Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910
Results 91 to 97 of 97

Thread: Detailed discussion and analysis of the H&L evidence

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Hargrove View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawn Meredith View Post
    Oswald's phony "friend" tried to take over the q and a and show that JA was wrong but I was ready for him.
    Comrade "Ernst Titovets," no?

    Will you consider going on the record here about that encounter, or post a url about it? Any additional info would be much appreciated!!! J Armstrong--quite unfairly--has left me--one of his most sincere fans--completely in the dark about this entire situation!

    Please... give us the story of this "Titovets" encounter.
    Yes him. Someone sent me his book some time back and I never read it, instinctively knowing it was a con job. Then he spoke at length at COPA, I must confess I missed much of it due to sitting and chatting with Cyril Wecht, we were laughing at the guy. He had tape recordings of himself and the person he claimed to be LHO. One was really laughable as it had "LHO" making some sort of future threat- shooting someone? I don't recall the details any longer nor does my husband. Nor do I recall the details of the short q and a except he was attempting to show that John's work was bogus. I cut him off quickly is all I remember. I don't think John and I discussed much of it. Sorry I can't be more helpful. What stands out is that he came to the front row before I began the presentation and just stared at me the entire time, clearly preparing for his effort to refute. I diffused it a bit by encouraging people to order Harvey and Lee. And decide for themselves, based on all the evidence.

  2. #92

    Default l Marguerites post 63

    I suppose I became a somewhat reluctant believer in the two Oswald's after looking into the information only a few months ago. However, there is an area I have a question about. That is in regard to the two Marguerite's after 1963-4 where I believe a couple of questions arise We do apparently know the real Marguerite C Oswald is born in 1907 and dies in 1981, at least according to the official record. I am not clear if there is a continuous tracking of the women publicly known as the Marguerite Claverie and mother of LHO, but, according to Armstrong, is not. Is this the person who can be known to have apparently have been tracked by media or others, the person who died in 1981. This also raises the obvious question that there should be two different death dates for two different people post 63? What happened to the real Margurite Claverie after 60 to 64 since it seems that we only see the other Marguerite at this point? I could be off on the last time Armstrong officially identifies the whereabouts of the real Marguerite during this period In general I do not see a lot from Armstrong's site in regard to John Pic, Robert Oswald, and the two Marguerite's, after 63. Hopefully this is not too extraneous or esoteric, it just struck me as a bit of a strange void in the continuity of the information.

    Sorry for previous unedited version I was in a hotel room and my mouse died which is pretty catastrophic Also under some strong meds. I should have just surrendered until getting a mouse
    Last edited by Matt Grantham; 07-06-2018 at 04:38 PM.

  3. Default

    I've avoided looking at the two Oswalds stuff too deeply, although a number of critics I respect do not dismiss it, and a couple of others who I also respect dismiss it vehemently. John Newman says he'll be running back through the Harvey and Lee evidence and assessing it when he hits volume 5 of his ongoing JFK series (1,2 are out already, 3 is out this Christmas, 4 and a revised version of 2 are scheduled for 2020 and the wrap-up volume 5 is scheduled for 2022, although if he decided to make the final volume twice as long and kick it across to the 60th anniversary in 2023 I wouldn't have a problem).

  4. #94

    Default

    Hi Anthony yes I understand the point that one can draw a general conclusion of of the two Oswald without delving into the minutiae Also one can just dismiss the theory on what many might call a common sense belief of what lies beyond the realm of plausible possibility Maybe that sounds critical, but i have no real objection to those who dismiss some theories as just simply "too outrageous,
    alternatively it might be logical to dismiss said conclusions by certain critiques leading proponents of the theory who may have questionable qualities of one sort or another. sloppy fact checking, poor citations, wrong on specific points etc I am very much open to the idea that i do not know all the facts, though i had a fairly long dialogue with W Tracy Parnell that I did not finding particularly enlightening. Also i hoped you noticed my post was very much oriented towards questioning what is perhaps a hole in the Armstrong narrative, and that I am not therefore just parroting the official Armstrong narrative I get it that many are not interested in pursuing this, and in many ways i have more questions for the supporters of the Armstrong narrative than those who question it I do appreciate it Anthony that you took the time to explain your position



    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Thorne View Post
    I've avoided looking at the two Oswalds stuff too deeply, although a number of critics I respect do not dismiss it, and a couple of others who I also respect dismiss it vehemently. John Newman says he'll be running back through the Harvey and Lee evidence and assessing it when he hits volume 5 of his ongoing JFK series (1,2 are out already, 3 is out this Christmas, 4 and a revised version of 2 are scheduled for 2020 and the wrap-up volume 5 is scheduled for 2022, although if he decided to make the final volume twice as long and kick it across to the 60th anniversary in 2023 I wouldn't have a problem).
    Last edited by Matt Grantham; 07-06-2018 at 04:59 PM.

  5. #95

    Default

    Anthony apologies that you had to read my unedited post yesterday. I edited it now if you would like to take a look again and you might better understand what I meant to say




    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Thorne View Post
    I've avoided looking at the two Oswalds stuff too deeply, although a number of critics I respect do not dismiss it, and a couple of others who I also respect dismiss it vehemently. John Newman says he'll be running back through the Harvey and Lee evidence and assessing it when he hits volume 5 of his ongoing JFK series (1,2 are out already, 3 is out this Christmas, 4 and a revised version of 2 are scheduled for 2020 and the wrap-up volume 5 is scheduled for 2022, although if he decided to make the final volume twice as long and kick it across to the 60th anniversary in 2023 I wouldn't have a problem).

  6. Default

    This photo does not look like either of them. How weird.




    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Hargrove View Post
    By the fall of 1959, when the "defection" took place, Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald had replaced American-born Lee Oswald, at least in the record reported after the assassination. The two young men were similar enough in appearance to sometimes fool casual observers, but many people in the Dallas Ft. Worth area knew American-born Lee Oswald. The Ft. Worth Star-Telegram ran LEE Oswald's picture, although HARVEY Oswald was actually the "defecting" spy.

    Does the man in the photo at left (Lee Oswald) look to you like a younger version of Harvey Oswald, the man killed by Jack Ruby?


    Attachment 5810
    Attachment 5809
    Last edited by Dawn Meredith; 07-06-2018 at 11:37 PM.

  7. #97

    Default John Pic WC Testimony

    Here is a brief excerpt where John Pic Lee Harvey Oswald's half Brother, states he could not identify the photograph of the Lee Oswald passing out communist propaganda in New Orleans in the summer of 63 as his brother


    Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 291, at the bottom of the page, there is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the young man handing out the leaflet?
    Mr. PIC - No, sir; I would be unable to recognize him.
    Mr. JENNER - As to whether he was your brother?
    Mr. PIC - That is correct.
    Last edited by Matt Grantham; 07-07-2018 at 08:18 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •