More Greg Bashing From Hargrove

Hargrove has posted some material from a friend about Greg.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24469-new-article-by-john-armstrong/?page=11

Since you continue to invoke Mr. Parker as if he matters here, let me offer up the following analysis of Mr. Parker's work from my e-pal of many years. My e-friend thinks Mr. Parker is nothing but a fraud. My e-friend's YouTube commentary is presented here with the express permission of the original poster. Here is what he said about Greg Parker:
You have to have a total grasp of where Parker is coming from in order to understand the exact flaws in what he is trying to do... I'm glad however that you once again sussed out the critical flaws in his approach without any understanding of the "Harvey & Lee" background of this issue...
Greg is the first person to demand precise methodology and evidence when he is dodging someone else's good claims, but typical of his ROKC group does not demand the same from himself..."Grandiose" might be one way of describing Parker's approach... I have some other words to add....

Because you haven't participated in the general debate you are not aware that Parker is trying to hide symptoms of Lee Oswald being doubled-over by the CIA double "Harvey" behind pseudo analyses of psychiatric conditions.... Parker is trying to portray the anti-social secretive behavior of a CIA spy as being due to Asperger's syndrome, but as you cleverly figured out it doesn't wash according to common sense and Oswald's real profile that Parker avoids by drawing you to his bogus lectures...
What Parker isn't being honest about is the fact Lee probably showed those psychiatric quirks because he was part of a CIA program that went back to his childhood and may have even murdered his father.... Because Lee was raised in this intel bubble in a dysfunctional family he exhibited mental traits equal to such an average southern boy in such a situation.... Maybe even Marguerite too....

Parker ignores the true cause and interpretation of this diagnosis in order to contrive his specious Asperger's theory...A wise observer would realize that Parker is making up this Aspergers explanation exactly because he is aware that Oswald's learning of Russian has no good explanation if it was just Oswald alone... Also, Parker is not honestly mentioning that Oswald had no time to learn Russian according to his Marine schedule... Moreover the Asperger's Parker refers to is an extreme condition that displays overt symptoms that military doctors and overseers would not miss... The savant aspects of Aspergers exist in an inverse relationship where the worse the condition the more the individual is able to perform the intuitive skill he focuses on... So just like you said, this would leave the individual unable to perform in the normal range and the Marines do not miss such defects...But even further, in his response Parker seems to confuse what Moorek is saying....

This is typical of Parker because he avoids information he can't give an honest answer to....  Moorek was not talking about Oswald's learning of Russian she was talking about the fact that the Oswald heard in the police station and on radio shows did not have the noticeable southern accent of Lee Harvey Oswald and that it was not linguistically normal to 'unlearn' such a core language feature under Oswald's circumstances...
This is what John Armstrong was also saying in his book 'Harvey & Lee' and the explanation for it is that the Oswald you are seeing in those scenes is a CIA double from Manhattan whose family had a background in Russian language through Hungary... Mr Parker is not explaining why his language savant Oswald did not pick-up Spanish in his interactions with the Cuban exiles?...Oswald also showed skill in concealing his covert activities for an alleged Asperger's victim....

Why do you continue to invoke Mr. Parker to defend the Warren Commission? Why is Mr. Parker always endorsed by Warren Commission apologists like you? Do you think any of us believe him?  Explain to us why Mr. Parker was banned from this forum, and the Deep Politics forum, and why we should believe you that we should believe him.  Why should we consider him to be anything but yet another shill for the Warren Commission, just like you?  Just askin'.

Here is what my friend wrote even earlier....

It seems to me that you are not familiar with Mr Parker, his website, or his agenda... The beauty of what you wrote is that you apparently have no knowledge of the Harvey & Lee theory or Mr Parker and his credulous agenda yet you managed to suss out the important details in both.... 

Mr Parker is the head cult leader of the notorious "Reopen Kennedy Case" website (ROKC).... His group focuses on vandalizing the evidence to the Kennedy assassination by taking a pre-emptive contrarian view to the accepted evidence for conspiracy and offering alternate opinions....

This deliberate destruction of the finer evidence for the conspiracy is self-referred to by ROKC as "thinking outside the box', but it is really just an ill-minded attempt to attack the known conspiracy evidence and try to get people to take them seriously....

Unfortunately they have fooled some less cautious conspiracy figures.... 
In reality the group is a collection of ill-inspired hacks who see their mangling of the evidence as enlightened breakthrough interpretations of what people failed to see before when the truth is it is a sad collection of internet "Skeptics" who dwell on a perverse sense of misguided sophistry to the degree of intellectual disease.... Please do not take this man or his group seriously....

Parker's Asperger's theory for Oswald was driven by his need to get around John Armstrong's evidence for a CIA double named "Harvey" who was used as an espionage trick to send a false defector in to Russia.... As you so wisely detected this person came from New York and did not have the southern accent Lee did....

Parker has a cult following who accept whatever he claims, however common sense tells you that any Asperger's condition that was severe enough to cause such results would have been noticeable and therefore prevented Oswald's admission to the US Marines.... As you wisely detected, Mr Parker's bogus "skepticism" mirrors the denial thought processes of Lone Nutters and other infamous deniers like David Von Pein.... 

If you don't know, Oswald's Russian abilities arise from "Harvey" (Oswald's CIA double) having a family background in spoken Russian and therefore adapting to it naturally - as was the plan in order to make him useful in his false defection to the Soviet Union.... Yes, Mr Parker is inventing a type of mental condition for Oswald, only he is doing it to get around evidence for a CIA doubles program involving Oswald....

Mr Parker is a fool and xxxx..."Idiot Savant" was first described in 1887 by Dr John Langdon Down...Mr Parker's attempt at Lemonade Stand Pop Psychology is laughable and pathetic seeing how it is only being used to dishonestly deny the obvious evidence for Harvey & Lee...

My e-friend is pretty smart.  Even smarter than Greg Parker and the CIA.

Vinny, after scraping the barrel, Hargrove went back and scraped it again. He passed the bits through a sieve and was left with a wild rant from Doyle to support H&L.
If Hargrove were a true friend to Brian he would make strenuous efforts to have the Unicorns posting privileges reinstated. They could then stun the world with the sperm experiment theory.

Vinny, it's the very definition of desperation to rely upon Brian. 

He has been invited here to debate me (and reminded about it yet again of that by Tracy). But he had better hurry. Time is running out.

He says "it is only being used to dishonestly deny the obvious evidence for Harvey & Lee..." I may not be among the savant-styled idiot crowd but I have yet to see any "obviousness" in the H&L codex.

The frothing-at-the-mouth followers of H&L remind me of those who lap up the scattered bits of JVB or the faked-Z film, or any of the other niches within the conspiracy "community".

Every new twist and turn introduced by such charlatans takes us further and further from a unified examination of the case from any intelligent perspective and their devout followers tned to rend the "community" asunder.

To them, it is a matter of "scoring points" rather than clearing up the case.

I am only happy to know I will not be around fifty years from now when such things are still going on and the petty bickering continua amongst themselves is all that will be holding any remaining "community" together.

I also can't understand why Hargrove calls Greg a "WC apologist". Greg is anything BUT one of those.

When asked about the Cuban stress analysis, Hargrove sidestepped and refused to answer.

His appeals to authority recur so many times in the single post that I lost track. If he cannot write intelligently, perhaps the illustrious Hargrove should curtail posting until some remedial actions are taken.

God I hate reading such stupidity.

What I hate more is that there are so many who read that drivel and find it intelligent!!

Methinks I shall take an extended vacay from the forums fairly soon. I've exceeded my head-shaking and hand-wringing quota for this lifetime. I'd rather watch paint dry... and crack...

Hargrove is Armstrong's pool boy. He hates Greg cause Greg makes him work harder than he should. I mean at the end of the day he's cruising forums trying to sell books. Greg's trying to get this case reopened.

Does Jim Hargrove know anything about this case that isn't published in Armstrong's book?

My biggest resentment concerning researching in the final few years before I gave up was every time you published something new, something fresh, something different - - one of these fucking puppets would show up and wrap Harvey & Fucking Lee around it.

Absolute gang of utter muppets.

Now he's trying his hand at the TEC aspect of the story.  Armstrong's content and conclusions concerning it all are complete horseshit.

Pure shite.

The Prodigal Son wrote:Does Jim Hargrove know anything about this case that isn't published in Armstrong's book?

My biggest resentment concerning researching in the final few years before I gave up was every time you published something new, something fresh, something different - - one of these fucking puppets would show up and wrap Harvey & Fucking Lee around it.

Absolute gang of utter muppets.

Now he's trying his hand at the TEC aspect of the story.  Armstrong's content and conclusions concerning it all are complete horseshit.

Pure shite.

hargrove wrote:Helen Cunningham was interviewed by the Warren Commission. She said that all of her counseling records were missing from Oswald's file except one. Irving Statman, the assistant district director of the TEC office in Dallas, was also interviewed by the Commission and he said that all of Oswald's counseling records were missing from the Dallas office. These records disappeared after being turned over to the FBI.

Absolute crap. The first thing I did after reading this was go through the Cunningham and Statman testimonies. The word "missing" is in fact missing. All Cunningham said was

"As Mr. Statman has probably told you, a photostat of the counseling record is not here. The record I am now looking at is the application form." She does not say it is "missing". She has no idea if it is missing, She is merely noting its absence among the commission papers presented to her.

Statmen said: Well, that's true. When this FBI man came in, and I can't think of his name I've got his card, but I probably cleaned my nails with it, but anyway, he came in and asked for a copy of, or the actual documents, and we told him that we had a certain amount of documents here and there were others in Austin, due to that interstate claim situation, and so we gave him all of our records, and also he contacted an FBI agent in Austin, and our Austin State office gave him some records. 
Now, in preparing these records, then, I saw the documents that we had on him. Now, what I have with me here is a copy of his application card. 

and later

Now, along with this should be his counseling card, which would indicate the type of counseling and any responses. I can't find that; I don't know--I know the FBI man has it. We might not have made a picture of it or it might have gotten lost, but again, Helen remembers enough about it to give you the pertinent details of it. Ask her about the E-41 or the counseling card.


So the TEC may have missed copying it, or may have the lost the copy. But they know the FBI has the original. Would the FBI deny that? 

What could possibly be on the counseling card that needed to disappear? Ms Kittrell's entries of course. He tries desparatly to tie the "missing" paperwork and Kittrell's statements.

I have worked in the industry. Ms Kittrell's statements are possible, but not plausible.

Included in the possible but implausible: 

sending Oswald back to have his employment codes changed because he had joined a union. Could have happened if those involved were slack, or Oswald was argumentative and they just wanted to get rid of him. Otherwise, a phone call to Kittrell to organize a time should have been the protocol and some type of evidence possibly of the membership. No Card? Any proof of paying dues? 

Adding employment codes to his record to increase the types of work he could be considered for. The idea is to target areas where there are employment opportunities AND in which they have a reasonable prospect of gaining employment - as pretty much explained by Cunningham.

The TEC story is infinitely more interesting and more enlightening when it is told correctly.

This guy doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about.

I wish he'd fuck off and join the Church of Scientology or something.  Steve Thomas is currently working his arse off on these questions.  He is one of very few pure researchers over at the place.  He asks the right questions.  He pulls up the right documents.  He is one of my favourite people posting on any forum.

And then we have Hargrove who simply regurgitates bullshit.  If it's not in the Harvey & Lee index then he has no answer.  If it is we get a parroted version of Armstrong's nonsense.

The way the actual evidence is twisted and shoehorned into proceedings is an utter disgrace.

The TEC story is one of the most important parts of the Oswald story.  Get that right, get the accommodation story right, get the movements and evidence at the TSBD right, get the Tippit shooting right - and you've got the real story.

Yet, we have to contend with Fat-Head and silly fucking beard wiping his arse over everything that his master cast his beady eyes over.

Every time I see his name appear on a post over there I just put my head in my hands.

Every time I see Hargrove's avatar I'm reminded of the scene in Busy Bodies where Stan accidentally glues a paint brush onto Ollie's chin and then to fix things he cuts the handle off:

Would you buy a used bowler hat from this man?

Could Hargrove actually be Armstrong with a different name?

I think he could be Armstrong. HAr(gr)(mstr)o(ve)(ng), if you know what I mean.

Of course in his(their) world they could also be products of a failed sperm bank experiment that resulted in two people who look different but think exactly the same in real time. 

Lardgrave and Hamstrung with some Newman's on top, 
...what a shit salad.

Here is a bit of Hardnose:

Hargrove:
Why are you wasting our time with these irrelevant links?  Is this a P.S.44/Beauregard kind of tap dance?


You know perfectly well there is no real evidence that the HSCA interviewed any of the CIA Tokyo station personnel mentioned by Wilcott.


Why don’t you get on to telling us that Wilcott was actually a blood-sucking vampire who murdered scores of orphans and tortured ponies and unicorns.


Below is a reproduction of pp. 199-200 of the HSCA report, as reproduced in Oswald and the CIA by John Newman.  As you read what the HSCA reported, keep in mind what we have already learned from the HSCA’s own notes of interviews with Mr. Wilcott and his long-suppressed testimony, and note how the report writers misrepresented and flat-out lied about the information Wilcott gave them.


For example, the report indicated that Wilcott viewed the information as mere “shop talk” when, in fact, he testified just the opposite.  The report told us that he was unable to “recall the agency cryptonym for the particular project in which Oswald had been involved,” when, according to the HSCA’s own notes, he said the cryptonym was RX-ZIM.  There is much more disinformation packed into these two pages.


As to to your question asking if the HSCA reported they interviewed 18 or so CIA personnel about Wilcott’s accusations, note the lawyerly weasel words in the paragraph beginning “In an attempt to investigate Wilcott’s allegations….”  Other than this, in a document with demonstrable falsehoods on these exact two pages, I see no reason to believe the HSCA actually interviewed anyone Wilcott named from the Tokyo station.


If any interviews actually were conducted, where are the transcripts or even the notes?  What were the dates and locations of these interviews?  Were there attorneys present?  What were their names?  There is nothing… nada… to make me believe the HSCA wanted to learn anything more about Wilcott than to make his accusations go away.


Tracy Parnell:
The HSCA used the language "shop talk" Wilcott did not. But he did refer to what he heard as "speculation" just not in reference to the reason why he did not report what he heard. The notes are from an unknown source and therefore worthless regarding the cryptonym. And Wilcott certainly did say he was unable to recall the cryptonym.


This should kill the idea that the HSCA conducted no interviews regarding the Wilcott matter. These are notes from the interview of Fred Randall who was Tokyo Deputy Chief of Station:


http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32694#relPageId=2&tab=page


Randall didn't remember much about Wilcott and had not heard of the LHO allegations. But he WAS interviewed. Unless you think CT hero Dan Hardway, who conducted the interview along with Harold Leap is lying

Hargrove:
OK, Tracy, fair enough.  I didn't know those notes existed.


I Aye eye 
Cheers, Ed