Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Harvey and Lee, Previous Generation!
-
I'm working on a graphic of the family tree of the two Lee Harvey Oswalds that I will post when finished based on the work of John Armstrong. However, at least on the audio tape, Armstrong claims that the name "Harvey" comes from (the tall) Lee Harvey Oswald's maternal grandmother, which would make the name of (the tall) Marguerite (Claverie) Oswald's mother "Dora Harvey." Dora was the wife of John M Claverie. Now this is still possible, and I may have misheard something, but the fact is that the father of (the tall) LEE Harvey Oswald, as opposed to the short Lee HARVEY Oswald, shows up in the census of 1910 for New Orleans, Louisiana, not as Robert E L Oswald, as he does in 1920, but as LEE Oswald. And this LEE Oswald, the son of William and Mary Oswald, has a brother named--I'll give you folks one guess at this! Yes, when the elder LEE was 14 years old in 1910 his brother HARVEY was 21 years old. Which raises the tantalizing possibility that Lee HARVEY Oswald was the son, not of Robert Edward Lee Oswald and Margaret Keating, as Armstrong tentatively hypothesizes in the interview, but of the uncle of LEE Harvey Oswald, Harvey Oswald, and his wife, perhaps the very same (short) Marguerite well-known to everyone. This would make the two Lee Harvey Oswalds not half brothers, as some of the evidence suggests, but 1st cousins, which would answer a lot of the inconsistencies in the evidence. Stay tuned. This is getting interesting.
-
I did a little more digging and it turns out that LEE Oswald's PATERNAL grandmother was Mary Harvey. This is confirmed by the fact that the brother-in-law of LEE's grandfather William Oswald, named Harry Harvey, was living with the family in 1900 in New Orleans. Harvey Oswald, William's son, was 12 at the time. I have been unable so far to find any evidence of a Lee Harvey Oswald on this Harvey's side of the family. Harvey's wife was named Floy (sic) and they had two daughters. John Armstrong's suggestion that the short Marguerite may have been Margaret Keating Oswald remains a possibility. Margaret Keating (once spelled "Margurite" in the census) was born in about 1892, which would make her 15 years older than the first Marguerite (b. 1907), the mother of LEE Oswald.
-
I have completed the partial genealogy of the two Oswalds (mainly the tall Lee). Let me know if you have any other information:
http://www.lordbalto.com/images/OswaldGen.jpg
-
Interesting stuff.I've never read Armstrong's book. But from your diagram it looks as if the family tree were pretty fleshed out for the 'tall' Oswald. But very little there for the 'short' one. Makes me wonder if maybe the 'short' one didn't exist and is an artifact of falsified evidence, disinformation, etc.
-
That's an interesting question. And it occurred to me also. But Armstrong presents not only documentary evidence but interviews with people who knew "Harvey," though, obviously, the Warren Commission ignored most of them. And there is a huge amount of data placing "Oswald" at two different places at the same time, though this is often attributed to an "impersonator." At one point, one of the Oswalds, I forget which, mentions that his "brother" sometimes substituted for him in school. From the physical resemblance and the identical names--and the reaction of "Lee" when called "Harvey," I have to think that these were two very real people who knew each other and were closely related, perhaps half-brothers. It is even conceivable that they were fraternal twins. The name would suggest that one or the other of the two Oswald brothers in the previous generation, R E Lee and Harvey, fathered one or both Lee Harveys. Keep in mind that it's not illegal to have two children with the same name. I had a grandmother with a sister by the same name. Also keep in mind that Hoover knew of the two Oswalds in 1960, one the communist defector and the other working with the anti-Castro Cubans, so that the main clue seems to be that "Harvey" always leaned to the left and "Lee" always leaned to the right, Thus, it's pretty easy to tell which one you're looking at from his behavior. It also looks to me like most of the theorizing about "Oswald" being one thing and pretending to be something else derives from the merging of the two individuals. In other words, Harvey really was a "Communist," and Lee really was a "spook."
By the way, the genealogical chart isn't from the Armstrong book. It's
derived from the 7-hour interview available for download and on my own
genealogical research using a popular genealogical site.
-
In regard to the suggestion that the government (read CIA) had created the alternate records, I would have to ask, what would have been the point? After all, if you're creating a duplicate of a person you wish to incriminate, your first responsibility to the project is to make the second person indistinguishable from the first. Creating alternate records would simply make it more obvious that your duplicate was just that, someone else passing for the original. No doubt this all would have come out in a trial, thus adding another reason to eliminate the patsy before any such public spectacle could be staged. In fact, the FBI and the Warren Commission went out of their ways to merge the two identities into one, thus demonstrating the need for a single biography.
-
You're assuming there really was a bona fide second Oswald. I'm saying that the whole ensemble of anomalies might be interpretable as a second Oswald without there ever being one. Now what falsify records? We know supposedly that Angleton at one point was trying to find a mole, and falsified bits and pieces here and there to see what would show up elsewhere. Would this account for everything? No, I'm not saying it would. But if you generalize from the Angleton bit, and suppose that on top of errors there were also falsified details for a variety of reasons, e.g. a report puts Oswald in such-and-such a place on a certain date in order to hide the fact he was actually there on another date when something traceable/illegal/etc. happened -- it's possible to imagine all sorts of things. But I do think something like this more likely than the Harvey and Lee thesis, just like when it comes to energy weapons bringing down WTC, while there may be evidence, I don't think it's supportable overall.
-
Again, the whole point of placing Oswald somewhere he wasn't, for example, the Hoover memos where he's in Florida with the anti-Castro Cubans and not in the USSR, would be to make it look like the real Oswald was somewhere he shouldn't have been. There's no point in fabricating an entire history of a second Oswald. You need to listen to the 7-hour Osanic/Armstrong interviews. These aren't just isolated incidents. These are two different histories, including school records, places of employment, military records, places of residence of himself and his mother, and on and on. But the real problem is, how would they even accomplish this? Sure, the marine records could be faked, but report cards from years before? Photographs of Oswald his brother refused to identify as him? And beyond all this, the Hoover memos were from 1960 and 1961. Was the CIA plotting Kennedy's murder even before he was elected? There's a level of foresight here you'd need a time machine to obtain. Adding to this the November 2 Chicago plot, are you really suggesting the CIA put this kind of resources into a backup plan?
Clearly, this has nothing to do with the assassination. It smacks of other, clandestine, activities. But still, what's the point of manufacturing an Oswald with the Cuban rebels? What would it ultimately prove? After all, it's pretty obvious that Oswald was in the Soviet Union. Despite the inconsistencies--he could or couldn't speak Russian, he met a woman who also knew the first American defector 400 miles away, Marina could or couldn't speak English--you'd be hard pressed to demonstrate that anyone would try to place him in Florida at the same time--there's no shuttle bus between Minsk and Jacksonville--and then go to the trouble to fabricate his 5th grade report card.
What it looks like to me is; they blew the Florida attempt; they blew the Chicago attempt; the loyal CIA was about to swoop down on them; Lansdale, 5 months retired, was about to hang; Dulles, no longer director, was about to spend the rest of his life in prison; and then somebody had a bright idea: The two Oswalds! One of them is working for us, and the other one is a damned commie pinko sympathiser. A marriage made in heaven. Use our guy to implicate their guy and get away scott free. And if it all blows up, blame it on the Russians and the Cubans and threaten to unleash WWIII if Kennedy doesn't play along. Keep in mind that the Warren Commission and the FBI went out of their way to make it look like there was only one Oswald. That's the official fairy tale. And fairy tales, despite Walt Disney, are never true.
-
Could be! I'll have to look at some more of the evidence.
