One of John Armstrong’s favorite investigative techniques is to suggest that since there are records that contain discrepancies, something sinister may be going on. But when others point out that mistakes and differences in records are a normal occurrence, Armstrong’s associates ridicule this idea and claim that so many unexplained discrepancies could not exist. But such inconsistencies can and do exist in the real world for varying reasons.
It turns out that Armstrong developed a theory as to the identity of the Marguerite “impostor” which he wisely chose not to pursue but does mention on page 133 in his book under a section titled “an unexplained curiosity.”
Margaret Keating Oswald was the first wife of Robert E. L. Oswald (father of Robert and Lee Harvey Oswald), whom she divorced in 1933. The court restored her last name to Keating, her maiden name, which she kept for the remainder of her life (she apparently never remarried). The name Margaret Keating and her address, 120 N. Telemachus Street, appear in New Orleans City Directories, telephone books, voter registration records, etc., from 1933 thru the early 1960's.
In the 1956 New Orleans City Directory, which records listings for the last half of 1955, the directory listed her as "Margt. Oswald," 120 N. Telemachus Street, New Orleans. This is the only occasion where the name "Margaret Keating" appears as Margt. Oswald-a name she had not used for the past 23 years. Perhaps this was a mistake, but perhaps not. These two listings appear during the time that both the short, dumpy heavy-set "Marguerite Oswald" imposter (whose true identity remains unknown) and the tall, nice-looking Marguerite Oswald lived in New Orleans. NOTE: Margaret Keating, who was 58 years old in 1954 and 67 years old in 1963, could have been the "Marguerite Oswald" imposter, but that possibility will not be explored or discussed in this book. For serious researchers, a telephone number and address were listed for Margaret Keating as late as 1996 in Baton Rogue (she was 100 in 1996).
So, for “serious researchers” only, Armstrong has provided a lead that he didn’t have enough faith in to pursue himself. Hopefully, no one wasted any time on this since Margaret Keating was born in 1892, not 1896 as Armstrong maintains and died in 1972.
https://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=102795476
She was four years older than Oswald and that is the obvious explanation for her fibbing about her age which he discusses on page 13. And it is obvious from her photo on Find-a-Grave that she is not the “impostor” Marguerite. Another H&L mystery solved.
No one said John Armstrong is the Messiah but his research has clearly shown that there was an 'Oswald Project' , at the minimum there was a guy they were using as a double in terms of historical record to provide a background for the guy we know as LHO.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with his conclusion that the photos show two different people , one of them seems to show a taller more butch guy but its not conclusive. If you have read his book and listened to his talks with Lee Osanic then you would know that there were two people and two mothers too. The mother of the three kids, photographed many times, is tall and relatively slim with a very happy face and had continuous work records. the lady we know as his mother is completely different in all respects.
My personal belief is that he has uncovered the key to understanding a lot of what happened then and its wider connections, but that there is something missing, something we haven't figured out yet. Maybe they were twins, maybe they had the same father and the two women are related. The lady we know as his mother gave so many incorrect answers to the Warren commission it cannot be ignored, how do you forget your birthday ? The name of your ex husband, your sons school history ? there were 20 or so glaring mistakes in her testimony of details you just don't forget.
Suggestions like Armstrongs that Margaret Keating may be the imposter are just suggestions to get people thinking and when they are discounted we can move on and eventually we find the truth. The imposter was a person, she had a record and a real name , one day , without people like you, we will find out who she was.
Objective Reality,
ReplyDeleteThere are literally millions of pieces of information in the JFK case. It is not surprising that there would be hundreds or even thousands of things that could be classified as anomalies or outliers in such a large data set. There is not a single thing that cannot be attributed to human error, mistaken witnesses and the like. Armstrong's "research" is essentially all but worthless at this point as most of the documents he located have been released under the JFK act. His primary contribution is work on LHO's early life, but that has been somewhat overshadowed by the nonsense he promotes.
Sorry could you confirm the ages... you say she's four years older than Oswald... Am I missing something ? She appears to be the right age for his mother.
ReplyDeleteShe was four years older than Robert Oswald (father of LHO). The point is, Armstrong suggested that Margaret Keating could be the "impostor" Margurite. But Keating would have been about 15 years older than the real Marguerite-an unlikely choice for the "impostor." And as noted, she looked noting like the real Marguerite.
Delete