David Lifton has died

[Robert Reeves]

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!

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Well done Tracy.

Thank you.

[Richard Smith]

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.

[Martin Weidmann]

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.

[Richard Smith]

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.

[Martin Weidmann]

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.

[Richard Smith]

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. 

[Martin Weidmann]

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.