JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Paul May on December 08, 2022, 09:54:37 PM
-
David S. Lifton (born September 20, 1939 and died December 5, 2022) was an American author who wrote the 1981 bestseller Best Evidence: Disguise and Deception in the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, a work that puts forth evidence that the alteration of the President's body to create a false story about how he was murdered was a planned part of the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy.
I met David several times. We had dinner in LA in the late 80’s. David had called me and asked was I at anytime employed by CIA. It was a long conversation. We met for dinner. We remained distant friends. David had never married devoting his life to the JFK event. RIP David.
-
Lifton was one of the legendary First-Generation researchers. His 1967 Ramparts article was a real achievement.
In "Best Evidence", he said he kept aspects of his theory from the HSCA. A lost chance for vetting. Harrison Livingstone would later challenge the theory.
Lifton was a gentleman from a time when neighbors met for conversation and people dressed nice in public.
-
Lifting was one of the legendary First-Generation researchers. His 1967 Ramparts article was a real achievement.
In "Best Evidence", he said he kept aspects of his theory from the HSCA. A lost chance for vetting. Harrison Livingstone would later challenge the theory.
Lifton was a gentleman from a time when neighbors met for conversation and people dressed nice in public.
David was very much a gentleman yet, he had another side to him as many people do. With the advent of the internet, he often went ballistic with researchers when his theories were challenged. I once suggested to him in a phone call that history is debated, not argued and he would be better served maintaining his composure. His response: “f—k you Paul”. That was David. He and I agreed on very little yet we had some laughs.
-
A brief tribute:
http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2022/12/a-tribute-to-david-lifton.html
-
I met David several times. We had dinner in LA in the late 80’s. David had called me and asked was I at anytime employed by CIA. . . .
I hope you told him that you weren't sure if you were authorized to answer that question. And then 45 minutes after you two parted called him back to say that, no, you were never employed by the CIA.
-
A brief tribute:
http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2022/12/a-tribute-to-david-lifton.html
Wow. That's wonderful, Tracy. I feel there's a huge void with Lifton gone and hope his unpublished work makes it through. I read the powerful "Best Evidence" and was onboard for awhile.
-
Lifton was one of the legendary First-Generation researchers. His 1967 Ramparts article was a real achievement.
In "Best Evidence", he said he kept aspects of his theory from the HSCA. A lost chance for vetting. Harrison Livingstone would later challenge the theory.
Lifton was a gentleman from a time when neighbors met for conversation and people dressed nice in public.
If you go outside in Toronto these days, may I suggest bullet-proofing your haberdashery
And stabbing seems all the rage there these days. And I don't mean just your Covid/flu shots.
-
Since this is a sort of remembrance post/thread I'll limit my comment to say I remain completely baffled that a obviously smart man like Mr. Lifton, a man who to his credit recognized early on and then openly denounced the abuses of the disgraceful Jim Garrison, could believe what he theorized. I exchanged a handful of posts with him over the years and he was gracious and formal; nothing over the top or ugly, no name calling.
To propose what he did - I'm sure everyone knows his theory - is...well, how can you begin to think that's possible? Based on the flimsiest of evidence he found? He correctly warned about "confirmation bias", something we all fall for. And yet this? It's a mystery.
Anyway, condolences to his friends and family as they and we shuffle on this mortal coil.
-
Wow. That's wonderful, Tracy. I feel there's a huge void with Lifton gone and hope his unpublished work makes it through. I read the powerful "Best Evidence" and was onboard for awhile.
Thanks Jerry.
-
Thanks Jerry.
Well done Tracy.
-
I've been reading the thoughts of people that knew David Lifton personally and everybody seems to agree David has devoted much of his life to fact-finding the assassination of JFK. Maybe too much? He is one of the 1st generation researchers of this subject. A group of like-minded people that became activists for the truth. I've listened to quite a lot of Mae Brussell's broadcasts, she mentioned David a lot. Brussell was part of the founding research group that David was a part of. ''I'll mention their names'' as Mae Brusell introduced them on her show(November 24, 1971.). A group of people that felt deeply there is something wrong with the conclusion to what happened to JFK, that it wasn't JUST Lee Harvey Oswald. These are the people that started this whole research never-ending mystery ...Maggie Fields in Beverly Hills, California; Penn Jones in Midlothian, Texas; Mark Lane in New York; David Lifton in Los Angeles; Sylvia Meagher in New York; Raymond Marcus in L.A.; Shirley Martin in Oklahoma; Leo Sauvage in New York; Joe Joestin in Germany; Hal Verb in El Cerrito, California; Harold Weisberg in Maryland. Mae brings up all the researchers books, pet theories. achievements. She talks about David Lifton's book that hasn't yet been resleased. She says David Lifton spent 7 years putting together his book Best Evidence. This was in 1971! David's book wasn't released until 1981? Am I missing something?!?! David Lifton really did give a tremendous effort into trying to make sense of the feelings that told him something wasn't right about the official verdict into who killed JFK. This is what fascinates me with a lot of those researchers that took up a call to arms and devote their lives to seeking 'their' truths.
From David's wikipedia page. ''Lifton purchased a set of the 26 volumes of the Warren Commission's investigation and started his own research on the Kennedy case.[1] In 1966, Lifton was dismissed from UCLA for neglecting his studies. He quit his aerospace job, devoting all his time to the Kennedy assassination.''
I remember Mae Brussell talking about how these original researchers co-ordinated this original research of the subject. They communicated via letters and phone calls...and meeting in person at least once a year. And from I've heard from Mae Brusell's broadcasts, these original researchers didn't agree on every thing. They, in fact, didn't agree much. It seems. They attacked eachother quite a lot. And I think some of these original risk takers were quite right to doubt and wonder about every interaction they received on this subject. I would imagine they may have thought they would be in real danger to delve into the topics they were researching, at the time. It's been uncovered how the alphabet agencies have investigated the people that started investigating them! I've read the released archives of many of the original JFK assassination researchers. They all questioned who was contacting them, and seemed to think they had become the target of the agency. The big C.I.A.
It's fascinating to know how people like David Lifton managed to hang around in very sophisticated subject material for so long and not go completely nuts.
I contacted David and we corresponded 10 or more times back'n'forth by email on some detail in the Zapruder film. He was curious about a few things and on a few facts was dismissive. I admire the tenacity and devotion of David Lifton to see if he could reveal the truth - when it comes to the JFK assassination. Unfortunately, David's massive devotion to replying to people curious to speak to him about this subject played a part in preventing Final Charade being published. A constant interruption from so many JFK conspiracy theorists view on the subject. David Lifton talked about how Final Charade would blow Best Evidence out of the water.
RIP David Lifton!
-
Well done Tracy.
Thank you.
-
Since this is a sort of remembrance post/thread I'll limit my comment to say I remain completely baffled that a obviously smart man like Mr. Lifton, a man who to his credit recognized early on and then openly denounced the abuses of the disgraceful Jim Garrison, could believe what he theorized. I exchanged a handful of posts with him over the years and he was gracious and formal; nothing over the top or ugly, no name calling.
To propose what he did - I'm sure everyone knows his theory - is...well, how can you begin to think that's possible? Based on the flimsiest of evidence he found? He correctly warned about "confirmation bias", something we all fall for. And yet this? It's a mystery.
Anyway, condolences to his friends and family as they and we shuffle on this mortal coil.
I completely agree. He should not be given a pass because he was a "nice" guy. His body alteration nonsense was an offence to history. A truly tin foil hat theory that was not only baseless but bizarre. All the more since Lifton otherwise had some reputation as a credible researcher. No reasonable person could have ever entertained such a theory. He will forever carry that shame.
-
I completely agree. He should not be given a pass because he was a "nice" guy. His body alteration nonsense was an offence to history. A truly tin foil hat theory that was not only baseless but bizarre. All the more since Lifton otherwise had some reputation as a credible researcher. No reasonable person could have ever entertained such a theory. He will forever carry that shame.
As expected, Richard will pollute an otherwise respectful thread with his usual vile drivel. The guy knows no shame.
-
As expected, Richard will pollute an otherwise respectful thread with his usual vile drivel. The guy knows no shame.
So needy for my attention. It's humorous. Lifton did this to himself with his outrageous and baseless theory. As a historian, he is a complete joke and disgrace. That is his fault not mine. Whether he was a "nice" guy is not relevant to the JFK assassination. Not only does his theory lack evidence but it is contrary to common sense and logic. If the conspirators intended to frame Oswald with use of a specific rifle fired from a specific location, would they have the real assassin fire the shots using an entirely different rifle from a different location? Necessitating the complicated and risky abduction of the president's body after the assassination. LOL. It's completely ludicrous as a plan and easily avoidable. They could have used the same rifle intended to frame Oswald and fired the shots from the same location to avoid all this risk and complexity. His theory is tin foil hat nonsense. Far out even by low CTer standards. Much like your own contrarian bull.
-
So needy for my attention. It's humorous. Lifton did this to himself with his outrageous and baseless theory. As a historian, he is a complete joke and disgrace. That is his fault not mine. Whether he was a "nice" guy is not relevant to the JFK assassination. Not only does his theory lack evidence but it is contrary to common sense and logic. If the conspirators intended to frame Oswald with use of a specific rifle fired from a specific location, would they have the real assassin fire the shots using an entirely different rifle from a different location? Necessitating the complicated and risky abduction of the president's body after the assassination. LOL. It's completely ludicrous as a plan and easily avoidable. They could have used the same rifle intended to frame Oswald and fired the shots from the same location to avoid all this risk and complexity. His theory is tin foil hat nonsense. Far out even by low CTer standards. Much like your own contrarian bull.
As expected, Richard will try to justify his abysmal behavior with more vile drivel filled with utter lies and pathetic "my imaginary conspirators would have done so and so" opinions.
Normal, reasonable people can disagree about something and still be respectful, but not Richard and that says a lot about him.
-
As expected, Richard will try to justify his abysmal behavior with more vile drivel filled with utter lies and pathetic "my imaginary conspirators would have done so and so" opinions.
Normal, reasonable people can disagree about something and still be respectful, but not Richard and that says a lot about him.
As usual, Martin avoids addressing the substance of my post and instead engages in personal commentary and insults to deflect from the issue. Again, would the conspirators (not mine but Lifton's) frame Oswald by linking him to a specific rifle and shooting location, but then assassinate JFK with a different rifle from a different location? Necessitating the incredible risk and complexity of stealing the president's body and altering it after the fact. No reasonable person can believe that was the plan since all this risk and complexity could be eliminated simply by using whatever rifle they intended to link to Oswald and firing the shots from the 6th floor. In addition, there is certainly no evidence to support Lifton's theory. Nor Martin has attempted to provide any or even address the logical inconsistencies of such a plan. Instead, as usual, has tried to deflect the discussion down the rabbit hole via his personal commentary.
-
As usual, Martin avoids addressing the substance of my post and instead engages in personal commentary and insults to deflect from the issue. Again, would the conspirators (not mine but Lifton's) frame Oswald by linking him to a specific rifle and shooting location, but then assassinate JFK with a different rifle from a different location? Necessitating the incredible risk and complexity of stealing the president's body and altering it after the fact. No reasonable person can believe that was the plan since all this risk and complexity could be eliminated simply by using whatever rifle they intended to link to Oswald and firing the shots from the 6th floor. In addition, there is certainly no evidence to support Lifton's theory. Nor Martin has attempted to provide any or even address the logical inconsistencies of such a plan. Instead, as usual, has tried to deflect the discussion down the rabbit hole via his personal commentary.
You just don't know when to stop.
I have no intention to enter into any kind of discussion about Lifton's theories, based on your own pathetically biased opinions, in a thread that deals with the man's death.
Your miserable attempt to derail this thread into another CT bashing exercise is contemptible.
-
As usual, Martin avoids addressing the substance of my post and instead engages in personal commentary and insults to deflect from the issue.
Please. Your entire screed against Lifton was personal commentary and insults. Will anybody even give a damn when you die?
-
You just don't know when to stop.
I have no intention to enter into any kind of discussion about Lifton's theories, based on your own pathetically biased opinions, in a thread that deals with the man's death.
Your miserable attempt to derail this thread into another CT bashing exercise is contemptible.
LOL. The only person that is derailing this thread is yourself. A common pattern. You interject yourself with personal commentary and insults and then run away. I addressed Lifton's absurd theory. The fact that he has died or was a "nice" guy doesn't impact the lack of evidence and common sense to support his bizarre theory. It is a joke.
-
LOL. The only person that is derailing this thread is yourself. A common pattern. You interject yourself with personal commentary and insults and then run away. I addressed Lifton's absurd theory. The fact that he has died or was a "nice" guy doesn't impact the lack of evidence and common sense to support his bizarre theory. It is a joke.
You really are some piece of work.
The fact that he has died or was a "nice" guy doesn't impact the lack of evidence and common sense to support his bizarre theory.
Lifton offered more credible evidence for parts of his theory than you ever will and can for Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired.
If anybody is a joke, it's a you.
-
You really are some piece of work.
The fact that he has died or was a "nice" guy doesn't impact the lack of evidence and common sense to support his bizarre theory.
Lifton offered more credible evidence for parts of his theory than you ever will and can for Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired.
If anybody is a joke, it's a you.
More personal commentary and insults. Are you indicating that you believe there is validity to Lifton's insane theory that JFK's body was stolen from the plane and his body altered? What "credible evidence" are you referencing that he presented to support this claim? Apply your same contrarian standard of proof to Lifton's theory that you apply to Oswald's guilt and tell us how it is "credible."
-
Try understanding what you read for once....
Are you indicating that you believe there is validity to Lifton's insane theory that JFK's body was stolen from the plane and his body altered?
I'm indicating that he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you ever have provided for your own crackpot theories.
Btw, the fact that you do not consider Lifton's evidence to be credible is most likely a combination of extreme bias and ignorance on your part as well as a fundamental lack of understanding what credible evidence actually is. I truly feel sorry for you, but it's not really my problem that you are this clueless.
-
Try understanding what you read for once....
Are you indicating that you believe there is validity to Lifton's insane theory that JFK's body was stolen from the plane and his body altered?
I'm indicating that he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you ever have provided for your own crackpot theories.
Btw, the fact that you do not consider Lifton's evidence to be credible is most likely a combination of extreme bias and ignorance on your part as well as a fundamental lack of understanding what credible evidence actually is. I truly feel sorry for you, but it's not really my problem that you are this clueless.
Try to understand what you are reading. I asked YOU what "credible evidence" YOU believe Lifton provided to support his theory. And you responded by just repeating that "he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you have ever have." LOL. In other words you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Again, deflecting the discussion to me instead of discussing the issue.
-
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/david-lifton-1939-2022-r-i-p (https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/david-lifton-1939-2022-r-i-p)
Here is my tribute to David Lifton. I provide a rare David Lifton letter to Mark Lane about Kerry Thornley.
fred litwin
www.onthetrailofdelusion.com
-
Try to understand what you are reading. I asked YOU what "credible evidence" YOU believe Lifton provided to support his theory.
I’ll answer this “Richard”-style.
Read “Best Evidence”. It’s all in there.
-
Try to understand what you are reading. I asked YOU what "credible evidence" YOU believe Lifton provided to support his theory. And you responded by just repeating that "he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you have ever have." LOL. In other words you don't have a clue what you are talking about. Again, deflecting the discussion to me instead of discussing the issue.
I asked YOU what "credible evidence" YOU believe Lifton provided to support his theory.
Yes and you are not entitled to an answer. I saw the question and ignored it, for one simple reason;
I have no intention to enter into any kind of discussion about Lifton's theories, based on your own pathetically biased opinions, in a thread that deals with the man's death.
Apparently you also had trouble understanding that. What else is new?
And you responded by just repeating that "he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you have ever have."
Here we go again with the usual misrepresentation of what I actually said, which was;
I'm indicating that he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you ever have provided for your own crackpot theories.
-
I asked YOU what "credible evidence" YOU believe Lifton provided to support his theory.
Yes and you are not entitled to an answer. I saw the question and ignored it, for one simple reason;
Apparently you also had trouble understanding that. What else is new?
And you responded by just repeating that "he provided a lot more credible evidence for his theory than you have ever have."
Here we go again with the usual misrepresentation of what I actually said, which was;
I'm "not entitled to an answer"? HA HA HA. Are you a child? You made an affirmative statement. I just asked you to clarify it. Caught out once again. First, it was Oswald "didn't come the stairs" but then refusing to explain whether that meant you have concluded Oswald wasn't the assassin. Now it's Lifton had "credible evidence" for his bizarre body alteration theory, but you won't tell us what "credible evidence" you are making reference to. Take up a different contrarian cause. This one is not working out.
-
I watched a few of his vids on his YouTube channel last night. Some observations:
1. All the assassination films have been altered.
2. The foot in the Miller photograph belonged to SS Agent John Ready, not Kennedy or Hill. Oh, you didn't realize that Ready jumped into the limousine in Dealey Plaza when the car came to a stop?
3. The Dallas doctors were right-wingers who let Kennedy die.
4. McNamara was in on it.
5. RFK entered AF1 on the dark side of the plane not seen by cameras. Problem is, we have video evidence of him ascending the forward staircase as others deplaned:
(https://img81.pixhost.to/images/0/323802838_vlcsnap-2022-12-12-14h09m44s632.jpg)
And I haven't even gotten to the body alteration nonsense.
-
I'm "not entitled to an answer"? HA HA HA. Are you a child? You made an affirmative statement. I just asked you to clarify it. Caught out once again. First, it was Oswald "didn't come the stairs" but then refusing to explain whether that meant you have concluded Oswald wasn't the assassin. Now it's Lifton had "credible evidence" for his bizarre body alteration theory, but you won't tell us what "credible evidence" you are making reference to. Take up a different contrarian cause. This one is not working out.
I'm "not entitled to an answer"? HA HA HA. Are you a child?
No, I was talking to you as if you were a child so you might actually understand something for once. It seems it was in vain.
You made an affirmative statement. I just asked you to clarify it.
After I had already stated that I was not going to enter into any kind of discussion about Lifton's theories in this thread.
First, it was Oswald "didn't come the stairs" but then refusing to explain whether that meant you have concluded Oswald wasn't the assassin.
Liar! This was explained to you over and over again. It's not my problem that you have a comprehension problem, as clearly demonstrated by you asking the same already answered question over and over again.
Now it's Lifton had "credible evidence" for his bizarre body alteration theory
Where exactly did I say that? You wouldn't be making stuff up again, would you now?
-
Where exactly did I say that? You wouldn't be making stuff up again, would you now?
Of course he is. He’s Strawman “Smith” — always demanding answers while providing none of his own.
-
David Lifton tried to make sense of the inconsistencies in the recollections of numerous trained medical personnel about the condition of JFK's body in Dallas v. his body in Bethesda. Like many others, I cannot buy his theory but I don't think its wise or justified to toss out the bacy with the bath.
-
I'm "not entitled to an answer"? HA HA HA. Are you a child?
No, I was talking to you as if you were a child so you might actually understand something for once. It seems it was in vain.
You made an affirmative statement. I just asked you to clarify it.
After I had already stated that I was not going to enter into any kind of discussion about Lifton's theories in this thread.
First, it was Oswald "didn't come the stairs" but then refusing to explain whether that meant you have concluded Oswald wasn't the assassin.
Liar! This was explained to you over and over again. It's not my problem that you have a comprehension problem, as clearly demonstrated by you asking the same already answered question over and over again.
Now it's Lifton had "credible evidence" for his bizarre body alteration theory
Where exactly did I say that? You wouldn't be making stuff up again, would you now?
Page after page of this nonsense. You indicated that there was more "credible evidence" to support Lifton's body alteration theory than the case for Oswald's guilt. I asked a simple question about what evidence you found "credible" to support his theory. You refused to answer questioning whether you made the statement. So clear it up for us. Do you believe there is "credible evidence" that supports Lifton's theory or not? If not, we are in agreement. If you do, however, enlighten us with what you find credible. Spare us the endless personal commentary and insults and try to focus on the topic.
-
David Lifton tried to make sense of the inconsistencies in the recollections of numerous trained medical personnel about the condition of JFK's body in Dallas v. his body in Bethesda. Like many others, I cannot buy his theory but I don't think its wise or justified to toss out the bacy with the bath.
Why not if his theory is absurd and baseless? No reasonable person can believe that the plan was to frame Oswald by linking him to a specific rifle and shooting location but then using a different rifle and shooting location to commit the assassination. Why do that when the conspirators could have just used Oswald's rifle and fired the shots from the 6th floor? Thereby eliminating the incredibly risky and complicated necessity of stealing the president's body. Of all the far out CTer theories, the most outrageous is that someone stole JFK's body and returned it before the autopsy. That is tin foil hat stuff that should be rejected without reservation by everyone.
-
Page after page of this nonsense. You indicated that there was more "credible evidence" to support Lifton's body alteration theory than the case for Oswald's guilt. I asked a simple question about what evidence you found "credible" to support his theory. You refused to answer questioning whether you made the statement. So clear it up for us. Do you believe there is "credible evidence" that supports Lifton's theory or not? If not, we are in agreement. If you do, however, enlighten us with what you find credible. Spare us the endless personal commentary and insults and try to focus on the topic.
You indicated that there was more "credible evidence" to support Lifton's body alteration theory than the case for Oswald's guilt.
You refused to answer questioning whether you made the statement.
What is it with you and all these lies? Do you figure you can somehow win an argument or even make a point by lying all the time?
Stop making stuff up. I never indicated anything of the kind.
-
Why not if his theory is absurd and baseless? No reasonable person can believe that the plan was to frame Oswald by linking him to a specific rifle and shooting location but then using a different rifle and shooting location to commit the assassination. Why do that when the conspirators could have just used Oswald's rifle and fired the shots from the 6th floor? Thereby eliminating the incredibly risky and complicated necessity of stealing the president's body. Of all the far out CTer theories, the most outrageous is that someone stole JFK's body and returned it before the autopsy. That is tin foil hat stuff that should be rejected without reservation by everyone.
According to his friends/colleagues, Lifton himself, he was working on an updated/new book - "Final Charade" - that included a claim that Oswald was a willing participant, a conspirator, in the assassination. He wasn't framed and/or an innocent bystander. Lifton's claim was that Oswald was indeed in the "sniper's nest" but that his role was to stick a rifle out the window and fire blanks at JFK.
Why he was supposed to do this is a mystery. Why he went along with this is another one.
To take a step back at this whole conspiracy idea: JFK had enemies in the government, he also had friends. And he also had people who may have disliked him but wouldn't go along with murdering him, essentially committing treason. How any conspirators planning this in advance would know which was which, know that some people they asked to go along with this wouldn't, would expose it before or certainly later after it was done, is something that I've never heard explained by the conspiracy believers. As in: "How could you possibly plan this out and know it wouldn't be revealed?"
Lifton's discussion is here:
-
You indicated that there was more "credible evidence" to support Lifton's body alteration theory than the case for Oswald's guilt.
You refused to answer questioning whether you made the statement.
What is it with you and all these lies? Do you figure you can somehow win an argument or even make a point by lying all the time?
Stop making stuff up. I never indicated anything of the kind.
Good grief. You are like a scared child. I asked you to clarify your position on Lifton's theory. Why these hysterics? Here are your EXACT words:
"Lifton offered more credible evidence for parts of his theory than you ever will and can for Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired."
Now again. What "credible evidence" are you making reference to here?
-
According to his friends/colleagues, Lifton himself, he was working on an updated/new book - "Final Charade" - that included a claim that Oswald was a willing participant, a conspirator, in the assassination. He wasn't framed and/or an innocent bystander. Lifton's claim was that Oswald was indeed in the "sniper's nest" but that his role was to stick a rifle out the window and fire blanks at JFK.
Why he was supposed to do this is a mystery. Why he went along with this is another one.
To take a step back at this whole conspiracy idea: JFK had enemies in the government, he also had friends. And he also had people who may have disliked him but wouldn't go along with murdering him, essentially committing treason. How any conspirators planning this in advance would know which was which, know that some people they asked to go along with this wouldn't, would expose it before or certainly later after it was done, is something that I've never heard explained by the conspiracy believers. As in: "How could you possibly plan this out and know it wouldn't be revealed?"
Lifton's discussion is here:
Maybe Oswald thought he was in a Three Stooges movie with one of those fake guns that has a flag that comes out and says "bang" when you pull the trigger. The fact that anyone can take this nonsense seriously is more fascinating than Lifton's theory. Imagine that there are people who apparently entertain or outright believe Lifton's theory that someone stole JFK's body from Air Force One, altered his body, and then somehow returned it unnoticed before the official autopsy. The fantasy conspirators were capable of these fantastic feats, but they were not smart enough to simply use the gun linked to Oswald to fire the shots and eliminate the necessity of the entire body alteration scenario.
-
Good grief. You are like a scared child. I asked you to clarify your position on Lifton's theory. Why these hysterics? Here are your EXACT words:
"Lifton offered more credible evidence for parts of his theory than you ever will and can for Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired."
Now again. What "credible evidence" are you making reference to here?
As John said earlier;
I’ll answer this “Richard”-style.
Read “Best Evidence”. It’s all in there.
-
The current count of evidence that “Richard” has provided for Oswald being on the sixth floor when the shots were fired still stands at exactly ZERO.
-
The current count of evidence that “Richard” has provided for Oswald being on the sixth floor when the shots were fired still stands at exactly ZERO.
Perhaps we simply haven't been patient enough. We have only been asking for some six months now....
-
Perhaps we simply haven't been patient enough. We have only been asking for some six months now....
So again - what is the "credible evidence" that you believe supports Lifton's theory? Why make a statement like that and then run like a child from it? Do you believe there is "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory or not? If so, what is it? Why is it so hard for you to explain your own position? Duncan should intervene and ban members who make such statements and then refuse to defend them.
-
As John said earlier;
I did read "Best Evidence" many years ago. I don't find it credible. How does that answer the question posed to you? What do you find to be "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory. That is the claim you made. So tell us what "credible evidence" supports his theory. Surely you know since that is your claim.
-
I did read "Best Evidence" many years ago. I don't find it credible. How does that answer the question posed to you?
Great. I read the Warren Commission Report years ago, and I don’t find it credible. How does that answer the questions posed to you? Now where’s your evidence placing Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting?
Why do you get to demand answers when you provide none of your own? If Duncan banned such people, you’d be the first to go.
-
So again - what is the "credible evidence" that you believe supports Lifton's theory? Why make a statement like that and then run like a child from it? Do you believe there is "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory or not? If so, what is it? Why is it so hard for you to explain your own position? Duncan should intervene and ban members who make such statements and then refuse to defend them.
Why make a statement like that and then run like a child from it?
Like you did (and still do) with your pathetic claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and came down the stairs within 75 seconds after the last shot?
Why is it so hard for you to explain your own position?
That's what I have been asking you, re the above mentioned claims, for six months now.
Duncan should intervene and ban members who make such statements and then refuse to defend them.
Says the guy who has refused to defend his own claims for some 6 months now.... Hilarious!
-
I did read "Best Evidence" many years ago. I don't find it credible.
Wow, now there's a surprise.... :D
You find nothing credible that points away from the official narrative.
But now that you have already confirmed that you don't find Lifton's evidence credible, there isn't much point in answering your question. It'll be a complete waste of time, just like talking to you is most of the time.
Great. I read the Warren Commission Report years ago, and I don’t find it credible. How does that answer the questions posed to you? Now where’s your evidence placing Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting?
Why do you get to demand answers when you provide none of your own? If Duncan banned such people, you’d be the first to go.
Thumb1:
He said he had answered our questions by telling us to read the Warren report. Like you, I also did that, years ago and recently I had another look at Chapter 4 (which deals with the assassin on the 6th floor) and there isn't any kind of explanation or even a shred of evidence in there to support Richard's claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and/or that he did come down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot.
-
Even Jesse Curry admitted that they had no proof Oswald fired a rifle and could not put him in that building with a gun in his hand. But “Richard” thinks he has some evidence that he never seems to get around to revealing. It’s a lot like Nixon’s “secret plan” and Trump’s tax returns.
-
Why make a statement like that and then run like a child from it?
Like you did (and still do) with your pathetic claims that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and came down the stairs within 75 seconds after the last shot?
Why is it so hard for you to explain your own position?
That's what I have been asking you, re the above mentioned claims, for six months now.
Duncan should intervene and ban members who make such statements and then refuse to defend them.
Says the guy who has refused to defend his own claims for some 6 months now.... Hilarious!
You and I and many others have gone over and over and over the evidence that links Oswald to the crime more times than I can count. Each single piece. The rifle, prints, witnesses, bullet casings, absence of a credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in the murder of a police officer less than an hour later, resisting arrest, nutty political background, and numerous lies to the police regarding his ownership of a rifle, carrying a long package to work that morning etc. Each piece of evidence has been discussed with you ad nauseum. You know that evidence. It has been compiled by the WC. I know your opinion and you know mine about that evidence. There is no mystery or ambiguity about the evidence that I or any LNer rely upon to conclude it links Oswald to this crime. Whenever you make an idiotic claim like there is "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory and are called on this type of moronic claim you deflect the discussion to a a different topic. So again, what "credible evidence" do you believe supports Lifton's theory as YOU claimed? I've asked this simple and direct question in response to YOUR claim a dozen times and you refuse to answer. It's bizarre. It's YOUR claim.
-
You and I and many others have gone over and over and over the evidence that links Oswald to the crime more times than I can count. Each single piece. The rifle, prints, witnesses, bullet casings, absence of a credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in the murder of a police officer less than an hour later, resisting arrest, nutty political background, and numerous lies to the police regarding his ownership of a rifle, carrying a long package to work that morning etc. Each piece of evidence has been discussed with you ad nauseum. You know that evidence. It has been compiled by the WC. I know your opinion and you know mine about that evidence. There is no mystery or ambiguity about the evidence that I or any LNer rely upon to conclude it links Oswald to this crime. Whenever you make an idiotic claim like there is "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory and are called on this type of moronic claim you deflect the discussion to a a different topic. So again, what "credible evidence" do you believe supports Lifton's theory as YOU claimed? I've asked this simple and direct question in response to YOUR claim a dozen times and you refuse to answer. It's bizarre. It's YOUR claim.
You and I and many others have gone over and over and over the evidence that links Oswald to the crime more times than I can count.
Nope... If that were the case, I wouldn't be asking for six months. Care to try again?
The rifle, prints, witnesses, bullet casings, absence of a credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in the murder of a police officer less than an hour later, resisting arrest, nutty political background, and numerous lies to the police regarding his ownership of a rifle, carrying a long package to work that morning etc. Each piece of evidence has been discussed with you ad nauseum. You know that evidence.
Yes, I know this evidence and none of it comes even close to support your claim that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the shots. Apart from the rifle issue, it's all biased circumstantial BS, speculation and wild assumptions. As far as the rifle goes - and I have asked you this before -, even if Oswald did order and receive that particular rifle in March 1963, how does that even begin to prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired on 11/22/63?
It has been compiled by the WC. I know your opinion and you know mine about that evidence.
Sure, but our opinions about the WC evidence have nothing to do with what I have been asking up for months now. You claimed Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot. For both of your claims there is not a shred of evidence in the WC report. So, again, other than just an assumption or even a flawed conclusion on your part, what is your evidence that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs after the last shot?
There is no mystery or ambiguity about the evidence that I or any LNer rely upon to conclude it links Oswald to this crime.
You can't be serious. Nearly 60 years of discussion is a clear sign there is massive mystery and ambiguity about the evidence!
Whenever you make an idiotic claim like there is "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory and are called on this type of moronic claim you deflect the discussion to a a different topic.
I did no such thing. I merely pointed out your massive hypocrisy. You've been playing this game for six months now. Pot meet kettle! I, on the other, have clearly stated from the beginning that I wasn't going to discuss Lifton's theories with you in a thread that deals with the man's death.
Btw, there is no "idiotic claim". What I said was that Lifton provided more credible evidence for his theories than you have ever presented for your wild and pathetic claims about Oswald being on the 6th floor. That's all I said and then you, as per usual, turned it all into a three ring circus.
I've asked this simple and direct question in response to YOUR claim a dozen times and you refuse to answer. It's bizarre. It's YOUR claim.
Join the club. I've been asking for 6 months for the evidence that supports your wild claims about Oswald being on the 6th floor and coming down the stairs and I am still waiting. Now, that's really bizarre!
-
Notice the trademark “Richard” sleight-of-hand here. He changes “evidence that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and came down the stairs within 75 seconds after the last shot” to “evidence that links Oswald to the crime”. Not that he has that either. Then he launches into his usual litany of false and unsubstantiated claims.
-
You and I and many others have gone over and over and over the evidence that links Oswald to the crime more times than I can count.
Nope... If that were the case, I wouldn't be asking for six months. Care to try again?
The rifle, prints, witnesses, bullet casings, absence of a credible alibi, flight from the scene, involvement in the murder of a police officer less than an hour later, resisting arrest, nutty political background, and numerous lies to the police regarding his ownership of a rifle, carrying a long package to work that morning etc. Each piece of evidence has been discussed with you ad nauseum. You know that evidence.
Yes, I know this evidence and none of it comes even close to support your claim that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the shots. Apart from the rifle issue, it's all biased circumstantial BS, speculation and wild assumptions. As far as the rifle goes - and I have asked you this before -, even if Oswald did order and receive that particular rifle in March 1963, how does that even begin to prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired on 11/22/63?
It has been compiled by the WC. I know your opinion and you know mine about that evidence.
Sure, but our opinions about the WC evidence have nothing to do with what I have been asking up for months now. You claimed Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot. For both of your claims there is not a shred of evidence in the WC report. So, again, other than just an assumption or even a flawed conclusion on your part, what is your evidence that Oswald was on the 6th floor when the shots were fired and that he came down the stairs after the last shot?
There is no mystery or ambiguity about the evidence that I or any LNer rely upon to conclude it links Oswald to this crime.
You can't be serious. Nearly 60 years of discussion is a clear sign there is massive mystery and ambiguity about the evidence!
Whenever you make an idiotic claim like there is "credible evidence" to support Lifton's theory and are called on this type of moronic claim you deflect the discussion to a a different topic.
I did no such thing. I merely pointed out your massive hypocrisy. You've been playing this game for six months now. Pot meet kettle! I, on the other, have clearly stated from the beginning that I wasn't going to discuss Lifton's theories with you in a thread that deals with the man's death.
Btw, there is no "idiotic claim". What I said was that Lifton provided more credible evidence for his theories than you have ever presented for your wild and pathetic claims about Oswald being on the 6th floor. That's all I said and then you, as per usual, turned it all into a three ring circus.
I've asked this simple and direct question in response to YOUR claim a dozen times and you refuse to answer. It's bizarre. It's YOUR claim.
Join the club. I've been asking for 6 months for the evidence that supports your wild claims about Oswald being on the 6th floor and coming down the stairs and I am still waiting. Now, that's really bizarre!
Amazing. So many words and none relevant to any matter of substance. You said Lifton provided "more credible evidence for his theories" than exists to prove Oswald's guilt. Even if you believe there is zero credible evidence of Oswald's guilt, by claiming that there is "more credible evidence" of Lifton's theory suggests that you must have concluded that it is supported by some "credible evidence." But you refuse to state what it is. What a coward. And you really are claiming that you have not discussed the evidence against Oswald with anyone here? Like his ownership of a rifle etc. Delusional. You are here night and day for years. Granted most of your posts derail threads to avoid the evidence with deflection, personal commentary and insults but there have been hundreds or thousands of exchanges on the evidence of Oswald's guilt.
-
Amazing. So many words and none relevant to any matter of substance. You said Lifton provided "more credible evidence for his theories" than exists to prove Oswald's guilt. Even if you believe there is zero credible evidence of Oswald's guilt, by claiming that there is "more credible evidence" of Lifton's theory suggests that you must have concluded that it is supported by some "credible evidence." But you refuse to state what it is. What a coward. And you really are claiming that you have not discussed the evidence against Oswald with anyone here? Like his ownership of a rifle etc. Delusional. You are here night and day for years. Granted most of your posts derail threads to avoid the evidence with deflection, personal commentary and insults but there have been hundreds or thousands of exchanges on the evidence of Oswald's guilt.
So many words and none relevant to any matter of substance.
Huh? Oswald's alleged presence on the 6th floor when the shots were fired is not relevant to any matter of substance? Really?
You said Lifton provided "more credible evidence for his theories" than exists to prove Oswald's guilt.
Stop making up stuff. I never said anything of the kind
And you really are claiming that you have not discussed the evidence against Oswald with anyone here?
No. Learn to read before you make stupid comments like this
You are here night and day for years.
If it were true (which it isn't), you would have to be "here night and day for years" to even know that.
Crappy comments like this are expected from you when you have run out of reasonal and plausible arguments to present.
Granted most of your posts derail threads to avoid the evidence with deflection, personal commentary and insults
Stop looking in the mirror!
but there have been hundreds or thousands of exchanges on the evidence of Oswald's guilt.
You do know where you are, don't you? What else but discussions about the evidence and/or Oswald's guilt do you expect on a JFK assassination forum?
-
So many words and none relevant to any matter of substance.
Huh? Oswald's alleged presence on the 6th floor when the shots were fired is not relevant to any matter of substance? Really?
You said Lifton provided "more credible evidence for his theories" than exists to prove Oswald's guilt.
Stop making up stuff. I never said anything of the kind
Truly amazing. A simple question was asked about your claim. You have spent countless posts going down every rabbit hole. Here are your exact words again:
"Lifton offered more credible evidence for parts of his theory than you ever will and can for Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired."
So again, what "credible evidence" supports Lifton's theory?
-
Truly amazing. A simple question was asked about your claim. You have spent countless posts going down every rabbit hole. Here are your exact words again:
"Lifton offered more credible evidence for parts of his theory than you ever will and can for Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired."
So again, what "credible evidence" supports Lifton's theory?
You can ask that question 1000 times more and whine and complain as much as you like, my reply is always going to be the same;
I have no intention to enter into any kind of discussion about Lifton's theories, based on your own pathetically biased opinions, in a thread that deals with the man's death.
Only a fool asks the same question over and over again and expects a different reply than the one already given.
Besides, you've already told us that you find Lifton's evidence not credible and you have demonstrated time after time that you are completely clueless about the credibility and evidentiary value of corroborated authentic evidence, so what would be the point in answering your question? It would be a complete waste of time and I am not going to play your usual game!
So, try to get this through your thick skull; my original statement was about you not providing any evidence for your BS claims about Oswald being on the 6th floor when the shots were fired. Lifton, on the other hand, wrote a book containing credible corroborated evidence, at for at least some parts of his theory, which makes my statement true, regardless of you considering his evidence credible or not.
-
Isn't it far easier to just kill the President and split town instead of setting up Oswald (how could they be sure he wouldn't be in someone's company at 12:30 PM?) and stealing/altering the body?
-
Maybe instead of stamping his feet like a petulant child, “Richard” should answer for his own evidentiary claim (that there is evidence proving that Oswald was on the sixth floor with a rifle when the shots were fired and went down the northwest stairs in 75 seconds without being seen or heard by at least 12 people along the way), before making demands of others. Is this the All About What “Richard” wants show?
-
Isn't it far easier to just kill the President and split town instead of setting up Oswald (how could they be sure he wouldn't be in someone's company at 12:30 PM?) and stealing/altering the body?
They wanted to frame a pro-Castro assassin to justify an invasion of Cuba. Sure, they then investigated the assassination and cleared Cuba/Castro of any role - thereby removing the reason/justification or purpose of the entire conspiracy - but let's not sweat the details. It's conspiracy thinking; it doesn't have to make sense, be logical; it just has to promote a conspiracy.
How about this alternative? Plant the rifle and shells in front of where JFK was located? Frame Oswald as being behind the fence. Then you don't have to change everything.
-
They wanted to frame a pro-Castro assassin to justify an invasion of Cuba. Sure, they then investigated the assassination and cleared Cuba/Castro of any role - thereby removing the reason/justification or purpose of the entire conspiracy - but let's not sweat the details. It's conspiracy thinking; it doesn't have to make sense, be logical; it just has to promote a conspiracy.
How about this alternative? Plant the rifle and shells in front of where JFK was located? Frame Oswald as being behind the fence. Then you don't have to change everything.
They wanted to frame a pro-Castro assassin to justify an invasion of Cuba.
Who are "they" and how in the world would you know what "they" wanted to do?
How about this alternative? Plant the rifle and shells in front of where JFK was located? Frame Oswald as being behind the fence. Then you don't have to change everything.
Some witnesses said they heard shots coming from more than one direction. How do you work that into your "alternative"?
-
We should start numbering the bad LN arguments.
“The conspiracy that I just dreamed up in my head would never do this thing I just made up and attributed to conspiracy theorists, therefore Oswald did it”.
-
Who are "they" and how in the world would you know what "they" wanted to do?
Unnamed "rogue elements." >:(
-
Sad news to learn David has passed. I interviewed him on the phone in 1986. At the time I was bewildered why Sylvia Meagher was so angry with him and Lifton didn't really know why. He admonished me for stressing the importance of the Secret Service speed limit but I felt the president was extremely vulnerable particularly since there were so many threats. There were some important discoveries in "Best Evidence" but I don't agree with everything David said over the years. I respect his research and tenacity greatly and he is rightly venerated as one of the most important critics of the laughable conclusions of the government. Hoping his finale, "Final Charade," is published soon.
-
Word is that Lifton lost the manuscript in a computer crash.