Jump to content
The Education Forum

DiEugenio, Cranor, and the mole (my mole) - 3/31/20


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 336
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 4/6/2020 at 1:00 AM, Pat Speer said:

 

P.A.C.E. is the bedrock of a special op. It holds that you not have one plan for your op, but four: your Primary plan; your Alternative plan; your Contingency plan; and your Emergency plan. If the first doesn't work, you move to the second, and so on.

While one should doubt--strongly doubt--that the assassination called for a shot from the front and body alteration afterwards,  one can not rule out that a shot from the front was part of an emergency plan--that only became necessary when the first shot failed to kill Kennedy.

 

This is an important point. Contingency plans must be in place to explain and contain all potential outcomes. There is evidence that, at the least, both Oswald as lone-nut and Oswald as co-conspirator with Russian/Cuban agents were active contingencies. The long inexplicable delay between the DPD entering the TSBD and the belated discovery of the so-called sniper’s nest can be explained as reflecting a wait for information from Parkland and, perhaps, the Texas Theater to confirm that the wounds could plausibly be determined as from the rear and that Oswald was indeed in position to be arrested or killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 it would take a lot of brainstorming to consider all the possible contingencies. If Oswald was a CIA asset with a Handler it would have been easy to control his exact location during the shooting and to lead him to the Texas theater for a meeting. It's hard to imagine all the contingencies needed if you couldn't control Oswald very closely.

What if Clint Hill had gotten to JFK just before the head shot and covered JFK's body with his own? What if Oswald went to take the first shot and fell out the window?

Edited by Chris Bristow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

What if Clint Hill had gotten to JFK just before the head shot and covered JFK's body with his own? What if Oswald went to take the first shot and fell out the window?

If Plan A was an ambush, I imagine it included shooting Hill or any other Secret Service agent who didn't get the memo and reacted too quickly.

As for Oswald falling out the window, that would make him the fall guy right there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Plus a possible miss (pavement strike) as the car turned from Houston onto Elm.

IMHO:  Whether the number of bullets were 1,3,5 or 8, the original plan for JFK's murder must have included a plan for bullet removal--by which I mean "pre-autopsy bullet removal."  If any non-Oswald bullets had reached the FBI Laboratory, that fact alone --in November 1963 terms-- would have signified "conspiracy".  And that would  have made it impossible for Lyndon Johnson to have a smooth transition to the Presidency; and --certainly--precluded his nomination as a viable candidate at the Democratic Convention (in Atlantic City) the next summer. For these reasons, if this was a high level plot --the purpose of which was to operate the U.S. presidential line of succession (and advance LBJ to the Oval Office) -- then pre-autopsy bullet removal would have been a necessary part of the original plan.  Without it,  such a plot could certainly have achieved the death of JFK, but not the political survival of LBJ.  Another way of stating this: what assured LBJ's smooth succession to the Oval Office, was not just the death of JFK (and the operation of the provisions of the U.S. Constitution for a stable succession), but the credible appearance of Oswald as "the lone assassin."  That combination of factors insured that the assassination of JFK would have the appearance of its being a "quirk of fate," i.e., an "accident of history."  Such an appearance would have been seriously damaged--if not destroyed--if the FBI Lab were to announce that the bullets it received were from some "other" gun --i.e., a rifle other than the one mail ordered by Oswald, the previous March.  Bottom line: pre-autopsy bullet removal was essential to the successful operation of this plot.

Edited by David Lifton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2020 at 7:20 PM, Chris Bristow said:

I never knew that Humes found stitches. I had assumed he just found scalpel marks. The idea of a signalman in the plaza makes much more sense if you consider a shot from the front as a last resort. From Jarrell Custer reports and Paul Connors it sounds like the brain may not have been replaced into the skull. Both of them say there was only a tiny amount of brains left in the cranium. If that is true the brain was introduced into the autopsy at some other point.

Humes (neither in the Bethesda autopsy report, nor in his March 1964 WC testimony) reported finding any stitches (and I stress the words "did not report"). As I recall, the account of stitches first arose when Dr. Ebersole, the radiologist (who was not called by the WC) testified before the HSCA in March 1978.  I have studied Dr. Ebersole's account carefully (starting with its first appearance in Lancaster [PA] newspapers).  Had there been a proper investigation, the question (to Humes) ought to have been: "Why didn't you tell us about these stitches"?

Edited by David Lifton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, David Lifton said:

IMHO:  Whether the number of bullets were 1,3,5 or 8, the original plan for JFK's murder must have included a plan for bullet removal--by which I mean "pre-autopsy bullet removal."  If any non-Oswald bullets had reached the FBI Laboratory, that fact alone --in November 1963 terms-- would have signified "conspiracy".  And that would  have made it impossible for Lyndon Johnson to have a smooth transition to the Presidency; and --certainly--precluded his nomination as a viable candidate at the Democratic Convention (in Atlantic City) the next summer. For these reasons, if this was a high level plot --the purpose of which was to operate the U.S. presidential line of succession (and advance LBJ to the Oval Office) -- then pre-autopsy bullet removal would have been a necessary part of the original plan.  Without it,  such a plot could certainly have achieved the death of JFK, but not the political survival of LBJ.  Another way of stating this: what assured LBJ's smooth succession to the Oval Office, was not just the death of JFK (and the operation of the provisions of the U.S. Constitution for a stable succession), but the credible appearance of Oswald as "the lone assassin."  That combination of factors insured that the assassination of JFK would have the appearance of its being a "quirk of fate," i.e., an "accident of history."  Such an appearance would have been seriously damaged--if not destroyed--if the FBI Lab were to announce that the bullets it received were from some "other" gun --i.e., a rifle other than the one mail ordered by Oswald, the previous March.  Bottom line: pre-autopsy bullet removal was essential to the successful operation of this plot.

If the original plan was an ambush to be blamed on Castro agents, it wouldn't matter how many "non-Oswald bullets" were found and there would be no need to remove them.

Also, if there were other shooters besides Oswald, how would that prevent LBJ from becoming president ("a smooth transition") as long as JFK was dead? The only problem I can envision is if there was an open military coup (as a last resort), in which case LBJ's fate would be up to the military. Otherwise I don't see why the number of shooters matters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Within 24 hours, the FBI Lab was reporting to Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry that (all) the bullets recovered in the assassination (the stretcher bullet [Exh 399] and the two fragments found in the presidential limousine [WCE 567 and WCE 569) were from Oswald’s rifle.  You can read that ballistic report  (see an actual facsimile of it) in the 26 Volumes of the Warren Commission, or in Chief Curry’s book.   Of course, you are entitled to your own opinion as to the (supposed) unimportance of “non-Oswald” bullets, but I think that my analysis is backed up by the actual facts in this case.   Neither of us have the benefit of a time-machine, but its my firm opinion that if the FBI had announced that bullets--any bullets --had been received at its Laboratory were from "other" (i.e., non-Oswald) guns, that would have led to political action that would have prevented LBJ from remaining in the presidency for very long.  Also keep in mind: Robert Kennedy was Attorney General at the time, and I do not believe he would have permitted such a clear (and provable) usurpation of his brother's legacy--- especially if "conspiracy" could have been so easily proven --i.e.,  as a consequence of non-Oswald bullets being received at the FBI Laboratory.  

Edited by David Lifton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, David Lifton said:

Within 24 hours, the FBI Lab was reporting to Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry that (all) the bullets recovered in the assassination (the stretcher bullet [Exh 399] and the two fragments found in the presidential limousine [CE 567 and 568) were from Oswald’s rifle.  You can read that ballistic report in the 26 Volumes of the Warren Commission, or in Chief Curry’s book,  Of course, you are entitled to your own opinion as to the (supposed) unimportance of “non-Oswald” bullets, but I think that my analysis is backed up by the actual facts in this case.

"The actual facts" that you cite happened quickly, "within 24 hours," only because of Oswald's arrest. That of course is my opinion, though I believe there are others of the same opinion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ron Ecker said:

If the original plan was an ambush to be blamed on Castro agents, it wouldn't matter how many "non-Oswald bullets" were found and there would be no need to remove them.

Also, if there were other shooters besides Oswald, how would that prevent LBJ from becoming president ("a smooth transition") as long as JFK was dead? The only problem I can envision is if there was an open military coup (as a last resort), in which case LBJ's fate would be up to the military. Otherwise I don't see why the number of shooters matters.

It may have been left up to after-action discretion.  Is a patsy going to hide out in a movie theater with a pistol?  For how long?  No, he's either there to plan his escape route or meet a confederate.  The authorities chose the former when Oswald survived.  The point of his dying in the theater was lost -- to impute that he was aided by Castro partisans unknown and uncaptured.

Kennedy died out of the same logic that decreed that Lumumba and Diem had to die.  The banana republic aspects of those killings were omitted for American domestic consumption.  And to impress the Russians.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no doubts that President's body, the throat and the cranium, were tampered with after the body left Dallas Parkland hospital. David's research described in Best Evidence was revolutionary then and it is very actual today.

It comes  to me as a logical assumption that whoever carried out the illegal surgeries to President's body had to have a good idea where the bullets were. Could there be a preliminary inspection of the body by a confederate amongst Parkland doctors who then advised others on what the challenges were? Could this happen aboard of AF2 if the body were there? It also appears obvious that those performing the surgeries to remove the bullets and to obfuscate the wound in the right occipital area of the skull needed to have one or more X-ray images in their hands. I cannot see how anyone would just roam the upper chest and brain through the wounds without knowing the locations of the bullets to be removed. This would mean that alterations occurred in two stages, a preliminary professional account of surface wounds (but a better and more detailed account than the accounts provided by Parkland doctors to the press and public) and an X-ray navigated removal of bullets. AF2/Parkland >Walter Reed hospital?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:
On 4/6/2020 at 9:19 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

That seems reasonable to me, Chris. I'd like to elaborate on your theory here and hopefully show Matt Allison et. al. that something like what David Lifton describes is conceivable:

The plan is for all the shooters -- from behind -- to shoot simultaneously... thus the "flurry of shots." An observer has been assigned to confirm that at least one shot hits the head squarely. None do and he gives the negative signal. A couple seconds later a contingency shot is taken from the front. This creates a head wound from the front, and so it requires the second part of the contingency plan to take place... removal of evidence of this shot.

The body is snatched and the hole in the back of the head is observed. A surgeon (or just a guy with tools) lacerates the scalp and breaks the top of the cranium open with a chisel and hammer. What's left of the brain is quickly removed and replaced with a brain that has damage to it and bullet fragments consistent with shots from behind. (This brain had been prepared beforehand as part of the contingency plan.) Scalp fragments are put back in place and the scalp is stitched here and there to hold the head together.

This isn't done as an attempt to fool the autopsists... it is done to allow the autopsists to follow orders and toe the official line without having to flat out lie.

When Humes sees the stitches he immediately knows that some official hanky panky has been going on with the body. He briefly notes the surgery, but then moves on to write an autopsy report that describes what he is supposed to be seeing.

 

 

I never knew that Humes found stitches. I had assumed he just found scalpel marks.

 

The stitches used to hold the lacerated scalp together are a speculated part of my theory. The head wound witnesses described the wound as having multiple roughly-parallel lacerations in the scalp, with a badly fractured cranium beneath. It seems to me that a stitch here and there would have been required to hold the head together after being opened wide enough for the brain to be removed. Being in the hair, the stitches would have been virtually invisible to all but the person handling the wound.

 

 

10 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

From Jarrell Custer reports and Paul Connors it sounds like the brain may not have been replaced into the skull. Both of them say there was only a tiny amount of brains left in the cranium. If that is true the brain was introduced into the autopsy at some other point.



I agree. I had forgotten about their reports.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ron Ecker said:

"The actual facts" that you cite happened quickly, "within 24 hours," only because of Oswald's arrest. That of course is my opinion, though I believe there are others of the same opinion.

 

The “found rifle” (on the sixth floor) was brought to Love Field, and flown to Washington, where it was immediately brought to the FBI Lab, where it was test fired to obtain test bullets to be used for ballistics tests.  That’s how it was quickly established that there was a “match” between the found rifle and the 3 pieces of ammunition recovered on11/22/63.

This was proper FBI procedure; It was not something that occurred   “only because of Oswald's arrest.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, David Lifton said:

The “found rifle” (on the sixth floor) was brought to Love Field, and flown to Washington, where it was immediately brought to the FBI Lab, where it was test fired to obtain test bullets to be used for ballistics tests.  That’s how it was quickly established that there was a “match” between the found rifle and the 3 pieces of ammunition recovered on11/22/63.

This was proper FBI procedure; It was not something that occurred   “only because of Oswald's arrest.”

I don't dispute that either Oswald fired his rifle or else someone fired it for him. In any case I'm glad to know that the FBI followed proper procedures in the aftermath of the assassination.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Lifton said:

As I recall, the account of stitches first arose when Dr. Ebersole, the radiologist (who was not called by the WC) testified before the HSCA in March 1978.

 

Ha!  My "stitches" hypothesis may be factual after all. I wasn't aware of Ebersole's account regarding stitches. (If this is in Best Evidence, I'll bet it is the second edition. I accidentally read the first edition not knowing that a second edition had been released.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...