to do with the body alteration theory.

That's correct on both counts.


From memory, and this was a long time ago, during his service at the ARRB, Doug Horne examined John Armstrong's evidence that there were three W-2 forms for Oswald that were faked, apparently by the FBI. There is a large amount of evidence here, and I will summarize just part of it. Let's look at one of the three pre-Marine Corps employers of "Lee Harvey Oswald," Dolly Shoe.

Here is one of the three W-2 forms John believes was forged.





Dolly Shoe Co. discontinued business in November 1957. The owner of the company was Maury Goodman. In 1995, Mr. Goodman was still alive and at John Armstrong's suggestion Goodman wrote to the IRS inquiring about its tax number creation date. Here is the response he received:




So, in a written response to Mr. Goodman on IRS letterhead, IRS official Della Sanford indicated that the tax ID numbers in questions were apparently issued in January 1964 (seven years after Dolly Shoe was dissolved and even longer since "Oswald" allegedly worked for the company). There were a number of other issues related to this, but I don't remember them all.

A ten or fifteen year old version of my web page describing all this can all be found here:

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_Hist...d_docs.htm

Now let's move ahead a year or so....

During the ARRB investigation, Mr. Horne wrote to the IRS asking if the tax records for Lee Harvey Oswald now in the National Archives were fakes. An IRS official named, from memory, Aileen Summerlin (sp?), provided the predictable response. Doug wrote a 200 page memo, based on this type of research, concluding that John Armstrong was wrong.


A quick reality check: John has advised me, again and again, that whenever you submit documents about "Lee Harvey Oswald" to any government agency for analysis, to be sure to black out the Oswald name, otherwise, according to John, "everything gets weird." With this in mind, I blacked out Oswald's name on the best copies I could get of the three W-2 forms in question and sent them to the leading type font specialist for IBM, a lady named Dawn Stanford. During our phone talk, Ms. Stanford advised me that, in her opinion, the three W-2 forms in question, from three different companies, were typed on the same machine, one with an odd font that she couldn't locate in her extensive files.

There is a very simple proof that the three W-2 forms John believes are fakes are indeed fakes, and that is that if you check the Social Security Administration "Lifetime Earnings Report" for "Lee Harvey Oswald," NONE of "Oswald's" pre-Marine Corps earnings are included. The HSCA was actually perplexed by this, and wrote a letter to the SSA asking about it. In it's response, Robert Bynum from the SSA wrote that he was including "Copies of three pages of the Warren Commission Report re employment of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to service in the Marine Corps." I'm not making this stuff up. Copies of all these document are reproduced here:

http://harveyandlee.net/Unraveling/Unravels.htm

During his November in Dallas 1998 conference, John was scheduled to talk immediately after either Mr. Lifton or Mr. Horne (I can't remember which). But as the start time for John's speech came and passed, David Lifton and Doug Horne began an endless colloquy that delayed John's talk into the late hours of the evening. John's presentation at NID 97 had created a sensation, and many in the audience were looking forward to his speech. John had also brought along Palmer McBride and several other "Oswald" eyewitnesses to the conference. These were, even by then, elderly men, and the late hour when John finally was allowed by Debra Conway to speak made their presentations less powerful than they could have been.

Please pay attention to John Armstrong's work. If and when the truth of this case was finally exposed, who here thinks there would be anything but an unearthly roar of criticism!

Bump!

[Albert Doyle]

Good work. You've got them by the short and curlies.



The taxpayer ID number mistake is similar to the mistake they made with the serial number for the money order for the Carcano.

[Tracy Riddle]

Like I said, I don't understand the motivation of Lifton and Horne. Armstrong's work doesn't conflict with theirs at all; in fact, they are two entirely separate areas. I think a lot of JFK researchers have done a huge amount of damage to the cause of critical research, and usually for reasons of ego and self-promotion.

[Albert Doyle]

Agreed. There's some run-away egos in this business. Human nature I guess. Just pay attention to their gains and ignore their mistakes.

[Dawn Meredith]

I think Douglas Horne and David Lifton are also opposed to Armstrong's theory. I don't know why. It has nothing to do with the body alteration theory.

That's correct on both counts.


From memory, and this was a long time ago, during his service at the ARRB, Doug Horne examined John Armstrong's evidence that there were three W-2 forms for Oswald that were faked, apparently by the FBI. There is a large amount of evidence here, and I will summarize just part of it. Let's look at one of the three pre-Marine Corps employers of "Lee Harvey Oswald," Dolly Shoe.

Here is one of the three W-2 forms John believes was forged.





Dolly Shoe Co. discontinued business in November 1957. The owner of the company was Maury Goodman. In 1995, Mr. Goodman was still alive and at John Armstrong's suggestion Goodman wrote to the IRS inquiring about its tax number creation date. Here is the response he received:




So, in a written response to Mr. Goodman on IRS letterhead, IRS official Della Sanford indicated that the tax ID numbers in questions were apparently issued in January 1964 (seven years after Dolly Shoe was dissolved and even longer since "Oswald" allegedly worked for the company). There were a number of other issues related to this, but I don't remember them all.

A ten or fifteen year old version of my web page describing all this can all be found here:

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_Hist...d_docs.htm

Now let's move ahead a year or so....

During the ARRB investigation, Mr. Horne wrote to the IRS asking if the tax records for Lee Harvey Oswald now in the National Archives were fakes. An IRS official named, from memory, Aileen Summerlin (sp?), provided the predictable response. Doug wrote a 200 page memo, based on this type of research, concluding that John Armstrong was wrong.


A quick reality check: John has advised me, again and again, that whenever you submit documents about "Lee Harvey Oswald" to any government agency for analysis, to be sure to black out the Oswald name, otherwise, according to John, "everything gets weird." With this in mind, I blacked out Oswald's name on the best copies I could get of the three W-2 forms in question and sent them to the leading type font specialist for IBM, a lady named Dawn Stanford. During our phone talk, Ms. Stanford advised me that, in her opinion, the three W-2 forms in question, from three different companies, were typed on the same machine, one with an odd font that she couldn't locate in her extensive files.

There is a very simple proof that the three W-2 forms John believes are fakes are indeed fakes, and that is that if you check the Social Security Administration "Lifetime Earnings Report" for "Lee Harvey Oswald," NONE of "Oswald's" pre-Marine Corps earnings are included. The HSCA was actually perplexed by this, and wrote a letter to the SSA asking about it. In it's response, Robert Bynum from the SSA wrote that he was including "Copies of three pages of the Warren Commission Report re employment of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to service in the Marine Corps." I'm not making this stuff up. Copies of all these document are reproduced here:

http://harveyandlee.net/Unraveling/Unravels.htm

During his November in Dallas 1998 conference, John was scheduled to talk immediately after either Mr. Lifton or Mr. Horne (I can't remember which). But as the start time for John's speech came and passed, David Lifton and Doug Horne began an endless colloquy that delayed John's talk into the late hours of the evening. John's presentation at NID 97 had created a sensation, and many in the audience were looking forward to his speech. John had also brought along Palmer McBride and several other "Oswald" eyewitnesses to the conference. These were, even by then, elderly men, and the late hour when John finally was allowed by Debra Conway to speak made their presentations less powerful than they could have been.

Please pay attention to John Armstrong's work. If and when the truth of this case was finally exposed, who here thinks there would be anything but an unearthly roar of criticism!

The only way anyone can ignore or discount JA's work is to ignore stunning proof such as this. And I am not sure ego is the reason. Nuff said. ::headbang::

[Drew Phipps]

I understand what might motivate the government to create a "legend" for Oswald...while he is alive. While he might yet stand trial. For what purpose is the government still busily generating fake records (in 1964) after Harvey is killed? It just can't be related to his former status as a CIA/FBI informant or agent. Why run the risk of making inconsistent sets of records available to the public (or to the country's enemies)? Posthumous records deliberately "backdated" would have a specific purpose or goal. It seems unlikely to me, given the official position of the government, that this purpose would be "to create a fake Oswald which could then be exposed" by someone like Armstrong.

The fact that these records are still being newly created after he's dead, in my humble opinion, makes it more likely that "one" of the alleged "Oswalds" is an entirely fictional creature, imagined and created to serve some murky purpose more related to a cover up, perhaps allowing for fictitious (or mistaken) "Oswald-sighting" witnesses to gain credibility. Or, you need to posit that the group of people creating these records from thin air have a purpose that is at odds with the official position.

[Jim Hargrove]

The reason that J. Edgar Hoover was confiscating Oswald's grade school records and pre-Marine employment records within hours of the assassination was that he knew exposure of the "Oswald Project" would immediately point to U.S. Intelligence... the CIA and, worse yet, Hoover's own beloved "Seat of Government" (the FBI)! This is surely why the plotters chose the "Oswald Project" as the patsy. This choice would immediately shut down a real investigation, which certainly could not be allowed to proceed.

The true biography of "Lee Harvey Oswald" was the real State Secret of the Kennedy Assassination. The FBI was covering up Oswald's biography before it had even investigated whether there were co-conspirators or other government targets.

The FBI is world-renowned for cooking evidence. Remember the famous Frederick Whitehurst scandal from the late 1990s, when this top FBI scientist disclosed that his organization had fabricated evidence for both the first World Trade Center bombing and the Oklahoma City bombing? The Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Bromwich, made a scathing report about FBI evidence tampering that everyone in the media had to work really hard to forget.

If you really want to see how powerful a case John makes for two Oswalds, read the Marine Corps chapter from Harvey and Lee. The evidence is just stunning! This is not a matter of mistaken witnesses and documentation errors. Can anyone here name an assassination case in the history of the world when investigators pursued elementary school records of a suspect before looking for co-conspirators or other government officials in potential danger?

[Drew Phipps]

I'm not saying that there weren't people running around pretending to be Oswald; in fact we know that people did impersonate Oswald. Mexico City, the FBI's very first ever "identity theft" case (while LHO was in Russia), and the Sports Drome shooting range come immediately to mind.

All these activities occurred while LHO was alive. I get why a "shooter group" would choose LHO as a patsy. Why on earth would people attempting to shut down an Oswald investigation (whether or not they are the same people as a "shooter group") continue to forge new records about him after he's dead?

[Jim Hargrove]

I'm not saying that there weren't people running around pretending to be Oswald; in fact we know that people did impersonate Oswald. Mexico City, the FBI's very first ever "identity theft" case (while LHO was in Russia), and the Sports Drome shooting range come immediately to mind.

Sure and, as you know, there are many other credible examples, more than the few you mention above. At what point do you start considering explanations other than "people running around pretending to be Oswald?"

All these activities occurred while LHO was alive. I get why a "shooter group" would choose LHO as a patsy. Why on earth would people attempting to shut down an Oswald investigation (whether or not they are the same people as a "shooter group") continue to forge new records about him after he's dead?

The facts seem to suggest that's exactly what happened, and the rest, I suppose, is speculation. My guess would be that, sadly, it is par for the course for American law enforcement agencies at many different levels to invent all kinds of evidence. On top of that, I'll bet Hoover cared more about the reputation of the Bureau than even Clyde Tolson's manly thighs. Everything about the "Oswald Project" had to go away, and for more reasons than just the FBI's reputation.

[Jim Hargrove]

The taxpayer ID number mistake is similar to the mistake they made with the serial number for the money order for the Carcano.

Yeah, and the money order had added quality of having never been cashed or even processed by any part of the system.