Harvey, Lee... and Ozzie...

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:No, that was really it Greg; I only meant to say 2 things there:

1. I don't want to say anything (more, ever again) that would lead to utter silence.

2. The hats are different.

Paul Klein wrote:

greg parker wrote:

Overview of Oswald Photos 

A UPI story about Oswald's "defection" ran in the Fort Worth Star
Telegram (285), accompanied by a photo that John Armstrong says "appears
to be Lee Oswald, recognizable to residents of Fort Worth (White #26).
Harvey Oswald's photograph did not appear in Fort Worth newspapers in
1959 -- no one would have recognized him as 'Lee Oswald" (286).

The article ran on November 1, 1959, the day after Oswald appeared at the
American Embassy in Moscow and had his confrontation with Richard Snyder.
The photograph (White #26) may have originated with UPI. The author
believes that this is actually a retouched and greatly (but
unintentionally) distorted version of the outdoors photograph taken by
George Wilkins at Atsugi (White #25), the original of which is of poor
quality. This photograph bears virtually no resemblance to either Lee or
Harvey Oswald. Jack White has noted the similarity to #25, but does not
suggest it was the basis for #26. Such details as the hairline and eyes
are compelling evidence that George Wilkins' photo fell into the hands of
a retouch artist with inexplicably poor eyesight or abilities or both. If
in a charitable mood, one can see how the artist misinterpreted shadows
in the photo to make the AP Oswald's nose far too large, but the AP
Oswald's chin borders on the inhuman, and relates in no way to the
Wilkins photo. The shape of Oswald's head is further distorted by an
undisguised cropping of the background, probably to remove the edge of
the hut seen behind Oswald in the Wilkins photo. This photograph should
be disregarded as a true representation of Lee Harvey Oswald; however, no
sinister overtones need be attached to its alteration. Retouching is the
rule, not the exception, in print media. This is in all probability is an
unbelievably incompetent example; there is no apparent purpose served by
the severe distortion of the subject's appearance; in fact, it could only
raise suspicions among those who knew him.
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/JA/DR/.o-dr.html

What a bunch of fucking bullshit. This photo here:


has been deliberately inserted over the original. Why didn't the Star Telegram originally use the  touch upped photo?

the defection article is what we need to find (as it will prove whether the above image is or isn't in that original article), and as of now we can't find that original article? 

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:      Having read your response, Greg, see my last post -- I'M the one BEHIND the curve because it took me until about a half hour ago to figure out exactly what you guys were talking about here. (and that's assuming I HAVE got it right this time)

On the "silence" issue, that was finding out yesterday that there'd been NO activity about 6 hours after I'd made my early morning postings ...... and thus, the "farted in church" observation.

If nothing else, we get good laughs here        

And now, I need to work through more of my issues with my Drago blocks
good day all

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:      Having read your response, Greg, see my last post -- I'M the one BEHIND the curve because it took me until about a half hour ago to figure out exactly what you guys were talking about here. (and that's assuming I HAVE got it right this time)

On the "silence" issue, that was finding out yesterday that there'd been NO activity about 6 hours after I'd made my early morning postings ...... and thus, the "farted in church" observation.

If nothing else, we get good laughs here        

And now, I need to work through more of my issues with my Drago blocks
good day all

greg parker wrote:No work... ha... I've been at at since 5:30 am... now I have to delay the post I promised because I forgot I have to disassemble the boys beds and assemble their new ones.  I've already preemptively torn up and tossed the instructions. I think the boys will be couching it tonight.

I'll be out in the doghouse.

LEE Oswald's Photograph (Not HARVEY) in the FWS-T

In 1959 live interviews of people involved in the current events, such
as Oswald's "defection," were rare.  Harvey may have successfully
replaced Lee and "defected" to Russia, but there were still risks that
the "defector's" identity would be questioned by people who lived in
Fort Worth who knew the real Lee Oswald up to age 12.  This problem
was solved, or at least in Fort Worth, when a photograph of LEE Oswald
(not Harvey) was published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on November
1, 1959.

The S-T published a front page article titled, "Brother's Turn to Reds
Puzzles Fort Worth Man."  On page 2 there is a photograph of a husky
young man with a thick neck and a wide nose who appears to be wearing
a Marine uniform-LEE Oswald.  Any resident of Fort Worth who saw this
photograph and knew the real Lee Oswald would probably recognize him.
The author located a copy of LEE Oswald's photo in the archives of the
FWS-T.  There was no notation as to the origin or source of this photo,
yet it was published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram only one day after
Oswald's "defection."

When the author was asked for a copy of the photo, he was told to get
in touch with Wide World Photos, Rockefeller Plaza, New York City.  He
wrote a letter and asked WWP if they knew the source of the photo.
They responded and said they did not know the source of the photo. SO,
how did the Fort Worth Star-Telegram get this photo only one day after
Oswald's "defection?"


                  Origin Of The FWS-T Photo

The first reporter who attempted to interview Oswald in Moscow was Abe
Goldberg, early in the afternoon of Oct. 31, shortly after Oswald left
the U.S. Embassy.  Goldberg told the FBI that he did not take a
photograph of Oswald.  Robert Korengold spoke briefly with Oswald at
the door to his room at the Hotel Metropole, but took no photographs.
Aline Mosby was the first person to actually interview Oswald in mid-
afternoon of Oct. 31, but there is no indication from her notes or
testimony that she tok a photograph of Oswald.  Priscilla Johnson was
the 2nd person to interview Oswald, but not until November 15, and
there was no indication she took a photograph of Oswald.

The photo of LEE Oswald that appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram
on November 1, 1959 appeared again in the November 26th issue of the
Evening Star in Washington  D.C.  This time the photo was credited to
the the Associated Press (AP), yet they claim to have no record of
it's origin.  The origin of this photo, published within 24 hours of
Aline Mosby's interview with Oswald in Moscow remains unknown.  (Once
again information about Oswald, in this case a photo, was given to the
media by an unidentified source only one day after his "defection."
The most LIKELY souce was a CIA media asset.

Harvey and Lee 269-73

CJ 
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/ZOTTmk7IObQ/SYiR3ltZEGwJ

Hello Hello wrote:

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:On the "silence" issue, that was finding out yesterday that there'd been NO activity about 6 hours after I'd made my early morning postings ...... and thus, the "farted in church" observation.

If nothing else, we get good laughs here        

Those bastard timezones and having to go to work bring nothing but problems.  I'm going to start a petition to eradicate both.

No timezones and no work.  Only by destroying these two timewasting concepts will we be able to all congregate here at the same time.

Get ready for dark days and blazing nights, Parker.  But on the plus side - you won't be very tired because - NO WORK!  Hoorah!!

 

terlin wrote:Lee,

When can we start the "abolish work" scenario?

Greg has posted twice since I started my response. This job is getting in the way of me getting any "real" work done!!

Hello Hello wrote:

terlin wrote:Lee,

When can we start the "abolish work" scenario?

Greg has posted twice since I started my response. This job is getting in the way of me getting any "real" work done!!

I've already handed my notice in, and assured my colleagues that by 4pm tomorrow they won't have to work either.  The revolution is on its way.

There is the question of money, which I should have thought about abolshing prior to the abolition of work but I'm sure there are workarounds.

greg parker wrote:

Hello Hello wrote:

terlin wrote:

Hello Hello wrote:

Lee,

I'm impressed. Where did you find the damned thing!?!!

Stan Dane wrote:

greg parker wrote:

To try to organize these, using my Drago blocks, I put together a draft legend that shows thumbnails of the images we want to keep straight, along with a ID and a description of the image. The format would look something like this:



If we go with this approach, we simply have to 1) ensure we include all of the images we want, 2) agree on an ID (e.g., LHO-1, etc.), and 3) make sure the description is correct. If you like this, I'll build it out, circulate for comments/revisions, then post the final in a new "Legend" thread in the Harvey & Lee section. That way it will be easily accessible for your Harvey & Lee needs. It can always be revised as well. Comments please.

Also, on the image above, where did the image on the right come from? If it came from Armstrong's website, I didn't see it. This may have been addressed, but is the crop image on the left supposed to have come from the image on the right? They look different to me. (I don't mean to have anyone go back over ground that's already covered but my head's a bit foggy this morning.)

Hello Hello wrote:

It was in John Armstrong's files at Baylor.

I'll link to all of his folders once I've had dinner, Terry.