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

[Steve Thomas]

3 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Steve,

I think its likely that Oswald would have been shot dead in the building by a law enforcement officer who encountered him either on an upper floor, or on the stairway coming down.

DSL

4/11/2017 8:55 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

David,

 

Shot while trying to escape. Yeah, there is that.

 

Steve Thomas

[Gerry Simone]

6 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

I would say that that was easy, no convincing necessary. She wanted out of Dallas, toute de suite.

Cheers,

Michael

And I don't think that Mrs. Kennedy was in a position to get involved in an argument.  And yes, after what happened, she probably wanted to get the hell out of "nut country" (No disrespect intended to any Texans.  I have visited several times and love the hospitality and the people.).

Edited April 11, 2017 by Gerry Simone

[Paul Trejo]

3 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Well, TIME covered the publication of  B.E. as a news story--giving it two full pages in the National Affairs section (in the January 19, 1981 issue). It ran under the title "Now, a Two-Casket Argument", a fine article by staff writer Ed Magnuson,  who wrote many TIME cover stories.  Further, I was told that B.E had a shot at becoming the cover story. (Wish it had!).  I'd be curious to know what year you finally read Best Evidence, because that's when you finally crossed the Rubicon into the world of "fraud in the evidence."  Most people cannot handle that.

DSL

4/11/2017 - 8:35 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

Now, a Two-Casket Argument -- TIME_ 1|19|81 copy.pdf

David,

When I read BE (1999) I was impressed by the number of times that you paused to consider a benign explanation for the secret pre-autopsy autopsy scenario.

Since then, apparently, you have abandoned any consideration of a benign explanation.

So I ask you -- insofar as Jim Garrison showed that Oswald was sheep-dipped in New Orleans as a Castro-loving FPCC Communist for nearly half a year (May to October 1963), how would a Communist-Oswald plot cohere with a pre-planned Lone-Nut-Oswald plot?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Gerry Simone]

5 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Ron:

Well, let me see if I can take another shot at this.

I appreciate your reply, but I think your elaboration has simply exposed further problems with your hypothesis.

Apparently, you subscribe to the view that there are multiple pro-Castro shooters located in Dealey Plaza.  In normal practice, each sniper usually has a spotter, and then, in this case, there probably also has to be a communications person.  And, in addition, and very possibly, one or more security persons protecting the  perimeter for the sniper. So, as a practical matter, each sniper would be part of a 3-person team, at least, and very likely each such position would have 5 people: again, the sniper, the spotter, a communications man, and perhaps two security persons.

Here’s the question I believe you must address: if you really believe this is a Castro ambush.  So please explain:            

     (a) your surmised locations for these different sniper teams; and

     (b) how it was arranged that they could (1) arrive at Dealey Plaza and set up their positions; and (2) shoot at the president and then (3) exit Dealey Plaza, and none of this would come to the attention of the Dallas Police or Sheriffs?

Alternatively: Are you implying that the Dallas Police Department offered protection, and then an exit strategy, for these multiple Castro ambush teams? That the Dallas Police  assisted them (somehow) so that they would remain concealed during the shooting, and then helped them get away afterwards?

    No you don't say that, but is that the implication?

So that  would be my first question - - you posit multiple (pro-Castro) sniper teams set up to shoot at Kennedy; teams that then actually do shoot at Kennedy, and murder him; and then they somehow exit Dealey Plaza under the nose(s) of the Dallas Police Department and the Dallas County Sheriff’s office, and there’s not a single trace in the record of any such activity.

Where are they located?  How come no one saw them shooting?  How did they exit?

            My second question concerns Oswald.  I don’t know what you position is on this question, but are you saying or implying that believe that Oswald was a shooter in this affair? If so, we part ways completely, because if you believe Oswald was an assassin--i.e., a pro-Castro sniper--then  you do not understand who he is, or his basic character.  He was not a fanatic at all, but a serious  admirer of Kennedy. He was quiet, and even meek.  As one of his fellow Marines once told me, he was very "Adlai Stevenson-ish."

     F inally, and perhaps most importantly, you seem to be promoting the idea that “there was no reason to cover up the fact that it was an ambush (i.e., there was no cover-up design or plan) until the arrest of Oswald.

    Oh really?

   Oswald was arrested at about 2 p.m. and brought to the police station by about 2:10.  But thirty minutes before, at least, a bullet had been placed on a Parkland Hospital stretcher that would link back to his rifle.

  No plan?

   I could cite you a lot of evidence that indicates otherwise.

   For example, according to Connally's posthumously published memoir, when he was wheeled up to surgery, a bullet dropped to the floor off his stretcher, too. (That item disappeared).

  No plan?

   But let's get more specific, and go to the first five minutes following the murder, and to the evidence on the Dallas Police tapes.

    There you will hear—within the first 5 minutes—three separate Dallas motorcycle officers radio-ing in their reports that the shots came from the Texas School  Book Depository, from the sixth floor, and finally, the third one--broadcasting at 12:37 P.M.-- actually specifies the window---the SE corner window on the sixth floor.

   No plan?

    This all unfolds in the first seven minutes; and all of this is laid out, in detail, in Chapter 14 of Best Evidence.

How do you explain this?  Do you think these DPD cycle officers were simply competent policemen doing their job?  That they all focused on the sniper’s nest at the sixth floor SE corner window, and somehow ignored all the other pro-Castro snipers you posit were present, at different locations on Dealey Plaza?  

Or: Do you believe they were deceived about the presence of the other shooters? (And if so, how?)

Alternatively, do you believe these Dallas Police officers, who made these radio transmissions pinpointing the TSBD, within the first 5-7 minutes  were part of the “supporting cast” of the pro-Castro ambush team assembled in Dealey Plaza for the murder of the President?  A "supporting cast" consisting of members of the Dallas Police Department?

Again. .  .no plan?

To wrap this up: No, I don’t think your “Castro-ambushed” Dealey Plaza theory is going to work, especially since (a) there is no evidence of the presence of other “pro-Castro” sniper teams in Dealey Plaza; and (b) I don’t see the Dallas Police Department playing a supporting role in such a major operation, one apparently designed (according to your political parameters) to support a group of pro-Castro assassins.

        Finally, my most important objection of all is your apparent belief that you can have a multiple-shooter Castro-arranged  ambush in Dallas, and that there would be no particular attempt to hide the reality of what was happening. Apparently you believe that, under such circumstances, that the Vice President would then accede to the presidency—and all of this would happen in accordance with the procedures for the presidential succession laid out in the U.S. Constitution.

    Politically, I do not think that would work.  At all.

      Essentially, you are positing that a network anchor such as Walter Cronkite would calmly tell 100 million Americans that a bunch of Castro assassins just shot the president in Dallas (and on the basis of what evidence, may I ask?); but not to worry, because Lyndon Johnson was being sworn in as president, so everything would be just fine.

     As someone we both know well would say, “That dog won’t hunt.”

I hope I have not gone to great lengths to, once again, "refute what you were not trying to say."

DSL

4/11/2017; 6:05 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

I think Ron Ecker meant an ambush involving more than one shooter, but that they didn't have to be pro-Castro; only the hope or plan that Castro would be blamed in the aftermath.

As for other shooters (and I'm sure you're aware of this), there's plenty of circumstantial evidence for multiple shooters from concealed or protected positions:

a) at the GK as well as a fake SSA to shoo people and police away;

b ) possibly from south knoll too a la Sherry Fiester;

c) TSBD 6th floor (shooters at both ends were seen by witnesses and even the HSCA confirmed a movement of boxes in the SN when Oswald had supposedly left it but before the arrival of the police or Truly, indicating that others were there)

d) Dal-Tex Building (trajectory of other bullet strikes)

e) County Records Building (trajectory of other bullet strikes)

 

Although I do concede that there could've been a plan for a lone nut from the outset, whether primary or as a contingency.

[Gerry Simone]

14 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Cliff, that is the consensus. I think all the information that I mentioned had to be coalesced and evaluated to see if it could be made to stick. As we know, there is plenty of evidence that the LN scenario is a falsehood. Some damning, undeniable piece if info could have popped-up in those few hours that would have made a conspiracy irrefutable. Also, something could have come out in the next few days to make a conspiracy irrefutable. There was always the possibility that they would have to walk that story back and work with a conspiracy scenario. The LN declaration was made in the first couple hours, but it was necessarily tentative.

Cheers,

Michael

They tried to make the LN scenario stick, but it wasn't quite a perfect fit.

[Gerry Simone]

14 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

They had plenty of irrefutable evidence!

They had bullet holes in JFK's clothes too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

They just ignored everything pointing to conspiracy.

They controlled the body, the investigators and the press.  What else did they need to make the LN stick?

Exactly.  (BTW, I liked the sequential photographic evidence in that ORJFK website.  A researcher mentor of mine presented Willis Slide #5 at least 20 years ago, that JFK's shirt cuff was visible from the rear view).

[Gerry Simone]

10 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

 

(5) THEREFORE -- to get LBJ and Jackie out of the Dallas danger-ground ASAP, the only compromise in this scenario was to insist -- forcefully  -- that the body of JFK had to fly to Washington with LBJ and Jackie (and the whole Secret Service staff) and obtain an autopsy back East.

 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Point 5 is a very plausible if not justifiable excuse, regardless of Texas State law.

Quote

(9) At about 4pm EST somebody in Washington DC, likely J. Edgar Hoover, came up with the Lone Gunman theory of the JFK assassination (says David Wrone (2001)). 

I posted a link to a letter or memo transcribing Hoover's phone call of November 24th at 4 pm about positing the LGT, which may be Wrone's source.  Another gent posted that McBundy mentions it the day before.

Cheers.

Edited April 11, 2017 by Gerry Simone

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, Gerry Simone said:

I think Ron Ecker meant an ambush involving more than one shooter, but that they didn't have to be pro-Castro; only the hope or plan that Castro would be blamed in the aftermath.

As for other shooters (and I'm sure you're aware of this), there's plenty of circumstantial evidence for multiple shooters from concealed or protected positions:

a) at the GK as well as a fake SSA to shoo people and police away;

b ) possibly from south knoll too a la Sherry Fiester;

c) TSBD 6th floor (shooters at both ends were seen by witnesses and even the HSCA confirmed a movement of boxes in the SN when Oswald had supposedly left it but before the arrival of the police or Truly, indicating that others were there)

d) Dal-Tex Building (trajectory of other bullet strikes)

e) County Records Building (trajectory of other bullet strikes)

Although I do concede that there could've been a plan for a lone nut from the outset, whether primary or as a contingency.

Gerry,

Please help me understand -- how could a Lone Nut theory of the JFK assassination ever be a planned scenario?   In what possible world would it have been a logical choice?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 11, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Michael Clark]

15 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

They had plenty of irrefutable evidence!

They had bullet holes in JFK's clothes too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

They just ignored everything pointing to conspiracy.

They controlled the body, the investigators and the press.  What else did they need to make the LN stick?

Cliff,.... I know, I know. If a bomb destroyed the limo and killed everyone in it, they still would have blamed LHO and the Magic Bullet. It's hypothetical, if something happened that did, in fact, at the time, belie the LN scenario, such that it was, in fact, at the time, abandoned...

Cheers,

Michael

[Gerry Simone]

10 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

David,

What is missing from this scenario is the Jim Garrison discovery of 544 Camp Street, and the six-month sheep-dip of LHO to make him look like an officer of the FPCC in New Orleans.

That material was intended to be exploited -- not tossed in a trash can.   (The same with the Mexico City and Kostikov connection).

One must go from 544 Camp Street to the Lone Nut scenario -- and y'all have not done that yet.

Also -- the Official Wire Service is, IMHO, too late on the chain.   It wasn't established until 11/23/1963, and they had all night to jimmy with it.

Instead, we should ask for the Local, Dallas Wire Service -- what they said minute-by-minute from 12:30 CST until 2:30 CST.

That's a special study, and would stand on its own.

There was even talk about General Walker in the local news in Dallas during the first two hours after the JFK murder.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Didn't Oswald fail at getting a VISA?  Wasn't he outraged and made a scene?  That wouldn't seem like he was working for the Soviets, but him simply being a Communist wannabe.  This still reinforces the image of the lone nut malcontent.

The Feds didn't believe it was Oswald and they didn't know for sure if it was the Soviets or Castro behind the shenanigans.

https://www.history-matters.com/frameup.htm

[Gerry Simone]

5 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

I'll venture a guess... it's a non-official term.

Commie-Cuban Attacks on the East Coast

Revised to...

Commie-Cuban assassination of the President in Dallas.

After the fact, aborted and downgraded to

A deranged, lone-nut, American, Commie Sympathizer.

 

5 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

It's my way of saying they took Operation Northwoods off the shelf and revised it. A new idea for a terrorist act (kill the president) to blame on Castro and invade Cuba.

 

That's how I understood that too, gentlemen.

[Gerry Simone]

8 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Well, TIME covered the publication of  B.E. as a news story--giving it two full pages in the National Affairs section (in the January 19, 1981 issue). It ran under the title "Now, a Two-Casket Argument", a fine article by staff writer Ed Magnuson,  who wrote many TIME cover stories.  Further, I was told that B.E had a shot at becoming the cover story. (Wish it had!).  I'd be curious to know what year you finally read Best Evidence, because that's when you finally crossed the Rubicon into the world of "fraud in the evidence."  Most people cannot handle that.

DSL

4/11/2017 - 8:35 a.m. PDT

Los Angeles, California

 

Now, a Two-Casket Argument -- TIME_ 1|19|81 copy.pdf

I read Best Evidence in the early eighties.  I think I bought the second edition too, years later.  I remember watching Marina's Story aka Fatal Deception too.  Robert Picardo (of ST Voyager fame) played David Lifton.  Never forget the ending scene on the GK of him holding hands with Marina listening to a recording of JFK's Peace Speech at American University.  I'm sure I have it on VHS somewhere.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Gerry Simone

[Paul Trejo]

3 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Didn't Oswald fail at getting a VISA?  Wasn't he outraged and made a scene?  That wouldn't seem like he was working for the Soviets, but him simply being a Communist wannabe.  This still reinforces the image of the lone nut malcontent.

The Feds didn't believe it was Oswald and they didn't know for sure if it was the Soviets or Castro behind the shenanigans.

https://www.history-matters.com/frameup.htm

Gerry,

Fair points.  It is agreed that Oswald failed to get his visa -- HOWEVER that itself was a deep, dark CIA secret until the 21st century.

(The CIA also had another story they could have used -- namely, the allegation that Oswald had tried to contact KGB assassin Valeriy Kostikov.  James Hosty actually made this the theme of his 1996 book, Assignment Oswald.)

The allegation that Oswald went to Mexico City "in order to get to Russia through Havana" was good enough for the press.   (Even though that was a lie.)

The truth is that to this very day, people in our News Media still believe that Oswald was a Communist and a supporter of Fidel Castro.   That's patent.

Oswald was thoroughly sheep-dipped to look like a Communist.  All we needed was LBJ, Hoover, Warren and Dulles to say, "CHARGE!" and Cuba would have been toast.

But they didn't.  After six months of thorough sheep-dip.  That tells me that the Lone Nut scenario was a "last minute" decision.  It was never pre-planned.  How could it be?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 11, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Gerry Simone]

53 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Gerry,

Please help me understand -- how could a Lone Nut theory of the JFK assassination ever be a planned scenario?   In what universe would it have been a logical choice?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Just as a lone wolf terrorist (not a member of ISIS but a fanatic that espouses extremist views).  IOW, Oswald was a malcontent and Communist-sympathizer.  

However, I can't rule out that Oswald was framed as the fall guy for a multi-shooter conspiracy, that was not acknowledged or promoted by LBJ and Hoover, who forced a LN scenario.

[Paul Trejo]

2 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Just as a lone wolf terrorist (not a member of ISIS but a fanatic that espouses extremist views).  IOW, Oswald was a malcontent and Communist-sympathizer.  

However, I can't rule out that Oswald was framed as the fall guy for a multi-shooter conspiracy, that was not acknowledged or promoted by LBJ and Hoover, who forced a LN scenario.

Gerry,

According to Jeff Caufield (2015) Oswald was a malcontent and Rightist ex-Marine who wanted to be a CIA double-agent.   

If Oswald was ever an actual Communist sympathizer he would have had at least one Communist contact in his social world -- but he did not.

His associates included George De Mohrenschildt, a former Baron in Eastern Europe, and Guy Banister, David Ferrie and Clay Shaw, who were Radical Rightists in New Orleans, as well as Gerry Patrick Hemming and various members of Interpen mercenaries.

Respectfully -- anybody who continues to believe that Oswald was a Communist sympathizer has simply bought the Guy Banister sheep-dip.  

Volkmar Schmidt -- who did not testify for the Warren Commission, was a young friend of George De Mohrenschildt, and knew Oswald personally.   Schmidt acknowledged that he spent a lot of time (some said hours) at a Dallas party in February 1963, to convince Oswald that General Walker was as bad as Adolf Hitler.  His motive, said Schmidt, was that Oswald was ranting against JFK's Bay of Pigs fiasco.

This was no Communist sympathizer -- just the opposite.  Yet the Red Oswald myth continues to this very day.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo