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.

Could be! I'll have to look at some more of the evidence.