Does Lifton's Best Evidence indicate that the coverup and the crime were committed by the same people?

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, Chris Newton said:

You really never research anything do you? You are like the Sean Spicer of this forum.

Please find me one citation that says they ever moved the desk secretary from the kitchen area.

Chris,

I research of ton of data, and you know it.  As for your claim that the desk secretary was ever in "the kitchen area," let's review the testimony of Ruth Paine, shall we?   Ruth said:

Mr. JENNER - It did make you curious? 
Mrs. PAINE - It did make me curious. Then, later that day, I noticed a scrawling handwriting on a piece of paper on the corner at the top of my secretary desk in the living room. It remained there. Sunday morning I was the first one up. I took a closer look at this, a folded sheet of paper folded at the middle. The first sentence arrested me because I knew it to be false. And for this reason I then proceeded-- 
Mr. JENNER - Would you just hold it at that moment. This is for purposes of identification...

Now -- that kitchen is tiny.  If there was a secretary desk inside it, then there was no room for a dining table, IMHO.  But all this is best explained by Ruth Paine's testimony again.  Ruth said:

Mr. JENNER - Excuse me. Would you please. state to the Commission why you are reasonably firm that it was the morning of November 9?...
Mrs. PAINE - Because I remember the weekend that this note or rough draft remained on my secretary desk. He spent the weekend on it. And the weekend was close and its residence on that desk was stopped also on the evening of Sunday, the 10th, when I moved everything in the living room around; the whole arrangement of the furniture was changed, so that I am very clear in my mind as to what weekend this was. 

Clearly, in this tiny house, if the furnture was being moved around between the tiny kitchen and the small living room, then one could speak about the secretary desk being in the "dining area" at one point, and in the "living room" at another point -- since these two rooms were right next to each other.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 22, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Micah Mileto]

3 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

I haven't encountered a CTer yet who gives a damn about the question of "WHERE DID THOSE TWO BULLETS GO?" They just don't care, and I usually get raked over hot coals for even having the gall to ASK such an obviously pertinent question. What I usually get from the clueless CTers is: Well, Davey, what happened to the third bullet that you say missed the whole limousine? -- as if that's even remotely similar to asking about TWO separate bullets that the silly CTers insist went into JFK's body but never exited and yet were never to be seen again.

The "Two Bullets Never Exited And Yet They BOTH Disappeared Off The Face Of The Earth" fantasy is reason enough--all by itself!--to accept the SBT. But no conspiracist on the planet (that I have encountered) will even entertain the idea of the SBT, despite the implausibilities that reside within their own "Two Bullets Never Exited" hogwash. (Go figure.)

One of the great aspects of the mystery behind the back wound is, if it was as shallow as perceived during the autopsy, it could've just naturally fallen out of the body.

[Paul Trejo]

On 4/19/2017 at 7:11 PM, David Lifton said:

Paul:

Much delayed, and in the spirit of "clean-up":

I do not have the time to debate (or "re-litigate") the entire Ricky White/ Roscoe White matter.

Suffice it to say that this whole area was widely debated--and (IMHO) seriously debunked, some 20 years ago (if memory serves).

To anyone following this discussion, simply Google the two names, and set aside hours for reading through all of that.

As I recall, Dave Perry analyzed it and did a good job; and there are one or more articles about it at the McAdams website.

My own recollection: it was a farce, and --essentially--established to be a hoax.

I would never ever base any legitimate assassination analysis on the accounts of Rickey White. It was all dissected, deconstructed, and proven to be malarky.

(And, in the spirit of FYI, I recollect Robert Groden, appearing on some talk radio show, trying to milk every last drop from that false story).

DSL

4/19/2017 - 5:05 p.m. PDT

David,

I realize the Roscoe White/Ricky White episode was dismissed decades ago -- but I think that it was dismissed with too much haste.

First -- Ricky White was a poor witness because he was a high-school dropout with a small vocabulary.  He spoke of the "Right Wing of the CIA," and other absurdities which clearly revealed his personal ignorance.

Yet just because Ricky White was an ignorant person -- that does not mean in the slightest that the account of his father, Roscoe White, to his mother, Geneva White, about being a shooter at JFK and the killer of J.D. TIppit -- was a lie.

It's completely unrelated.

Those who dismissed Ricky White could not explain how Geneva White had a complete separate pose of Oswald's Backyard Photograph, that the Warren Commission never even dreamed about.   That crucial fact was simply ignored by famous researchers like Harold Weisberg -- whose mind was obviously slammed shut by 1990.

I think the Roscoe White case merits a review.   So does Professor Walt Brown.  Just because a few old timers dismissed it -- that does not close the case for me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 22, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Chris Newton]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Also that weekend, Ruth Paine had asked Michael Paine and Lee Harvey Oswald to move furniture around for her.  So, her secretary desk was being moved around too -- in that space between the kitchen and the living room -- also called a dining area.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot Trejo

This is your quote, not mine. I've simply bolded the part where you infer the "desk secretary" could have been construed to be in the dining area. There is no logic to this statement. It is a "tiny house" but the living room and kitchen/dining room are two distinctly separate rooms.

Note that there is, in fact, today, a desk secretary along the wall in the dining area which is not where it was in late 1963 through at least the date of Ruth's WC testimony. Maybe it got there because of the "Trejo Effect".

I've been saying, all along, that it's my belief that the desk secretary swapped places with the couch in the living room.

[Paul Trejo]

On 4/19/2017 at 7:48 PM, David Lifton said:

Will come back to this post later, if time permits. i just want to call your attention to a chronological error.  Your post states:

"The context itself is riveting: Oswald had spent face time with Kositkov in the presence of Nechporenko, but had no idea that Kostikov was a KGB assassin.  Together and separately they interviewed Oswald for a total of 2.5 hours on Thursday 9/26 and Friday 9/27. "

Oswald did not arrive in Mexico City until the morning of Friday, 9/27.  On 9/26, he was still en route. 

DSL

David,

Are you assuming that the FBI claims that Oswald entered and exited Mexico by bus are accurate?  Because I challenge that.

Instead, I maintain that Oswald (as Mexican Immigration records say) entered and exited Mexico as a passenger in an automobile. 

The reason that the FBI (and the WC) suppressed this fact is because it proved that Oswald had accomplices (i.e. a driver) and thus that the LN theory was false.

IMHO, Oswald entered Mexico on 9/26/1963 by automobile, driven by Loran Hall with Larry Howard as another passenger -- and I find support for this CT in the 1965 claims of Harry Dean, who said that the JFK assassination was part of a plot that reached Southern California's Minutemen and JBS, which included Loran Hall and Larry Howard, and a ton of money donated by the JBS -- and first articulated by Ex-General Walker.

Harry Dean had helped Loran Hall and Larry Howard load their trailer with paramilitary supplies for that trip -- and they parked their trailer in Texas as they drove to New Orleans to pick up Oswald early on the 25th -- drove back to Dallas (8 hours from New Orleans) to briefly visit Silvia Odio (hoping for an alternate plan to sneak Oswald into Cuba).  Then they drove on to Mexico and reached Mexico City (18 hours from Dallas) on the 26th.  It was quite a drive, but Loran Hall was popping bennies continually.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 22, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Ron Ecker]

4 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Blaming Allen Dulles makes no sense at all.

Do you think he'd actually set up family friends of his mistress as Oswald's handlers, which might blow back on him?

 

Why not? Consider the fact that the Bush family was friendly on a direct basis with the Hinckley family, home of an excellent patsy for a presidential shoot. Blowback? There wasn't any. Oh, I think some fringe website coined the phrase "the Bushy Knoll," but so what? (Hinckley even bought his gun on Elm Street in Dallas. Boy, that Deep State has a wicked sense of humor.)

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

Why not? Consider the fact that the Bush family was friendly on a direct basis with the Hinckley family, home of an excellent patsy for a presidential shoot.

If Hinckley (et al) had succeeded Bush would have been President.

Dulles was never going to be anything more than a semi-disgraced former head of the CIA.

He was the designated patsy for the Bay of Pigs, and I suspect he stood in the patsy chain had the Dallas plot gone awry.

2 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

Blowback? There wasn't any. Oh, I think some fringe website coined the phrase "the Bushy Knoll," but so what? (Hinckley even bought his gun on Elm Street in Dallas. Boy, that Deep State has a wicked sense of humor.)

There has been rampant speculation about the Bush-Hinckley connection for 36 years.

[Ron Ecker]

7 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

There has been rampant speculation about the Bush-Hinckley connection for 36 years.

Sure, but what do they care about speculation? As usual they got away with it. The only thing that went wrong with the plot was that Reagan was too dumb to die.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Nice one again, Chris. I like the Ninja suit humor.

How about this one by PT:  The murders of JFK and the murders of Lee Harvey Oswald were separate -- quite distinct -- and the best way to explain them is separately.

LOL ROTF 

Anyone who thinks this is simply so far out there they are around the bend. Once LHO escaped his fate at the Texas Theater, it was simply a matter of time until Ruby polished him off.  Oswald's call to John Hurt on Saturday night was probably the last straw.

I mean you are aware of Ruby's posing as a reporter at the station on Friday night and correcting Wade on the name of Oswald's committee?  I mean that does not tell you something? You are aware that he was then there on Saturday? He was then there on early Sunday morning?  That it was his idea for Carlin to call him?  That the Western Union station could be clearly seen out the back of the station? That the HSCA found a policeman who swore that there was no way on earth Ruby came down the Main Street ramp? That films show Ruby hiding behind someone before Oswald comes out? 

The idea that Ruby and Oswald did not know each other is also malarkey. The DPD got rid of some of that evidence also.

Far from being separate, the two events were directly related.  In more than one way.  If you look at at the results of Ruby's polygraph, as analyzed by the HSCA, you will see the giveaways.

 

 

My argument is that the personnel who took positions in Dealey Plaza weren't connected to the guys who framed and eventually killed Oswald, except both were controlled from the very top.

Garrison investigated the Oswald Kill Team; he wasn't allowed to get close to the JFK Kill Team.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 minute ago, Ron Ecker said:

Sure, but what do they care about speculation? As usual they got away with it. The only thing that went wrong with the plot was that Reagan was too dumb to die.

 

My argument is that Dulles in '63 was in a much more vulnerable position.

He took the blame for the BOP -- why not the hit on JFK?

[David Von Pein]

11 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

DVP,

C'mon, I've read plenty of theories about what happened to the throat bullet and to the back bullet.  Are you kidding?  There are so many.

One says the back bullet fell out during heart massage at Parkland Hospital, and was even reported, but the FBI hushed it up.

Another says the throat wound was made by a frangible bullet.  Another says it was made by a missle other than a bullet.  Another says an ice bullet.

There are so many.

And every one of them is too silly to consider for more than two seconds.

[David Von Pein]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I haven't yet encountered an LNer who gives a damn about the question, "HOW DID THE MAGIC BULLET PASS THROUGH THE KNOT OF THE TIE WITHOUT MAKING A HOLE?" They just don't care.

(And BTW Davey, we do indeed care where those bullets went and have discussed the possibilities in great detail. So what you said about CTers is just plain wrong.)

Well, Sandy, my memory isn't as good as it once was (I'll admit that), so maybe I have encountered a few CTers over the years who are willing to put on the table their theory(ies) about where the two bullets went. But I normally just get the usual CT runaround and dodging of the question.

I have heard of the theories Paul Trejo mentioned earlier, but the CTers I have argued with in the past usually prefer to scold me for even asking the question, rather than be embarrassed by placing their absurd "ice bullet" or "low-powered bullet" theories on the table for consideration.

"The assassins choose bullets that inflict non-lethal, 1-inch-deep wounds? Instead of feeding JFK to lions, they decided to nibble him to death by ducks?" -- Bud; April 1, 2006
 

Edited April 23, 2017 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

9 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

One of the great aspects of the mystery behind the back wound is, if it was as shallow as perceived during the autopsy, it could've just naturally fallen out of the body.

Sure. But then we'd have to believe that that bullet just GOT LOST somehow, plus yet ANOTHER bullet GETS LOST too, don't forget. What are the odds? A billion to one against?

Isn't it time for conspiracy advocates to just accept the obvious truth? I.E., one bullet went clear through the man named John F. Kennedy and then went on to hit the man who was sitting in front of him (who was a man who also just happened to be wounded in the UPPER BACK by a bullet during the shooting that day).

And then there's the Z-Film evidence of the two victims reacting at precisely the same instant in time.

When all these factors are added together and assessed reasonably, what other logical conclusion can a sensible person come to other than: The SBT Is Correct?

I, for one, can't think of a single other "logical conclusion". Can you?

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/sbt-clips.html

http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

Edited April 23, 2017 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

REPRISE....
SANDY LARSEN SAID:

I haven't yet encountered an LNer who gives a damn about the question, "HOW DID THE MAGIC BULLET PASS THROUGH THE KNOT OF THE TIE WITHOUT MAKING A HOLE?"


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But don't you have the exact same problem if the bullet ENTERED the throat (versus it EXITING the throat)?

Don't the CTers who think JFK's throat wound was an ENTRANCE wound still have to ask themselves the very same question you just asked me? I.E.,

"HOW DID THE BULLET PASS THROUGH THE KNOT OF THE TIE WITHOUT MAKING A HOLE?"

How does the belief that the throat wound was a wound of entry make the above question go away for the conspiracy theorists? Do they think if the bullet entered the Adam's Apple area of JFK's throat, it somehow was able to miss the tie knot area entirely? But if it exited there, it had no choice but go through the tie knot and create a hole? Is that it?

~shrug~

And "for the record"....

Although Sandy is correct when he says there was no "hole" in President Kennedy's necktie, there was, in fact, some damage done to that tie by the passage of Lee Harvey Oswald's "SBT" bullet #CE399. That damage was in the form of a "nick" on the left side of the President's tie, which the FBI's Robert Frazier said was caused by some kind of a "projectile". (See the passages below from Page 92 of the Warren Report and Robert Frazier's testimony [at 5 H 62].)

"When the President's clothing was removed at Parkland Hospital, his tie was cut off by severing the loop immediately to the wearer's left of the knot, leaving the knot in its original condition. The tie had a nick on the left side of the knot. The nick was elongated horizontally, indicating that the tear was made by some object moving horizontally, but the fibers were not affected in a manner which would shed light on the direction or the nature of the missile." -- Warren Report; Page 92

------------------------

ARLEN SPECTER -- What did you note, if anything, with respect to the tie, Mr. Frazier?

ROBERT A. FRAZIER -- When the tie was examined by me in the laboratory, I noted that the neck portion had been cut from one side of the knot. However, the knot remained in apparently its original condition. The only damage to the tie other than the fact that it had been cut, was a crease or nick in the left side of the tie when you consider the tie as being worn on a body. As you view the front of the tie, it would be on the right side. This nick would be located in a corresponding area to the area in the shirt collar just below the button.

[...]

MR. SPECTER -- Does the nick in the tie provide any indication of the direction of the missile?

MR. FRAZIER -- The nick is elongated horizontally, indicating a possible horizontal direction, but it does not indicate that the projectile which caused it was exiting or entering at that point. The fibers were not disturbed in a characteristic manner which would permit any conclusion in that connection.

MR. SPECTER -- Is the nick consistent with an exiting path?

MR. FRAZIER -- Oh, yes.

MR. SPECTER -- Is there any indication from the nature of the nick as to the nature of the projectile itself?

MR. FRAZIER -- No, sir.

MR. SPECTER -- Is the nick consistent with a 6.5 millimeter bullet having caused the nick?

MR. FRAZIER -- Yes. Any projectile could have caused the nick. In this connection, there was no metallic residue found on the tie, and for that matter there was no metallic residue found on the shirt at the holes in the front. However, there was in the back.

 

[James DiEugenio]

6 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Sure. But then we'd have to believe that that bullet just GOT LOST somehow, plus yet ANOTHER bullet GETS LOST too, don't forget. What are the odds? A billion to one against?

Isn't it time for conspiracy advocates to just accept the obvious truth? I.E., one bullet went clear through the man named John F. Kennedy and then went on to hit the man who was sitting in front of him (who was a man who also just happened to be wounded in the UPPER BACK by a bullet during the shooting that day).

And then there's the Z-Film evidence of the two victims reacting at precisely the same instant in time.

When all these factors are added together and assessed reasonably, what other logical conclusion can a sensible person come to other than: The SBT Is Correct?

I, for one, can't think of a single other "logical conclusion". Can you?

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/sbt-clips.html

http://Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

DVP always cracks me up.  That is why I say he should do stand up.

Edited April 23, 2017 by James DiEugenio