Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Lifton

Members
  • Content count

    908
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About David Lifton

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

33,761 profile views
  1. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    DVP: Filing is a problem when one has collected the large amount of material that I have. Anyway: I found the notebook that I created when I spent the time examining the Dallas Radio Station Tapes back in 1970-1972. As soon as possible, I'm going to devote some time to reviewing it, and will let everyone know what I find, and what seems pertinent to post. A companion document is a detailed inventory of 16 hours of audio excerpts that I made from the collection. DSL
  2. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    This is an exceptionally clear print, and I have re-examned it carefully. I want to withdraw my previous remarks that the cyclists were smiling. I no longer believe that to be the case. DSL 6/15/2018 - 1:35 AM PDT
  3. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    DVP: No, I don't. (But I should locate and check my "Dallas Radio Tape" notebooks, to verify. But I don't think so.). DSL
  4. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    DVP: FWIW. . Yes, it does sound like it. . . but: the document I was looking at was at least 100 pages. Some background (for you as well as those reading this) Here's what I learned, from the transmittal document(s) connected with that item. To begin with, a question: how come all of these "Dallas radio tapes" ended up at the National Archives. Surely, they played no role (at least, no discernible role) in the WC investigation. . . so. . one might ask: What is going on here?" Let me begin by asking another (closely related) question: Why did I want to review all of the Dallas radio station tapes? Very simply: because I believed there had been a significant (i.e., politically significant) conspiracy; and I felt that, if that was so, then there was a high probability that there might be (i.e., "might have been") a leak of some sort, made by this or that person, who said something significant on one of the local radio broadcasts. So, that's how my interest began. Sometime around 1969/70, I ordered the "inventory", which --as I said--ran over 100 pages (at least). Which leads to the next question: Who made this inventory? i.e., how did it come to exist? And who (and for what purpose) were all these Dallas radio tapes collected? The answer: at some point shortly after the assassination, Secret Service agents were dispatched to Dallas to collect all--and I mean "all"--of the Dallas radio station tapes. Then, those tapes had to be reviewed, as to content. Now. . who the heck was equipped to embark on such a project? Sure, the FBI could do it (i.e. "could have done it") -but it would take quite a few people, and then become a very public "matter of record." Which then leads me to recount how all this was accomplished. . . So. . .read on. HOW THE COLLECTION EFFORT WORKED. . . After the Secret Service "collected" all these tapes (and I do believe they were the original broadcast tapes, from each and every Dallas and Fort Worth area radio station), they were sent to. . .guess where? . . .Tinker Air Force Base, in Oklahoma. NEXT STEP: Tinker Air Force Base--and a complete review of the content Apparently, teams of USAF people, wearing headsets, sat at their desks, or consoles, and reviewed the contents of each and every tape. In each case, they made a "list" --or "inventory" --of the contents of each tape. Those lists, when gathered together, became the Commission Document in question--and I'm not really sure its CD 976 (because there's a second "list", which was made strictly of WFAA tapes, and made by WFAA, not the US Air Force). . . so please do check carefully. . Anyway, that document produced, let's say, 200 pages of "inventory." (N.B.: This is the "inventory" that i ordered, back around 1970, and it was large enough that I had it sent to me on 35 mm microfilm). What this inventory permitted (at the time of its creation): What this inventory permitted was for someone--some third party--to "review" the content of the hundreds of hours of radio broadcasts, without taking the trouble to personally listen to each and every one of the tapes. In other words, that part had been "delegated". So once that part was executed, these detailed lists existed. So on to the "next step": If the "reviewer" found something interesting, he (or she) could simply pull the reel in question, listen to the tape, make a transcript, or perhaps note the item, e.g., "Not important"; or perhaps "Please review" etc. OTOH: If something "important" was found--e.g., an audio-taped record of the Perry press conference--that could be pulled, reviewed, and possibly even excised from the tape, before its return. (I'm speculating here, based on what I saw, as to the purpose of what this was all about). What this smacks of: Shortly after JFK's murder, someone in "high authority" wanted to get a definitive record of the entire "audio tape record" of all the radio stations in the Dallas/Fort Worth area, looking for "something." What was the "something"? When I did my review of all this material, I speculated that it was the Perry press conference. Some time later--as in "quite a few years later"--I came up with a superior hypothesis, which I cannot disclose at this time. But I no longer think that the Clark/Perry press conference is what this humongous "collection effort" was all about. Anyway, the 100 plus pages of listed content were then turned over to the Warren Commission (or, perhaps more accurately, for I don't know the details) were sent directly to the National Archives (perhaps with an innocuous transmittal document saying "Please include this in the WC collection," or some such thing). And then, at some point (and I don't know when), the tapes (or perhaps dupes) were also sent to NARA. So that is the backstory--such as I have been able to learn--as to how and why all these many Dallas radio tapes were (a) collected and then (b) analyzed to create a detailed list as to content. NOW. . a question: who was behind all of this? (i.e., who "wanted to know" and what were they searching for?) My personal hunch (no direct evidence. . . yet): Sec Def Robert McNamara (with the full approval of RFK). Anyway, now you know the backstory. ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT ALL OF THIS. . : What's interesting about the account I have just related is this: I reviewed the Dallas Radio Tape collection thinking, "Oh my! What a good idea! I can see if any morsel of significant information may have slipped into the public record, via some interview or info broadcast locally!" . . in other words, that was my thought., And so I spent at least two weeks at NARA, reviewing all this stuff; only to come to realize --somewhat later--that "someone was here 'before me". . and that's why all these lists exist! And that's why all this audio tape was collected, in the first place!" In other words, these lists--and these audio tapes--don't exist at the U.S. National Archives ("NARA") because some good soul, out of the goodness of their heart, thought it was a nice idea to "collect" all this stuff., This material--the lists, and the audio--exist because "someone was here before me". In other words, just as I--as a civilian--was "looking for something" (i.e., accidental leaks of information), I have come to believe that this collection was created, in the first place, by someone who had a similar goal, a similar agenda; and was carrying out the complex task of (a) collection and (b) analysis with that goal in mind, and on the orders of some "higher authority." That's about all I know, and can say for certain, for now. SOME ADDITIONAL DETAIL: To do the work I did, which (as I recall, took at least 2 solid weeks, and perhaps more), I sat in the office of the NARA audio archivist, Les Waffen, with two SONY decks--one provided by NARA, on which I could play the original materials; and the other, rented by me, from an audio shop in Washington. So I arrived every day in Les's office, shortly after he did, and sat at that table for the entire day (and sometimes had lunch with Waffen) reviewing all the tapes--each and every one. Looking for any elusive "piece of data" that I might find, and only aware, towards the end, that the very collection I was searching constituted circumstantial evidence that "Hey, someone was here before me!" Also, FWIW: the only reason I was able to do all this work was that--as I recall--I was extended hospitality by the late Bernard Fensterwald, who permitted me to spend every night as a house guest in his home, at Arlington, Virginia. And still another note: It may have been --and I think it was--during this period that I spent one evening, having rented a car, going out to the home of William Greer, and spending several hours with him, engaged in what began as a gentle Q and A, but ended up in a very aggressive one-of-a -kind cross examination. And with him almost scolding me, as I left his home, saying to me in a not-so-friendly tone: "Well, I'll tell you one thing. Chief Rowley would sure be interested in knowing what you're doing!" (Another subject, another time). And finally, this little vignette. At the end of my multi-week stay with Les Waffen, I wanted to leave with a momento--an audio momento--of my time there. Les had supervisory control of a huge audio collection. He suggested that I might want an audio copy of William Jennings Bryant's "cross of gold" speech (which closed: "You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold!"), but I declined that offer when he told me of some of the other possibilities. And so I selected the US Army's official audio recording of the hanging of those convicted after the Nuremberg trial. Its a very dramatic tape, with the voice of Army radio, broadcasting from Nuremberg, describing how each convicted Nazi war criminal person ascended the gallows, how a black bag was put over his head, a rope tied around his neck, one or two proclaiming "Heil Hitler," and then "the trapdoor was sprung, and they went to their maker." * * * So much for my experiences at NARA, circa 1970/71. And perhaps some of you reading this can understand why I--and someone like Pat Valentino, to whom I related much of this--find it totally laughable that the truth of the Kennedy assassination can be found by pursuing the matter of David Ferrie or Clay Shaw. Each to his own. DSL 6/10/2018 - 6:30 PM PDT
  5. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    No. I don't think there were any such items in that collection. Sorry. DSL
  6. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    A I recall, it was within a minute or two of the shooting. And it was not a "beep" tone. It was simply someone pressing down on their mike button, and then releasing it; i.e., using it as a telegraph key. So the brief sounds transmitted was the "on" and "off" of the unmodulated carrier. (Again: no words were spoken). DSL
  7. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    The title of one of the "original" Warren Commission "CD's" (Commission Documents) reads ("Tapes of Dallas Radio Broadcasts"). You can find that entry on the NARA Warren Commission "List of Basic Source Materials", and its up in the 800 or 900 area of the list (which has about 1550 items). I requested that tape collection, and spent hours reviewing them--every single one of them. While I played the materials on "their" recorder, I had rented a second SONY 560 (or something); and had a patch chord set-up, so I could record relevant excerpts as I went along. What I remember, most clearly, were the many tapes from KRLD, and--as I recall--WBAP (I think). As stated,, I made an "excerpt tape" (and kept a detailed notebook, as I reviewed the items, one by one). I don't want to rely on recollection too much; but I do remember one that began something like this, as the motorcade left Love Field (don't hold me to every word): Announcer: Well, its a beautiful sunny day here in Dallas! And there's the gun-metal gray limousine, slowly pulling away, with the President and the First Lady and Governor and Mrs. Connally. For those of you lined up to see the President, here's the motorcade route! Lemmon to Cedar Springs, to Turtle Creek, down Harwood to Main, then on Main Street to. . . " And here's where my memory fails, or at least I don't wish to rely on it, in writing this post. But I'm 80% sure that the turn from Main to Houston, and then onto Elm was included, because I am certain that the announcer said that the motorcade would be going to the Trade Mart via Stemmons Freeway, and you can't access Stemmons (directly) from Main. So. . .that's a deduction (more or less); not a recollection. But that's my recollection - - that the announcer (the same one who enthusiastically said, when AF-1 landed, and JFK and Jackie deplaned) "And I can see his tan from here!" (not realizing, of course, that the "tan" was not a sun tan, but from Kennedy taking cortisone, for the Addison's Disease). . So he's the same one that described, as the motorcade started moving, the limo as the "gun metal gray limousine". . and then said, "And for those who weren't here at Love Field, and are waiting on the motorcade route. . :" etc. . And yes, then he described the route. DVP: If you have the KRLD radio tape, I'm pretty sure its right on that tape. DSL 6/10/18 - 4 PM PDT
  8. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    By the way, and in the spirit of an "Addendum" or Postscript to this thread, I thought I might add the following: As the 3 cycle officers who led the motorcade emerged from the Triple Underpass, a photographer--McIntyre (not sure of spelling)--was standing somewhere on a grassy island just to the west of the TU--and he snapped an important photograph. It shows the 3 cyclists leading the way, with the chaos erupting behind them--i.e., with JFK's car, Curry's vehicle and others, now racing away from Dealey Plaza, and just emerging from under the TU. If you blow up that photograph, one can get a pretty clear image of those 3 cycle cops, and the general impression that I got (and still "get") is that they are smiling broadly. Perhaps its just the sunny weather? Sure, that's possible, and yes, its possible that they are completely unaware of what's just happened; but I think (as the saying goes) a picture is worth a thousand words, and that further study is warranted. Also, on that general subject, and in the spirit of "further study," let me add this fact: if one listens to the audio of the DPD channels (I believe its DPD Channel 1, but possibly Ch. 2), within 30 seconds of the actual shooting of JFK, one of the cycle cops used the transmitter key on his radio to clearly broadcast the following, easily identifiable signal to anyone who (like myself) knows Morse code (which I did, and still do, as a ham radio operator). The signal went: "Di Di Di Daah. . . Di Di Di Daah." That's "dot-dot-dot-dash," Morse code for the letter "V" (for "Victory"), which marks the opening of Beethoven'w Fifth Symphony (FYI: Beethoven didn't know anything about Morse, he simply chose those tones to herald his musical opening). Years later--those same tones were used as the musical theme for the TV series "Victory at Sea," recounting the naval heroics of World War II. Sometime in the last year or so, I came across a document (perhaps it was an HSCA document, not sure) in which this particular audio segment (from the DPD radio) was sent to a lab for analysis, and yes, it certainly was what it sounded like., . ."dot dot dot dash", or V. My own opinion about all of this: In 1963, Dallas was a city where many thousands turned out for the noontime (and very high spirited) motorcade. And whether they agreed with JFK's policies or not, they respected him as a person, and the office of the presidency. BUT. . . there was an element in that city, and notably in the Dallas Police Department, who bought into the idea of "JFK as traitor," an element which was probably recruitable into an assassination scheme, or plot. I think that the McIntyre photograph showing the smiling cycle escort deserves to be enlarged (and the subject of close study); I also believe that that photograph, along with the unmistakable "Morse code telegraphy" should be kept in mind when considering the "atmosphere" in Dallas. Kennedy was warned not to go there; that the atmosphere was "poisonous." But he did, anyway; shrugging off such talk and relying on the Secret Service to "protect him". In doing so, neither JFK (nor Bobby) had any idea that the senior person on his security team--Roy Kellerman--would be looking at him in the rear-view mirror in the seconds leading up to the shooting, or turning around and watching him (as the car slowed) while he was shot, and not making a move to jump into the rear seat and assist. My 1965 Telephone Call to Roy Kellerman: Having studied the Zapruder frames (as published in LIFE) and amazed at Kellerman's non-response, I actually picked up the telephone, found his number via Directory Assistance, and telephoned him (this was in 1965) reaching him at his home in Maryland. At the time, I was relatively "new" to the JFK case (had recently acquired a set of the 26 Volumes of the Warren Commission, didn't know "who to trust" or "what to trust") and actually wondered whether he was seated in the car (in the right front passenger seat) or whether it might be someone else, because the photograph published in life, and his non-response, was so completely out of whack with my impression of the way a Secret Service agent was trained to behave, and it made me wonder. So I questioned him bluntly, on this issue: Was that really him, sitting on the passenger side of the front seat? Or perhaps someone else? I wasn't sure, I said, because the photo was somewhat indistinct. Yes, he assured me--in his deep voice--that was him. "Mr. Lifton," he drawled, "I take a pretty poor picture." DSL 5/10/18 - 1:25 PM PDT South Orange County, California
  9. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    Jim: Let me save the readers some time. The late Roger Feinman was an employe of CBS News. He was very smart, but erratic and somewhat unstable. While at CBS, and during the period they were making their famous four-part documentary on the Warren Report (June 1967, approx.) , he stole a number of documents from CBS files, thinking they would be important in "breaking the story" of what he viewed as perfidy on the part of CBS. Feinman was a serious (if not adoring) disciple of Sylvia Meager, and was often telling her that he would write a "definitive" book on the assassination, or on CBS, some day. "Someday" never arrived, and the only book he ever wrote was a privately published bizarre multi-hundred page vituperative diatribe about me But let me not digress. I learned about Feynman's possession of a copy of the White House copy of the CBS transcript of Dr Perry's press 11/22 press conference around 1978/79. I wanted that transcript to complete my reporting on that topic, as spelled out in Chapter 3 of B.E.:"The Throat Wound: Entrance or Exit?" So I telephoned Feinman, introduced myself, told him I was under contract writing a book, and requested his assistance, making clear that I needed that document. Feinman was vague, and meandering, but essentially refused to help. In a second (or third?) phone call I made clear how serious the situation was--that I didn't want to base my reporting of the Perry press conference, on press reports of what Perry said, when there was an official transcript, and he already had a copy! In the beginning of this dialogue, it was not clear how Feinman got "his copy" of this document, or why he was behaving so secretly; but then, as I questioned him quite directly (which he didn't like one bit), the truth emerged. Roger's copy was not really "his"; rather, he had stolen it from the files of CBS News (!). The impression I got was that he considered it "his", and was not gong to make it available. At some point, I told Feinman that if he didn't cooperate, I was going to go directly to CBS News and demand that they provide me with a copy, too. I had no intention of publishing a book with a chapter on the throat wound, and without that transcript, while he sat on "his" copy in his apartment in Queens. Somewhere along the way, he told me that the document he possessed --although it originally came from a White House file--was actually available at the LBJ Library, and that's how I obtained my copy--from the LBJ Library. FYI: Best Evidence marked the first publication of the critical verbatim excerpts from the official transcripts of the 11/22/63 Clark/Perry press conference (showing that Dr. Perry said, three times, that JFK was struck in the neck, from the front). And the publication of the critical passages from the transcript made clear that Perry's published statements that the throat wound was an entry were not the result of journalistic error--that that's what Dr. Perry actually said. No doubt Feinman was enraged when he saw that I published excerpts from "his" transcript, but. . .welcome to the real world. As to how I obtained the transcript, here's what I wrote in Chapter 3 of Best Evidence, which began with my recounting how CBS anchor Walter Cronkite had quoted from the document, without revealing its source, in one of the broadcasts of their infamous (four -part) June 1967 documentary: "Cronkite's references to "the transcript"seemed to indicate that CBS had a document which no one else seemed to have. I made a fruitless attempt to obtain the transcript from CBS in 1968. In 1976, I learned that an employee of CBS News had located the document, and knew something about its background. I contacted him and was told that CBS had secured its copy from a file at the White House in the course of interviews conducted in the course of preparing the 1967 broadcasts. it was an official White House transcript, and its designation was '1327-C' Eventually I obtained a copy from the Lyndon Jonson library in Texas." What I did not say was that the identity of the person was Roger Feinman; that he stole a copy of the document from the files at CBS News, that he was "hoarding" it; and that I found the whole situation intolerable. Also, I decided that he'd acted in such a hostile, toxic and negative way that it was best that I not mention his name at all. In the years following--and having nothing to do with Best Evidence--Feinman was fired from CBS; and in addition, and because of his outrageous behavior (in matters having nothing to do with his theft of documents from CBS)--was disbarred as a lawyer. The detailed reasons for his disbarment became a matter of public record when he appealed the disbarment, and the panel of judges who heard his case basically said, "No way, Jose. You are hereby dismissed from the legal profession." ( I can provide the Internet link(s) to that very public disbarment proceeding, and perhaps will return to this post, and add the link(s) at a future time.) So much for Roger Feinman, the acolyte of Sylvia Meager, and who subsequently became a "raging bull" when it came to the subject of DSL--making outrageous statements in his privately published manuscript, including the fact that the CIA was paying my bills and implying that I was responsible for a third party's suicide. Anyway, he's not around anymore, DiEugenio, and its interesting to see that you're part of his fan club. One other footnote to the story: Roger Feinman (somehow) arrived at the conclusion that the throat wound was an exit wound. (Yes, that's no typo; after all this fuss, Feinman concluded that the throat wound was an exit!) Which leads me to ask: Since you apparently hold him in such high esteem, Is that what you believe too, Jim DiEugenio? To those reading this post: There's not much further to say. I have no idea what DiEug is talking about when he brings up "Ralph Martin's book" or "Burger King." As I said at the outset of this post, he often brings up non-sequiturs and/or talks in gibberish. DSL; 6/10/18 - 5:30 AM PDT; updated, 12:30 PM PDT
  10. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    Jim: I find much of your writing gibberish. Its just plain illogical, and this post is a good example. Re Dr. Wecht and what I wrote about him In Best Evidence: I wrote the truth about what I found in dealing with Dr. Wecht (in August 1972, when I was asked to be his "briefer" in connection with his examination of the autopsy X-rays and photos). I spent much of the summer of 1972 --assisted by someone connected with UCLA--writig some excellent briefing books. Upon arriving in Pittsburgh, I found he had not read them. Then we flew from Pittsburgh (his residence) to Washington, D.C., To my considerable surprise (and irritation), I found that Wecht was basically a publicity hound, and, among other things, could not read the X-rays. And so he made his focus, in speaking to Fred Graham of the New York Times (an interview Hecht requested that I arrange, which I did, and most of which took place in my presence, in a taxi-cab ride from NARA back to Washington's National Airport, where he took a flight back home to Pittsburgh), the fact that the National Archives did not have JFK's brain--a fact that was already known. The result: major headlines to the effect that "the President's brain is missing!" In recounting this experience in Chapter 20 of B.E., I recounted all this carefully and accurately. Including the fact that Wecht went on to write an article that the evidence showed President Kennedy was shot twice from behind, that there was--essentially-no indication of any fraud in the evidence, etc. I ended this episode (my chapter, Ch. 20, titled "The X-rays and Photographs (Circa 1971-72)" with this sentence: "He [Wecht] was a sheep in wolf's clothing." You tell readers "Take a look at what he did to Cyril Wecht in his book. . " What did I "do" to Wecht? I'll tell you what I did: I told the truth .Wecht looked at the X-rays and photos, was basically flustered and couldn't do a blessed thing, so he resorted to a publicity stunt. He "asked for" the brain (which was not available); and so then he made a major announcement (which led to major publicity and headlines): "The President's brain is missing!" etc. Then, in the after-glow of his"missing brain" publicity: he then co-authored an article --his "definitive" take on the materials--stating that the President was shot twice from behind, there was--essentially--no evidence indicating "fraud in the evidence" etc. As I recall, it wasn't until some years later, when Dr. David Mantik obtained access to the materials, and brought in a table-top densitometer, and made critical measurements, that he was able to essentially state (re the X-rays, and particularly the head X-rays): "This stuff isn't real. Its fake." So again, that's what I did: I told the truth, as I saw it. I refused to be part of some "Wecht-Adoring" club, and play politics with the issue--especially after, as I recounted, Wecht was so incompetent he couldn't locate the entry wound on the X-rays. On that subject, and as I described in Chapter 20 of Best Evidence, I had to stand in the doorway of the examining room and tie a two knots in a piece of thread, and explain to Wecht that in order to locate the wound (on the lateral X-ray), he should place one knot on the thread (that I handed him) at the location of the external occipital protuberance, and then "swing an arc" on the X-rays, to locate the image of the entry wound--because he (at the time) misunderstood and apparently thought the "entry" would actually look like a "hole", rather than a different shading of gray. The whole thing was a farce, and when I got back to Los Angeles, I wrote a detailed report--going to 100 pages single spaced, recounting the entire experience. I never released it at the time, but I recently had it professionally retyped, and am considering different venues for publication, because I think its important, in the service of history, to understand what happened in August 1972. About CD 344, the transcript of a taped interview of Marina Oswald, on or about Sunday 11/24/63: I made the document available to everybody as part of a 300 page book that cost about $20, titled "Document Addendum to the Warren Report." All the JFK researchers bought one, word of mouth spread,and I sold about 300 copies. For reasons I don't completely understand, you come along some 20-30 years later, treat the report as some kind of "find", and perhaps are now embarrassed that I published it, in its entirety, some 50 years ago. So sorry, Jim. Most important to note, however: The two whoppers that I cited have nothing to do with Marina Oswald or that document. As already stated (in a prior post), they concerned the fact that (a) you suggested on Black Ops radio, that the explanation for "two coffins" was that on Friday night, 11/22/63, the naval ambulance stopped when it was carrying Jacqueline Kennedy and RFK (and others) from Andrews to Bethesda (and, you implied, there was a "switch" at that point). Of course that is ridiculous--insane, really--but you told that whopper to the audience as your glib "explanation" for two coffins. And then (b): Second, you told another whopper when--apparently borrowing an idea that you got from you pal, Millicent Cranor--you suggested that the reason Paul O'Connor said JFK arrived in a body bag, was the fact that, on TV, and as a consequence of the Vietnam War, there had been so many stories about people coming home in body bags--so O'Connor mistakenly said JFK arrived at Bethesda in a body bag. And yes, Jim DiEugenio, I (and/or Pat V.) accurately noted that absurdity, and yes, that that's a whopper. DSL 6/10/18 5 AM PDT; updated 12 noon.
  11. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    Short answer: No, I don't. On the subject of "who was who's spy," you may be aware that it was Marina's opinion, after she married Oswald (4/30/61), that (she came to believe) he was a spy for the U.S. She was questioned on this topic when she appeared before the House Select Committee (See HSCA Vol 2, p. 219). Also (and in connection with certain unusual (in not exceptional) expedited treatment that he received in connection with his June 1962 return to the U.S.), I believe that can be explained by the fact that, when he went to the USSR, he had a US intelligence assignment (CIA denials notwithstanding); that his prolonged stay in the USSR was not part of the original plan, and that there were important people back in the U.S. who wanted to see him back in the US as soon as possible. But no. . I don't think Marina had any secret agenda. It was Lee who had the intelligence connection(s)--and who, on one occasion or another, had a "secret agenda." DSL 6/9/2018 - 11:50 PM PDT
  12. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    Jim DiEugenio: You're repeating your usual nonsense. When first questioned by the two SS agents (Charles Kunkel and Mike Howard) she told falsehoods in a futile effort to protect her husband. But then, within days (or a few weeks at most), she in effect threw in the towel and told the truth. All this is explained, quite clearly, by Marina herself, when she testified. (That's right. . .she admitted she lied, admitted to it, under oath, to Chief Justice Warren, and then said that she would not do that again--that henceforth, she would tell the truth. And guess what: She did) So it is not Marina, but it is you who is spreading nonsense on this forum, and not paying proper attention to the historical record. And just for the record, and referring to that Secret Service document, which is a transcript of Marina's very first interview with the Secret Service at the Inn of the Six Flags in Dallas. . .: FYI: It was I who first obtained the transcripts of the Executive Sessions of the Warren Commission, plus that specific Secret Service Report to which you refer (CD 344, if memory serves), and privately published that material (in 1968, approx) as "Document Addendum to the Warren Report," selling several hundred copies to all the major researchers (at the time) and to many libraries. Yes, DiEug, some decades before you got involved in this case, I privately published the very document to which you are referring, and distributed it widely to those who were researching the JFK case. And yes, Jim: You do tell whoppers. That's your trademark, in fact. For example: Remember the one that you told on Black Ops radio?. That's when you suggested that the reason there were "two coffins" in this case, was that the naval ambulance which met the Kennedy party at Andrews Air Force Base, and left there with the Dallas coffin, and Jacqueline and Robert Kennedy, stopped en route to Bethesda Naval Hospital? (That's Whopper #1. Spreading nonsensical confusion, for no particular reason, other than to muddy the waters). Here's another (call it Whopper #2): How about your statements, on Black Ops radio, that the reason Paul O'Connor stated that JFK's body arrived at Bethesda in a body bag, was that he was confused by the news coverage of the Vietnam War, where nightly broadcasts sometimes showed U.S. casualties, in body bags. Oh sure, Jim. . So that's why O'Connor remembered the president's body as being delivered to Bethesda in a body bag, inside a shipping casket? Because he watched too much TV? (Perhaps you don't know this. . .but O'Connor was a medic in Vietnam. So perhaps you will now cite that as an "explanation" for his account? That he perhaps confused his battlefield experiences with what occurred on the night of 11/22/63 at Bethesda?) Really: Is that your idea of proper analysis and debate? Pardon my wording. . I'm trying to be polite. Yes, your "warning" notwithstanding, these are whoppers--totally false and irresponsible statements, in fact. You own them, and they're "yours"--along with a lot of the other bluster that you disseminate. DSL 6/9/18 - 8 PM PDT
  13. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    Ron: The evidence is crystal clear that Oswald ordered a rifle (under the name A. Hidell) to his PO Box, the order being dated 3/12/63. He also ordered a pistol (in mid-January 1963; the transaction with the Rose Company, in Los Angeles). Re the rifle: Marina testified that he possessed a rifle, and she certainly talked to me about it, too. (Do you think she made all of that up?) Furthermore, DeMohrenshieldt describes how, when visiting the Oswald apartment, Marina pointed to the rifle--standing upright in the closet-- and said (words to this effect): "We hardly have enough money to eat, and my foolish husband ordered a rifle." Are you aware of this evidence? (Why do you ignore it?) What bothers me is that people who are interested in this case, and who follow this thread, will follow the nonsense of DiEugenio rather than what is plainly shown in the historical record. So it is in that spirit that I ask the following questions: Please explain why you do not believe, contrary to the documentary evidence, that Oswald ordered a rifle. Separately: Please explain why you do not believe, contrary to the record, that he "possessed" a rifle (i.e., that Marina saw him with it). And finally, and throwing this into the mix "for good measure," please do explain the basis for the assertion in your post that "the whole Nixon thing was created as disinformation by Cord Meyer." Why do you not understand that Oswald did the various provocative things he did under the guidance of a third party (a "handler") and instead come up with these assorted explanations that are without any evidentiary foundation? DSL 6/9/18 - 7:45 PM PDT
  14. David Lifton

    Who changed the motorcade route?

    Hello Andrej: Thanks for your post. Its good to see someone attempting to "get beneath the surface" and try to analyze Oswald's psychology. Its not easy. I first embarked on this journey (a serious study of Oswald) around the "summer of 1982" (approx 1-1/2 years after the publication of Best Evidence); and besides studying documents (FBI reports, SS reports, loads of testimony, plus a ton of writing by journalists, and books such as McMillan's Marina and Lee), I was greatly assisted by Marina Porter (nee Marina Oswald) herself. In the aftermath of the publication of B.E.--and its best-seller status (Spring of 1981)--she contacted me, and we spoke frequently. Not once or twice, but dozens of times, over the course of many years (about 13 years). What she was saying on the phone--and the way she stood up for her husband's innocence--was so important (and sometimes, even, poetic) -- that I repeatedly urged her to go on camera and say those same things in that venue. As I recall, it wasn't until the 25th anniversary (Nov 1988, and the publication of an interview with her in the Ladies Home Journal) that the ice broke and she even considered it. Finally, in the summer of 1990, she agreed to a filmed interview. SUMMER OF 1990 - -FILMING MARINA The film maker was a friend of mine who had serious credentials and I believe it was his participation that persuaded her to do it. We met at the Adolphus Hotel, and my friend ordered up sumptuous trays of food, and did everything we could do to make her feel comfortable. The filming was done in 16mm format (quite unlike today, where just about anyone can go to Best Buy, purchase a camera, and try their hand at becoming an "instant historian.") One of the high points of that interview occurred when she volunteered--and I am quoting from memory here--that, in all truth, she wanted to make very clear that Lee "adored" President Kennedy. Some of that interview can be found on YouTube today, because I ("we") used it on 3 sequential episodes of HARDCOPY; (and some of it may have been shown, again, when the show CURRENT AFFAIR, did a full 30 minutes on Marina). THE CLOSING QUESTION OF A MULTI-HOUR INTERVIEW But for me, one of the most memorable moments occurred at the very end. As stated, our filming was done in 16mm and that meant a "reel change" every 11 minutes. When we were on what appeared to be the last film cassette, and the cameraman signaled to me that we had 1 or 2 minutes left, i tried to think of a "final question" to ask. Suddenly, an idea blossomed, and I said (again, from recollection): "Marina: If Lee could come back today, and if you could ask him a single question, what would that question be?" She paused, and thought for a few seconds, and then looked directly at the camera, in what I always thought of as a "Greta Garbo" moment, she replied: "What would I ask him? (long pause). I would ask him, 'Who are you?'" I caught it just in time; just before the film ran out. I am relating this because it captures the essence of Marina Oswald. . . i.e., Marina Oswald Porter. MARINA DIDN"T KNOW WHO LEE OSWALD "REALLY WAS" As a good friend of mine said at the time, "David. . you know her husband better than she does!" And that was--and probably still is--true. I know--without a doubt--that the autopsy was falsified--i.e., based on an altered body (and that this was "planned in advance", the central MO of the crime); but more important, I knew --in great detail--all about Lee Oswald's past, and about his character and psychology. And a most important thing to understand--and which Marina certainly did not know (or if she suspected, was just beginning to think about) --was that Lee Oswald was an actor. As George DeMohrenshildt said, "An actor in real life." Not because he was mentally unstable, or anything like that. But because ---in short--he was "on assignment" and often "in character," in the same way that an undercover agent plays a role, and can be said to be "in character." The difference with Oswald--after his June 1962 return from the U.S.S.R.--is that he was in character "all the time." He didn't go out "in the evening" to play some role. He was "on" 24/7. It was part of his job, an assignment that was explained to him, and which he thought was completely legitimate. He never said to her, "I am going to tell you what I'm doing, but you must never breath a word of it." No, not at all. He just lived his life "in character." Just how did this work? Bottom line: Lee Oswald had a handler, and that explains why he behaved (most of the time) as he did. He lived a life of pretense. But there was a serious negative side to all this: it had a destructive effect on his marriage. LEE OSWALD'S ROLE PLAYING HURT HIS MARRIAGE Marina, who knew Lee as a reasonable, normal healthy male in the USSR, suddenly started to see him in a different light; and the major turning point for Marina was the April 10, 1963 (supposed) attempt to murder Walker (which I believe was a deliberate "missed shot", and possibly involved Walker's cooperation, though on this last point, I'm not completely sure). But he came running into their apartment, breathless with excitement, and stating that he just tried to kill General walker, and--turning on the radio and listening to news reports--stated that he was so "sorry" that he "missed." Following the Walker incident--which [after JFK's assassination] Marina tried to conceal from the FBI (for about 10 days)--there followed another "theatrical performance", what the Warren Report calls the "Richard M. Nixon Incident". And following that, there was still another: the night that Lee talked about hijacking an airplane. All of this was total b.s., a total theatrical act. A serious and well-designed malicious attempt to impeach Oswald's character in the eyes of his wife; someone who would, after JFK's murder, be perhaps the most important living witness to the character of the accused. MARINA'S FRONT ROW SEAT TO LEE'S DRAMATICS Marina had a front row seat to all of this--this theatrical performance--and it had a serious effect on their marriage, and on her appraisal of the psychology and character of the person to whom she was married. In the dozens and dozens of conversations that I had with Marina--starting in the Spring of 1981, but especially in the years following-- I functioned not just as a friend, but (almost) as a "de-programmer." I had to explain--repeatedly, in lengthy conversations--what this or that did not mean what (at first) she might think it did. I kept careful records of all these conversations, and I know they had an effect. If you want to see Marina "at her best," just find the interaction she had with Tom Brokaw, a true believer in the validity of the Warren Report, and how Marina put him down handily, and closed with a statement that she hoped he could "sleep well" at night, or words to that effect. I remember the night of that broadcast: Pat Lambert telephoned afterwards, saying 'Hurray for Marina!" THE 1993 TV MOVIE: Fatal Deception When Marina sold the rights to her life story around 1992, and the producer (Bernard Safronski) and writer (Steve Bello, of "Hillside Blues" fame) were writing a screenplay, they interviewed Marina extensively and asked her who had influenced her in her changing views. Apparently, she replied that I had done so, and that's why they approached me so they could portray me (in a highly synopsized manner) in their film ("Fatal Deception: The Marina Oswald Story"). "You played a unique role," they told me. Based on my experiences, I can say with considerable confidence that DiEugenio, in this area, is peddling pure superficialities--pure garbage. This man who flaunts himself as "a well recognized authority" is spreading b.s. He got involved in all of this decades after the events occurred, was nothing but a Jim Garrison adoring newbie at the time, and continues that role today. MARINA'S AWAKENING AND THE KEY WORD: "Gaslight" Now back to Marina: Her "awakening" didn't occur until years later, it occurred gradually, and she finally "came out" and spoke her mind in a detailed interview with Myrna Blyth, Editor in Chief of the Ladies Home Journal. Titled "Marina Oswald --25 Years later," the piece was published in the November 1988 issue of the LHJ. There is one final point to be made, and it is fairly important--and that concerns the word "gaslight". The word "gaslight" comes from a famous movie film in which a husband tries (psychologically) to manipulate his wife (played by Ingrid Bergman) into thinking she is crazy, that she does not "know" her own mind, that she is imagining things. Unfortunately, in the period following his June 1962 return from Russia--and especially starting in the fall of 1962, and then accelerating in the Spring of 1963--Lee (as part of his "assignment" [he thought]) was gas-lighting his wife. And it led to considerable damage in their marriage. Lee never lived "to explain". And so, because of his behavior, she was left with a host of unresolved issues. When I met with the Director of the film (Robert Dornheim), and the writer (Bello), we discussed much of this, so he could --hopefully--fine tune the performances of the actors, and attempt to communicate, as best as one could, in the space of a TV movie, the complexities of this situation. Those readers who wish to know more about this movie - -Google "Fatal Deception" (and/or look at the IMdb data base). Those who have followed the case for years probably know the basics: Marina was played by Helena Bonham Carter, and I was portrayed by actor Robert Picardo (China Beach, Star Trek Voyager, Stargate). As is described in wikipedia (and elsewhere): It is "the story of the widow of Lee Harvey Oswald. . coming to grips with the fact that she too may have been a pawn in a giant conspiracy." Yes, it was very unusual to open TV Guide in November 1993, and see myself given second billing in a movie that was broadcast nationally via NBC. DSL 6/9/2018 - 5:15 PM PDT South Orange County, California
×