Rick McTague

7 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

Rick,

How did you get to that spot where you took the picture? I've been to DP once, in 1990, and wanted to explore that area by walking from the north knoll, but the way was fenced off. The railroad tracks weren't fenced off, but there was a closed gate and fencing along the railing of the overpass, and I guess I didn't try to venture onto the tracks. (I'm trying to remember exactly how it was and what I did almost 30 years later, but it was frustrating not to go where I wanted to go.)

 

  

It's all open now; I just walked from the parking lot at the west end of the north knoll and started across the overpass.  You can easily walk across it today which is what I did.  I go there about every 3 months or so since I live a ways north.  I try to go on a Friday, get there about 11:30, eat at a diner close to DP then just walk around, starting on the overpass.  

34 minutes ago, Greg Wagner said:

Great photo, Rick. Thanks for posting that. I was never convinced of a gunman on the South Koll until I read Sherry's book a couple years ago. She makes a strong case for it and I now consider it a very real possibility.

Greg,

You are very welcome.  Here are a couple more pics. 

This one is from the very southernmost end of the overpass.  Seems to be too far south for it to work. 

This next pic is moving a little north from the end of the overpass,  Still not the right angle but getting closer.  At the far left lower corner, you can see right where James Tague was standing, that little spot of concrete. Where I'm standing there is a decorative column (visible at the left) where someone could stand and hide a rifle where no one else could see it from the opposite end of the overpass where SE Holland and the other railroad workers were located.

It wasn't until I moved to about 20' (in my first pic) that the angles lined up.  Getting on site really gives a good perspective; DP is much much smaller in person than it seems in pictures and film.

Hope this helps!

3 hours ago, Paz Marverde said:

I found this astonishingly well written 

Paz, 

I appreciate your posts.  To give a little context on the trajectory of a bullet "through and through" the windshield from front to back and angling from midline towards JFK's right as Milicent explains, here is a pic I took back in February from about 20' from the south end of the triple overpass, standing right over where James Tague stood (the concrete divider between Main and Commerce).

The two maroon cars in the center lane of Elm are over the two X's painted; the rear car is over where they claim JFK was shot first, where the front throat shot hit him.

FYI the maroon car in the front is over the X where he was hit in the head; it also shows a trajectory from this same location to the right temple hairline entry (as he was leaning towards his left into Jackie) towards the back right part of the head for exit, like the Parkland folks saw it.

I think this is where Sherry Fiester tracked those two wounds as well.

Hope this helps!

Rick 

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Rick,

The Oswald Project was not established to assassinate JFK.  It was designed to give a Russian-speaking kid an American identity so he could travel to the USSR and pretend he didn't understand the Russian language.  This is exactly what happened years before the assassination of JFK.

The Harvey and Lee project became entangled in the Kennedy assassination probably beginning in the summer of 1963, or a little earlier.

Jim,

So H&L was a one-off project?  Or were there other sets of doubles, maybe tied with the intelligence operation of fake ex-military defectors to Russia?

The planning, preparation and execution of such a complex project makes me think they wouldn't use it one time, but that there would be additional sets running around.  Any research on this?

Thanks

41 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

DJ,

As you indicate, and according to Wikipedia as well, Truman signed the National Security Act, which created the CIA, in 1947. But note that the Wikipedia article further states, “In 1949 [Lawrence] Houston helped to draft the Central Intelligence Agency Act (Public law 81-110), which authorized the agency to use confidential fiscal and administrative procedures, and exempted it from most limitations on the use of Federal funds. It also exempted the CIA from having to disclose its "organization, functions, officials, titles, salaries, or numbers of personnel employed."

It sounds like the CIA didn’t get it’s real covert teeth until that 1949 law.

Now, let’s look at Marguerite….  

She quickly spent her tiny (or non-existent) funds obtained after the death of her husband, Robert E. Lee Oswald in 1939, and by the WWII years was so destitute she couldn’t keep her children.  But then, in 1947, she suddenly had enough money to purchase 101 San Saba in Benbrook in her own name.  Just a year later, she purchased a second him in her own name at 7408 Ewing in Fort Worth, and, in 1951, yet another house at 4833 Birchman in Fort Worth.

I think Marguerite’s money most likely came from a deal she made with U.S. Intel, but it probably started with a precursor to the CIA. CIA funding from the start is not totally impossible, I guess, but the Agency just sounded pretty immature during 1947 and 1948, when Marguerite suddenly was able to purchase two houses in her own name. 
 

Jim,

Greetings.  I follow your thorough and well-referenced work from afar and had a quick question on the CIA planning of the 2 Oswalds.  How could they (CIA planners of the two Oswalds project) know as far back as the 40's that they would need to create the two families?  I mean, from this side of history we can look back as you and Mr. Armstrong have done to piece it all together.  But from the viewpoint of planning and executing to set up the two Oswalds to converge at the events in Dallas in 1963, how could they have known even in the late 50's that they would need to have two Oswalds and take steps to set that up before JFK was even running for president?

If a "set up double patsies in case we need them in the future" CIA project existed, shouldn't there have been more than just the one set of two Oswalds?  I mean, wouldn't they have established additional double sets of other people to be used for various purposes?  Are there other cases of the CIA doing this?

I appreciate in advance your consideration.

Rick

12 hours ago, David Andrews said:

I'd believe the wrist/throat thing if Connally had been hit in the left wrist, but it seems to me that he's swatting with his hat, pointlessly and irrationally, at a very near miss that buzzed past him on his left, hitting Kennedy.

What kind of Texan was Connally?  A stump politician used to swatting at insects with that hat.  It was muscle memory, as if he'd been surprised by a big, nasty bee.  Get outta my car, you!

He can't make that motion or hang onto his hat with a broken right wrist.  Plus his attention would be focused in  that direction.

I think he's sensed that there was a previous shot into the limo interior, and the near-miss has proved it for him.

David,

Gov. Connally is reacting to the 2nd shot to enter the limo: the frontal shot that hit Kennedy in the throat.  The first shot into the limo hit Kennedy in the back and didn't penetrate; it did cause JFK to say, "My God, I'm hit!" according to Kellerman. 

And of course, these 2 shots were #2 and #3 overall, since the first shot missed entirely and hit the curb that wounded James Tague.  Then came the shots that hit Connally - part of the "flurry of shots" again by Kellerman.

If the SBT is true, how could JFK speak after the bullet tore through his throat?

Rick

On 2/27/2017 at 9:19 AM, James DiEugenio said:

What he says at the 37:00 mark is very important about the whole Vietnam issue.

When McNamara and Taylor made their journey to Saigon in late September of 1963, Kennedy did not even allow them to write their own report about what they observed.  The whole time they were there, back in Washington, Krulak and Prouty were working on the report under the supervision of Bobby Kennedy, per the instructions of JFK.  (John Newman, JFK and Vietnam, p. 401)

This is how determined JFK was to control the results of what why were going to say about the conditions in Vietnam. The report was being written by people who were not even there, but in Washington. (Ibid, p. 416)  It was given to Taylor and McNamara in Hawaii rebound in leather covers. This happened because JFK was  determined to base the change in policy upon this resultant report.  That new policy was, of course, NSAM 263.  (ibid, p. 401)  In fact, Kennedy made this the second conclusion of the report.  That America should be able to withdraw by 1965 since the military campaign was going well. And this withdrawal would begin with the removal of a thousand men at the end of that calendar year. (ibid, p. 402)

Kennedy then rammed the report and the NSAM through a meeting of his advisors and told McNamara to announce it to the press.  But before he did, JFK shouted at him, "And tell them that means all of the helicopter pilots too." (p. 407)

IMO, this is one of the most important pieces of evidence about Kennedy's intent to withdraw from Vietnam. He was now taking unilateral control over the information his advisors were getting in order to impress his own views on them.  And most of them did not know that. (Although McNamara and Taylor had to.)

Think this will be in the PBS documentary?  

James,

In watching this just now, the connection he makes between the withdrawal in Vietnam and the fact that only covert CIA operatives were there - and had been since 1965 - was his first major step in disabling the operations of the CIA, on his way to splintering it into a thousand pieces and scattering it to the winds.  Other countries where they were operating would have followed as well, effectively dismantling the operations side of the CIA for good.

The withdrawal of troops from Vietnam was the withdrawal of CIA personnel - not formal military personnel - from Vietnam.  

Sorry if I'm stating the obvious here but that was a revelation to me.

Thanks

Rick

WH petition to release the remaining JFK assassination documents now as required by law.

13 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

In fact, it seems that not only Billy Lovelady is on steps in Darnell but also, not surprising, Bill Shelley. Bill Shelley stands at the spot on the top landing which he also occupied in Altgens6 and Wiegman film. The lady wearing a dark headscarf appears to stand as if talking while the lady wearing a white headscarf is moving continuously up the steps over successive frames in Darnell. 

Andrej,

In the interest of making a complete picture, I was curious if you wanted to update this fine graphic with Carl Jones, the African-American gentleman seen in Altgens6 directly below and in front of Billy Lovelady?

Robin had an earlier thread that revealed it was Carl Edward Jones whose side profile is shown.  

Hope this helps.

Rick 

7 minutes ago, Rick McTague said:

Thank you!

Actually, reading that post, Robin's conclusion is that it was Carl Jones.

25 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

 

The Black man's name is ROY LEWIS.

Credit: Robin Unger

 

--  TG

 

Thank you!

5 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Rick,

That African American is much closer to the camera that the people on the steps.

--  TG

True of the female African Americans, but the male's head is behind the left hand column of the alcove of the building, right?  You only see like 2/3 of his head.

54 minutes ago, Robin Unger said:

 

In Altgens 6, there is a figure of an African-American male's head facing east directly in front of Shelley, behind the front of the building, in the alcove area, at his chest level.  Where is that person in the lower screen shot showing PM, and in the color picture Andrej posted?

Thanks

Rick

Howdy!

Hey I live here in north Texas, and I was curious if anyone would be interested in joining a group of EF folks in a walkabout in Dealey Plaza some Friday around lunchtime (seems appropriate).

You can PM me and we could post some potential dates before it gets too dang hot.  It would be nice to meet other EF members in person.

Just a chance to get on site and understand the true scale, position and environment of this pivotal event.  Nothing formal, just some interested folks checking out the grounds.

Thanks,

Rick

5 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

One of Oswald's three bullets entered the President's head near the bottom of his skull, and also four inches higher.

A second bullet entered the base of the President's neck, and also several inches lower in his back, exited an entrance wound in his throat, struck Governor Connally's back, broke a rib bone, exited his chest, broke two bones in his right wrist, became embedded in thigh bone, and finally fell out onto the gurney of a little boy in Parkland Memorial Hospital.

A third bullet missed entirely, striking a tree limb which separated the jacket from the lead core, and the core traveled on to strike pavement near James Tague, a motorcade bystander who was slightly wounded by concrete splatter. (I'm actually a little uneasy about this explanation, but if Gerald Posner claims its true, who am I to argue?)  Now here's where you have to pay close attention....

 

1

Jim,

It is important to note that the round that entered JFK's head was a frangible round, designed to disintegrate on penetration.  The other 2 were full metal jacket rounds, designed to penetrate, maintain shape, and continue penetrating.  I just can't get past the improbability of a single assassin loading 2 types of ammunition in the partially loaded clip.  

Thoughts?

Rick

12 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

He may have been a pragmatic "good citizen".  Make some money (nothing wrong with that, in my humble opinion), and make sure it gets developed before it can "up and mysteriously disappear."

--  TG

Or before one of the counterfeit SS agents using actual SS IDs (probably stolen at the nightclub where the SS was partying until early in the morning) could demand the film from him ala Arnold near Zapruder on the grassy knoll.

Steve,

In addition to the live round (#4 of 4 total rounds) with no fingerprints are these two factors:

1. Different types of bullets.  Shots #1 and #2 were full metal jacket rounds that penetrate and keep on going.  1 miss and 1 the magic bullet that caused 7 wounds in two men and wound up in near pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland (CE366).  Shot #3 was a frangible round that hit JFK in the head and exploded into many tiny fragments.  Then #4, another FMJ round left in the rifle.

2. An incompletely loaded magazine.  The MC clip holds 6 rounds yet only 4 were loaded.

These two factors make it improbable, in my opinion, that the only shots fired at JFK happened as the WC report said.  Who loads different types of rounds, in reverse order of intended targets?  Who partially loads a clip when they are intending to assassinate the president?

Thanks

Rick

21 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Rick,

I read that the Dallas coffin got busted en route.  So you have to ask yourself - big deal?  This is how Lifton has made his case for the thrumming copter theory. For example, and I know this is not going to answer your "switched coffins" concern 100%, but he does this throughout his writings.  Burkley, Kennedy's doctor, said he was with the coffin the entire time.

Undeterred, Lifton will then go to another source to "prove" Burkley was wrong.

I'm putting this here because there's another thread about the thrumming copter theory. I think this, too, is important info to consider about the scalpels at the ready theory that's Lifton's.

 

 

Michael,

Thank you for answering my Q about the two types of caskets.  I also recall that the Dallas casket had to be modified to get it to fit into AF1. 

What is your take on the Bethesda staff receiving JFK's body in a body bag vs. wrapped in sheets as it left Parkland? 

In addition, I'm curious to hear your perspective on JFK's body being in the morgue having photographs / x-rays taken well before the Navy ambulance with the bronze casket arrived at the front of Bethesda?  The x-ray technician was carrying films to be developed when he saw Jackie and the others come in the front door.  To me, this is evidence that JFK was not in the bronze casket that left Andrews.  What do you think?

Thanks much,

Rick

8 hours ago, David Lifton said:

Rick McTague:

I see that you are a relative newcomer to this forum, and that you seem to be interested in the matter of the arrival of more than one casket at Bethesda on the night of 11/22/63, each of which supposedly contained JFK's body, but --in fact--only the first actually did.  The second was empty.  Then there followed some rigmarole in which the second casket (the Dallas asket, which was empty) was "loaded" with JFK's body, brought outside, and brought back in (under the watchful eye of the honor guard) in order to conceal the fact that the body had been intercepted in the first place.  I called this "three entries of two caskets" and the situation in treated in considerable detail, and with appropriate timelines, in Chapter 25 of Best Evidence.  That chapter is titled "The Lake County Informant"--the "informant" being Dennis David (who died recently) and whose account, if true (and I am certain that it is ) establishes that the coffin in the Naval ambulance that arrived at 6:53/6:55 PM at the front of Bethesda Naval Hospital. was empty. Why? Because Dennis David had already witnessed the true arrival of the body, some 20 minutes before, in a black hearse, and in a shipping casket. (This was later corroborated by the discovery of the Boyajian document, which indicates that the body was delivered to the Bethesda morgue at 6:35 PM).

The discovery of this situation was truly remarkable, and marked a major turning point in my JFK research.  I interviewed Dennis David on July 2, 1979--and you can read what he told me. verbatim, in Chapter 25. Then, about two weeks later, the HSCA report was released, and there was the statement --in Appendix Volume 7 (devoted to the medical evidence) --that JFK's body arrived in a body bag (!). That led to my  interviewing Paul O"Connor on 8/25/79.  The combination was dynamite and that led to a meeting with the top people at Macmillan (my publisher) and that led to agreement--in effect--to a lengthening of the  book, and to a changed due  date.

Meanwhile, I had to contend with another "research" issue:  when?  When was the body removed from the original Dallas coffin?

 

THE "WHEN AND WHERE" PROBLEM

Within an hour of getting off the phone with Dennis David, I knew that the President's body must have been removed, from the Dallas coffin, prior to takeoff.  This was obvious because, just from studying the time line of events, the following proposition was crystal clear; "An empty coffin at the Bethesda front entrance meant an empty coffin upon take-off in Dallas."  See Chapter 25 of B.E., where this is all spelled out, just as I experienced it. The logic is airtight: the question was: when could the body have been removed from the coffin (i.e., when, "before take-off") could that have occurred?

I was well aware of the dispute over the circumstances of the LBJ swearing in--with Lyndon saying "Bobby told me I should be sworn in before take-off" ( and so that was the reason the take-off was delayed); and Bobby denying any such instruction.  And so, from the beginning, I focused on the swearing in, with all those people being drawn towards the area with LBJ, at the time this covert removal must have occurred.

This turned out to be incorrect, but that's the way it appeared to me, initially.

THE PRESENTATION IN BEST EVIDENCE

And I presented it that way in Best Evidence, which, by the way, was not reviewed by TIME, but instead, in a break with standard procedure, the publication of my book was covered as a news story --two full pages splashed across the National Affairs section of TIME, January 19 1981. (Furthermore, there had been serious consideration at TIME of buying first serial rights--i.e., and publishing it in TIME, as series of magazine articles).

But. . 

The "but" is that within a month of publication, General Godfrey McHugh wrote a letter to TIME Magazine saying, in effect, "This coudn't have happened, the way the author states it did. Why? Because I was there, in the tail compartment, the whole time. I never left! And no one took the body out of the coffin."

I respected Godfrey McHugh, having spoken to him twice, in lengthy conversations, in connection with the researching and writing of Best Evidence.

So . . what to do about this?

WHAT WILLIAM MANCHESTER SAID ABOUT McHUGH:

When I conulted Manchester's The Death of a President, he painted a picture of McHugh so upset by the delayed departure, that he was constantly leaving the area, at the back, and going to the front, and to the pilot's cabin, wanting to know what the delay in the take-off was all about?  Manchester paints a picture of McHugh as so upset that if that plane didn't take off soon, he would fly it! (He was an Air Force Brigidair General).

Anyway this is where matters stood by about February 1, 1981.  This event, the removal of JFK's body from the Dallas asket --which was dictated by the aw of the arrivals of the two ambulances at Bethesda, later that day, a logic which made clear that the body was no longer in the Dallas casket---must have occurred during the swearing in.  Because there was no other time that Jackie wasn't with the casket.

Or so I thought. . .

Now flash-forward to the summer of 1984. .. I was  back in Los Angeles (I was living in New Jersey at the time) and was up at the UCLA campus.  It was a beautiful bright sunny day, and I was walking across the campus,  and suddenly, I had this very important insight: the swearing in of LBJ was NOT the only time that the Kennedy party was separate from the casket.

That was an incorrect statement, and I could hardly believe that I had made such an error.

The Other Time Period (when Jackie wasn't with the casket)

The "other" time period was when the cream colored ambulance from Parkland had first arrived, and Jacqueline and others congregated on the tarmac on the port side of Air Force One.  As photographed by Cecil Stoughton, a group of SS agents, led by senior agent Roy Kellerman, carried the Dallas coffin up the stairs, and into the tail compartment.  Then they had to turn left, which caused the coffin to be lost from sight, and there was activity of supposedly "securing" it against the wall of the airplane. So that took a bit of time; not much, but some additional seconds.

It as during this period that Kellerman (et al) were with the coffin, in the tail compartment, while Jacqueline Kennedy, and others, were down on the tarmac. There is no "Zapruder film" of Jacqueline Kennedy's ascension up the steps, but it was not immediate.  There was a small time interval.

Most important: That was the only "other" period.

MY OWN INFERENCE FROM THIS "NEW" DATA

It was during that period, that Kellerman (and others) opened the coffin, and hustled the body across to the starboard side of the aircraft, and to the rear starboard door --actually a "half-door"-- and off the plane.

That was just a hypothesis (at the outset of this reevaluation, in the summer of 1984); but then, in the years following, I found more evidence - -evidence of a forklift truck being utilized on the starboard side of AF-1. It was even better than that: a witness who saw something being offloaded or onloaded via the forklift.

I'l have much more to say about all this in Final Charade, but rest assured that, with certain additional evidence, the conclusion I have reached is found: JFK's body was removed from Air Force One between the time Kellerman was at the top of those rear port stairs, and the time that Jacqueline Kennedy (and others) ascended those same stairs,  entered the tail compartment, and took their seats, assuming an immediate takeoff--which, as is now known, did not occur  At least not immediately.  Because as the Kennedy party soon found out, Lyndon Johnson was aboard what they viewed as "their" airplane, and was now telling Kenneth O'Donnell and Larry O'Brien that there had to be a delay, because he had to be sworn in.  And why? Because, said LBJ, Bobby told him that he must do that.

There is additional detail about what occurred, and when, etc.  The bottom line: JFK 's body was removed via the rear starboard door, and it ended up in the forward luggage compartment.

More later.

Well, there is one other thing that I'd like to mention, something that I believe I wrote about back in 1982, when the first paperback edition of Best Evidence was published.

IMPLICATIONS OF A BODY-CENTRIC PLOT

The only reason that Kellerman (et al) were able to act so quickly (with regards to the body) is that, from the outset, this was a body-centric plot.  I used this phrase in describing the basic structure of the JFK murder plot, in my talk at Bismarck State College in November 2013 (Google: David Lifton Bismarck, for a video).  From the outset, there was a "twin focus" if you will: (a) to murder the President and then (b) to alter the body (retrieve bullets, and alter wounds)so as  to lay the groundwork for a false autopsy, one designed to "doctor the bod" so as to change the basic facts of the shooting, and incriminate a pre-selected patsy.

However, the plan didn't work as intended--and a major problem developed when Governor Connally was unexpectedly shot.  This not only led to major confusion, but a serious malfunction in the original plan, and much of which then occurred was sheer improvisation --i.e., was done "ad hoc" (as they say in Latin).  First of all, there was now an extra "body"--and Gov JC wasn't dead.  But whether he lived or died, the true circumstances of how he was shot would have to be falsified.  And there was still another complication to Gov JC having been shot: had he not been shot, and if there were complications with getting JFK's body out of the state without an autopsy, the Governor (a close and lifelong friend of LBJ) could probably be relied upon to issue an executive order going along with such a request. But once shot seriously (as he was), it was hardly possible for an aide to show up in his Operating Room, clipboard in hand, and say, "Governor, would you mind signing this? They want to take the President's body out of Texas, without an autopsy."  And that's just one of several problems.  So many things happened after the shooting of JC that were strictly ad hoc; and --in Final Charade--I hope that there will be sufficient evidence to peruade the reader that this was a plot that was "elegant in conception, but bungled in execution."

I bring up this subject not only because I have written about it before, publicly (but probably not at this length, and with such specificity); but because unless one understands the basic concept (and implications) of this being a "body-centric" plot, it is difficult to comprehend how, upon reaching Love Field, anyone would be prepared to remove JFK's body  from the Dallas casket, in order to change its condition so as to harmonize with some pre-conceived scenario.

DSL

3/15/2018 - 3 AM PDT; edited, 5:35 AM PDT

Orange County, California

Mr. Lifton,

Thank you for replying with such clarity and details to my questions to Michael Walton regarding the hard evidence of multiple caskets / entries / conditions of JFK's body at Bethesda compared to Parkland.  I would still like to get his reply on how he views this evidence, leaving out for the moment the "why" and "how" questions for the moment. 

MW, just focusing on this alone, what is your take on the multiple caskets / entries / conditions of (meaning the wrappings vs. body bag) JFK's body?

Thanks

Rick

58 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

People get their stories wrong all the time, Rick. You know the old rumor story.  You say to someone on day one, "The dog was brown" and one year later you hear it again as "The white cat ate the brown bird."

This case is no different. This kind of thing happens on many, many other theories in this case. Someone hears from someone who was there that the "zipper" was unzipped and all of a sudden a new theory was born - he was not wrapped in a sheet but in a zipper bag so therefore his body just had to be altered.

 

 

1

Thanks for the reply, Michael.  So to understand your explanation of the 3 documented casket entries, the two types of caskets (the ornate bronze one and the pink shipping casket seen - not "heard about" - by two different people), the wrapping of JFK in a sheet leaving Parkland and being removed from a body bag at Bethesda in the presence of Paul O'Connor (as opposed to him "hearing" it was a body bag), and Jerrol Custer taking JFK x-rays to be developed when he saw Jackie and the entourage enter Bethesda are all got their stories wrong about what they saw (not "heard about").

I did not say that I am adherent to body modifications, I only asked about these items.  If I believe these witnesses were not mistaken, that does not imply that I believe in the body modifications.  I think they were credible, believable witnesses of what they saw, and you think they all got their stories wrong. Simple as that.

Thanks again.

7 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Mic, what you fail to understand about this theory are the logistics of it. Don't get hung up on the holes and ripped scalp and so on of the photos and the head injury.  We know his head was blown to bits.

Instead, back up and think how this entire theory could have possibly taken place. The body's put in a coffin at Parkland. It was wrapped with sheets and the head was wrapped as well. It's put in an ambulance.  The wife and his staff are all right there, feet away from it all.

Now ask yourself - is it really, truly possible that some how, some way, this coffin surrounded by the wife and staff, was some how stolen or whisked away? Perhaps at Love Field, where someone on the plane took a photo of it as it was being brought on board, with the wife walking behind it?

Or perhaps two hours later as the plane lands? Remember the wife and staff are around the coffin for the duration of the flight. But as it lands and as the wife walks out of the plane on that transport thing and the coffin is right there and then into the ambulance, some how, some way, secret agents were able to get the body out of that same coffin - I'm guessing mid-flight right in front of everyone - put it in a body bag, and as the plane lands, in full view of everyone, they whisk it out the back door of the plane onto a thrumming helicopter?

So now ask yourself, Mic.  Could it really, truly have happened that way? Could it, Mic? While all of this was going on and when all these people were some how around and kind of looking at each other and bumping into each other in the hall ways and on the plane and so forth?

And not a single one of them ever came forward with something like, "Well, yeah, I remember as we arrived at Love there was a decoy ambulance and the one from Parkland drove off and went into a hangar and I saw white-coated doctors taking the coffin out of the ambulance.  I seen it." Or "Yeah I went to the bathroom in mid-flight and took a peek inside of the room where the coffin was...no one was there, but I noticed two military guys in there, one closing the lid and I glanced on the floor and there was a body bag with a body in it. Jackie stepped in and I looked at her and she nodded and smiled.  I seen it."

Not a single person ever came forward, Mic, in 55 plus years. All of these people out and about and no one ever saw this happen and reported it.

It makes a great story but knowing how life goes, it didn't happen that way and there was no reason for it to have happened that way.

MW,  I would like to ask your explanation of the three documented multiple casket entry times, multiple caskets (ornate bronze / pink shipping) and multiple conditions of JFK's body (covered in sheets, in a body bag) that are a matter of record and hard evidence, none of which match the condition of the body matched to the casket as it left Parkland.

What about Jerrol Custer holding JFK x-rays for development at Bethesda when he saw the Navy ambulance pull up and Jackie and the entourage get out?

Thanks

3 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Until you can convince me and many many others that the thrumming helicopter and scalpels at the ready and Perry said this when he didn't theories, then Lifton's theories are open for ridicule and further discussion. Von Pein mentioned many things on here that refute the silliness that Lifton is trying to pass here, with no clear additional evidence to prove otherwise.

I'm tired of you, too, Adrej because you always try to be so "respectable" here and you probably don't even bother reading the rebuttals to Lifton because your mind is already made up that there's  a thousand and one theories to believe in.

By the way what makes Lifton so respectable to you?  Because his book sold a million copies 30 years ago? Because he was on national TV here?  Yeah, I read that book back then when I was 18 years old and yeah, I saw him on the PBS documentary series NOVA. Just because your book sells and you're on TV doesn't make you right.

So let me ask you - as Jackie is walking up the steps to board the plane ride back to DC, do you really think that the body was whisked off somewhere? Or as Jackie was on that service truck as she left the plane next to Jack's coffin, do you really think that the thrumming helicopter behind the plane was whisking his body away to some undisclosed place?

Really Andrej? That's what you really really think happened?

LOL

Running the risk of being included in your insults and vitriol, I would like to ask your explanation of the three documented multiple casket entry times, multiple caskets (ornate bronze / pink shipping) and multiple conditions of JFK's body (covered in sheets, in a body bag) that are a matter of record and hard evidence, none of which match the condition of the body matched to the casket as it left Parkland.  

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Joe... from what I've read... anything can happen after the bullet strikes such a thick bone as the skull...

The bullet appears to have been made to fragment as this chart shows... the Carcano could not fire at high enough speed to cause the fragmentation seen for a jacketed bullet..

We must remember that the fragment cloud seen extending from the right front to the left rear was micro particles... 

That simple does not happen with that kind of bullet...  unless it is a hunting type with a very thin copper jacket... then the lead fractures and spreads....

Whether the fragment they claim was embedded was actually THAT fragment.. who knows.  More importantly is the mention of the HOLE in the windshield... 

David,

I appreciate your reasoned posts here on EF.  Your post comes back to something I mentioned on another thread: multiple bullet types.  If we are to believe the WC and its adherents, LHO was not only a marksman of the first caliber (pun intended) but was able to load the magazine, in reverse order of where on JFK he intended to hit, two FMJ rounds (one miss, one for the magical fantasy single bullet CE399), followed by one fragmentary round (fatal head shot), followed by a fourth round he left in the rifle.  In addition, he didn't even feel the need to fully load the magazine; the MC mag holds 6 rounds but he was sure he could do the assassination in that order, with just 4 rounds. 

 
No one I know of loads multiple bullet types into any firearm.  Typically, the magazine/clip is fully loaded with the same type for the purpose of the shooting (FMJ for target and penetration / JHP for self-defense / soft-nosed or fragmentary for even nastier breakup and damage).  The only time a magazine is partially loaded is typically at the end of a shooting session when you have a few rounds left in the box to fire.  I would think if LHO set out to kill JFK, he would have had at least 6 rounds loaded up of the same type of ammo, if not having a spare mag for a reload.  It just doesn't add up.  

To me, beyond many other compelling pieces of evidence, the multiple ammunition types alone points to multiple shooters as does the through and through small caliber front to back hole in the windshield. 

Thanks,

Rick

23 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

presumably the fatal shot was also a frangible bullet. during the 1992 ABA mock trial, Roger McCarthy did an experiment firing a frangible bullet into a plastic milk jug containing water. the bullet did not exit the jug. this is because all of the energy was dissipated upon impact.

Who loads purpose-driven rounds of different types into a rifle's magazine?  Everyone I know, from the recreational shooter to former PD, to ex-military loads a magazine full of the single type of ammunition made for the single purpose.  Either all hunting, all self-defense or all target.  Which makes the LN even more tenuous, considering the titanium-like ability of the previous round in the LHO rifle (supposedly CE399) that can stay so miraculously intact as it caused 7 wounds in two men through one of the hardest bones in the body.  The shooter pre-planned what round would do what damage to the specific part of the target's body? "I'll try hitting with the first round, a FMJ bullet.  I might miss but then I'll get a body hit with round #2 (FMJ).  I have to save that 3rd round for the head since it's a frangible round."  An incredible feat of planning and marksmanship.

Next, why wasn't the magazine fully loaded?  How could LHO or anyone else cooly say to themselves, "The full capacity of this magazine is 6 rounds.  I'm here to assassinate the leader of the free world.  Instead of stacking the deck in my favor by loading the magazine 100%, I'm only going to load up with 4 rounds (of two types of ammo) because I'm JUST THAT GOOD"?

- Different ammo types, loaded in order, based on where I am shooting the target

- Partially loaded magazine

2 hours ago, David Andrews said:

No one has ever found Gordon Arnold in any film or photo, except the White-Mack "Badgeman" enlargement/colorization.  Yet Arnold is the source of all stories that there was uniformed police officer behind the GK fence.  How one wishes the Arnold story could be proved or disproved, not the least by finding or not finding Arnold where he is said to have been.

... and to view the film that said policeman stole from his camera.