Talk:Political decoy

Untitled

I can't help but notice that some *cough* bright spark *cough* has edited this so that the links that were meant to point to four decent lookalikes

-

Other lookalikes can bear a startling resemblance to far more powerful figures, as shown by these lookalikes:

President George W Bush [5]

Laura Bush[6]

President Bill Clinton [7]

Senator Hillary Clinton [8]

- actually point instead to the Wpedia entries for the real people whom the lookalikes resemble.

Give that editor a peanut and please keep him away from sharp objects.

Scepticality

Stalin could NEVER have been impersonated! Through being born within the borders of Russia, he was not ethnically Russian but Georgian. (As languages they are completely unrelated.) His original name was Iosif Dzjugasjvili. A possible look-alike could not have had, or even ACQUIRED, the same language skills! His family and close friends would NOT be fooled. The description of “Rashid” is not credible. The claimed physical resemblance is to close to be true. Furthermore, if he died in 1991 at the age of 93 he would have been born in 1898. That would in turn make him 20 YEARS YOUNGER than Stalin! Obviously, the author does not know what he/she is writing about.

I am sceptic to all look-alike stories. Unless the alleged look-alike’s name and life are known in ANY detail I assume that it is a rumour. The stories are simply too many to all be true!

2006-11-13 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

If you have a look at the introduction, you will see that documented allegations and unconfirmed cases of doubling (e.g., Stalin/Rashid) are identified by putting the entry headings in quotes. In contradistinction to proven cases, which are not.

It is also worth reflecting that the use of make-up and plastic surgery are common in doubling.

There are other factors you might like to bear in mind, but one big one is this: if you (as a resident of the Stalin-era USSR) saw someone you believed to be Stalin, in an official appearance, but thought he looked slightly different from what you might expect, would you point and shout out "That man is an imposter!" ..? Would you ever breathe a word of doubt to anyone? Would you, in fact, rapidly convince yourself that nothing was ever the matter at all? Think carefully before you answer ..! :¬)

Garrick92 16:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Even with plastic surgery, small details such as scars and birthmarks would be different. It is the claim of having identical scars that makes the description of ”Rashid” unbelievable. (Sure, that could have been fixed with make-up but that completely misses the point.) You seem to mean that anyone saying that the man claimed to be Stalin was not him would have been punished. However, there was a small group of people who the real Stalin would have protected for emotional reasons. This group included his wife, children, an a housemaid who might have been his mistress. It might also have included a pocketful of close friends. Stalin may have been one of the most evil persons of all times, but that did not prevent him to be kind to a limited number of people. Have you ever seen the photo of Stalin hugging a little girl? That is his own daughter!

The only look-alike story I believe is Bernard Law Montgomery/M. E. Clifton James. Why? Because I have read statements about Clifton's full name, date and place of birth, date and place of death, ethnicity, occupation, and when he and Bernard switched places. I have also seen photos of them both so I know how similar they looked. However, I have no problem accepting voice-only decoys. After all, you can change your voice voluntarily and some people are very good at that. They don’t have to be more physically similar than Adolf Hitler and Bruno Ganz: Bruno acted Adolf in the movie “Der Untergang”. (In English the movie was named “Downfall”.) Bruno is noticeably shorter than Adolf was and have a different shape of his face. That means the exact distances between the features of their faces are different. Consequently, I have no problem telling them apart. Yet Bruno managed to imitate Adolf’s voice convincingly as well as his Austrian dialect. (Bruno is a German-spoken Swiss.) So if an imitator is heard bur not seen – through telephone or radio – it is quite probable that people would be fooled.

2006-12-31 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

This is going to sound rude, but I don't really care to continue this particular strand of discussion. There are several instances given of proven and successful political decoying, yet you are only willing to accept one, on the basis that you have seen photographs. This, to me, seems wilfully eccentric and not worth the candle.

On another point, the information about Hitler's double, Gustav Weler, was given wrongly in one source cited. Weler was in fact located and interviewed by the Allies in 1945, which would have been difficult had he been the corpse in the Russian footage (pictured). So Hitler had two known doubles, one of whose name remains unknown. So I've amended it. Garrick92 13:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I meant that I seariously doubt any look-alike stories unless I have seen enought evidence. Some I don't think they could ever have happened such as in the case of Iosif Stalin. In such cases I don't want anyone to belive it. (That is why I expressed myself so ”drastically”.) In other cases I just ask about the evidece. Such a case is Elizabeth II/Jeanette Charles: all I need is to know Jeanette's ethnicity an to see a good photo of her (one with enough resolution to make a clear image of her features). In the case of Gustav Weler I need to know his date of birth, date of death, ethnicity, occupation, an what hapened to him afterwards. I also have to see a good photo of him to juge his resemblance to Adolf Hitler. If Adolf and Gustav ever changed places I want to know when. That is what it takes to convice me.

Please note that Bruno Ganz is a 65-year-old man living today, he just acted Adolf Hitler on the silver screen. About th photo claimed to show a dead look-alike it is so bad that it may well be a forgery. It might eaven be a part of a communist hoax. Russian soldiers alleged to have seen Adolf dead. In reality the corpses of he and his wife Eva was had beed cremated the same day as they commited suicide. That in turn was two days before the Russians reached the bunker. When this fact become known the Russians might have said that the photo showed a dead look-alike. This is only a working hypothesis: I don't claim to know the truth.

2007-02-11 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

Anyone else?Garrick92 12:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Replaced entry on Julian/Joaquin Castro. Not sure who removed it or why. Garrick92 09:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Also not sure why this article has been reclassified as "Article with unsourced statements", since whichever wikigenius did this has neglected to add the necessary 'citation needed' flags at the points which have offended his or her sensibilities. Could the someone in question oblige, or is this just one of those "conservatively playing the rules" tactics? Garrick92 14:27, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Judging by the new information about one of Stalin's doubles, who is in fact alive, your skepticism is fairly unfounded. Ladonite 21:20, 14 April 2008

Political Decoys In Fiction

The section with the Rober A. Heilein novel "Double Star" appears two different times. I suggest they both be merged into one entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.45.69 (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Uday Edit

I edited the section under Uday, as it was nearly incomprhensible from all the grammar and spelling errors. There was 3 large paragraphs that were taken from the inside flap of Latif Yahia's book, and not really relevant to the article. What I deleted will be put up on his page, which I will create soon. Tydamann (talk) 21:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a wealth of evidence that Uday Hussein did not use doubles, and that Latif Yahia's claims to being a double for Uday are fake; should we even have him on this page? That said, much of the media (and the movie industry) liked the story enough to print it without looking into it. I have edited the section somewhat to reflect what recent investigative journalism has turned up on claims about Hussein when doing any diligence at all, let alone what is due.

As the Uday Hussein bit of this page is being repeatedly changed back by an IP address, with no corroboration, no valid documentation, and no discussion added; I am recommending this page be protected.trickietrickie (talk) 09:18, 06 January 2012 (UTC)

Where's Hess

There's a reference to "Hess (above)" but no Hess above. Presumably somebody has deleted the Hess section. I can't be bothered to investigate but maybe somebody else can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.101.136 (talk) 19:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

RfC about the inclusion of Lee Harvey Oswald

The consensus is that the article should exclude the section about Lee Harvey Oswald. The section has been removed. Cunard (talk) 00:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should the article include the section about Lee Harvey Oswald? Location (talk) 02:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Seeing as the theory is patently absurd, no. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 12:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

There are, and not ever likely to be, any WP:RS about Oswald and any decoys. No sources = no inclusion. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

No. I think there are reliable sources discussing that some people claim that there was a conspiracy involving an Oswald body double but that information belongs in John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories. This article is about political decoys, which I infer to be about people impersonating political figures. Oswald was not a "political figure". -Location (talk) 23:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

• Probably No - If we were going to keep it, it would have to 1) be better referenced and 2) be moved to the Alleged section. NickCT (talk) 15:54, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

No. Unless he was Governor Oswald, Senator Oswald, Candidate Oswald, &cet, he does not belong. Anmccaff (talk) 16:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

No. Just no. Pure unsourced speculation. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 00:21, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

• No as per the others Chetsford (talk) 01:49, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
• No - As per above and WP:OR. Meatsgains (talk) 02:03, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
• Exclude, per WP:RS If you read the one source [1], it does not support inclusion. It repeatedly refers to the two Oswald theory as an unsupported "conspiracy theory." And, while the author finds some items puzzling, the article and its RS editors do not present it as possible, let alone plausible, let alone likely, let alone fact. Chris vLS (talk) 05:08, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bisley boy

I realise that the story of the Bisley boy is highly implausible, but it's been widely repeated, and anyway it's quite a good story, so I suggest it merits inclusion somewhere on Wikipedia. However it may not strictly speaking count as a political decoy, should it be turned into an independent article? PatGallacher (talk) 01:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)