Final Charade

[Jamey Flanagan]

I agree Pat, we do need a deep dive on Oswald and Marina and not just the same old "official version" we have always heard! I respect what Marina did in later years far removed from the assassination in coming out and saying she thought Lee was innocent and was set up as a patsy. That being said, Marina deserves much more scrutiny than she has ever received. I am convinced that Marina was a spy for Russia much like Oswald was a spy for America. I believe there are numerous things she has held back or just simply lied about. We definitely agree on those two needing another look. As far as your assessment of the "Best Evidence" alteration theory presented, I was wondering what your take on this was Pat. Maybe I'm just reading between the lines, and sometimes written text can easily be taken out of context, but I got the distinct impression that you maybe consider the very idea complete hogwash. And other comments I've read from you about the very idea of alteration as far as involving films or photographs seem to support this assumption on my part. I'm just curious as to the extent that you may dismiss this, that is if you do dismiss it. So, I'm asking whether you believe any of the witnesses from Bethesda who have spoken of the President's body being wrapped differently (in a body bag) and being in a different casket (a pinkish grey shipping casket like used for soldiers as opposed to the expensive bronze casket) than he left Dallas in? And early on in my study of the case it was often Dallas versus Bethesda witnesses compared and pitted against each other, however, many witnesses at Bethesda report the very same head wound in the back of the head that Dallas doctors saw but often times this wound upon arriving at Bethesda was even more massive in size. Do you think those who reported this were just mistaken or lying? Just trying to find out what your take is on that. Thanks in advance for any reply!

[Andrej Stancak]

I am convinced that publishing FInal Charade now, even if maybe not finished in a definitive way, would be a big contribution to the JFK case. The book will contain new, so far unknown information, and this is what counts. It is difficult to do a better book in JFKA realm than Best Evidence, and it may be difficult for David himself. Anyway, I cannot wait reading new interviews, facts and data which this book surely will bring to light.

[Jamey Flanagan]

I'm just afraid of what may happen should he pass away before it gets released. Not sure if he has any emergy plan lined up or not. I am very worried that if this should happen and some other entity has control of it then either it will be edited or changed or even most likely never see the light of day.

[Micah Mileto]

It'll come, it's just like George R. R. Martin and The Winds of Winter!

[Pat Speer]

18 hours ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

I agree Pat, we do need a deep dive on Oswald and Marina and not just the same old "official version" we have always heard! I respect what Marina did in later years far removed from the assassination in coming out and saying she thought Lee was innocent and was set up as a patsy. That being said, Marina deserves much more scrutiny than she has ever received. I am convinced that Marina was a spy for Russia much like Oswald was a spy for America. I believe there are numerous things she has held back or just simply lied about. We definitely agree on those two needing another look. As far as your assessment of the "Best Evidence" alteration theory presented, I was wondering what your take on this was Pat. Maybe I'm just reading between the lines, and sometimes written text can easily be taken out of context, but I got the distinct impression that you maybe consider the very idea complete hogwash. And other comments I've read from you about the very idea of alteration as far as involving films or photographs seem to support this assumption on my part. I'm just curious as to the extent that you may dismiss this, that is if you do dismiss it. So, I'm asking whether you believe any of the witnesses from Bethesda who have spoken of the President's body being wrapped differently (in a body bag) and being in a different casket (a pinkish grey shipping casket like used for soldiers as opposed to the expensive bronze casket) than he left Dallas in? And early on in my study of the case it was often Dallas versus Bethesda witnesses compared and pitted against each other, however, many witnesses at Bethesda report the very same head wound in the back of the head that Dallas doctors saw but often times this wound upon arriving at Bethesda was even more massive in size. Do you think those who reported this were just mistaken or lying? Just trying to find out what your take is on that. Thanks in advance for any reply!

I've got book-length chapters on this stuff on my website. (They are free.) In short, I initially believed the back of the head photo was fake because the wound appeared to be in a different location than it was shown on the other photos and x-rays. After months of studying photos of tattoos on the the top of the head from different angles, however, I realized that this was wrong, and that the photos and x-rays are in fact consistent. 

As far as the casket stuff, my friend Matt Douthit looked into this far more than I, and he found that the statements of the witnesses were wildly inconsistent on this front. Of course, that doesn't prove there was no switcheroo.

But I can say this with 100% conviction. If the body was in fact altered to suggest a single assassin, it was a complete fiasco, as the medical evidence and autopsy protocol strongly suggest there were two head shots, and that the bullet creating the back wound did not transit. 

Now, it only makes sense to me that if the body was doctored to conceal a conspiracy, that the photos and reports on the autopsy would also conceal a conspiracy. But they don't. They are clear evidence for conspiracy. I mean, there are two parts of every report. The facts and the conclusions. The facts in JFK's case fail to align with the conclusions. Well, this suggests to me that no alteration was performed on the body, and the medical evidence is legit. 

Now, the saddest thing about all this, IMO, is that most researchers have missed the forest for the trees. By first focusing on the supposed alteration of the body, and then the supposed alteration of the photos, X-rays and Z-film, they have overlooked the freakin' SMOKING GUN handed to them by the Clark Panel. The Clark Panel moved the entrance wound on the back of JFK's head 4 inches when they couldn't resolve that there was no evidence within the brain that a bullet traveled on the trajectory described by the Warren Commission. They just moved the wound. This happened over 50 years ago. This should be common knowledge. And yet, when I talked to non-JFK buffs, such as the nurses at the hospital, a number of them said they heard the autopsy photos were fake, or that Kennedy was shot by one of the Secret Service men. But none of them had ever heard the 100% historical fact that a secret panel moved the entrance wound to a location where no one saw the wound, once they realized the trajectory as initially proposed made little sense. This always gets eye rolls. "Are you sure? Why haven't I heard of this?" 

All the energy spent arguing about alteration would have been far better spent, IMO, simply reporting on the facts of the case, free of conjecture, free of spin.  

 

[Michael Crane]

Damn,David was just on here & didn't see this thread.

[Jamey Flanagan]

Just bumping this thread back up with the recent passing of David S. Lifton. I really hope the book does see the light of day in some shape or form! I just wanted to add a few things here. First of all, there was a post some months back to the effect of Morningstar and Lifton being wrong and it kind of lumped those two together and seemed to suggest they had pretty much the same theory. That's most definitely not the case! Lifton didn't subscribe to the aspect of a body double, but rather that the President's body had been altered. Morningstar believes that officer J.D. Tippit was used as a body double for JFK at Bethesda. Secondly, I remember stating a few times in different threads that it was Lifton's belief that the body was taken out the other side of Air Force One after landing and put on a helicopter bound for another facility, most probably Walter Reed. At least at the time of Best Evidence this was his leading theory. But watching the tribute videos that Vince Palamara has posted I see that he had changed his mind in later years about that. He came to believe that the body was taken on to Air Force One and before the entourage got on that the body was taken out of the coffin and transported out the other side and placed into one of the luggage compartments underneath in Dallas. And then I'm assuming that it was removed upon landing while the press was focused on the unloading of the coffin and everything. Just wanted to post this update.

[Vince Palamara]

There is 100 percent definitely a manuscript that is, to most people's standards, done but perhaps not "David Lifton" done (he was forever adding and amending). How I know this: researcher Matt Douthit, who became good friends with David. According to the gentleman who started the thread (his recent comment), they are going to get it published [perhaps even if it is "just" Author House or similar self publishing venues a la what Tyler Newcomb did with his late father's book MURDER FROM WITHIN co-written with the late Perry Adams].

[Micah Mileto]

Was there no recording of the zoom Q&A that David advertised on Twitter and gofundme in September of this year?

[Vince Palamara]

6 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Was there no recording of the zoom Q&A that David advertised on Twitter and gofundme in September of this year?

 

[Vince Palamara]

***UPDATE*** Good news, bad news about FINAL CHARADE (a small excerpt from a public post by researcher Matt Douthit):

"This case literally lived with him 24/7. Over a span of 56 years, he interviewed on audio and video more JFK eyewitnesses and researchers than any other researcher I have ever known. If he ever had a lead, boom, he would be on the next bus. And if he didn’t have the funds to do it, he would always find a way no matter what. The most important thing he taught me as a mentor was to always avoid Confirmation Bias, and to always be open-minded. I first got to know him when I was 19 and got to know him even more in person when he lived here in Dallas for a year. We would sit in diners, I in awe, mesmerized listening to him tell me literally everything he knew and all his theories. Yep, I heard it all. I was blown away when he read to me out loud from his spiral notebook the Introduction to “Final Charade”. He has since made all this public per the interviews he’s given in the past few years. As for the manuscript itself, I’m sad to tell you all that his laptop had crashed and he “lost everything.” BUT, like I said, the gist of it all has been made known through those interviews he gave"

[see the video above]

[Benjamin Cole]

11 minutes ago, Vince Palamara said:

***UPDATE*** Good news, bad news about FINAL CHARADE (a small excerpt from a public post by researcher Matt Douthit):

"This case literally lived with him 24/7. Over a span of 56 years, he interviewed on audio and video more JFK eyewitnesses and researchers than any other researcher I have ever known. If he ever had a lead, boom, he would be on the next bus. And if he didn’t have the funds to do it, he would always find a way no matter what. The most important thing he taught me as a mentor was to always avoid Confirmation Bias, and to always be open-minded. I first got to know him when I was 19 and got to know him even more in person when he lived here in Dallas for a year. We would sit in diners, I in awe, mesmerized listening to him tell me literally everything he knew and all his theories. Yep, I heard it all. I was blown away when he read to me out loud from his spiral notebook the Introduction to “Final Charade”. He has since made all this public per the interviews he’s given in the past few years. As for the manuscript itself, I’m sad to tell you all that his laptop had crashed and he “lost everything.” BUT, like I said, the gist of it all has been made known through those interviews he gave"

[see the video above]

Egads. Lost everything? You know, if the laptop still exists, usually tech-types can retrieve the valuables....

[Hugo Langendoen]

Would be really sad if all was lost. Didn’t he share it with editors or fellow researchers ?