• Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Paul Brancato

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

854 posts in this topic

42 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Michael - I meant how would have changed the shenanigans with the body?

Why would there need to be shenanigans with the body?

The Castro conspiracy would have been in play with Oswald's accomplices at large.

Why go thru all those moves when it'd be easier to provide additional dead patsies in due time?

By then Havana would have been, in the words of Richard Helms, "bombed back to the Stone Age."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 4/4/2017 at 0:45 PM, Michael Walton said:

Just a few light rebuttals to David Lifton.

I  think the Tippit murder was planned. If we're  to believe  they found a wallet  thrown down  next to Tippit with LHOs ID in it to me that's  a  catalyst  for DPD to shoot to kill LHO.

I know  this isn't  based  on evidence  but it just  seems  too wild and unbelievable  that they'd  squirrel away the body, with Jackie right there,  and onto a helicopter.

The thrumming helicopter  David  uses as his evidence  that  that's  the copter taking  the  body  away, reminds  me  of  the HL caper. In other  words, some  of  the records are not 100% accurate  so therefore  there just  has to be an LHO clone on  the  loose.

Your sound theory about the Tippit murder IS based on circumstantial evidence. :) 

Edited by Gerry Simone
changed 'is' to 'IS'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Which means that the people who arranged, "in advance, to alter the body (as part of the crime)", MUST have thought that after he was shot, President Kennedy would NOT be transported to any hospital in the Dallas area for medical treatment.

Is that what you're suggesting, Mr. Lifton?

But, just for the sake of argument, even if your theory is correct about a pre-planned "sophisticated strategic deception", how could the plotters who were planning such a complicated mission on 11/22/63 have possibly thought they could have totally concealed the FRONTAL gunshot wounds that these gunmen/conspirators knew were going to be sustained by JFK during the shooting in Dealey Plaza (since you think ALL shots that hit the President came from the FRONT and not the REAR)?

How on Earth could such a crazy, backward plot to kill the President possibly be successful, given the fact that anyone with half a brain HAD to know that the injured President was most certainly going to be rushed to the nearest hospital immediately after the injuries were sustained -- i.e., well BEFORE any kind of covert body-altering surgery could have possibly been performed on the body of the President?

I think only these four words need to be uttered at this point...

It makes no sense!

DVP
4/04/2017; 12:37 p.m. EDT
Mooresville, Indiana USA

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/07/david-von-pein-vs-david-lifton.html

 

Hello David,

Maybe the plan all along was for only rear shooterS getting JFK, but when they had to rely on a frontal shooter, then it complicated things and the cover-up apparatus went into overdrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gerry Simone said:

Hello David,

Maybe the plan all along was for only rear shooterS getting JFK, but when they had to rely on a frontal shooter, then it complicated things and the cover-up apparatus went into overdrive.

Like Lee NOT taking out JFK on Houston?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I find it highly likely that the plot was designed to look like a conspiracy.

Lots of folks assume the Lone Nut scenario was the plan all along, but such an assumption is baseless.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Despite my amazement at Paul O Connor's divulging that JFK's body  arrived in a "shipping casket". and the lost time with JFK's body between 6:35 and 8;00 o'clock.

Then you ask, what reasonable expectation could any assassination plot that employed at least 2 shooters, from the front and rear (much less 3!) have of any sort of decent autopsy coverup without the body snatchers scenario?

But then, was it a decent autopsy coverup? Contradictions abound! There was always the obvious discrepancy between the Doctors at Parkland, who were instructed to keep a low profile and Hume and company who were under orders to perform an autopsy that would promote the concept of a lone gunman. It was good enough for a scared, rather sheepish public who had gone through the Cuban Missile crisis, and really didn't want to hear anymore about possible Castro or Russian involvement, and let out a sight of relief when Oswald was then promoted as a lone malcontent gunman. The point is, it succeeded no matter how makeshift and shabby it was in it's performance.

I'm not saying I'm thoroughly convinced of it, but when you look at it, it is simpler and more elegant.

Edited by Kirk Gallaway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Like Lee NOT taking out JFK on Houston?

Not if it exposes the real shooter in the sniper's nest to prevent him from getting away so that they pin it on Oswald.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry if I'm  not  mistaken  LHO had a wallet  on him when arrested. So here's  a  guy who didn't  drive  but I  believe  he "owned" three wallets one conveniently  found  next to the dead Tippit?

He supposedly had a jacket  on and dumped  it but the dry cleaning  label in it was from CA? 

He supposedly  ejected automatic shells  while  fleeing  the  scene  yet the gun in the theater was a revolver?

All circumstantial  yes but sounds  like solid stuff to me.

And in an entirely  different  case years later  the suspect  leaves a bloody glove at the crime scene but he's  found  not guilty.

Stranger  things  have  happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How exactly do the conspirators alter the body so the large blasted out hole in the occiput goes away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On ‎4‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 8:32 AM, David Lifton said:

To all:

I’m going to jump in here and present my view—which, by the way, I have already stated (to some extent) in my appearance at Bismarck, North Dakota in November 2013 (Google, David Lifton, Bismarck) and in the November 2016 Night Fright Show (with host Brent Holland), just a few months ago.

In a nutshell:

 1. This was not an “ordinary murder”; but rather, a political assassination accompanied by the deployment of a sophisticated strategic deception. The purpose of the deception was to change basic facts, and hide the truth about how Kennedy died (and who was responsible).

2. The basic concept: this was a body-centric plot –i.e., it was planned, in advance, to alter the body (as part of the crime); to change legal facts about the shooting, and promote a false story of how the president died.  (Moreover: a key purpose of the autopsy falsification was to falsely connect the sniper’s nest at the sixth floor window with the crime which took place in the street below).

 3. It was never intended that the body, at autopsy, would provide a true picture of the crime; and. . .(see next point). . .

4. It was never intended that there would be two medico-legal records: one from certain medical personnel who saw the body prior to alteration; and a second record emerging from those present at the official autopsy.

5. Fundamental mistakes were made which resulted in a botched execution of the crime, as planned:
           a. The unexpected shooting of Connally
            b. Oswald getting out of the TSBD alive; and then. . .
c.  Oswald being arrested (alive); and then. .
d.  Oswald making the statements about his innocence, which he did, during the two days he remained alive.

6. The existence of a “live Oswald” necessitated creating a plan to eliminate him. (That resulted in the murder of Oswald, by Ruby, which--of necessity--was   broadcast on national TV).

7. The Tippit murder was never supposed to have occurred, and was not part of the original planning for the murder of Kennedy. It was an unexpected event that occurred as a consequence of 5b.  If Oswald –qua “assassin”—had been murdered in the building, there would never have been: (a) any Tippit murder or (b) any professions of innocence coming from the mouth of the accused.  Dead men don’t talk.

8.  It was part of the original conception of the crime that the Attorney General of the U.S.—the President’s brother—be neutralized as part of the crime.  That part worked.  Essentially, Bobby made certain very muted (and cryptic) private statements, but by and large, he maintained the public posture that he believed the official version (See his appearance in Cracow, Poland, on 6/29/64, when he first announced this stance; which was front page news (cols 6 and 7, bottom half of paper) in the New York Times in the next day’s newspaper [6/30/64]).

         Robert Kennedy Says Oswald
Acted on Own in Assassination
The story, by Times reporter Arthur Olsen, continues on page 2, under this headline:
                        KENNEDY LABELS
OSWALD A MISFIT
Opening paragraph (on page 1):

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy said today that his brother had been assassinated by Lee H. Oswald, “a misfit” who took out his resentment against society by killing the President of the United States.

9. Generally speaking: the JFK assassination was “elegant in conception, but bungled in execution.”  That’s the reason why there are strong elements of an “after-the-fact” cover-up.  Mistakes were made, and the result (in those cases) was improvisation and ad hoc solutions and “cover-up” events which, of necessity, occurred after he fact, and which were justified by allusions to “national security” or “preventing World War III.”  That was all baloney.   Generally speaking (and referring to many details): the assassination was not planned to unfold in the manner in which it did.  Much went wrong, the result being akin to a boat which almost sank, but which—both through cleverness and desperation—was kept afloat.

10.  Finally, and this is my personal opinion (which I will be writing about in Final Charade, or in an auxiliary essay): the original assassination, as planned, was for the fall of 1961. Certain unexpected events occurred which resulted in it being postponed until November 1963.  This fact is important in properly interpreting certain historical data pertaining to the evolution of the event.

DSL

4/04/2017; 6:20 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

David,

An alternative explanation of the facts goes like this:

(1) This was an "ordinary assassination," outlined by Joseph Milteer, in which JFK would be killed by a high-powered rifle from a tall building, and then a Patsy would be picked up within hours to throw everybody off.

(2) This was not originally a body-centric plot.  There was no advance plan to alter JFK's corpse.  (This helps to explain the hasty, botched job of the pre-autopsy.)

(3) The original plan, by the JFK Killers, was to blame the Communists by proving that LHO was a Communist, i.e. a supporter of Fidel Castro in New Orleans during the summer of 1963.

(4) By 4pm EST, J. Edgar Hoover determined the basic facts of the case -- that Oswald was the patsy for Guy Banister in New Orleans, and therefore of the Radical Right in the South, centered in Dallas.

(4.1) Therefore, to counter the political bombshell of JFK killed by Communists, J. Edgar Hoover invented the "Lone Nut" theory, to blame the Patsy, and so use the plotters' own Patsy against them.

(4.2) The Truth would have been propaganda fodder for the USSR during the Cold War, and had to be strictly suppressed.

(4.3) Therefore, it became mandatory to promote a false story of how JFK died.

(4.4) The original plotters would not care if multiple shooters were postulated -- because the Communists worked in groups. 

(4.5) So, the "Lone Nut" theory, of a "Lone Shooter" on the 6th Floor TSBD was a *late development* (by the US Government -- not by the JFK Kill Team) and was only conceived on the afternoon of the JFK assassination.

(4.6) It was determined by 4pm EST, that the JFK body, at autopsy, must provide a false picture of the crime -- that is -- the Patsy must now become the "Lone Shooter".

(4.7)  The official story of the Parkland Hospital involvement is correct -- LBJ and the Secret Service wanted to get out of Dallas -- the Kill Zone -- as quickly as possible, but Jackie Kennedy refused to leave JFK for emotional reasons.  Then, for political reasons, LBJ could not leave Jackie behind.  So, the JFK body was forcibly removed from Parkland.

(4.8)  This turned out as serendipity, because now the autopsy could be completed by Military staff before Bethesda.  But it had to be QUICK.

(4.9) The fact that there would be two sets of medical records was not viewed as a major obstacle.  Official gag-orders would solve the problem.

(5) The first mistake of the JFK Kill Team was Oswald getting out of the TSBD alive, getting arrested and appearing on film.

(6) The JFK Kill Team then had to conceive of Plan B, namely, Jack Ruby, to quickly kill LHO (who should have been shot dead at *any* point after the JFK assassination). 

(7)  The second mistake of the JFK Kill Team was the death of JD Tippit.  Yet it is likely that JD Tippit was part of the JFK Kill Team, assigned to help kill LHO in the streets.

(8) RFK was muted in the JFK assassination by his own involvment in "Operation Mongoose" and the FBI knowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald was related to "Oparation Mongoose" personnel through Guy Banister at 544 Camp Street in New Orleans.

(8.1)  It was immediately apparent to RFK, as it was to J. Edgar Hoover, that the Radical Right in the South had killed JFK -- but that the Truth could not be made public because of the benefit that would accrue to the USSR as propaganda during the Cold War.

(9) Generally speaking, there were two separate plots:

(9.1) The JFK Kill Team plot to blame the Communists through Lee Harvey Oswald;

(9.2) The JFK Cover-up plot to deny the JFK Kill Team their invasion of Cuba.

(9.2.1) The late, "Lone Nut" theory of the JFK murder alone led to the pre-autopsy autopsy, which was so hasty, rushed and botched that the photos, xrays and medical evidence had to be hidden from the world.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
4.5 clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Gerry if I'm  not  mistaken  LHO had a wallet  on him when arrested. So here's  a  guy who didn't  drive  but I  believe  he "owned" three wallets one conveniently  found  next to the dead Tippit?

He supposedly had a jacket  on and dumped  it but the dry cleaning  label in it was from CA? 

He supposedly  ejected automatic shells  while  fleeing  the  scene  yet the gun in the theater was a revolver?

All circumstantial  yes but sounds  like solid stuff to me.

And in an entirely  different  case years later  the suspect  leaves a bloody glove at the crime scene but he's  found  not guilty.

Stranger  things  have  happened. 

Yes, I've read about the other wallet and automatic shells found at the Tippit scene, yet they had Oswald's wallet at the police station when they were holding or interrogating him.  I think there's enough circumstantial evidence to suggest a frame-up and an impersonator.  Poor Oswald.  He didn't stand a chance against the forces of evil at play then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

David,

An alternative explanation of the facts goes like this:

(1) This was an "ordinary assassination," outlined by Joseph Milteer, in which JFK would be killed by a high-powered rifle from a tall building, and then a Patsy would be picked up within hours to throw everybody off.

(2) This was not originally a body-centric plot.  There was no advance plan to alter JFK's corpse.  (This helps to explain the hasty, botched job of the pre-autopsy.)

(3) The original plan, by the JFK Killers, was to blame the Communists by proving that LHO was a Communist, i.e. a supporter of Fidel Castro in New Orleans during the summer of 1963.

(4) By 4pm EST, J. Edgar Hoover determined the basic facts of the case -- that Oswald was the patsy for Guy Banister in New Orleans, and therefore of the Radical Right in the South, centered in Dallas.

(4.1) Therefore, to counter the political bombshell of JFK killed by Communists, J. Edgar Hoover invented the "Lone Nut" theory, to blame the Patsy, and so use the plotters own Patsy against them.

(4.2) The Truth would have been propaganda fodder for the USSR during the Cold War, and had to be strictly suppressed.

(4.3) Therefore, it became mandatory to promote a false story of how JFK died.

(4.4) The original plotters would not care if multiple shooters were postulated -- because the Communists worked in groups. 

(4.5) So, the "Lone Nut" theory, of a "Lone Shooter" on the 6th Floor TSBD was a *late development* and was only conceived on the afternoon of the JFK assassination.

(4.6) It was determined by 4pm EST, that the JFK body, at autopsy, must provide a false picture of the crime -- that is -- the Patsy must now become the "Lone Shooter".

(4.7)  The official story of the Parkland Hospital involvement is correct -- LBJ and the Secret Service wanted to get out of Dallas -- the Kill Zone -- as quickly as possible, but Jackie Kennedy refused to leave JFK for emotional reasons.  Then, for political reasons, LBJ could not leave Jackie behind.  So, the JFK body was forcibly removed from Parkland.

(4.8)  This turned out as serendipity, because now the autopsy could be completed by Military staff before Bethesda.  But it had to be QUICK.

(4.9) The fact that there would be two sets of medical records was not viewed as a major obstacle.  Official gag-orders would solve the problem.

(5) The first mistake of the JFK Kill Team was Oswald getting out of the TSBD alive, getting arrested and appearing on film.

(6) The JFK Kill Team then had to conceive of Plan B, namely, Jack Ruby, to quickly kill LHO (who should have been shot dead at *any* point after the JFK assassination). 

(7)  The second mistake of the JFK Kill Team was the death of JD Tippit.  Yet it is likely that JD Tippit was part of the JFK Kill Team, assigned to help kill LHO in the streets.

(8) RFK was muted in the JFK assassination by his own involvment in "Operation Mongoose" and the FBI knowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald was related to "Oparation Mongoose" personnel through Guy Banister at 544 Camp Street in New Orleans.

(8.1)  It was immediately apparent to RFK, as it was to J. Edgar Hoover, that the Radical Right in the South had killed JFK -- but that the Truth could not be made public because of the benefit that would accrue to the USSR as propaganda during the Cold War.

(9) Generally speaking, there were two separate plots:

(9.1) The JFK Kill Team plot to blame the Communists through Lee Harvey Oswald;

(9.2) The JFK Cover-up plot to deny the JFK Kill Team their invasion of Cuba.

(9.2.1) The late, "Lone Nut" theory of the JFK murder alone led to the pre-autopsy autopsy, which was so hasty, rushed and botched that the photos, xrays and medical evidence had to be hidden from the world.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

I would agree, more or less, what you wrote here.

Tippit could simply have been sacrificed to pin the blame on Oswald and make him more susceptible to police brutality and execution.  Maybe Tippit's failure to get Oswald earlier meant he would pay for that with his life?

Your point 9.2 could be true since we know that LBJ and Hoover knew about someone impersonating Oswald in Mexico City and felt that there might have been some funny business going on.  I think there's also a memo by Hoover where he scratches a note indicating his doubt about info coming from the CIA (or expressed to one of his agents).

I see what you mean by the "lone nut" scenario concocted later.  There was always a fall guy with accomplices which turned out to be Oswald in Dallas, but the "lone nut" scenario would quell concerns about starting WWIII.  Ergo the botched conspiracy that resulted in lingering questions about the autopsy, the SBT, etc. etc.

I still think there was a rogue CIA cell involved with possible help from the Radical Right (financing) and the Mob (enter Jack Ruby).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

12 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Maybe the plan all along was for only rear shooterS getting JFK, but when they had to rely on a frontal shooter, then it complicated things and the cover-up apparatus went into overdrive.

Utilizing ANY frontal shooters AT ALL within an assassination plot like the one purported by David Lifton (and all other CTers who think Oswald was being set up in advance to take the fall as the lone assassin) would have been suicide for the conspirators.

How can that basic fact not be blatantly obvious to everybody here?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

4 hours ago, Ollie Curme said:

How exactly do the conspirators alter the body so the large blasted out hole in the occiput goes away?

The large hole in the occiput—as observed at Parkland Hospital—did not “[go] away”. Rather, its existence was cleverly incorporated into the description provided by Humes of the “large” defect in President Kennedy’s skull, as described in the Bethesda autopsy report (drafted by Humes).   The final typed draft, as accepted in evidence as Warren Commission Exhibit 387, reads: ““There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions.  In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter.”

Please focus on the words “extending somewhat” and “into the. . occipital regions.”  By the use of this kind of language, Humes was able to incorporate the Dallas “occipital” wound into his official description of the “large” (in fact, much larger) Bethesda wound that was present at the time he examined Kennedy's body.

This language—from the Bethesda autopsy report, and describing how the body looked to Humes—provided the legal basis for the Warren Commission conclusion that President Kennedy was struck fatally from “above and behind.”

 

THE AUTOPSY PHOTOS

Now moving forward several years, we come to the revelations contained in the autopsy photos (and X-rays) which were not processed until around December 10, 1963, and which was not seen by the public until the summer of 1978, during the televised hearings of the HSCA. The first indication of what they showed came with the release of the Clark Panel Report –from the examination of the autopsy photos by a four-man panel convened by AG Ramsey Clark in March 1968. That report was made public, probably on White House orders, around January 17th, 1969, just three days before Nixon’s inauguration.  It was a major news story. That report described the geometry of the head wounding somewhat differently, and it became a cat-and-mouse game to try and decipher just what it showed from the paucity of data.  Finally, during the 1978 HSCA hearings, the public got its first visual look when it was arranged for an artist (Ida Dox), to create exact copies of the photos.  The rear view of JFK’s head—televised nationally during these hearings—made clear that the occipital wound described in Dallas (and incorporated into Humes slippery description) had completely disappeared. I saw the actual photos in May 1981, when I met with SS employee Jack Fox, and obtained my personal copies in December 1982, courtesy of Mark Crouch, and published them in the 1988 (Carroll & Graf) edition of Best Evidence, first released in October 1988. But now returning to 1979, when I was drafting Best Evidence:  In Chapter 20 of Best Evidence, I addressed this situation in detail, because these photographs represented a “third view” of the wounds—i.e., there was Parkland, then Bethesda (per the autopsy protocol), and now this “other” Bethesda view (a “third view”) per the autopsy photographs.  I displayed the data, in tabular form, in Figure 38 in Chapter 20. (See p. 506 of the Macmillan or Carroll & Graf [trade paper] edition). And I called the three different representations of the head wound Lens 1, Lens2, and Lens 3. Both the “Humes version” and the “autopsy photo” version had a back-to-front head trajectory, but they were distinctly different.  The autopsy photo version—which became the legal basis for the HSCA conclusions—had everything rotated by about 20 degrees, clockwise, and so the back of the head was now intact.  Wow.  Mirable dictu.  The “blowout” at the rear—so prominent in Dallas, and incorporated into the Humes version (i.e., the autopsy report, with its slippery language) –had now disappeared! I addressed this situation in Chapter 20, referring to these three different views of the wounding, as noted, as the result of viewing the head through 3 lenses: Lens 1 was Dallas; Lens 2, was Bethesda (per Humes); and Lens 3 was Bethesda (per the photographs).

 

REVISITING THE WARREN COMMISSION SITUATION. . .

Going back now to the time frame of Spring 1964, and the Warren Commission investigation, the question I addressed next was whether WC attorney Arlen Specter, in charge of the medical evidence, was aware of this situation—or was it a fact that he never saw the autopsy photographs? (in which case all he would have been aware of was Lens 1 (Dallas) and Lens 2 (Bethesda, per the autopsy report).

Officially, Specter never saw the photos; but we know that he admits to being shown a photo of the back wound, when—apparently—he insisted on being shown photo evidence that the wound was high enough on the back to support the Single Bullet Theory.  But did he ever see the autopsy photos of the head wounding, and –if he did—did he recognize the difference in the head wounding as described by Humes, as described in the Bethesda autopsy report, and the head wounding as shown in the autopsy photographs? 

The answer, I believe, is yes, he did.  I based that on two detailed memos that he wrote, and which I discovered in my January 1971 nearly-month-long stay at NARA, when I reviewed all the memos written by all the staff attorneys that were in the WC “office files.”  These memos –about the autopsy photos and X-rays—are dated April 30 and May 12, 1964, and they provide potent evidence re Arlen Specter’s state of mind, when it came to this evidence which (supposedly) he had not seen.

 

WHAT SPECTER WROTE. . .

This section is titled “Specter’s Memoranda of April 30 and May 12, 1964”, runs seven plus pages, and contains numerous indications that Specter was very much aware of the differences in the historical record between what Humes stated in the Bethesda autopsy report showed, and what these photos showed. (See pp. 508 – 515 of Best Evidence).  Specter was a very bright man, and it seemed to me that he fully understood the various differences and the implications—but he had to be careful in writing these memos because, supposedly, he had not seen the photos (!). You have to read my discussion to get a full appreciation of all this; i.e., of what I referred to as –“Specter’s seeming awareness of the conflicts in the record.” For example, in Specter’s Memo of April 30, 1964, he wrote (as his Point Number 3”) that “The Commission should determine with certain that there are no major variations between the films and the artist’s drawings” (referring, at that time, to the crude drawings by naval artist Rydberg, that Humes used to illustrate his Warren Commission testimony). Specter seemed very aware that Humes testimony—as it then stood—could not explain the many differences in the photos, and wrote: “I suggest that we have a court reporter present so that we may examine Dr. Hume after the X-rays and photographs are reviewed to put on the record . . . any changes in his testimony or theories required by a review of the –rays and films. .“

Specter was well aware that the issue was whether Kennedy was shot from the front or the back.  He wrote that “none of the doctors at Parkland Hospital in Dallas observed the [entry] hole in the President’s back or the small [entry] hole in the lower portion of his head.”

Emphasizing the problem, Specter—exhibiting considerable prescience—wrote: “Some day someone may compare the films with the artist’s drawings and find a significant error which might substantially affect the essential testimony and the Commission’s conclusions.”

 

Now Returning to the Matter of whether the body or the photos were altered. . .which was it? (or was it both?)

Reviewing the record retrospectively, and assisted by having these two “Specter Memos” (of 4/30 and 5/12 1964), memos written by none other than Arlen Specter himself, it seems clear to me that both kinds of alteration were present in this situation.

The body was (covertly) altered on November 22, 1963, prior to the start of the official autopsy, and that explains the differences in the record between Lens 1 (Dallas) and Lens 2 (Bethesda).  This was part of the original plot to alter the body "as part of the crime." But then, starting that night (in the morgue) and then on into  the one to two weeks following, some sort of “clean-up” occurred, and a photo record was created (the “autopsy photographs”).  That photo record was not utilized (officially, anyway)  by the Warren Commission and remained under lock and key for years.  That photo record  did receive major attention by the Forensic Panel of the House Select Committee, circa 1977-1979) and that photo record became the basis for the HSCA conclusions about trajectory.  All of that occurred I the time frame 1976-1979.

To recap:  The alteration of JFK’s body –whether viewed from the perspective of the Warren Commission’s investigation (1963-64) or the HSCA  (1976 – 1979) was done to create a false legal record which, in each case, became the foundation for official conclusions, but in investigations that occurred in separate years.   Also, they resulted in slightly different legal records (i.e., when it came to the particulars of the head wounding).  (N.B.: There are also other interesting differences, but I am not addressing them here, in this writing).

(A) Dallas vs Bethesda (Lens 1): Here, the physical alteration of the body between Dallas and Bethesda was, essentially,  a crude alteration that involved the removal of bullets and the alteration of wounds. By the time of the start of the official autopsy, the body no longer contained any evidence of shots from the front—at least, at least none from the front that was officially noted in the autopsy report.

(B) A further physical manipulation of the body, at Bethesda, to stage a reconstruction for the purpose of creating a photo record (Lens 3) which would show (a) no shots from the front and (b)  that was devoid of any evidence that the body had been altered.

Based on my analysis, (A) was the result of the original planning for the assassination; (B) was the result of an effort at "clean-up"; i.e., to sanitize the result of what was (as originally executed) a crude medical forgery, and make it “acceptable” for photography.

The result of all this activity was the “disappearance” of the rear exit wound by the time the autopsy photographs were created; and the existence of three separate and distinguishable legal records (the 3 “lenses” described in chapter 20 of Best Evidence).

To return to the point that Ollie raised: Commander Humes testified based upon the body as he saw it; and so the language he used to describe "the condition of the body" included (or "incorporated")  "the occipital wound" that was so prominent in Dallas (Lens 1) and certainly partially visible at the time of autopsy (Lens 2). But that wound was no longer present in the autopsy photographs (Lens 3).

DSL

4/5/2017 - 10:45 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

Edited by David Lifton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

5 hours ago, Ollie Curme said:

How exactly do the conspirators alter the body so the large blasted out hole in the occiput goes away?

Ollie,

There's a brilliant video quartet by our own Pat Speer at www.patspeer.com which explains how the large hole in the lower back right of the skull was very simply faked to appear at the top front right of the skull.

The HSCA surgeons simply turned the X-ray sideways!   Honestly -- just sideways!

That was shown, IMHO, brilliantly by Pat Speer.

It is an elegant confirmation to the original work done by David Lifton in the 1970's, and completely validates his pre-autopsy autopsy hypothesis with regard to the JFK assassination.

My only difference with David Lifton today is with regard to my Benign Theory of the pre-autopsy autopsy, which I outlined here this morning.

Regards
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now