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

[Gerry Simone]

Just now, Michael Clark said:

No need for sorry. I will admit that I haven't followed nor absorbed much about him.

Morales is one interesting dude.  After a few drinks, something might have slipped out of his mouth.

Read this fascinating bio by John Simkin => http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKmorales.htm

[Gerry Simone]

10 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

The President Has Been Shot. Charles Roberts  (p. 141) A reporter for Newsweek, Roberts was on AFI and met McGeorge Bundy at Andrews.

 

<quote on>

I remember looking at (McGeorge) Bundy because I was wondering if he had any word of what had happened in the world while we were in transit, whether this assassination was part of a plot. And he told me later that what he reported to the president during that flight back was that the whole world was stunned, but there was no evidence of a conspiracy at all.

<quote off>

Bundy first posited the Lone Assassin scenario.

Thank you for that Cliff.  I wonder if Hoover et al got their cue from Mac Bundy?  He was the President's National Security Adviser.  Very 'appropriate' for him to launch the LN scenario into action.  This would be consistent with the notion that the LN scenario was concocted to protect national security.

Edited April 8, 2017 by Gerry Simone

[Gerry Simone]

On 4/5/2017 at 5:28 PM, 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.

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

BTW, I saw that video.  Excellent stuff.  Thanks for pointing me to it.  I've also seen Pat Speer speak at Lancer twice over the years.  He also likes to talk to students of the assassination and attendees outside of the conference room.  He's real keen.

[Paul Trejo]

4 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Nice summary of "facts"?

It's been shown to Paul over and over and over again that Hoover was not the author of the Lone Nut scenario but he keeps repeating this fiction.

Why encourage him in this fabrication?

Cliff,

It has indeed been REPEATED to me over and over again that Hoover was not the author of the Lone Nut scenario -- but it has never been SHOWN with factual or logical demonstration.   You have your opinion, based on Hoover's late claim that he long suspected that Oswald had accomplices -- while at the same time pushing in government and in the press that Oswald was the Lone Nut.

To resolve this issue we must have DATES.    WHEN did Hoover first articulate an official Lone Nut position -- and WHEN did Hoover suggest that Oswald had accomplices.

That would resolve it.  Not mere REPETITION, bare insistence and a smug attitude.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

5 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

A nice summary of incriminating facts indeed, if not suspicious.  (Some info new to me).

Oswald was posthumously accused of that attempt against Walker, but there are many reasons to doubt that story.

http://22november1963.org.uk/did-lee-oswald-shoot-general-edwin-walker

The fact that Oswald goes to New Orleans to work with Ferrie at 544 Camp, which was under Banister's control, would make it more unlikely than ever that Oswald was opposed to Walker's views to have made an attempt on his life.  There's also circumstantial evidence that Oswald was a fake defector and agent-provocateur including being identified walking with David Atlee Phillips (aka Maurice Bishop) by Antonio Veciana.  Then there's the issue of Oswald being impersonated in Mexico City, which was monitored by the CIA, with the alleged disappearance of audio tapes (and I think photographs too) that were within the CIA's control.  David Ferrie knew Carlos Marcello (another Mob link), but David Ferrie being involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion cannot preclude him from being at the end of a tentacle of the CIA.

All of the latter to me says CIA connection or influence.

P.S.  BTW, here's a nice article I found on David Ferrie and his many nefarious connections.  He was also brilliant it seems.

http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/interview-david-ferrie-rick-bauer-jfks-darkest-hour/

Gerry,

Thanks for the continuing dialog.  I'm familiar with all of the objections you've raised -- since yours is the majority position, IMHO.   Yet please allow me to argue against the tide here -- since it may be interesting to you.

(This is also relevant to the theme of this thread -- namely -- why the JFK Cover-up Team was sharply different from the JFK Kill Team, and why this supports David Lifton's pre-autopsy autopsy findings.)

1.  Although I do agree with you that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) himself had politics leaning to the Right (which is in line with his career in the Marines and his working with David Ferrie at 544 Camp Street) I still maintain that LHO tried to kill General Walker.

2.  The strongest evidence comes from George De Mohrenschildt (DM) in his WC testimony but also in his 1977 manuscript, I'm a Patsy! I'm a Patsy! which he wrote before he committed suicide.

3.  George DM admitted he had a close relationship with LHO in 1962-1963, and that George used to harshly criticize General Walker to LHO.  They used to call General Walker, "General Fokker," together.

4.  George DM also named his friend, Volkmar Schmidt in this regard.   Volkmar can be found on YouTube, in a Frontline Special, admitting that he worked for a long time to get LHO to regard General Walker as another Adolf Hitler.  

5.  George DM was sometimes an informant for the CIA, also an oil geologist, also a college professor.  LHO was in thrall to George DM, and possibly hoped to get a job in the CIA if he could only impress George DM.

6.  George DM hated General Walker with a purple passion.  This is because George DM was a Russian Expatriate, who not only hated Russian Communists, but after the German Nazi's failed to help him get his family Estate back, but instead ravaged his homeland, so that in WW2 Russia was hit harder than any other nation -- George DM also hated German Nazis, and extended this to all racists and all fascists.  

7.  For George DM and Volkmar Schmidt -- General Walker was a fascist.  These two men had the ear of LHO in 1962-1963.

8.  It therefore makes some sense that a Right-winger like LHO would try to kill a Right-winger like General Walker -- if it would please a nice guy like George DM (and possibly get LHO a regular career in the CIA, which he wanted more than anything on earth).

9.  As for David Atlee Phillips (DAP), I accept the evidence that Antonio Veciana (Alpha 66) met LHO and DAP in Dallas in September 1963.  This was, I maintain, in the context of assassinating Fidel Castro.  

10.  This was also in connection with Guy Banister, David Ferrie and Interpen guys in New Orleans.  DAP was involved with them, too -- yet that was in the context of assassinating Fidel Castro.

11.  DAP wrote a manuscript, named, The AMLASH Legacy (1988) which is a novelette based loosely on his life -- in which he claims that he was one of the handlers of LHO, in the context of assassinating Fidel Castro -- and he could not explain how LHO was hijacked by some other group.

12.  As for Mexico City -- there are two 21st century classics in field today: (12.1) the Lopez Report, which is mandatory reading; and (12.2) State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) by Bill Simpich, which is a free eBook, and is also mandatory reading.

13.  Their portrait is that LHO was indeed in Mexico CIty trying to get a instant visa into Cuba based on his alleged leadership position in the FPCC which LHO argued based on his many newspaper clippings in New Orleans showing he was on radio and TV -- and a street fight -- for the FPCC.

13.1.  On at least one occasion, some CIA mole (probably David Morales) impersonated LHO over the Cuban consulate telephone calling the USSR Embassy and asking for KGB assassin Valeriy Kostikov.  

13.2.  The purpose of this telephone impersonation was to link the names of LHO and Kostikov in CIA records.

13.3.  The CIA translators knew within minutes that this was an impersonation.   The CIA high-command then knew it had to be a Mole.

13.4.  The CIA high-command started a top-secret Mole Hunt within the hour.  They changed LHO's photograph and changed his middle name to Henry in his CIA file.

13.5.  The upshot is that LHO went to Mexico City and was also impersonated there.   It isn't an either/or scenario.

13.6.  The reason for the confusion about the audio tapes and the photograph is that there was an ongoing CIA Mole Hunt involving these artifacts. 

14.  As for David Ferrie -- he was smart, but not that smart.   He was also a de-frocked priest, a dabbler in cancer research, a dabbler in hypnosis, and a minister of a mail-order Church, just like Fred Crisman -- and the two were in competition regarding the young boys they wanted to impress.  

15.  That is, David Ferrie may have been brilliant -- but he was a brilliant mind with derelictions.  

16.  David Ferrie helped Guy Banister offer legal support to Carlos Marcello in his fight for residence in the USA -- and also it is clear that Carlos Marcello gave Guy Banister tons of mafia money to support his Radical Right causes -- I maintain that Marcello left the political stuff to Guy Banister.

17.  So, none of this has CIA influence, that I can see.  DAP was outside the loop.  David Morales was an off-the-reservation Mole.  Howard Hunt confessed to his son that he was "on the sidelines" of the JFK assassination.

18.  THEREFORE -- this was a Radical Right plot.

18.1.   BTW, I invite you to read the recent book by Dr. Jeffrey Caufield entitled, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015).

19.  The JFK Kill Team was entirely Civilian (with the occasional rogue), and wanted to blame the Communists for the JFK murder.

20.  The JFK Cover-up Team was entirely US Government, and wanted to remove the Radical Right stain by using the Lone Nut theory.

21.  THEREFORE, the JFK Cover-up Team was different and even opposed to the JFK Kill Team.

22.  As for David Lifton's pre-autopsy autopsy theory -- it is best explained, IMHO, as the result of a late decision to go with a Lone Nut theory, made around 4pm EST in Washington DC, and quickly given the authority of LBJ.   This explains the botched nature of the pre-autopsy autopsy.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 9, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[Paul Brancato]

Thanks Paul - this thread was intended to be about the autopsy sham being possible evidence that the kill and coverup were done, or at least managed, by the same entity. Not intended to be a forum for your incessant theory. The fact that you wind it down by mentioning the autopsy doesn't alter the fact that you just can't help but twist every thread into a forum to push your theory. And no, it is not necessary for you to go through your entire scenario.

Edited April 9, 2017 by Paul Brancato

[Michael Clark]

4 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thanks Paul - this thread was intended to be about the autopsy sham being possible evidence that the kill and coverup were done, or at least managed, by the same entity. 

Hello Paul, In my reading of the above, we are necessarily being asked if the autopsy, or Parkland line and staff, were part of the "kill Team".

*****on second reading, the autopsy people's function could fall under "management"****

Cheers,

Michael

Edited April 9, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Paul Brancato]

Michael - Yes, but no. Not part of the kill team. To my way of viewing it, the kill and coverup are managed by a central group of conspirators. Sure, planning wasn't perfect. But I think the military control of the autopsy suggests that it was always the plan to stage a military style multiple shooter crossfire and then cover it up by controlling the evidence afterwards. The sniper's nest, the commandeering of the body, the change of venue for the autopsy, lead me to that conclusion. I don't suggest that the shooters knew the full plan. But the sniper's nest was faked and in place, the hunt for Oswald was way too clever, and likely managed by the reserve 488th military Intelligence unit in charge of the Continuity of Government bunker. I think, unlike Trejo and like Varnell, that Bundy was a central part of the conspiracy, and that the decision to blame a lone gunman was always the plan.

[Michael Clark]

8 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Michael - Yes, but no. Not part of the kill team. To my way of viewing it, the kill and coverup are managed by a central group of conspirators. Sure, planning wasn't perfect. But I think the military control of the autopsy suggests that it was always the plan to stage a military style multiple shooter crossfire and then cover it up by controlling the evidence afterwards. The sniper's nest, the commandeering of the body, the change of venue for the autopsy, lead me to that conclusion. I don't suggest that the shooters knew the full plan. But the sniper's nest was faked and in place, the hunt for Oswald was way too clever, and likely managed by the reserve 488th military Intelligence unit in charge of the Continuity of Government bunker. I think, unlike Trejo and like Varnell, that Bundy was a central part of the conspiracy, and that the decision to blame a lone gunman was always the plan.

Thanks Paul, I am getting a fuller view of your view of 11-22. One thing that seems to have a place in the above is some mention of Parkland, but it is not there.

I'll understand if it was not addressed intentionally; I have found that it is a sore spot.

Another point that just popped into my head regards the 6th floor. It is said that the floors were being re-done up there. I recall mention of Shelly being mentioned as a supervisor for that work, and other TSBD workers doing the work. That strikes me as being odd. I will keep my eyes open as I read or re-read testimony to see who says tha TSBD employees were doing floor-work on the 6th floor. I don't recall any of that sort of testimony.

Hardhats come to mind.......

Edit *** flooring crew thread...

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/23079-flooring-crew-in-tsbd/&page=2

Cheers,

Michael

Edited April 9, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Sandy Larsen]

4 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Michael - Yes, but no. Not part of the kill team. To my way of viewing it, the kill and coverup are managed by a central group of conspirators. Sure, planning wasn't perfect. But I think the military control of the autopsy suggests that it was always the plan to stage a military style multiple shooter crossfire and then cover it up by controlling the evidence afterwards. The sniper's nest, the commandeering of the body, the change of venue for the autopsy, lead me to that conclusion. I don't suggest that the shooters knew the full plan. But the sniper's nest was faked and in place, the hunt for Oswald was way too clever, and likely managed by the reserve 488th military Intelligence unit in charge of the Continuity of Government bunker. I think, unlike Trejo and like Varnell, that Bundy was a central part of the conspiracy, and that the decision to blame a lone gunman was always the plan.

Paul,

I agree that it seems that part of the assassination plot was to cover up the multiple shooter crossfire, which they did by making Oswald the patsy.

On the other hand, it seems to me that their intention wasn't to make Oswald a "lone nut." The Mexico City incident seems to have been designed to make it appears that Oswald was in cahoots with the Russians. That Oswald was under Russian control. Otherwise, why the alleged communication between Oswald and Kostikov?

This leads me to believe that a second coverup ensued... one by the government that would make Oswald a lone nut.

So far, none of this is new.

But my question is this: If the goal of the assassination plotters was to make it appear that the assassination was a Russian plot, why try to limit the blame to one shooter?? Why not allow Oswald to be caught so that the Soviet ties could be discovered, AND allow the discovery that other shooters had been involved as well? IOW, a shoot team under Soviet control or influence.

Do you (or anybody here) have any thoughts explaining this?

(BTW, it is because of this that I wonder if the Mexico City incident was a subplot concocted by an element of the main plotters. Where the intention of the main plotters was only to eliminate Kennedy and draw attention away from themselves and toward Oswald. Whereas the intention of the double-crossing subplotters was to point the blame at the Russians... their goal being a war with Russia, an invasion of Cuba, and/or wars with other communist regimes connected to Russia.)

Edited April 9, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Ron Ecker]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Michael - Yes, but no. Not part of the kill team. To my way of viewing it, the kill and coverup are managed by a central group of conspirators. Sure, planning wasn't perfect. But I think the military control of the autopsy suggests that it was always the plan to stage a military style multiple shooter crossfire and then cover it up by controlling the evidence afterwards. The sniper's nest, the commandeering of the body, the change of venue for the autopsy, lead me to that conclusion. I don't suggest that the shooters knew the full plan. But the sniper's nest was faked and in place, the hunt for Oswald was way too clever, and likely managed by the reserve 488th military Intelligence unit in charge of the Continuity of Government bunker. I think, unlike Trejo and like Varnell, that Bundy was a central part of the conspiracy, and that the decision to blame a lone gunman was always the plan.

Wow. I just have a hard time grasping how "a lone gunman was always the plan" when the same plan was to stage "a military style multiple shooter crossfire." I mean, isn't there a little disconnect there? To put it another way, that is not Occam's Razor by a long shot. Occam's Razor would be that "a military style multiple shooter crossfire" was planned to look like exactly that, "a military style multiple shooter crossfire." The only question being, who to blame it on. Well, Operation Northwoods was the logical answer. But what happened is that something went wrong, which would most logically be the capture alive of Oswald, who was supposed to be a patsy, obviously, in this "military style multiple shooter crossfire." Only one of the shooters would need to be shot dead and identified, and that was Oswald, except that someone, for whatever reason, didn't shoot him dead. Hence the lone-nut scenario went into effect while arrangements were made to silence Oswald as soon as possible. This required a sloppy, play it by the ear cover-up that included theft of the body even if it meant shooting the local coroner, a pre-autopsy autopsy however it could be arranged, topped off by a laughable government commission and a single-bullet theory. All of which succeeded because the only people they had to worry about was a bunch of gullible sheeple, for 50 plus years and counting.

 

[Michael Clark]

4 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

Wow. I just have a hard time grasping how "a lone gunman was always the plan" 

Ron, Paul said..... "to blame a lone gunman was always the plan."

[Ron Ecker]

27 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Ron, Paul said..... "to blame a lone gunman was always the plan."

And to use a military style multiple shooter crossfire to blame a lone gunman really makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

 

 

Edited April 9, 2017 by Ron Ecker

[Michael Clark]

16 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

And to use a military style multiple shooter crossfire to blame a lone gunman really makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

 

 

I though of that after I signed-off last night.

But hey, it's the plan A, B, C, D thing

 

******** edit: Paul. Here is a short thread you may be interested in

 

Edited April 10, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Cliff Varnell]

14 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

But my question is this: If the goal of the assassination plotters was to make it appear that the assassination was a Russian plot, why try to limit the blame to one shooter?? Why not allow Oswald to be caught so that the Soviet ties could be discovered, AND allow the discovery that other shooters had been involved as well? IOW, a shoot team under Soviet control or influence.

Do you (or anybody here) have any thoughts explaining this?

 

According to the Operation Northwoods playbook "irrevocable evidence of Communist complicity" was required for swift action, but a patsy captured alive -- professing his innocence -- destroyed that rationale.