David Lifton

Re your statement: "Later in life Blakey realized he had been used." No. I don't believe Blakey was "used." I met him. He was not dumb. I talked to him, at length. Prof. Blakey was a stubborn man of limited ability who simply could not see beyond his "mob did it" hypothesis. In conversations that I had with both him(and attorney Andrew Purdy, the "Arlen Specter" of the HSCA investigation), I laid out the particulars -- that this (Dallas) was a "body-centric" plot. That the body --i.e., JFK's body, i.e., his wounds -- were altered to provide the legal basis for a false story of the crime. Two shots from behind; LHO did it, etc. Blakey simply didn't believe it --or couldn't. I do not propose to satisfactory explain why Blakey behaved (or believed) as he did. I can only report my own experience. Dealing with Robert Blakey was like trying to explain the motion of the planets to someone who didn't, or couldn't, believe in gravity. (DSL, 9/12/22, 2 AM PDT)

I had one or two detailed conversations with Robert Blakey at the time of the HSCA investigation; one, on the phone, for over an hour. Blakey had a hopelessly flawed vision of Dallas as a consequence of his "mob did it" biases -- which were more or less a fixation. (IMHO, Blakey was not "bamboozled." Rather, he was self-deceived). I found Blakey to be a very obstinate, stubborn, close-minded person when it came to Dallas. He was a prisoner of his own serious biases, and his own pet hypotheses about the mob. As a consequence, Robert Blakey squandered an important opportunity to get to the bottom of JFK's murder. DSL (9/12/22; 1:40 AM PDT)

I realize its not possible to "prove a negative", but. . . FWIW. and I knew Marina quite well for many years, there's not a chance in the world that she had any ties to Soviet intelligence. She was happy to be in America -- was super-impressed with the plethora of goods available at the supermarket, and was basically a very lovely "homebody." She was not at all superficial, but very annoyed that LHO had a rifle. And when he came running into the house one night, and said that he had "shot at Walker," she was quite frightened, and started to wonder about his mental stability. (Its too bad that Lee didn't live long enough to explain to Marina that it was "all an act" [my quotes]). By the way, and I hope this is clearly remembered by students of the JFK case, Marina said that Lee "adored" JFK. She said it once, under oath to the Warren Commission) but in obscure language. But if she had testified the way she later talked to me, she would have been a very strong "defense" witness. (DSL, 9/11/22)

FWIW: I used to believe Dan Rather's account was a slam dunk. But then I read the account he provided in a book that he wrote: (Not "The Camera Never Blinks." ) I'll have to retrieve my copy, excerpt the quote, (and present it here); but I remember thinking that it raised serious questions about my previous interpretation.

Agreed: no role to play. (At least -- none that I am aware of.) DSL

The source for this allegation is Paul K. O'Connor. I first interviewed PKO in Aug 1979. In that original interview, he mentioned nothing about Curtis LeMay being at the autopsy. As I recall, that claim wasn't first made until he became a fixture on the lecture circuit -- i.e., was invited to speak at Lancer. Only then did he modify his account to include the assertion that LeMay attended the autopsy. Based on my original telephone interview with O'Connor (Aug 1979), plus my filmed interview with him (a few months later), I would not give any credence to this claim. One other thing: It is highly unlikely that LeMay attended the autopsy for still another reason: LeMay's presence surely would have been noted in the FBI report written by SA's James Sibert & Francis O'Neill, who kept a list of who attended the autopsy. Regarding LeMay's possible foreknowledge. Like you, "I don't know." DSL

I don't know. Again, I would ask my usual question: in your view, what role did he play? DSL

Kathy: How does one donate to the Forum? Is there a postal address? Or a Paypal address? Please reply to me (privately) at dlifton@gmail.com. DSL

Michael: I agree that LeMay had the mentality you describe. Furthermore -- and on that score-- wasn't there an episode with JFK where-- rejecting some advice offered by LeMay- JFK left his presence and (thoroughly exasperated) remarked, "And they call us the civilized world." (Source, A M Schlesinger, I think). The problem -- i.e., "my problem" --with including LeMay in a plot (or in "the" plot) is that I don't see any specific role for him to play; no specific function for him to fulfill. DSL 9/5/22 - 10:40 AM PDT

I've said this before, and its worth saying again: yes, the imo stopped. I interviewed the Newmans in 1971 (or 1972(. But the best evidence can be found in the Friday evening edition of the Dallas Times Herald, O ne or more of the cycle escort said it stopped; and as researcher Tyler Newcomb pointed out years ago, I believe you can actually see one of the DPD cyclists with his foot down and firmly on the pavement. I always thought that Vince Palamara's tabulation of "car stop" witnesses was excellent. DSL

No text.

In analyzing the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11, W. Niederhut (who's field, I believe is psychiatry), starts by citing his own credentials, which include his test scores (in the physics MCAT) and his experience in tutoring undergraduates at Brown in physics. Much of this is completely irrelevant braggadocio. Next comes his theory. Niederhut treads carefully. He does not present us with his own theory about the buildings' collapse, but instead casts his (unstated, but implied) hypothesis in the form of a series of questions (scroll up, to see them in boldface font). Perhaps Niederhut is unaware of the various technical reports and published analyses which serve to address many of his questions, and to demystify some of the specifics of the collapse of the Towers. Here is an excerpt from one study, which addressed the issue of how fire led to the collapse of a floor, followed by "pancaking" of others: QUOTE ON: Collapse of the World Trade Center In September 2005, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) published the results of its investigation into the collapse. The investigators did not find anything substandard in the design of the twin towers, noting that the severity of the attacks was beyond anything experienced in buildings in the past. They determined the fires to be the main cause of the collapses, finding that sagging floors pulled inward on the perimeter columns, causing them to bow and then to buckle. Once the upper section of the building began to move downwards, a total progressive collapse was unavoidable. END QUOTE (DSL, 8/31/22; 8:45 PM PDT) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center

No Text. Sorry.

Agreed. An excellent interview. DSL (8/28/22)

To those who follow the Twin Towers tragedy: The 105th floor was the location of a wonderful restaurant -- "Windows on the World"- -where my late father took us (my Dad, my mom, and my sister) for lunch or dinner on numerous occasions. I'm sure others have posted excellent photos from that location. Sitting right next to the window was special, and somehow --by my Dad tipping the right people --we always used to end up with a window seat. 0n 9/11/2001, about 6 AM, I was in Santa Monica, and was at the cashier's stand--paying for breakfast at my local deli --when I heard radio reports of a plane crashing into one of the Twin Towers in New York. My very first reaction was way off the mark: I immediately thought of what happened in 1945, when -- while flying low in a haze of heavy fog-- a B-25 Bomber made a wrong turn in New York City and crashed into the Empire State Building. (Use Google if you wish to know much more.) But media reports on 9/11 noted the weather was crystal clear. . .so how could such an accident have happened? What the heck was going on? Then, within minutes, came reports of a second plane crash, and immediately I knew --and said so aloud: that this was "a military attack." I had no idea who was behind it. I ran back to my apartment, turned on a small TV, and watched for hours. Another memory. I often jogged along the beach, at water's edge, at night. That night's jog was memorable: It was completely dark, and there was not a plane in the sky. DSL (8/28/22 -2:25 PM PDT)

Agreed. In particular, I'm surprised (and disappointed) that Niederhut is among those who subscribe to this hypothesis (I hesitate to use the term "theory"). As for 9/11, says Niederhut, the scientific evidence for explosive demolitions of the WTC is overwhelming, (Oh pleez! --DSL); furthermore, I say that with considerable confidence (but now wait, and be prepared to take at least one aspirin before continuing): Niederhut cites his own credentials to be "a guy who used to tutor physics at an Ivy League college"! That's laughable, and a bizarre over-reach. It is the sort of statement that Bill Maher might cite at the beginning of his Friday night show ("Real Time with Bill Maher"), if he was attempting to ridicule a specious --and truly comical -- "argument from authority." If Niederhut thinks citing his high school tutoring experience as "credible" credentials in terms of properly analyzing what made the Twin Towers fall, he's either a total neophyte (when it comes to the mechanics of structures) or just awoke from a fanciful dream, sort of like Walter Mitty, and forgot to drink some strong morning coffee before posting on this forum. (DSL, 8/28/22 2:30 PM PDT).

I've been a close student of what--for years-- I have called "PAFPS" ("Post Assassination Foreign Policy Switch") -- my original "teachers" in this area being JFK researcher Ray Marcus, the original articles in Minority of One and book(s) by UC Davis Prof. Larry Berman, who invited me to speak at UC Davis. This thread is most informative, and loaded with all kinds of relevant data. The best joke --at least recently -- was DiEugenio's comment: "I guess the Domino Theory meant Domino's Pizza." As to the comparison between Los Angeles and Ho Chi Minh City, I couldn't agree more. On this point, my own realization ("OMG, its like Los Angeles!") came when watching a documentary broadcast a few years back. The night-time scenes of Ho Chi Minh City -- along with the interviews --were just beautiful, and raised the question: What the heck was this war (really) all about? I'll tell you what I think, but that's another discussion. (DSL 8/28/22 8 AM)

I realize that "contra-factual" history has its problems, but (on the question of JFK's intentions) it seems clear --to me, anyway --that JFK had no intention --none whatsoever -- of escalating the war in Vietnam (which, when JFK was alive, was simply viewed as a 'counter-insurgency" operation). The Pentagon Papers (1971) had a section of JFK's intentions; and --for me, at least --that seemed to settle the matter. So did the book written by Prof. Larry Berman, who I came to personally know. JFK articulated his intentions to close friend and advisor Kenneth O'Donnell (as well as Sec Def McNamara); and it was all spelled out in a 1964 cover story in LIFE (which then became part of O'Donnell's memoir.) I don't suppose anyone will ever come up with a document that explicitly spells out a connection between Dallas and the subsequent escalation in Vietnam; but the actual "escalation chronology" spells out the reality of what was going on. Under Secretary of State Geo. Ball spelled out the situation in his 1965 book "The Discipline of Power." Ball wrote a powerful dissenting memo to LBJ, in a last ditch effort to head off the escalation, predicting that the U.S. commitment would soon (and inexorably) reach 500,00. Ball was told --by LBJ -- "That's crazy" (or "You're crazy!") but history shows he was correct. My own experience --signing up, fall '65 I remember my own personal experience (when I registered for the draft when I turned 23 (approx). Some gung ho Army officer said, in wise-guy fashion, "Yup, sign up now and you'll soon be coming back in a body bag!" In fact --and ironically --that was the first time I had heard the term "body bag." At the time, I was employed at North American Aviation/Space Div. , the primary contractor for Project Apollo (JFK's moon program) and so was provided an "exception" to the draft. Once the war escalated, I have a vivid memory of often eating dinner -- on a Friday night, at a UCLA dorm, with Walter Cronkite (on a large TV screen) announcing to a roomful of anxious students the weekly casualties --approx. 200/week (if not more); along with the lottery numbers, which determined a student's level of risk at being called to serve. (DSL Note: last sentence edited, just now, 10/8/22_ 3 AM PDT) In retrospect, I have come to believe that LBJ was seriously self-deceived; An important negotiator (in the Senate), LBJ truly believed that he could escalate (which was akin to turning on a firehose), and then quickly negotiate a "solution" to the conflict. But that was a delusion, and did not take into account the psychology of Ho Chi Minh, for whom a unified Vietnam was his lifelong goal. The true symbol of all of this was the ultimate Paris agreement, negotiated under Nixon, which led to Saigon being renamed Ho Chi Minh City. The world of "if": I presently believe that if President Kennedy had not been murdered in Dallas, he would have negotiated a "solution" to Vietnam --resulting in one unified country. And guess what --all those hawks with their exaggerated view of the consequences, and their domino theories about future disaster, would have been proven wrong, only years earlier, and without the 58,000 American dead that resulted from LBJ's misguided policy of escalation. (DSL, 8/26/22, 4 AM PDT)

FWIW: I am the person who discovered the information about Officer Tippit being at the GLOCO station, when I was employed, as a temporary staff writer, at RAMPARTS magazine, in (appxo) July 1966. In the interest of keeping the historical record accurate, here are the relevant details. 1. I was located in San Francisco and working at Ramparts during the period July 1966 (and perhaps August). My job was to work with Ramparts editor David Welsh, and write a detailed account of the medical evidence. This we did, and our article -- published in the December 1966 issue of RAMPARTS -- was titled "The Case for Three Assassins." It was a a 30,000 word essay on the medical evidence (as it existed at the time). Our article, with many diagrams and photographs, and was also published in the UCLA Daily Bruin. 2. While at Ramparts (again, this was July or August 1966), I learned about Dallas photographer Al Volkland, and interviewed him briefly, via phone. It was he who told me all about the "Tippit--at- GLOCO station" situation. 3. I turned that information over to the late William ("Bill') Turner, who was also employed at Ramparts at the time. (We worked in little booths, that were close by; the Ramparts officers were located at 301 Broadway, in San Francisco.) All of this activity took place under the direction o RAMPARTS publisher Warren Hinckle, and senior editor Stanley Sheinbaum 4. Turner used the information I had found in the major RAMPARTS article he wrote, dated November 1966, about the JFK assassination. 5. Here is the Internet link to that article; https://www.amazon.com/Ramparts-November-Krassner-Magazine-Ginsberg/dp/B00HWUJQ9M 6. The cover for that November 1966 issue -- showing a smiling JFK cut up into many puzzle pieces, like a jig saw puzzle --was the idea (and work of) Ramparts art director, Dugald Sturmer. 7. I just checked at Amazon. That issue can be presently bought separately, and sells or about $35.8. 8. To recap: Keep in mind: The first information about "Tippit at the Gloco station" was first published in the November 1966 issue of RAMPARTS, based on the research and "investigative reporting" that I did while employed at RAMPARTS the previous July (i.e. 1966). If there are corrections needed to the above text, send me an email, and I will make any necessary modifications. DSL 7/17/22 - 4 PM PDT PS: Also note; There was nothing about Tippit-at-the-GLOCO station published in the Warren Report (published in late September 1964) because none of this information existed at that time. Again, it did not exist until July-August 1966, when I discovered it while employed at RAMPARTS. I immediately shared the information with writer (and ex-FBI agent) William Turner who was also employed at RAMPARTS, at the time). Turner included it in the RAMPARTS cover story that he wrote, and which is dated November 1966. The specific article that I co-wrote (with Ramparts editor David Welsh, about a month later); was devoted entirely to the medical evidence, and was published in the Ramparts issue dated December 1966. That writing (to repeat, "The Case for Thee Assassins") was devoted entirely to the JFK medical evidence, and made no mention of the "Tippit-at-the-Gloco station."

I've known Paul Hoch since about July 1966. For many years, Hoch has written a newsletter. ("Echoes of conspiracy." No strict publishing schedule. Approx once/month. Sometimes has useful info). Paul has filed several FOIA's. Also, he was the first to obtain the ONI file on LHO). Hoch has always been a lone nutter, but he hides behind the position that he's simply a neutral researcher, and an agnostic. In terms of changing his views, that will never happen. Should you go down that path, rest assured it would a waste of your time). DSL

Paul: You're stepping into "dangerous territory" (spoken with some humor). A few years ago, I bought several books on the subject. (FYI: The late Mary Ferrell was very interested in the subject, as I learned from the late Robert Chapman, who was also interested in the subject, and a very close friend of Mary Ferrell). As I suppose you are aware, 60 Minutes (the TV show) devoted a show (or two) to the subject some months ago. Featured were one or two Pentagon officials. The subject was taken most seriously. However, I think its a "lyric leap" to make the jump from the subject of UFOs to the notion that that has anything to do with JFK's assassination. (DSL, 7/4/22_ 8 PM PDT)

Ooops. no text.

The FBI did extensive investigation of LHO practicing with the (or "a") rifle. They also did canvassing of gun shops to determine where he might have purchased ammunition. As I recall, there were pages and pages of such reports.(Have you not examined all of the Gemberling FBI reports?) The evidence that LHO ordered a rifle (in March 1963) was found in the microfilmed business records of Klein's Dept. Store, in Chicago. N.B.: the correct spelling of the abbreviation of "etcetera" is "etc." (not "ect."). N.B. (2) I am unaware of any evidence that LHO had any rifle cleaning equipment.

Re: "Shanklin was the big boss in Dallas." Yes; that's true. Specifically, and using FBI terminology: Shanklin's position was designated --officially -- the "SAIC" of the FBI's Dallas Field Office. ("SAIC" stands for "Special Agent in Charge,") Shanklin's top assistant, who was delegated responsibility for handling the "Oswald" investigation, was Robert Gemberling (who was designated "ASAIC" ("Assistant to the SAIC", pronounced "Aye -Sack). That is why, when navigating the voluminous FBI records -- you will find them all categorized as "Gemberling" reports. One other "filing fact" to keep in mind: the Gemberling report (FBI) volumes fell into two categories: "Oswald" and "Non-Oswald" (as I recall). Most -- or much -- of what was labeled "Oswald" became the basis for the "essential" info in the WCR (or the 26volumes). Much of the "Non-Oswald" material was simply sent to the National Archives. Some of it (the "non-Oswald" stuff) was laid out in the "Speculations and Rumors" Appendix to the Warren Report. (Appendix 13, as I recall). Furthermore: when it came to "Speculation and Rumors," nothing was off limits and some of it was truly bizarre; and all of it seemed designed to reinforce (or promote) the idea that the FBI "had left no stone unturned" (my quotes). For example (and if memory serves): I remember one allegation --which the FBI then duly investigated: the source insisted he saw Oswald and Ruby at a State Fair, in Tupelo, Mississippi --with one playing the role of a clown, and the other being part of some two-person clown act. The FBI agent (or likely two of them) had to take the time to sit down, conduct the requisite interviews, and write up such nonsense, on the standard FBI 302 forms. (Really. You can find these reports somewhere in the WC's 26 volumes). Another FBI exhibit I shall never forget: upon first opening my copy of the Warren Report, there was one page with a carefully drawn exhibit: "Diagram of a hair." Really! "Diagram of a hair"! The general impression given: the FBI had paid serious attention to detail. What I have just described took place mostly in 1965 and the first half of 1966. Matters took a much more serious turn (for me) in mid-Oct 1966, when -- shortly after the FBI 302 report of the two agents present at the autopsy (James Sibert and Francis O'Neill) was released, I discovered the startling passage (on page three of their FBI report) describing what happened at the outset of the Bethesda autopsy: that when JFK's body was unwrapped, it was "apparent" that there had been -- as in "already had been" --"surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull." What happened next? See Best Evidence, Chapters 9 and beyond, for the rest of that story. (DSL, 6/26/22, 12:05 AM PDT)

Thanks. I had not made the connection with Fritz's behavior towards Frazier. But now I see why Frazier may have been quite fearful of Fritz. On that score, here's another factoid: If memory serves, I recall FBI interviews -- (source, the Gemberling reports, and possibly under the sub-section "Alleged Rifle Practice", which sometimes appeared in those reports) -- which described Oswald engaged in alleged rifle practice. Either at a rifle range or some other location. Now here's why I am writing this post: in those FBI reports, rifles (plural) were being passed over a fence (and then fired); so another person was involved. Most important, the FBI witness to this event stated that the second person was named "Frazier." (Really! The name "Frazier" was actually recalled.) A lot of this material is now available at the Mary Ferrell Foundation, and name indexes can be used to locate these FBI pages. If those few pages of FBI reports can be located, and if my recollection(s) are reasonably accurate, the inference to be drawn (i.e., intended to be drawn) was to be that --perhaps --Frazier was with Oswald on one (or more) occasions when Oswald engaged in rifle practice. If so, that might explain his serious fear of being "connected" with Oswald, in a more incriminating context. In other words, the source of Frazier's concern(s) wasn't just a matter of "driving to work with Oswald"; Frazier may have accompanied Oswald on an occasion when Oswald was engaged in rifle practice. (DSL, 6/22/22- 6 AM) P.S. For the record: I believe LHO was the pre-selected patsy in the JFK affair; and that if he did in fact engage in rifle practice, the purpose was to spoof up his image as a "dangerous" assassin. Let me put it another way: if Oswald did order a (or "the") rifle, and if this was part of the Dallas set-up, it would make no sense if there was no evidence of Oswald having actually used the rifle. Shown some competence, etc. Which brings us to another subject. . . RIFLE PRACTICE. As those who have studied all the FBI reports (and Dallas Morning News accounts) may be aware, there were not only accounts of Oswald practicing at a rifle range (and also at a Trinity River "riverbed" location), there was also the matter of his behavior at the rifle range: "wild-firing" at another person's target. (How's that for creating a hard-to-forget scene?) (Some of this was captured in interviews in Mark Lane's film). Finally, there's the matter of Oswald's expended shells. As I recall, the FBI collected quite a few shells, but there was no firing pin match -- which suggested to me that "Yes, it was Oswald," but Oswald may have had access to another rifle. (DSL 6/22/22 - 6:30 AM).