Paul Brancato

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

744 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

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?

Frontal shooters were a contingency.  Not suicide if you have someone posing as a secret service agent to shoo people or police away, if their location wasn't undetectable in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

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?

David Von Pein:

In this regard, I cannot speak for anyone else, only for myself, but you are dead wrong, as will be established definitively with the publication of Final Charade. In the interim, please engage in the following thought experiment:

Step 1: Imaging a large dumpster, of the kind used to pick up trash in many communities. (They are all over the roads, here in Southern California, especially in the early morning hours, clanking loudly as they race down the major avenues towards their various destinations).

Step 2: Imagine a big sign being placed on that dumpster device: “Dustbin of History”  (and perhaps in small type, and in order to give proper intellectual credit: “Original wording, per Leon Trotsky”).

Step 3: Imagine yourself being consigned to that location, because of your persistent and very loud statements that the President could not have been shot from the front (and setting aside the issue of whether he was shot “only” from the front).  You keep pointing out this problem, and I gather it concerns you deeply.  That is a good sign.  It shows you have the capacity to think logically.  Now, to the next step. . .

SOMETHING FOR YOU TO PONDER: Do you really think that those who engineered the plan to remove Kennedy from office were so stupid that they set up a plan to shoot him in a motorcade, and to frame a “pre-selected patsy” (etc.), and yet were such dunderheads that they failed to conceive of a plan to remove bullets, much less alter wounds?  Do you not think that anyone with an IQ above room temperature might conceive of the necessity for such planning? 

Or do you believe you're the only person, blessed with the intelligence and insight, to raise such an issue?

Food for thought.

DSL

4/5/2017 – 11:35 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

Edited by David Lifton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

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?

DVP,

With respect, it was not suicide given these general facts:

1.  As Professor Walt Brown said, the crime scene, the evidence, the witnesses, the suspects and their families were all under the control of the Dallas Police.

2.  Also, the best assassins are those who act out of a sense of honor, rather than for money; and who live locally and easily fit in to the background.  Police best fit that profile. 

3.  The parking lot behind the picket fence of the Grassy Knoll was almost exclusive to Dallas County Jail workers across the Knoll; including Dallas Deputies. 

4.  When unsuspecting DPD officers ran behind the picket fence of the Grassy Knoll, they saw only other DPD officers and Dallas Deputies.  Nothing to see.

5.  Even if there was any suspicion here or there -- the comradery of the Dallas Police would suspend judgment long enough to escape detection.

6.  This was highlighted by a FORUM member, Will Turner, in his book, Power on the Right (1971).

7.  The CT by Jeff Caufield (2015) that the Radical Right killed JFK necessarily involves ground-crew conspirators among the Dallas Police. 

Regards
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@David Lifton,  Thank you for your responses and updated analyses.  It was BE that got my friend and I hooked (there have been other influences but yours is notable). 

I think Horne added to your analyses.

@Paul Trejo, I need to check out Pat's site for that video you mention.

@Ollie Curme I always thought that the scalp with maybe a little loose bone was pulled over the back of the head to hide the avulsion we see in Z-335 to Z-337.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

31 minutes ago, David Lifton said:

...SOMETHING FOR YOU TO PONDER: Do you really think that those who engineered the plan to remove Kennedy from office were so stupid that they set up a plan to shoot him in a motorcade, and to frame a “pre-selected patsy” (etc.), and yet were such dunderheads that they failed to conceive of a plan to remove bullets, much less alter wounds?  Do you not think that anyone with an IQ above room temperature might conceive of the necessity for such planning? 

Or do you believe you're the only person, blessed with the intelligence and insight, to raise such an issue?

Food for thought.

DSL

4/5/2017 – 11:35 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

David,

Although I am a CTer, I would defend DVP on this specific point.

There was no need to plan any surgery to prove a "Lone Nut" shooter, because the original JFK Kill Team did not envision a "Lone Nut" scenario -- instead, they envisioned a "Communist Plot" scenario.

The JFK Killers had sheep-dipped (Jim Garrison's term) Lee Harvey Oswald all summer long for this scenario.   They even had some CIA rogue impersonate Oswald in Mexico City over the telephone of the Cuban Consulate, to the USSR Embassy, asking for a KGB agent -- all to *prove* that Lee Harvey Oswald was a COMMUNIST.

Not a "Lone Nut."

Realizing this by 4pm EST, the universal genius of J. Edgar Hoover came up with the "Lone Nut" scenario in order to foil the JFK Kill Team; that is, to prevent them from attaining their ultimate goal -- the invasion of Cuba.

Hoover was successful -- the USA did not invade Cuba.   

Hoover's 4pm EST "Lone Nut" scenario was broadcast to LBJ and then to the entire US Government.   The "Lone Nut" scenario was now a matter of National Security.

No wonder there was a pre-autopsy autopsy.   No wonder it was so hasty, botched and all the photos and X-rays and medical evidence had to be hidden from the WC.

That is using Occam's Razor, sir.   IMHO there is no need to postulate a medical plot before the JFK assassination.  It was conceived only after the JFK assassination.

Regards
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

  Deleted, not enough info.

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Related Discussion....

BEN HOLMES SAID:

YOU WANT TO CHERRY-PICK THE AUTOPSY REPORT!!!


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Everybody cherry-picks, Ben. LNers do it. CTers do it. Can't be helped. It's human nature and always will be. (And I already told you that same thing several times in the past.)

Plus....

Ben Holmes is a HUGE hypocrite when he tosses this statement up in my face....

"YOU WANT TO CHERRY-PICK THE AUTOPSY REPORT!!!" -- B. Holmes

....because YOU, Benny, will forever "cherry pick" the autopsy report. You LIKE the "somewhat into the occipital" verbiage (which is obviously inaccurate as far as an "absence of scalp and bone" is concerned, as the photos and X-rays AND Zapruder Film readily confirm for all time)....but you sure as heck HATE these THREE parts of that VERY SAME autopsy report [WCR, p.543], don't you Mr. Kettle?.....

"It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high velocity projectiles fired by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."

and....

"The fatal missile entered the skull above and to the right of the external occipital protuberance."

and....

"The other missile...made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck."

So, as we can easily see via the above examples of things that Ben will completely disregard (or label as "lies"), Hypocrite Ben Holmes is a much more blatant and brazen "cherry picker" of JFK's autopsy report than I have ever been.


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

An "Occipital" Addendum....

Since we know without a doubt that there was no MISSING BONE OR SCALP in the "occipital" region of JFK's head, I'm wondering if Dr. Humes really meant to say "somewhat into the temporal and FRONTAL regions" when he wrote this paragraph of President Kennedy's autopsy report....

"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."

If the word "occipital" is replaced with the word "frontal" in the above paragraph, it becomes a much more accurate paragraph (based on the autopsy photographs and X-rays, plus a look at the Zapruder Film as well)....

JFK-Head-Wound-Photographic-Comparison.png


Human-Skull.jpg

I'll also provide the following excerpts from the 1996 ARRB testimony of two of JFK's autopsy surgeons, Dr. James Humes and Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, which is testimony that most certainly indicates that these two autopsy physicians KNEW that there was no missing bone or scalp in the OCCIPITAL portion of the President's head:


QUESTION -- "Just for any scalp lacerations, were there any tears over the occipital bone?"

DR. HUMES -- "No. No."

QUESTION -- "None whatsoever?"

DR. HUMES -- "No."

QUESTION -- "There were tears, however, over the temporal--"

DR. HUMES -- "Temporal and parietal."

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

QUESTION -- "Can you describe generally where there was any missing bone from the posterior portion, to the best of your recollection?"

DR. HUMES -- "There basically wasn't any. It was just a hole. Not a significant missing bone."

QUESTION -- "So a puncture hole--"

DR. HUMES -- "Puncture hole."

QUESTION -- "And no bone missing--"

DR. HUMES -- "No."

QUESTION -- "Anywhere in the occipital?"

DR. HUMES -- "No, no. Unless maybe--you know, these drawings are always strange. Unless the part of this wound extended that far back. I don't think it did, really. Most of it was parietal temporal."

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

DR. BOSWELL -- "This is what's missing here."

QUESTION -- "So you're pointing at what I would describe as the temporal and parietal bone on the right hemisphere?"

DR. BOSWELL -- "I guess that would--actually, that looks like frontal there, doesn't it? Frontal, temporal, and some parietal. But that's where this space is here."



BEN HOLMES SAID:

Now you finally admit that Dr. Humes *DID* write "occipital".


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

When did I ever deny that?

Answer -- Never.

Why on Earth would I deny that Dr. James Humes wrote a word that I can see for myself in the autopsy report?

I suspect he SHOULD have written "FRONTAL" there, however. And the Humes/Boswell testimony I cited above provides some good evidence that I'm correct in that assumption, with Dr. Boswell even using that very word -- "FRONTAL" -- to describe one of the missing areas of JFK's head as he looks at an X-ray during his ARRB session. And guess what word he DIDN'T use in that testimony? Answer -- "Occipital". ....

DR. BOSWELL -- "That looks like frontal there, doesn't it? Frontal, temporal, and some parietal. But that's where this space is here."


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Hey Davey!!! You've admitted that the Autopsy Report states that the large wound, devoid of scalp and bone, extended "somewhat" into the occipital... You've admitted that the occipital is in the BACK of the head... When are you going to retract your lie and admit that the prosectors put the wound in the back of the head?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Earth to Ben (again)----

There is NO MISSING SCALP OR BONE in JFK's occipital.

Sorry. But that's the way it is---regardless of the flawed language that we find in the autopsy report on WCR Page 540.


GARRY PUFFER SAID:

Isn't it interesting that DVP thinks he can simply declare a part of the autopsy report "flawed language?"

It's not flawed, David. It's very clear and precise. We can't help that you don't like it, but you can't just decide it's "flawed."


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh really? Please point out the "absence of scalp and bone" in the occipital in any of these three items shown below. I await your logical "All three of those items are fake, Davey" retort....

JFK-Head-Wound-Photographic-Comparison.png


More here....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1045.html


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Lifton said:

David Von Pein...Do you really think that those who engineered the plan to remove Kennedy from office were so stupid that they set up a plan to shoot him in a motorcade, and to frame a “pre-selected patsy” (etc.), and yet were such dunderheads that they failed to conceive of a plan to remove bullets, much less alter wounds?  Do you not think that anyone with an IQ above room temperature might conceive of the necessity for such planning?

But you see, David, since I don't think for one second that there was a group of people out there who "engineered the plan to remove Kennedy from office", I, therefore, don't have to engage in the wild speculation that you have engaged in for the last fifty-one years about "altered wounds" and "falsified evidence" and an elaborate "sophisticated strategic deception".

In my opinion, Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, killed President Kennedy by firing three shots at him from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building. And the evidence in the case most certainly supports that basic fundamental conclusion (despite the continued protestations of conspiracy theorists).

But even if I were to take a big leap off of your unique conspiracy-slanted diving board and accept the idea that some unknown group was responsible for JFK's death, my previous "It makes no sense!" comment would still be a perfectly valid and reasonable comment. Because no sensible person who was in the process of planning--IN ADVANCE--the following two things (in tandem with each other) would have even considered for even a single moment the idea of shooting at President Kennedy from the FRONT....

1. Kill John F. Kennedy.

2. Frame Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone "patsy" for JFK's murder.


By firing any bullets into JFK's body FROM THE FRONT, the plotters have virtually guaranteed that #2 could not be accomplished (unless, that is, God Himself was part of the assassination hit team).

DVP
4/05/2017; 4:14 p.m. EDT
Mooresville, Indiana USA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

But you see, David, since I don't think for one second that there was a group of people out there who "engineered the plan to remove Kennedy from office", I, therefore, don't have to engage in the wild speculation that you have engaged in for the last fifty-one years about "altered wounds" and "falsified evidence" and an elaborate "sophisticated strategic deception".

In my opinion, Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, killed President Kennedy by firing three shots at him from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building. And the evidence in the case most certainly supports that basic fundamental conclusion (despite the continued protestations of conspiracy theorists).

But even if I were to take a big leap off of your unique conspiracy-slanted diving board and accept the idea that some unknown group was responsible for JFK's death, my previous "It makes no sense!" comment would still be a perfectly valid and reasonable comment. Because no sensible person who was in the process of planning--IN ADVANCE--the following two things (in tandem with each other) would have even considered for even a single moment the idea of shooting at President Kennedy from the FRONT....

1. Kill John F. Kennedy.

2. Frame Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone "patsy" for JFK's murder.


By firing any bullets into JFK's body FROM THE FRONT, the plotters have virtually guaranteed that #2 could not be accomplished (unless, that is, God Himself was part of the assassination hit team).

DVP
4/05/2017; 4:14 p.m. EDT
Mooresville, Indiana USA

As Paul Trejo said, the planners might not have cared about frontal shot evidence if it was their intention for Oswald to be the only guy caught out of a much larger conspiracy involving anti-Castroites.  Those who covered it up could not let that conclusion be drawn for fear of WWIII (if not the fear of discovering complicity of their own nationals).

Edited by Gerry Simone
'pro' before Castroites should be 'anti'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh really? Please point out the "absence of scalp and bone" in the occipital in any of these three items shown below. I await your logical "All three of those items are fake, Davey" retort....

JFK-Head-Wound-Photographic-Comparison.png

 

DVP,

The alleged "photograph" you reproduce is an expert retouching of the original, which shows a massive hole in the lower back right skull.

The little flap that sticks out of the right part of the skull may match that little freeze-frame which somebody cherry-picked, but it doesn't match the full Zapruder head explosion.

Please watch the video quartet presented by our own Pat Speer at www.patspeer.com and tell me what you think of Pat's theory.  I think it's brilliant.

Each video in the quartet is only about 7 minutes long, so it's not too much.  Or, you might just watch the second video in the series for an overview.

That little flap that sticks out of the right part of the skull is part of the actual wound as shown in the X-ray (when it is turned back to its normal position from the sideways position the HSCA had turned it).

Let me know!

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

17 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

jim - you mean an honest autopsy followed by alteration of the record? I can't see that as a possibility. Could you flesh that out?(no pun intended)

Paul:

 

How could it be an honest autopsy?  There were about 30 members of the military brass there, and that likely included LeMay according to Paul O'Connor and the snipped part of the AF One tapes.

I mean we know from various sources, e.g. Finck's testimony at the Shaw trial, and the HSCA review, and Jeremy Gunn's review, that there was a plethora of stuff that should have been done that was not done.  The most import  being that there was no dissection of either wound.  Therefore, there was no way to figure out directionality, and also if they were through and through wounds.  Plus there was no weighing of the brain, which is a real puzzler.  But even worse, there was no sectioning of the brain.

In Reclaiming Parkland, I spend 32 pages on the autopsy.  And I examine all of these terrible practices.   And examine all the lies that the pathologists told, and what a  farce the HSCA was.  But the two things I am most proud of are:

 1.) My exposure of the Second  Magic Bullet, due to the HSCA version of the elevated skull wound into back of the head- see pages 157-59, something almost no one here talks about.  I mean the possibility of having two magic bullets in six seconds in the same murder is so off the charts its risible.

2.) My examination of the evidence showing that the Ida Dox drawings cannot represent Kennedy's brain.  See pages 160-65.  After considering this evidence it is simply not possible.  And Stringer's testimony was the capper for me.   Plus the fact that in pummeling Horne, Bugliosi left this out.

So yes, it can be done.

And maybe people will get the title of the book right.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

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.

Cliff,

I agree with you emphatically on both points.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

24 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

DVP,

The alleged "photograph" you reproduce is an expert retouching of the original, which shows a massive hole in the lower back right skull.

Absolute nonsense, Paul. You can't prove what you just said if your life depended on it --- and you know it!

The FACT remains --- there isn't a single photo or X-ray (including the ORIGINALS, which were all seen by the HSCA) that shows ANY missing bone or scalp in the "occipital" region of President Kennedy's cranium. Not one. And the HSCA confirmed that FACT.

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to have to agree with DVP, but geeks, on this one I have to.

But I would like to ask PT:  where is there a photo which shows a massive hole in the lower back right skull?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Absolute nonsense, Paul. You can't prove what you just said if your life depended on it --- and you know it!

The FACT remains --- there isn't a single photo or X-ray (including the ORIGINALS, which were all seen by the HSCA) that shows ANY missing bone or scalp in the "occipital" region of President Kennedy's cranium. Not one. And the HSCA confirmed that FACT.

 

David Von Pein,

Puh-leeze do yourself a favor and watch the video quartet at www.PatSpeer.com.

Don't keep your mind closed.  Just tell me what you think of the videos.

They are short.   Just watch.  Then let me know.

Regards 

--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