ADDENDUM to PKZIP 2 Manual -------------------------- This file contains the most up-to-date information, additions and changes to the PKZIP version 2 manual. AUTHENTICITY VERIFICATION FEATURE --------------------------------- The Authenticity Verification information you receive from PKWARE will include two AV Serial Numbers and one checksum. The Serial Numbers and checksum include BOTH letters and numbers. ALL LETTERS are LOWER CASE, with the exception of the letter L. The letter L will be printed in upper case to avoid confusion with the number one. After both Serial Numbers are entered using the PUTAV.EXE, the program will return a checksum value. This checksum must match the one provided by PKWARE. If the checksums do not match, then the installation was not performed correctly and PUTAV.EXE should be run again to ensure that the Serial Numbers and Name were entered correctly. If you run PUTAV.EXE and you encounter the error, "WRONG VERSION OF PKZIP.EXE", verify that you are running PUTAV on the REGISTERED version of PKZIP.EXE. AVEXTRA.TXT ----------- With the PKZIP 2 Authenticity Verification feature, additional text can be displayed on subsequent lines following the verification message. An ASCII text file named AVEXTRA.TXT is created containing the additional text you want displayed. When the AVEXTRA.TXT file is in the current directory when you use the "PKZIP -!" option, PKZIP will add this text to the .ZIP file and PKUNZIP will display it after the normal Authenticity Verification message. The Authenticity Verification feature is available only to registered users of PKZIP. SELF-EXTRACTING FILES ACROSS MULTIPLE DISKETTES ----------------------------------------------- PKZIP 2 has the ability to compress a large .ZIP file across multiple diskettes. Self-extracting files CAN NOT span multiple disks. This would make the PKSFX code extremely large. A simple batch file can be created that would uncompress across multiple diskettes. All that would be required is to have the batch file follow this procedure: 1. Create a batch file called install.bat 2. Edit install.bat and in that file have the following line: pkunzip -d a:program c:\test This batch file would create the directory C:\TEST on your computer and then unzip the file called PROGRAM.ZIP into the c:\test directory. PKUNZIP will prompt the user to enter the diskettes in the extraction order. PKCFG.EXE --------- * PKCFG.EXE is only included in the registered version of PKZIP. PKZIP.EXE can have many of its features configured with a configuration file called PKZIP.CFG. This configuration file can be located in either your current directory, a directory specified with the environment variable PKZIP.CFG, or in the directory that PKZIP.EXE is located. PKZIP.EXE will search for the configuration in each location in the order listed above. This means that you may have a default configuration file that is easily overridden by using a configuration file in either of the first two locations. Any option that is set in the configuration file may be overridden from the command line. The configuration file may be created manually with a text editor. The PKCFG.EXE program will look for an existing configuration file in the same locations and order that PKZIP.EXE would look. If the PKCFG.EXE program finds an existing configuration file it will load it. The existing configuration values will be shown in the place of the defaults. A list of options will be displayed on the screen, and a highlighted cursor indicates the option that you can modify. PK SAFE ANSI ----------- * PKSFANSI.COM is only included in the registered version of PKZIP. Another program included with registration of PKZIP 2 is called PKSFANSI.COM. PKSFANSI is a terminate and stay resident program that disables ANSI keyboard key Reassignments, thereby preventing ANSI "bombs" embedded in any text file (such as README files) or output by any program. Normally, ANSI sequences that redefine the keyboard could be hidden inside ANY text file or program, and could be executed completely unnoticed until it is too late. PKSFANSI intercepts calls to the ANSI.SYS or other ANSI device drivers, and filters out any keyboard reassignments, while allowing other ANSI sequences through unaltered. If a keyboard reassignment is attempted, PKSFANSI will intercept the sequence and discard it. PKSFANSI will also BEEP to alert you that a reassignment was attempted. PKSFANSI requires less than 1K bytes resident RAM, and should work with any ANSI driver, such as the standard ANSI.SYS driver, NANSI, ZANSI, DVANSI, etc. Note that if you use a memory resident ANSI driver, such as the DESQview DVANSI.COM driver, PKSFANSI should be loaded after the ANSI driver is loaded. Using PKZIP and DPMI -------------------- If you experience difficulties when using PKZIP in a DOS window under Windows, use the -) option to disable DPMI support. If this eliminates the problem, you may default this option for PKZIP by using the configuration file (see manual for details). With PKUNZIP, this option may be set as an environment variable (see below for details). PKUNZIP as an Environment Variable ---------------------------------- PKUNZIP includes the ability to use an environment variable as a continuation of the command line. An option, or number of options may be specified by an environment variable. PKUNZIP will treat the variables as if they were passed on the command line. example: set PKUNZIP=-) This example would disable DPMI usage. Note that since the PKUNZIP environment variable is a continuation of the command line; it will supersede any preceding option on the command line. Minimum DOS Requirements for SPANNING & FORMATTING -------------------------------------------------- For PKZIP 2 to span multiple disks with a .ZIP file, DOS 3.0 or greater is required. To be able to format diskettes on-the-fly, DOS 3.2 or greater is required. PKUNZJR.COM & PKSFX Junior -------------------------- When using PKUNZJR or PKSFX Junior, remember to end your output path with a : or a \. Because the PKUNZJR and PKSFX Junior were designed to be as small as possible, please note that they perform minimal error checking. CHANGE TO "MOVE" OPTION ----------------------- When using the -m option in PKZIP.EXE PKZIP will now remove the directories and subdirectories after the compression process has been completed. This feature is turned on by default. If you wish PKZIP not to remove the directories/subdirectories, use a -m- option to disable this feature. PKNOFASTCHAR= Environment Variable --------------------------------- This tells PKZIP/PKUNZIP to use the slow DOS 1.x/2.x character output function calls rather than the 'DOS Fast Character Output' function. This option is designed for compatability with TSR's or BBS doors etc. that do not intercept the DOS Fast Character Output function. ERROR MESSAGES -------------- This is an addendum to the ERROR MESSAGES found in the manual. PKZIP: (E[19-23] and E29) Insufficient Memory PKZIP: (E26) DOS 3.0 or later needed to span disks PKZIP: (E26) DOS 3.2 or later needed to format disks PKZIP: (E28) Destination for .ZIP file is same as temporary file PKZIP: (E28) Source and destination is the same PKZIP: (W07) Warning! Bad System Track PKZIP: (W08) Warning! Can't write FAT PKZIP: (W09) Warning! Can't write root directory PKZIP: (W10) Warning! Can't write boot sector ZIP2EXE: (E09) Can't create ouput file ZIP2EXE: (W01) Warning! The file already exists, overwrite (y/n)? PKSFX: Warnings numbers are the same as PKUNZIP [9-18,20,21,23,24] PKSFX: (E02,E03) Error in .EXE file PKSFXJR: No numbers are printed by PKSFXJR. The manual states that PKSFXJR will report error numbers, but this is incorrect. It will print only a message, no number is printed. The errorlevel will be returned to DOS however. SUMMARY ------- PKZIP: 0 No Error 1 Bad file name or file specification 2,3 Error in .ZIP file 4-11 Insufficient Memory 12 No files were found to add to the .ZIP, or no files were specified for deletion 13 File not found. The specified .ZIP file or list file was not found 14 Insufficient disk space for .ZIP comment or Insufficient disk space for update file or Disk Full, file XXXXX 15 .ZIP file is read-only and can not be modified 16 Bad or illegal parameters specified. (help screen displayed) 17 Too many files 18 Could not open file 19-23,29 Insufficient Memory 26 DOS 3.2 or later needed to span disks 28 Destination for .ZIP is same as temporary file or Source and destination is the same 255 User pressed control-c or control-break ZIP2EXE: 0 No error 1 Error in .ZIP file 2 Error in .ZIP file, use PKZIPFIX 3-4 Insufficient memory to process file 6 Bad or illegal parameters specified. (help screen displayed) 7 Can't open Source file 8 Error in .ZIP file 9 Disk full writing target file during EXE to ZIP process 11 Disk full writing target file during ZIP to EXE process 12 .ZIP file being converted contains a file compressed with a method not supported by the version of PKSFX being attached by ZIP2EXE 13 User answered "No" in response to an "overwrite(y/n)?" prompt PKSFX: 1 Warning error such as: File fails CRC check, Unknown compression method. 2,3 Can't find .EXE file 4-8 Insufficient memory 9 Unable to locate listfile 10 Bad or illegal parameters specified. (help screen displayed) 12 User aborted at comment pausing, "Extract now (y/n)?" prompt 2,3,13 Error in .EXE file 50 Disk full NOTES ----- Note, the -x option in PKUNZIP now is used to specify files to eXclude. As stated in the PKUNZIP 1.1 documenation, use of '-x' to mean eXtract would not be supported in future versions of PKUNZIP. The -e option of PKUNZIP specifies extraction. Note, the -o and -k, as well as the ZIPDATE= options in the pkzip.cfg file, will be ignored when used with the -& option. Note, PKZIP requires 206K of memory if no EMS or XMS is available, and 108K if enough EMS/XMS is available. Note, In the PKZIP manual, it states that the -o option will set .ZIP file date to oldest file in .ZIP file. This should read set .ZIP file date to latest, not oldest. Note, Page 76 of the PKZIP manual incorrectly lists the default value of view as Long. The default value of view is normal. Note, When using either the -&l or -&u, both of these options will format the destination diskette(s). PKZIP BACKUP GUIDE ------------------ PKZIP can now create .ZIP files that exceed the size of a floppy disk. You can use PKZIP to backup your entire hard disk and unlike most backup programs, PKZIP can use disks formatted by DOS, or it can format the disk for you. PKZIP can optionally erase all files on the destination disk(s), or leave those files intact. PKZIP can optionally quick format the destination disk(s), or do a normal (unconditional) format. A quick format erases the information on the disk without formatting each track, greatly reducing the time required to format a disk. Option Description -------------------------------------------------------------------- -& Span disks if necessary. You must specify this option if you wish to create a .ZIP file on multiple disks. If this option is not specified and you exceed the capacity of a floppy disk, a DISK FULL error message will result. -&f Format the destination disk. PKZIP will format the destination disk(s) if you specify this option. If the disk has been formatted previously, a quick format will be performed, otherwise a full format will be performed. -&fl The destination disk is to be formatted to low density. If you plan to use low density disks in a high density disk drive, this option is required. For example, if you have a 1.44 meg floppy disk drive, and plan to zip to 720K disks and your disks are not formatted, you must specify this option. If your disk drive is a 360K or 720K drive, this option is not required. If any information was previously contained on the disk, it will be erased. -&u Unconditionally (always) format the disk. Always format the disk before being used. A full format will be used, a quick format will never be performed. If any information was previously contained on the disk, it will be erased. -&ul Unconditionally (always) format a low density disk in a high density disk drive. Always format the disk before being used. A full format will be used, a quick format will never be performed. If any information was previously contained on the disk, it will be erased. -&w Wipe the disk. (Erase all files and subdirectories) This is similar to -&f, except the files are deleted, rather than formatting the disk. This is for usage with non floppy removable devices, such as Bernoulli boxes. -&s[d:] Include subdirectories in zipping process (similar to -rp \*.*). -&v Turn on DOS verify when spanning. This may also be set by using BACKUP=verify in the pkzip.cfg file. This option tells PKZIP that you wish to backup the entire disk drive. The current disk drive will be used if no disk drive is specifed. You do not need to specify the -rp option (recurse and store pathnames). If you also specify files on another disk drive, these files will be compressed, as well as all files on the default drive. (Please see following examples.) All options are case insensitive, but this may change in future versions. We suggest you USE LOWER CASE LETTERS FOR FUTURE COMPATIBILITY. The -&l option must be specified with -&u or -&f. * Note: If you create a .ZIP file with the same name as exists on a disk set, you do not need to use the WIPE or FORMAT options. PKZIP will create a new .ZIP file with the same name; this method is faster. * Note: All the PKZIP Configuration File options can be overridden on the command line by specifying the option and a '-'. For example, -&f- will override "BACKUP=FORMAT" in the Configuration File and turn off formatting. * Note: When using PKUNZIP.EXE to restore a from a spanned backup set, it is most efficient to start by inserting the last diskette. * Note: If you would like to use PKZIP.EXE for full and incremental backups, use the -a+ for the full backup. This will turn off the archive attribute after the files have been compressed. Then to perform a incremental backup, use the -i option. This will compress only files that have changed since they were last backed up. Examples -------- Command Line Description ----------------------------------------------------------------- pkzip a:zipfile -& Zip the current directory to drive A:, and span disks if necessary. The files currently on drive A: will not be affected. C:\>pkzip a:zipfile -&s Zip all files on drive C: to the A: drive. C:\>pkzip b:zipfile -&s d:\sd\*.* Zip all files on drive C: (the current drive), and all files in the D:\SD directory to the B: drive. C:\>pkzip a:zipfile -&s d:\*.BAT Zip all the files on drive C: and all .BAT files on drive D: to the A: drive. pkzip a:zipfile -&f -rp Zip the current directory and its subdirectories to drive A:, and format each disk. A quick format will be performed if possible, which is much faster than a unconditional format. pkzip a:zipfile -&u -rp Same as above, except the disk will be unconditionally formatted. pkzip a:zipfile -&fl Zip the current directory to drive A:, and format each disk to low density. This option only applies to users using a 360K floppy disk in a 1.2 meg drive, or users using a 720K floppy disk in a 1.44 meg drive. A quick format will be performed if possible, which is much faster than a unconditional format. pkzip a:zipfile -&ul Same as above, except the disk will be unconditionally formatted (do not quick format). pkzip a:zipfile -&w -rp Zip the current directory and its subdirectories to drive A:, and wipe each disk. All files and subdirectories will be erased from the A: drive. The disk will not be formatted or quick formatted. pkzip a:zipfile -&fs Zip the current disk drive (including subdirectories) to drive A:, and format each disk. If the destination disk has previously been formatted, a quick format will be performed. Otherwise, an unconditional format will be performed. New Options For the PKZIP.CFG Configuration File ------------------------------------------------ The keyword BACKUP= can be followed by the following keywords: SPAN The -& option is enabled. If this keyword is not specified, the following options will only be enabled when -& is specified on the command line. Same as -&. UNCONDITIONAL Format the disk unconditionally. Same as -&u. LOW Using low density disks. Same as -&l FORMAT Format the disks. Same as -&f. WIPE Wipe the disks. Same as -&w. FULL Do a full backup. Same as -&s. VERIFY Turn on DOS verify when spanning. Same as -&v Examples Same as -------------------------------------------------------- BACKUP=SPAN FORMAT -&f BACKUP=SPAN FORMAT UNCONDITIONAL -&u BACKUP=LOW VERIFY SPAN -&lv BACKUP=FORMAT WIPE Illegal -- WIPE and FORMAT are exclusive. BACKUP=FULL -&s BACKUP=FULL WIPE -&sw PKWARE, PKZIP, PKUNZIP and PKSFX are registered trademarks of PKWARE, Inc. PKSFANSI and PKCFG are trademarks of PKWARE, Inc. Trademarks of other companies mentioned appear for identification purposes only and are the property of their respective companies. { A{D:LICENSE.DOC INFORMATION ON LICENSING USE ON MORE THAN ONE COMPUTER To use PKWARE products in a commercial, educational or governmental agency on more than one computer, it is necessary to purchase a SITE LICENSE. The Site License allows the organization to use the software package on up to the number of computers licensed. Site License fees are based on the total number of computers that will use the software package. Please use the "Multiple Use Order Form" in the ORDER.DOC file. NOTE THAT THE SITE LICENSE INCLUDES ONE COPY OF THE SOFTWARE AND DOCUMENTATION. The Site License allows you to copy it for the number of machines licensed. Distributing, repackaging, or reselling of the software to third parties is not allowed. All licenses are prepaid. DISTRIBUTION LICENSE A Distribution License is required by an organization, company or government agency to use PKWARE programs to facilitate the distribution of software or data to outside parties. To use PKWARE programs within your organization, company, educational or government agency, please see the Site License information. Please note that if a self-extracting file (created with ZIP2EXE) is used, a Distribution License is required. The PKWARE code is distributed in the form of the PKSFX program combined with file(s) being distributed. Complete and return the following Application for Distribution License to receive a quotation. There is no obligation to complete and return the Application to receive a quotation. You may fax or mail the completed Application. PKWARE will send a written quotation. The Distribution License is non-exclusive and non-transferable. All licenses are prepaid. APPLICATION FOR DISTRIBUTION LICENSE (NOTE: there is no obligation to complete the application for a quotation. Please print or type.) NAME: ____________________________________________________ COMPANY: ____________________________________________________ TITLE: _________________________________ DATE:____________ ADDRESS: ____________________________________________________ CITY: _______________________________ STATE: __________ ZIP CODE: _____________ (COUNTRY:) __________________________ PHONE #: (_____)______________ FAX #: (____)________________ PLEASE COMPLETE AS BEST AS POSSIBLE. 1) I am interested in distributing the program(s): (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): PKZIP ___ (for compression) for MS-DOS ___ PKUNZIP ___ (for extraction) for OS/2 ___ PKSFX ___ (self-extracting files created with ZIP2EXE for extraction) 2) In what quantity do you estimate distributing the software indicated above? ________ copies. Per year ____ or one time ____ (CHECK ONLY ONE). 3) If you are interested in distributing PKZIP, PKUNZIP or PKSFX to SAVE DISKETTES, how many disks are required BEFORE compression ______, and how many diskettes are required AFTER compression _____ (cont'd) 4) Please complete the following: (feel free to attach additional sheets) - Describe the intended usage of the PKWARE programs indicated in question 1. - Describe the software packages(s) that you intend to distri- bute with or using the PKWARE programs, and their price or price range. - List any other relevant information: 5) State the names(s) of the software package(s)/program(s) which will be distributed using the PKWARE programs. 6) Please indicate the state or country in which your organization is incorporated: ( A D:MANUAL.DOC  Ŀ PKZIP 2 ÿ The next generation in compression software *SHAREWARE MANUAL* ٳ PKZIP PKUNZIP PKSFX PKZIPFIX PKUNZJR ڴ PKWARE, Inc. 9025 N. Deerwood Drive Brown Deer, WI 53223 USA Phone (414) 354-8699 Fax (414) 354-8559 BBS (414) 354-8670 Ͼ Copyright 1989-1993 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. U.S. Patent No. 5,051,745 No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any other language or computer language in whole or in part, in any form or by any means, whether it be electronic, mechanical, magnetic, optical, manual or otherwise, without prior written consent of PKWARE, Inc. PKWARE, Inc. disclaims all warranties as to this software, whether express or implied, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, functionality, data integrity or protection. PKWARE, the PKWARE logo, PKZIP, PKUNZIP, and PKSFX are registered trademarks of PKWARE, Inc. StupenDOS is a trademark of Eclipse Technologies, Inc. MS-DOS is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation. Netware and Novell are registered trademarks of Novell, Inc. Trademarks of other companies mentioned in this documentation appear for identification purposes only and are the property of their respective companies. *** PLEASE NOTE *** This is a condensed version of the manual provided with the registered version of PKZIP. Some sections have been condensed or omitted in this shareware version. Most notably, the tutorial had to be omitted. See the ADDENDUM.DOC file for information about the benefits of registering PKZIP. CONTENTS ________________________________________________________________ Introduction 1 Product Support ......................................... 3 ________________________________________________________________ Installation 5 Installing PKZIP On Your Hard Drive ..................... 5 The Addendum File .................................. 7 ________________________________________________________________ Tutorial 8 Getting Started ......................................... 8 Simple PKZIP and PKUNZIP usage ......................... 10 Zipping a Single File ............................. 12 Zipping Multiple Files ............................ 14 Testing .ZIP files ................................ 15 Storing and Rebuilding Directory Structures ............ 16 Deleting Files from a .ZIP file ................... 19 Speed vs. Size ......................................... 21 Selecting the Compression Type ......................... 23 Using Advanced Features ................................ 24 Extracting Files to a Device ...................... 24 Storing and Restoring the Volume Label ............ 25 Compressing and Extracting Hidden and System Files 26 Zipfile and File Comments ......................... 27 Suggested Reading ...................................... 29 PKWARE Inc. Contents i ________________________________________________________________ PKZIP Command Reference 30 ________________________________________________________________ PKTMP 47 ________________________________________________________________ PKUNZIP Command Reference 48 ________________________________________________________________ PKSFX/ZIP2EXE 57 Creating a Self-Extracting File ........................ 57 PKSFX Junior ........................................... 57 PKUNZIP Junior ......................................... 58 PKSFX Command Summary .................................. 59 Modifying a Self-Extracting File ....................... 60 Stripping the PKSFX Code ............................... 60 Sending a Self-Extractor ............................... 60 With PKSFX Junior ................................. 61 With PKSFX ........................................ 61 Confirm before extract ................................. 62 Memory Requirements .................................... 62 ________________________________________________________________ Using List Files 63 Reading List Files ..................................... 64 Generating List Files .................................. 65 List file size ......................................... 66 ________________________________________________________________ Using Data Encryption 68 Long Keys ......................................... 69 Complex Keys ...................................... 69 Multiple Keys ..................................... 70 How secure is PKZIP encryption? ................... 72 ii Contents PKZIP 2 ________________________________________________________________ PKZIP Configuration ......................................... 74 PKZIP.CFG .............................................. 75 ________________________________________________________________ Authenticity Verification 78 Using PUTAV ............................................ 78 Application for Authenticity Verification 81 ________________________________________________________________ F.A.Q. (Frequently Asked Questions) ......................... 82 ________________________________________________________________ How Does PKZIP Work? 91 Compression ............................................ 91 Information content ............................... 91 Binary Data Representation ........................ 92 Speed vs. Size .................................... 95 Archiving .............................................. 95 How PKZIP Builds a .ZIP File ...................... 97 Building a New .ZIP File .......................... 97 The .ZIP File Structure ........................... 98 ________________________________________________________________ Trouble-Shooting 101 Determining the Problem .......................... 101 Customer Support Form ............................ 105 ________________________________________________________________ ERROR MESSAGES 107 Error Levels .......................................... 118 ________________________________________________________________ PK Safe ANSI 120 Usage ............................................ 120 Monochrome Option ................................ 121 PKWARE Inc. Contents iii FEATURES The PKZIP 2 software utilities include many features. Here are just a few of them: Improved Compression. PKZIP 2 implements a new compression algorithm called Deflating. Deflating has varying levels of compression and speed available, allowing you to specify the method of compression to be employed. Both the speed and amount of compression are improved over previous versions of PKZIP. Multi-volume archive support. PKZIP 2 can create .ZIP files larger than a single floppy disk. Subdirectory storage. PKZIP 2 can find and store subdirectory pathnames within a .ZIP file. Files can then be restored to their original subdirectories, or they may be re-created. Storage includes empty subdirectories. Automatic detection and utilization of 80386 and 80486 CPU's, EMS and XMS memory, Novell Netware, and 32-bit DPMI. PKZIP 2 gets the most out of your machine by using the power of modern CPU's. EMS and XMS support offer the ability to process more files with less available conventional memory. Novell Netware and 32-bit DPMI support offer speed improvements. The above features also allow you to get the best performance when in a DOS session under OS/2 or Windows. OS/2 and Windows offer EMS, XMS and 32-bit DPMI without your using extra drivers. Memory Requirements. PKZIP requires a minimum of 183K of conventional memory. If EMS is available, the conventional memory requirement is 85K. PKUNZIP requires 90K of conventional memory. PKSFX requires a minumum of 71K of memory. Easy to use configuration program. PKZIP 2 can be configured to best suit your needs through the use of the PKCFG program. PKSFX Junior and PKUNZIP Junior. These "Junior" programs use very little memory and are extremely small. Although they are reduced in ability, their small size makes them very useful. Password Encryption. Sensitive data files can be scrambled with password protection. The security of this feature has been improved in PKZIP 2. Authenticity Verification. Users requiring authentication of archive files may request an Authenticity Verification code. This allows users to create .ZIP files which reveal tampering. iv Features PKZIP 2 INTRODUCTION Welcome to PKZIP 2.0. This release continues the high performance tradition of previous versions of PKZIP, with a host of new features. In addition to an improved reference section, this manual contains a step-by-step tutorial. By following the Installation, Tutorial and Advanced Features sections in order you will learn how to use PKZIP to your best advantage. Use the Command Reference sections in your day-to-day use of PKZIP. Convenient indices to these sections are printed on the inside of the front and back covers. PKZIP is a powerful program. It has many options, but it is possible to make use of PKZIP by knowing only a few simple options. You can start out with a basic understanding and learn more if and when you need to use additional features. It is recommended that you first read through this introduction and the installation procedure. Then perform the installation and work through the Tutorial in order. Follow up with the Advanced Features section of the Tutorial. You should not attempt to use the PKZIP Backup Guide until you have completed (and understand) the entire tutorial. Conventions This manual follows several conventions for clarity and to help you find information quickly. Text that you would see on your computer screen is shown here in a "typewriter" typeface. Text that would be entered by you in these examples is shown in bold: C:\DOS>dir Bold text is also used for emphasis and to point out terms which are then shown in vocabulary boxes. Vocabulary Terms that are felt to be technical enough to require explanation are listed in convenient vocabulary blocks. These vocabulary terms are with the first instance of the word, so that you may read them and continue on without needing to search for the glossary. This block is an example. ** Anything that we want to be sure you don't miss will be pointed out in the same manner as this paragraph. PKWARE Inc. Introduction 1 Command Syntax Standard command specification syntax is used throughout the Command Reference section. This is used to differentiate between command option parameters which are optional or mandatory, and to indicate when certain options may be combined: < > Angle Brackets are used to indicate a command option parameter which must be present. The option parameter will follow immediately after the option with no space. [ ] Square Brackets indicate a command option parameter which is not mandatory. , | If there are several possible options which may be used in the position indicated by the angle or square brackets, they will be separated by either a Comma or a Vertical Bar. If options are separated by a comma, then more than one of the options may be used simultaneously. If they are separated by a vertical bar, the options are exclusive of one another and only one may be used at a time. Following are some abstract examples of how these syntax rules are applied. Syntax Valid Entries --------------------------------------------------- -z -za, -zab, -zac, -zbc, -zabc -z -za, -zb, -zc -z[a,b] -za, -zb, -zab, -z -z -za, -zb, -zac, -zbc -zab or -zabc would be invalid. 2 Introduction PKZIP 2 Product Support We hope that your use of PKZIP and PKUNZIP will be enjoyable and trouble- free. It is our intention to provide the best possible product and documentation. We understand that problems may arise, and in most cases you will be able to resolve any problems you may have by referring to the documentation. Answers to questions you might have will usually be found within these pages. You may reach our Product Support staff in several convenient ways. Support Conferences PKWARE maintains support conferences on several BBS Networks. Such as ILink, SmartNet and Rime. You may leave a question in the PKWARE support conference on any of these networks. A Support Technician or fellow user will answer your questions. Many other BBS networks also offer PKWARE conferences, but these are not necessarily monitored by PKWARE. PKWARE BBS PKWARE also maintains its own BBS. The PKWARE BBS is normally available 24 hours a day. The BBS supports all baud rates from 1200 up to 14.4K. Set your communications software for 8 bits, 1 stop bit, no parity. The PKWARE BBS offers the latest in PKWARE shareware as well as many other files for downloading. The PKWARE BBS has multiple phone lines for your convenience. PKWARE BBS (414)354-8670 CompuServe PKWARE Support Technicians maintain a discussion forum on CompuServe. To get to the forum, simply type "GO PKWARE" from any CompuServe prompt. PKWARE CompuServe ID# 75300,730 PKWARE Inc. Introduction 3 Internet/Usenet PKWARE products are frequently discussed in the newsgroup "comp.compression". Internet newsgroups are not supported directly by PKWARE. Through Internet PKWARE.Inc@mixcom.com Voice and Fax You may reach a PKWARE Support Technician by sending a Fax containing your question. PKWARE FAX (414)354-8559 If your question is urgent, or you do not have access to any of the above methods of communication, a Support Technician may be reached by phone. PKWARE Technical support is normally available Monday through Friday, 9 am to 5 pm Central Time (-7 hours GMT). PKWARE Voice Support (414)354-8699 Information to Give When contacting PKWARE Technical Support in any of the above methods, please be prepared to provide as much information about the problem as possible. Include the version numbers for: PKZIP, DOS, and any Memory and Device Drivers you are using. Include the command(s) you have tried to use, and what the results were and note why you feel you have a problem. When faxing a problem, a print out of any error messages is often helpful in determining a solution. Please see the Trouble Shooting section for additional information. PKWARE Inc. 9025 N. Deerwood Dr. Brown Deer, WI 53223 (414)354-8699 (414)354-8559 FAX (414)354-8670 BBS 4 Introduction PKZIP 2 INSTALLATION PKZIP works best when it is located in your path. You can put PKZIP in your path by either copying it into an already existing subdirectory that is in your path, or by copying it into its own subdirectory and putting that subdirectory into your path. Throughout this manual many examples will show the command prompt. This will look like "C:\>" or "C:\PKWARE>" or something similar. This represents the command prompt displayed by your computer and is not to be typed in. If you do not see a prompt that looks like this when you are using DOS, try typing the command "PROMPT $P$G". This will set your prompt to resemble those used here. You may also want to add the "PROMPT $P$G" command to your AUTOEXEC.BAT file. Path There are two meanings for path as used under MS-DOS. It may refer to the location of a file, or it may refer to the places DOS will search for a command. In the first instance, a path would be the directory or subdirectories that a file is located in. If a file called "HOURS.PYS" is in a subdirectory called "JUNE" under a directory called "PAYROLL" on the D: hard disk, it's full path would be "D:\PAYROLL\JUNE\HOURS.PYS". In the second instance, the path is a list of places stored in an environment variable called "path". If you type "path" at the DOS prompt and press enter you will see the path that is currently set on your computer. It will usually look something like this: C:\;C:\DOS;C:\UTIL;D:\WINDOWS It will look different on your machine). The path is set by a statement in the AUTOEXEC.BAT file. For more information, please see your DOS manual. Installing PKZIP On Your Hard Drive Your computer should be turned on and at the DOS prompt. If your computer normally runs a program automatically when you turn it on, you will need to exit from this program. You should have a prompt on your screen similar to: C:\> ** This installation example shows PKZIP being run from the C:\PKWARE directory. PKZIP may be run from any drive in any directory. PKWARE Inc. Installation 5 Place the diskette containing the original PKZIP distribution in your floppy drive, either A: or B:. Next, create a subdirectory for PKZIP on your hard drive. To do so type: C:\>MD \PKWARE Then change to this subdirectory. C:\>CD \PKWARE C:\PKWARE> Now enter the name of the self-extractor on your PKZIP disk, include the drive letter as part of the name. C:\PKWARE>A:PKZ200 Note that the name of the self-extractor used throughout this manual (PKZ200.EXE) may vary but will follow the pattern of PKZ###.EXE where ### represents the version number of the software. The contents of this file will now extract into the PKWARE subdirectory. The A: and C: drives in the above command are only for example, and may be replaced with other drive letters as appropriate to your particular setup. You must next modify your AUTOEXEC.BAT file. You can edit this file with any editor that can load and save DOS TEXT or plain ASCII files (For example, "edit" in DOS 5.0, Windows Write, or any word processor with a DOS TEXT editing ability. Consult your word processor's manual if you are unsure). If you have DOS 5.0 type: C:\>edit autoexec.bat Look for a line in the file that says something similar to: PATH=C:\;C:\DOS;(etc...) Go to the end of this line and add a semicolon if one is not already there, and the drive and path to PKZIP that you just created. For example "...;C:\PKWARE" The line will now look similar to this: PATH=C:\;C:\DOS;C:\PKWARE 6 Installation PKZIP 2 You will most likely have additional items between the C:\DOS; and C:\PKWARE. Next add a line that looks like this: set pkzip.cfg=c:\pkware The directory specified must be equal to the directory where PKZIP.CFG is located. If you have followed this installation procedure exactly, the above line will work fine. This line should be near the top of the AUTOEXEC.BAT file. Save the file and exit. You will have to re-boot your computer to make the change take effect. After you reboot type "path" at the command line and press [ENTER]. Your machine will show the path. Make certain that the subdirectory you placed the PKWARE files in is shown in the path. You may now verify that PKZIP is installed by typing "PKZIP" at the DOS command prompt. After you press [ENTER] you should see a banner screen from PKZIP. Try PKUNZIP as well. You should be able to type PKUNZIP or PKZIP in any directory and drive, not just in the PKWARE subdirectory. If you receive the message "Bad command or file name" or "Unknown command", PKZIP is not properly installed. Check the location of the files you extracted from the distribution file. Also check the lines that were added to the AUTOEXEC.BAT file. Make certain you have rebooted since the changes were made to the AUTOEXEC.BAT file. The Addendum File In addition to the files that make up the PKZIP program, you also have a text file containing any last minute changes or updates to the documentation. You need to print the addendum file in order to be aware of anything that is not mentioned in the manual, or has changed since this manual was printed. To print the addendum, load the text file ADDENDUM.DOC into your wordprocessor and print it. PKWARE Inc. Installation 7 TUTORIAL A comprehensive tutorial is provided with the registered version of PKZIP. This tutorial has been omitted from the shareware version to save download transmission time. PKWARE Inc. Tutorial 8-29 PKZIP Command Reference Items contained in square brackets([ ]) are optional parameters to an option and need not be included. Where there are two (or more) items separated by a comma, you may use any ONE of those options following the main option character. If there are parameters in angle brackets(<>) you must include that option, or choose one of those in the series. When choosing options from a bracketed series, you may use more than one of these options if they are separated by a comma. If the options are separated by a vertical bar (|) you may only choose one option. See page 2 for examples. Command Option Guide _____________________________________ -a+ Turn off archive attribute of added files. By using this option you can create a complete backup of your disk, while clearing the archive attributes to make the way for incremental archiving. Incremental archiving makes use of the archive attribute to take only the files which have been modified since the last backup. In order for this process to work smoothly you must first have a complete backup and a clearing of the archive attribute for all files. C:>pkzip f:backup.zip -a+ -rp _____________________________________ -b Create temporary .ZIP file on alternate drive Every time a .ZIP file is updated, PKZIP creates a temporary work file. When the modifications to the .ZIP file are successfully completed, the original .ZIP file is replaced with the temporary work file. This means you must have at least as much additional disk space available as was used by the original .ZIP file. 30 PKZIP PKZIP 2 For Example: If you have an existing .ZIP file of 500K, and you are adding another file to it that takes 10K compressed, you need additional workspace of at least 510K during the update process. This command option will allow you to create the temporary .ZIP file on a drive different from the one on which the original .ZIP file resides. This allows you to update large .ZIP files when space is limited, such as a large .ZIP file on a floppy disk. Also, by setting this temporary drive to point to a RAM drive, you can speed up the operation of PKZIP. Immediately following the -b option place the drive and/or path you wish to use for the temporary work file. A:>pkzip test.zip -bc: order.doc C:>pkzip wp.zip -bz:\public wp51\*.* ** It is necessary to specify a path in addition to the drive letter only if you are in a situation where disk space or access is being limited by subdirectory, such as on a local area network. _____________________________________ -c Create/Edit file comments for all files -ac Create/Edit file comments for all files during update -C Add comments for new files only Each individual file contained within a .ZIP file may have a comment attached to it. Comments are useful for identifying files, especially if you need to go back months later to look at a file, or if you are sending the file to someone else. Each comment may be up to 59 characters long, including spaces and punctuation. The -c (lower case) option is used when you want to add or edit file comments for all files within an existing .ZIP file. The -ac option may be used during the .ZIP file creation process, or during an update/freshen process. This will add comments for new files as well as allowing you to edit/add comments for files that were already in the .ZIP file. pkzip test.zip -ac license.doc When each file is added to the .ZIP file you will be prompted for a comment. Type a comment of up to 59 characters, and press [ENTER]. If you are updating an existing .ZIP file and there are files which already have comments, the comment will be displayed on the prompt line for you to edit. You may make changes or simply press [ENTER] to leave it unchanged. PKWARE Inc. PKZIP 31 The -C (upper case) option is used when you want to add a file comment to new files that are being added to an existing .ZIP file. Files which are not being added, or files which already existed in the .ZIP file will not be prompted for comments. pkzip test.zip -C *.doc In this situation, you would be adding additional files to the file called test.zip. Since the file license.doc was added to it in the previous example, you would not be prompted for a comment for this file. _____________________________________ -d Delete files This command will allow you to remove individual files from within a .ZIP file. This command is only applicable to already existing .ZIP files. pkzip test.zip -d license.doc In the above example the file license.doc would be removed from the .ZIP file test.zip (assuming that it was in the .ZIP file in the first place). ** The deletion of files from within a .ZIP file causes a situation where a temporary .ZIP file will exist during the deletion process. In order to delete a file from a .ZIP file there must be as much disk space free as will be occupied by the modified .ZIP file. Multiple files may be deleted at one time. You may do this either by placing multiple file names on the command line, or by specifying a list file containing the names of files you want deleted. (See Using List Files) pkzip july.zip -d file1.wk file2.wk1 pkzip tue_back.zip -d @old.lst _____________________________________ -e[x|n|f|s] Specify compression method -ex Maximum compression (most compression, most time) -en Normal compression (default) -ef Fast compression -es Super Fast compression (least compression, least time) -e0 Zero compression (storing) PKZIP 2 provides four different methods of compression, allowing you to choose the compression that best suits your need. You can choose speed, high compression or a balance. The default method will provide good compression at a reasonable speed. 32 PKZIP PKZIP 2 The switches for this option are intended to be mnemonic in nature: -ex eXtra or maXimum -en Normal -ef Fast -es Speed/Super Fast -e0 Zero compression The only two that may be difficult to remember are the order of Fast and Super Fast, you might want to think "Extra Speed". If you need to complete the compression in the minimum amount of time possible, then choose the fast compression method. To force PKZIP to use its fastest compression method, use the option -es (Super Fast). To achieve the smallest files possible, specify the maximum compression method using the option -ex (Maximum). pkzip -ex test.zip d:\wp51\*.wp Using no compression with the zero option is useful when archiving files which will either not compress or compress very little. This would generally be true when archiving .ZIP files. By specifying no compression PKZIP will store the files directly rather than first attempting to compress them. The compression method to use by default can be specified in the configuration file. If you have specified the super fast, fast or maximum compression method in your configuration you may override this and use the normal method by using the option -en. _____________________________________ -f Freshen files in a .ZIP file When this command is specified, PKZIP will compare the contents of the .ZIP file specified on the command line against the files specified for compression. If a file ALREADY EXISTS in the .ZIP file, PKZIP will check to see if the file exists in the source area (i.e. the files specified on the command line). If the file does exist, it then checks to see if the file in the source area is more recent than the copy contained in the .ZIP file. If it is more recent, it will replace the compressed file with the one found in the source area. Using this parameter will normally speed up the ZIP process considerably, as PKZIP will be able to skip over files that it has already compressed. pkzip -f baka.zip c:\ranma\*.* This example checks the contents of the .ZIP file "baka.zip" against the files specified by "c:\ranma\*.*". Any file that matches will be PKWARE Inc. PKZIP 33 updated if the file in the source area is newer than the copy within the .ZIP file. See Also: -u, -i _____________________________________ -h display command summary (Help) This option will display a brief summary of the command switches available. _____________________________________ -i Add files that have the archive attribute - then turn attribute off -i- Add files that have the archive attribute - do not turn attribute off This option is very handy when backing up files. If this option is specified, only files with the archive attribute will be compressed, and the archive attribute will be set to off when the ZIP operation is complete for these files. You may alternatively ZIP all files with the archive attribute set, but not modify the archive attribute. A detailed explanation of the use of this option is given in the PKZIP Backup Guide. Archive Attribute Every file on an MS-DOS partition has several properties associated with it. One of these properties is called the Archive Attribute. When a file has just been created, this attribute is set to be ON. Also, if a file is altered, the attribute is set. After a file has been backed-up by a program which uses this attribute, the attribute is switched off. By making use of the archive attribute you may make certain that you get all files that are new or changed. You save time by not backing up files you have previously archived. This process is called an Incremental Backup. See Also: PKZIP Backup Guide, -f , -u, -a+ _____________________________________ -j Specify masking of file attributes -J Specify retention of file attributes (used to override config file) When PKZIP archives a read-only file (or is forced to archive a hidden or system file through use of the -w option) the default is to retain these attributes with the file in the archive. You may choose to strip these attributes off the file during the ZIP process by specifying the -j (lower case) with the letter(s) corresponding to the attribute you wish to mask. 34 PKZIP PKZIP 2 File Attributes Every file on an MS-DOS partition has several properties associated with it. These attributes are: archive(a), hidden(h), read-only(r), and system(s). The archive attribute is explained under the -i option. The Hidden attribute prevents MS-DOS from displaying the file in a directory listing. Files that have this attribute are normally ignored by PKZIP. The read-only attribute prevents a file from being changed or deleted. When a file has this attribute you cannot delete the file or change it's contents. The system attribute signifies a file that is a system file. System files are used by MS-DOS and are treated as Hidden files. Please see your DOS manual for additional information. You may set masking of particular attributes to be the default by using either the PKZIP.CFG file or the PKZIP configuration program. If any of these options are set in the configuration they may be overridden temporarily by use of the -J (upper case) option. pkzip markie.zip -Jhs c:\util\*.* ** Please note there is no space between the -j/J option and the h,r or s. _____________________________________ -k Retain original .ZIP file date -k- Set .ZIP file date to the current date (override configuration file) Normally, when PKZIP updates an existing .ZIP file by either adding to it or deleting from it, the .ZIP file date is changed to the current date. If the - k option is specified on the command line the .ZIP file date will not be altered. This option may be made the default, see PKZIP Configuration. If PKZIP is configured to keep the original date in the configuration file, this may be overridden temporarily by use of the -k- option. See Also: -o _____________________________________ -l Display license screen If this command is specified, PKZIP will display the software license agreement. _____________________________________ -m[u|f] Move files Normally, when PKZIP archives a file, it is making a copy of that file. The original file is not modified in any way. By choosing the -m option, you may actually MOVE the file into the .ZIP file. PKWARE Inc. PKZIP 35 After the ZIP operation is complete, PKZIP will delete all the files it just placed into the .ZIP file. In effect moving the files from their previous location into the .ZIP file. This option may be combined with the Update (-u) and Freshen (-f) options. When this is done PKZIP will perform the Update or Freshen as it would normally, and then delete all the files that were placed into the archive. See Also: -f, -u _____________________________________ -o Set .ZIP file date to latest file in .ZIP file -o- Set .ZIP file date to current date (used to override configuration file) Normal default operation for PKZIP is to set the date of a .ZIP file it is modifying or creating to the current date. By specifying the -o option you can tell PKZIP to set the date of the .ZIP file equal to that of the oldest file within the .ZIP file. This option may be made the default, see PKZIP Configuration. If this option is set, you may override it by using the -o- option. This will force PKZIP to set the .ZIP file date to the current date. Note that the -o- option must be completely separate from any other options, such as the -f in the example: pkzip oldfiles.zip -o- -f c:\wp51\text\*.wp See Also: -k _____________________________________ -P Preserve specified path names -P- Turn off path storage (used to override configuration file) This option and the related -rp option control the storage of pathnames with files inside of a .ZIP file. The -p (lower case) option is used only in combination with the -r option as -rp (see -r for more information). The -P (upper case) option can be used alone or as a -rP option. The -P option causes PKZIP to store pathnames found on the command line as part of a filename specified for compression. This command will only have an effect if a file or files specified either on the command line or in a list file have path names. pkzip pathtest.zip -P c:\dos\attrib.exe In the above command the file "attrib.exe" would be compressed into the .ZIP file "pathtest". Because the -P option was specified, and because the path "\dos" was specified as part of the file name, the 36 PKZIP PKZIP 2 file will be stored as "dos\attrib.exe". This means that the path name will be available for reconstruction during extraction. Stored path names can be seen when the .ZIP file is viewed. pkzip path2.zip -P d:\coreldrw\*.cdr In this example all files with the "cdr" extension will be placed into the .ZIP file "path2", and will have the path "coreldrw\" stored with them. This option may be made the default, see PKZIP Configuration. If path storage is turned on in the configuration file, you may turn it off for a particular command by using the -P- option. pkzip mydoc.zip -P- c:\wp51\docs\zoofund.wp See Also: -r, -v _____________________________________ -q Enable ANSI comments -q- Disable ANSI comments (used to override configuration file) PKZIP retains ANSI control codes in comment text that is added to a .ZIP file. Dury of the other researchers and their reluctance to have dealings with you. Who is out of step with whom?" (Meagher, Sylvia. Letter to David Lifton, November 4, 1966) She was "shocked and outraged" at Lifton's conduct, and broke off all contact with him for a long time. (Meagher, Sylvia. Letter to Harold Weisberg, January 28, 1981) Lifton attempted to see Meagher while she was visiting Los Angeles in mid-January 1967. While she refused to see him, she accepted his phone call on her last day in L.A., January 15. She noted, "Admits his great big discovery, the one he took to WJL, is flash in pan." (Meagher, Sylvia. Note for record re phone call from Lifton, January 15, 1967) Meagher also recalled this phone conversation in a memorandum she wrote after resolving finally to break off contacts with Lifton. (Meagher, Sylvia. Note for the record, August 25, 1970; Lifton told her the sensational discovery he had taken to Liebeler was "mistaken".) Besides Meagher's contemporary accounts, there is abundant corroborating evidence for Mr. Lifton's self-imposed isolation. As his book came to light, The Washington Post reported that Mr. Lifton "was forever tantalizing his contacts in the research community with the claim that he was the only one on the right track. 'He always claimed he was the one researcher among us who knew the answer,'" The Post quoted one unnamed source as saying ("David Lifton's Startling Study of JFK's Murder, The Washington Post, September 5, 1980, p. C1) Ordinarily, I would not rely solely upon even a well-respected newspaper's quote from an unnamed source, neither is there any instant need to do so. The Post's report not only conforms to my recollection of limited personal contacts with Mr. Lifton during the mid-to-late-Seventies, but to his own admissions. "At various times in the past two years, I may have mentioned to various people that I am 'working on a manuscript' for publication. None of them know what area [of the case] it is, or any specifics . . ." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, February 12, 1969) "I am not dealing with any of the Warren Report critics in regard to my new work. This has been my policy since I started to work full time on this case, in the fall of 1966. There *are* people with whom I have perfectly cordial relationships (such as Fred Newcomb, or Bill O'Connell) yet with whom I do not discuss even the existence of such matters." (ibid.) "I don't want new ideas, research materials etc. to be stolen by someone who hears about it on the grapevine." (ibid.) He also exhibited worry for his personal welfare. (ibid.) Specifically, he said he had "lowered a wall of silence" between himself and anyone who was sympathetic in any way towards Jim Garrison. That included a large number of critics, but not Sylvia Meagher, who was vocal in her distaste for Garrison's evidence and methods. "Even knowledge of the area in which I am working is absolutely taboo." (ibid.) Contrary to the apparent implications of this quote, however, Mr. Lifton did not disclose his alleged "head surgery insight" to Meagher. One must approach Lifton's correspondence with Sylvia Meagher with ever-present caution. Although hindsight might lull readers into concluding that the foundation of "Best Evidence" was indeed the big secret, the Lifton-Meagher correspondence tends to indicate on closer inspection that, within the period encompassing their relationship, he was studying and either writing or attempting to write on unrelated areas of the assassination (in which case much of the semi-autobiographical account of his researches in "Best Evidence" falls under suspicion), or else that he was deliberately misleading her into believing that he had taken her into his confidence while actually throwing her off the track. Based upon the article "His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End" (Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20), previously cited in this work, which establishes through personal interviews that by 1975 Mr. Lifton had no manuscript at all; his January 1967 article for Ramparts Magazine entitled, "The Case For Three Assassins" (discussed in the next chapter of this manuscript); and inferences reasonably drawn from the record of Mr. Lifton's correspondence with Meagher, I have concluded that the semi-autobiographical account contained in "Best Evidence" for the development of Mr. Lifton's theory during the years up to late 1970 is, at best, grossly exaggerated and, at worst, a literary hoax. For example, as late as January, 1970, Lifton called the following matters that he and Meagher had discussed "integral" to his work and subject to confidentiality: the alleged interception of the Zapruder film before it went to LIFE Magazine, and the eradication of the alleged car stop that was reported by a handful of eyewitnesses to the assassination (the film alteration theory is briefly discussed in a footnote in the book); the administrative relationship between Gemberling, Shanklin, and the Dallas Field Office investigation, including Shanklin's transfer to Dallas before the assassination. (Not covered in the book) the alleged substitution of windshields before one was sent to the FBI laboratory for analysis (Another footnote in the book); the shooting of Governor Connally as an "accident" (Ignored in the book); the accidental happenstance of Zapruder's film; (Not explained in the book) the manner in which Jack Ruby got into the Dallas Police Department's basement to shoot Oswald. (Not covered in the book) (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, January 23, 1970) the paraffin tests of Oswald's hands after he was arrested in the Texas Theater on the afternoon of the assassination. (This, too, is not covered in "Best Evidence.") It seemed evident to many when his book was published that Lifton's "earthshaking discovery" was the alleged "head surgery" reference in the Sibert and O'Neill report, something about which both Harold Weisberg and the team of Fred Newcomb and Perry Adams had already written. There is no doubt that, as early as 1966, Mr. Lifton raised a question about the meaning of the "head surgery" remark in the Sibert and O'Neill report. This is documented in FBI file materials that I have examined. The questions are, "Where and when did he get The How?" and, "When will he tell us The Who?" CHAPTER THREE I DON'T PICK BRAINS, I EAT THEM Mr. Lifton took umbrage at the following paragraphs in my informal critique of his work on Compuserve: "If Lifton had originally set out to prove his "Best Evidence" scenario, why did he spend 14-15 years prying information and ideas out of other researchers, pretending all the while that he had some great secret which he would never agree to reveal? The reason is that he had nothing. This semi-mythical manuscript which he told people he was working on (the one he would not even show to a staff attorney on the HSCA, even though he could have been assured that its contents would not be disseminated) could not have contained anything more than a pedestrian rehasing of a well-covered area which, by the late-1970's, many found just plain boring." "I believe Lifton reached a dead end until his agent persuaded him that he could sell a book cast in terms of a personal odyssey through the wilderness." "If Lifton had this theory nailed down when he first found his agent, why did it take him nearly three years to rewrite his original manuscript? That manuscript would have been pure gold! It would not have required the addition of "the personal touch." If it needed work in matters of style or syntax, Macmillan would have rewritten the book for him and rushed it into print!" The history of Mr. Lifton's manuscript was sketched in Chapter One. There was a misstatement in the first paragraph quoted above: The manuscript that Mr. Lifton's told people he was working on during the years prior to 1975 was not "semi-mythical"; it was an outright, full-fledged lie. Aside from "the big secret", Mr. Lifton for years maintained a pretense of being hard at work on a book manuscript when, in fact, he was not. "I have been working, day in and out, and making solid progress generating typescript." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, March 17, 1969) Compare this, however, with what he told an interviewer as the third edition of his book went public: "It was still in the form of file material, conclusions, memos, but not a manuscript." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20) Lifton told Meagher he was writing a section of his manuscript that would "blast away at the performance of the WC staff." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, March 27, 1969) "It was still in the form of file material, conclusions, memos, but not a manuscript." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20) "My work is progressing very nicely. I am so excited over portions of this manuscript that I sometimes have trouble getting a full night's sleep." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 2, 1969) "It was still in the form of file material, conclusions, memos, but not a manuscript." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20) "I have hundreds of pages behind me. . ." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 2, 1969) "It was still in the form of file material, conclusions, memos, but not a manuscript." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20) "The manuscript is based on evidence, much of it new, but all of high pedigree and legitamacy [sic]. The inferences from evidence are very carefully made. Now, as regards political matters: the political superstructure that one places on an operational substructure is largely a function of the evidence, and the facts." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, August 7, 1969) "I have told a few people that I am writing a manuscript. No one who is on the grapevine, however, knows the specifics that I told you in the telephone conversations we had back in January and February." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, August 7, 1969) "It was still in the form of file material, conclusions, memos, but not a manuscript." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20) It was Sylvia Meagher's understanding, based on previous conversations and letters, that Mr. Lifton felt his basic case was "coherent and conclusive." Although she would not agree to assist him in the writing of his work, she offered to help Lifton resolve any uncertainties that might be plaguing him, were he to deal with her candidly. (Meagher, Sylvia. Letter to David Lifton, August 12, 1969) Lifton responded: "[T]he basic case is coherent and complete. What still remains to be done? Basically, what remains to be done is the writing of sections of exposition which, for the most part, have already been researched." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, August 31, 1969) "It was still in the form of file material, conclusions, memos, but not a manuscript." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Magazine, p. 20) Either Lifton was telling Meagher the truth about his manuscript in progress, or he was simply prevaricating, or he was being duplicitous for some ulterior purpose. His representations of the subject areas of his work certainly do not correlate in the main with the subject, substantive contents, and major theme or theses of his book. A Question of Legitimacy ------------------------ In "Best Evidence" it is not only the chronology of his philosophical musings about the Warren Commission's honesty and integrity (or lack of same) that Mr. Lifton has reconstituted and woven into a fictitious autobiographical construct; the same conclusion obtains with regard to his analysis of the substance of the evidence. Mr. Lifton writes in "Best Evidence" about his reaction upon reading the first critical appraisal of the Warren Report to receive widespread media attention: "I first read Inquest in June 1966. I thought Epstein was wading in very deep waters when he extended his "political truth" concept to the deliberate falsification of the Kennedy autopsy." (Chapter 4) And later in the book, he ridicules the notion that the autopsy pathologists' testimony could have been untruthful: "To believe that Humes' testimony was false, one had to believe that a navy commander would deliberately lie, risk criminal charges, and bluff the Chief Justice of the United States." (Chapter 6) Compare, however, Lifton's diametrically opposed contemporary view: "I consider the entire Bethesda autopsy result to be incorrect and *fraudulent*. It is unfortunate but true that those who argue for a rearward hit in the President's head, although they concede the Bethesda autopsy to be false in other areas (like the first shot exiting at the throat) assume that in this one area, possibly, the doctors aren't lying "that much", and that possibly the exit wound on the head shown in the artist's drawing does exist." (Lifton, David. Memorandum re: Head Snap Phenomenon and Zapruder Film Frame Sequence, March 20, 1967)(Emphasis added) "The double-head-hit theorists thus invoke Bethesda autopsy descriptions of the head to find an exit wound for a rearward entering bullet. "I believe the Parkland Hospital description, only, on this point. I do not accept the Bethesda autopsy." (Lifton, David. Memorandum re: Head Snap Phenomenon and Zapruder Film Frame Sequence, March 20, 1967) What Lifton wrote in March 1967 is completely at odds with what his book alleges he was thinking at the time. "The Case for Three Assassins" (The January 1967 Ramparts Article) -------------------------------------------------------- "Three Assassins" was an able synopsis of the Kennedy assassination controversy as it stood in late 1966. It is not my purpose to review the details of that controversy. Rather, I raise the subject of Lifton's only previously published work on the assassination because it stands in astonishing contrast with his later work, "Best Evidence," where Lifton gives an account of the progress of his research and theory that is grossly inconsistent with the contemporary published work. As late as mid-October 1966, Lifton could still say, "I believe at least two men were shooting, and probably several more than three from about three different locations." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, October 13, 1966) In "Three Assassins", Mr. Lifton argued for a crossfire scenario in Dealey Plaza, and accepted as true that both the President and Texas Governor John Connally had been struck by shots from the rear, as well as from in front of the limousine. Yet, according to "Best Evidence", by the time Mr. Lifton wrote and published "Three Assassins" in Ramparts, he was well on his way to developing the "trajectory reversal" theory that is central to the body swipe/alteration thesis of his book, not a hint of which is to be found in the Ramparts article. The inconsistency is not completely lost upon Mr. Lifton, because he does fumble over it for two or three pages in his book, finally conjuring up the lame excuse that he did not consider the senior management of Ramparts (Warren Hinckle and Robert Scheer) smart enough for him to explain his theory to them. Who among us is indeed worthy? The key question, however, is what did Mr. Lifton find so good about the evidence upon which he relied in "Three Assassins" that soured for him by the time he wrote "Best Evidence?" It is this strange metamorphosis in either the evidence or himself that Mr. Lifton declines to elaborate, even as he disparages other assassination critics for holding views similar to those he originally expressed. In "Three Assassins", Lifton accepted that both Kennedy and Connally sustained wounds to their backs during the shooting, and he posited at least two gunmen firing from behind the presidential limousine, while also arguing for shots to Kennedy's head and throat from at least one assassin firing from in front, i.e., the grassy knoll. In "Best Evidence", Lifton ignored Connally's wounds and theorized that Kennedy was not shot in the back after all, the wound was artificially inflicted by plotters. In "Three Assasssins", Lifton cited and discussed the testimony of Glenn Bennett, a Secret Service agent riding in the follow-up car behind the President who saw the second shot hit him, in support of both the existence and location of the President's back wound, never providing any inkling that Bennett's testimony and written report could be doubted. (Lifton, David and Welsh, David. "The Case for Three Assassins, Ramparts, January 1967, p. 82 [hereinafter, "Three Assassins"]) Furthermore, Lifton pointed to the holes in the President's suit jacket and shirt as corroborative of the back wound's location. (ibid.) In "Best Evidence", Lifton branded Bennett a liar and part of the conspiracy; he insinuated that Bennett's role in the plot was to provide a false Secret Service cover story for the phony back wound. Furthermore, the holes in the President's clothing were now deemed fake. Examining the Warren Report's "single-bullet theory", i.e., that one shot pierced both President Kennedy and Governor Connally, Mr. Lifton discussed the bullet fragments embedded in Connally's wrist and thigh. (Three Assassins, pp. 84-85) In "Best Evidence" this evidence is ignored. Mr. Lifton asserts that all of the ammunition allegedly recovered by investigators had been planted. The Ramparts piece cast suspicion on Dr. James Humes for burning the original draft of his autopsy report. (Three Assassins, pp. 81, 91). "Best Evidence" exonerates Dr. Humes as an honest guy. In Ramparts, Mr. Lifton conceded, "The fact that the Parkland doctors observed no entry wound there [on the rear of the President's head] does not mean that it did not exist, and it is conceivable that a hit from the rear occurred." (Three Assassins, p. 90) [And notice the similar view Lifton expressed three months after the publication of the article: "It is possible that the doctors at Parkland missed a rear entrance wound on the head. This is generally conceded. For example, no Parkland doctor testified to right temporal entrance wounds. . . ." (Lifton, David. Memorandum re: Head Snap Phenomenon and Zapruder Film Frame Sequence, March 20, 1967)] In "Best Evidence", however, what was once conceivable became impossible, and the impossible (creation of a false entrance wound after-the-fact) became both conceivable and lucrative. In 1967, Mr. Lifton pointed to the Warren Commission's "consistent failure" to call witnesses who thought shots came from the knoll. (Three Assassins, p. 93) From at least 1980 through the present, however, the Warren Commission has been okay with him. In a survey for Ramparts of the eyewitnesses who thought that one or more shots were fired from the grassy knoll, Mr. Lifton did pick up the testimony of Paul Landis, Jr., another agent riding in the follow-up car ("I heard what sounded like the report of a high powered rifle from behind me, over my right shoulder."), and presidential aide David Powers ("My first impression was that the shots came from the right and overhead ... )(Three Assassins, p. 97), so it is clear that he studied the testimony of the Dealey Plaza witnesses who heard shots from either direction, including those who thought that all or some came from behind the presidential limousine. Was Three Assassins replete with factual errors? Did someone check the many citations to the official record in that article and find them innaccurate or nonexistent? And, which of the abovementioned points from the article are less valid today than they were twenty-six years ago? Upon what grounds? Mr. Lifton requests our confidence and belief in his explanation that he really didn't mean it; while he was working on bringing Three Assassins to publication, he was actually developing a completely different theory of the case. I do not accept what I call his "split personality" hypothesis. He says in the Compuserve essays, "By the end of December 1967, I not only had a case that the wounds were different in two areas of the body, but I had the beginnings of a theory as to when and where the body had been intercepted -- on the east coast, at Bethesda, in connection with the events surrounding the ambulance chase." As we have seen, Mr. Lifton was thinking about many areas concerning the assassination. We have also seen, to some extent, that the views he held then were radically different from the views he *says* he held then in his book. This point will be further developed later. There is no doubt that, in late 1966, Lifton asked the FBI about the head surgery remark in the Sibert and O'Neill report. The iron facts are, however, that the theory Lifton claims is his own was first published by others, and that he did not find the witnesses who were key to the version presented in his book until 1979. The "Sources" listing at the end of his book, revealing that many of his interviews are dated 1978 or later, implies that much of his formulation of the "Best Evidence" theory is based on interviews with witnesses who were either first identified by the HSCA or whose military orders not to talk were not lifted until the HSCA investigation. In the Compuserve essays, Mr. Lifton explains the progress of his research according to what he terms "Areas A and B." While Mr. Lifton sunk deeper into the quagmire between "A" and "B", trying to figure it all out, the body alteration theory was first published by Fred Newcomb and Perry Adams in an article for the September/October 1975 issue of Skeptic magazine, excerpted from their unpublished manuscript, "Murder From Within," a fact that is nowhere acknowledged in "Best Evidence." The Newcomb/Adams thesis was precisely that advanced by David Lifton in his book, i.e., the alteration of the wounds beetween Parkland and Bethesda. Like Lifton, only sooner, Newcomb and Adams posited a high level plot implemented by the Secret Service. At the very least, one would have expected to see Mr. Lifton report the impact that this Skeptic article had on his research, any fault that he found with its evidence or logic, some evaluation of his conversations with either Newcomb or Adams (surely he must have found the time to call them before he completed his unpublishable first draft in August 1976). . After all, hadn't he felt "isolated" with his terrible secret all those years? Didn't he want some company? The subject of "changes in the size and shape of the wounds" is not original to David Lifton. Previous authors wrote extensively about the apparent discrepancies between the Parkland and Bethesda descriptions of the wounds. About "evidence" that the body was intercepted. Lifton says he discovered the "ambulance chase" in 1967 and knew that "something happened at Bethesda." This is what he calls his "Area A." He discovered nothing except a group of witnesses, dramatis personae minor, whose stories (when they were able to remember anything at all) contradicted each other so wildly that they made no sense. He claims that by February 1971, as he was "soliciting Dr. [Cyril] Wecht's help in connection with my work," he already had formulated "a series of lengthy memoranda" which, as it turned out, "correspond exactly to what is in Best Evidence" chapter by chapter in "many key areas." It is noteworthy that he points to material he prepared after the termination of his dealings with Sylvia Meagher in 1970. The record of those dealings varies dramatically from what he alleges in his book and strongly implies that, if he did have "the beginnings of a theory", it did not take any concrete form until after that timeframe. He claims that these memos to Dr. Wecht dealt with: Alteration of the neck wound (Chapter 11); The statement in the Sibert and O'Neill report mentioning surgery (Chapter 12); Alteration of the head wound (Chapter 13); Trajectory reversal (Chapter 14); The theory of the pre-autopsy autopsy (Chapter 18) Mr. Lifton interviewed a number of Parkland Hospital personnel in 1966. It bears mention that, with only three exceptions, he did not interview any participant in the autopsy until 1978 or later. The three exceptions were the chief autop 48 PKUNZIP PKZIP 2 C:\ABCDIR1 DIR2DIR3 DIR4 XYZ PDQ If you executed: pkzip -rp a:stuff c:\abc\*.* A .ZIP file called STUFF would be created containing all the files in the directory "abc", as well as any subdirectories below that directory. If you then executed: pkunzip -d a:stuff c:\xyz\newabc The directory structure of drive C: would now look like this: C:\ABCDIR1 DIR2DIR3 DIR4 XYZNEWABCDIR1 PDQ DIR2DIR3 DIR4 All of the files and subdirectories which were originally in the "abc" directory are now located in the "newabc" directory (shown in the box). Note that the "newabc" directory was created by PKUNZIP because it was specified on the command line. See Also: Tutorial - "Storing and Rebuilding Directory Structures" _____________________________________ -e[r][c,d,e,n,p,s] Extract files in a sorted order This option is used to specify a particular order in which to extract files from a .ZIP file. These options are used along with the -e. Each option will cause extraction sorted in ascending order of the particular criteria. PKWARE Inc. PKUNZIP 49 Sort Options r Reverse sort order c CRC Value d Date e File Extension n File Name p Percentage (ratio) of compression s File Size The most useful of these options will normally be extraction in order of Date, Name, or Extension. Extraction in value of CRC order is in effect a random extraction. In this example the files contained within the .ZIP file ZUCKER would be extracted in the order of their names. pkunzip -en zucker.zip To reverse the order of extraction combine with the [r]. pkunzip -ern zucker.zip _____________________________________ -f Freshen files in extract directory This function is the inverse of the freshen function in PKZIP. When this option is used, the PKUNZIP command will be executed normally except that files will be extracted only if: -> The files already exist in the target directory or directories AND -> The files in the .ZIP file are newer than the files in the extract directory. _____________________________________ -h Display command summary (Help) This option will display a brief summary of the command switches available. 50 PKUNZIP PKZIP 2 _____________________________________ -j Specifies masking of file attributes (default) -J Specifies extraction of file attributes During normal use, PKUNZIP does not extract files as being hidden, system or read-only. If there are files stored within a .ZIP file that have any of these attributes, you must specify the -J (upper case) option to keep the attributes. pkunzip stuff.zip -Jhsr In this example all the attributes would be preserved. For an explanation of what file attributes are see your DOS manual. See Also: PKZIP -w, PKZIP -j _____________________________________ -l Display license information This command will display the software license agreement. _____________________________________ -n Extract only newer files This option is the compliment of the -u option in PKZIP. When this option is used files will only be extracted if: -> They do not exist already in the target directory OR -> They are newer than the file already in the target directory This means that files which already exist and are more recent than those in the .ZIP file will not be overwritten. _____________________________________ -o Overwrite previously existing files -o- Never overwrite files This option will cause PKUNZIP to overwrite any files that already exist in the target directory, without prompting. When this option is not specified PKUNZIP will pause if it attempts to extract a file that already exists. It will prompt you: PKUNZIP: Warning! File XXXXXX already exists. Overwrite (y/n/a/r)? If you forget to specify the -o when you give the PKUNZIP command, you may respond to the above question with "a" (All). PKUNZIP will continue as though a -o had been specified originally. The -o- option will cause PKUNZIP to skip any file which already exists, regardless of file sizes or dates. PKWARE Inc. PKUNZIP 51 _____________________________________ -p[a/b] [c] [#] Extract files to the printer This option is used to extract files from a .ZIP file and send them to a printer (serial or parallel) for printing. The command parameters are defined and several examples are given here to make this complex command clear. -pa Extract to the printer device in ASCII mode -pb Extract to the printer device in BINARY mode ASCII mode is commonly used to print text. It will form feed after each file when multiple files are being extracted. Binary mode does not send any extra characters, extracting purely the contents of the file to the specified device. This is commonly used to send fonts or graphics to a laser printer. It will not form feed between files. The a and b options cannot be mixed in the same command line. In combination with the -pa or -pb option you may specify the port to which PKUNZIP should extract. If only a number between 1 and 4 is specified, the extraction will go to that number of printer port (LPT1 through LPT4). If a "c" is specified PKUNZIP will extract to the COM port. The "c" option may also be combined with a number from 1 to 4, specifying COM1 through COM4. This example will extract the specified files to the parallel port LPT1. pkunzip sesame.zip *.doc -p This example is extracting files in binary mode to a printer on the second serial port. pkunzip graphix.zip *.eps -pbc2 Here the files are extracted to a printer on the second parallel port in ASCII mode. pkunzip docs.zip -pa2 _____________________________________ -q Enable ANSI comments -q- Ignore ANSI control codes (default) By default, ANSI control codes embedded in comments are not displayed by PKUNZIP. When the -q option is used these ANSI sequences will be output and interpreted by the ANSI device driver if one is present. 52 PKUNZIP PKZIP 2 This option can be forced on by default in the configuration file. The configuration option to add is: ANSI=enabled The enabling of ANSI control codes in the configuration file may be overridden at the command line by using -q-. ANSI control codes provide the feature of adding color to text on a system which has ANSI.SYS loaded in the CONFIG.SYS. ** However, ANSI control codes also perform many other features, some of which can be potentially hazardous if you do not know the source and contents of the comment. It is for this reason that PKZIP and PKUNZIP filter out ANSI control codes unless you explicitly tell them not to. PKWARE has created an addition to the ANSI.SYS driver called PKSFANSI (PK Safe ANSI). By using this in conjunction with your normal ANSI.SYS you can be sure of receiving only the ANSI characters that you want. PKSFANSI is provided by PKWARE free of charge. It is included on the PKZIP distribution disk. See Also: PKZIP -q _____________________________________ -s[password] Decrypt files This option is used to unscramble (decrypt) the files in a .ZIP file. PKZIP has a -s option which is used to encrypt the files. If a password is not specified the user will be prompted for it. When extracting a .ZIP file that has been encrypted, the files will not be extracted unless the correct key (password) is included on the command line or entered at the prompt. ** Notice there is no space between the -s and the encryption key. pkunzip payroll.zip -o -sSecret *.dbf In the above example, all files with a "dbf" extension will be extracted and the key "Secret" applied to them. This will only work if the files have been compressed with the key of "Secret" applied to them. ** This option is case sensitive. This means that "Secret", "secret" and "SECRET" are all different passwords. See Also: "Using Data Encryption", PKZIP -s PKWARE Inc. PKUNZIP 53 _____________________________________ -t Test .ZIP file integrity This option is used to test files within a .ZIP file in order to verify that they are valid and have not been corrupted. PKUNZIP will perform all the actions that would normally be taken during a .ZIP file extraction, except that files will not be written to disk. The data will be extracted and checked against the CRC to ensure it's val- idity. After each file is checked it's name will be displayed with an "OK". C:\PKSTUFF>pkunzip zc102 -t Searching ZIP: ZC102.ZIP - PKWARE Support BBS (414)354-8670 Testing: ZC.DOC OK Testing: ZC.EXE OK Testing: ORDER.FRM OK Testing: VER-HIST.TXT OK In this example a command is issued which performs a test on the .ZIP file "zc102". As each file is tested its name is displayed. Note that the .ZIP file comment is displayed. If you test a file that is not a .ZIP file, or specify particular files within the .ZIP file that do not exist, you will receive the message: PKUNZIP: (E11) No file(s) found. Testing a .ZIP file with errors would produce a display something like this: Searching ZIP: PROBLEM.ZIP Testing: WORLD.M~ PKUNZIP: (W15) Warning! file fails CRC check Testing: CORELDRW.BPT OK PROBLEM.ZIP has errors! Normally, a CRC failure as above indicates that a file has been damaged either in storage or transmission. For instructions on attempting to repair a .ZIP file that has been corrupted, see PKZIPFIX in the Trouble Shooting section. See Also: "Trouble Shooting", "F.A.Q." 54 PKUNZIP PKZIP 2 _____________________________________ -v[b][r,c|d|e|n|p|s][m] View [brief] file information -vt[m] View Technical file information The -v option for PKUNZIP is the same as the -v option for PKZIP, with one exception. In PKUNZIP the `c' option for sorting refers to the CRC value. For PKUNZIP this option refers to the Comment of a file. For complete information, please see the -v option in the PKZIP Command Reference. See Also: PKZIP -v _____________________________________ -x Exclude files from extraction -x@list.lst Exclude list of files from extraction By specifying a -x as part of the PKUNZIP command, you may prevent a file or group of files from being extracted. Using -x with a list file will allow you to exclude a list of files from extraction. pkunzip fd201.zip -x*.doc In this example all files are extracted from the .ZIP file "fd201.zip" except for those with a ".doc" extension. -x may be used more than once on the command line, and may be used in combination with specific filespecs and list files. See Also: PKZIP -x _____________________________________ -$ Restore volume label This command is used to restore any volume label that has been stored in the .ZIP file. It is important to remember that the PKZIP command used to store a volume label does not store a drive letter along with the label. Upon extraction, the volume label will be assigned to the target drive. C:\>pkunzip davebk.zip -$ a: This example will extract the contents of "davebk.zip" to the A: drive. If a volume label was stored as part of the .ZIP file, the volume label for the floppy in drive A: will be reset to the one contained in davebk.zip. See Also: PKZIP -$ PKWARE Inc. PKUNZIP 55 _____________________________________ -@filename.lst Generate LIST file Please note that this option is different from using a list file. When a list file is to be read by PKZIP there is no dash in front of the @. Using this option will cause a list file to be generated using the specified file name instead of a normal PKUNZIP operation being performed. The output file will be a plain ASCII file with one file name per line, and will be identical to the listing of files PKUNZIP would have extracted had the -@ option not been used. pkunzip underdem.zip -@showme.lst This would create a list file called "showme.lst" containing a list of all the files present within the .ZIP file. File specs may be used in conjunction with this type of command, in the same manner as a normal extraction command. Also the -e option may be used for sorting. The following example creates an alphabetized list file of only the ".doc" files within it: pkunzip manuals.zip -en *.doc -@docs.lst The extension of ".lst" on a list file is not mandatory, but recommended for clarity. See Also: "Using List Files", PKZIP @, -@ 56 PKUNZIP PKZIP 2 PKSFX/ZIP2EXE The PKZIP utilities offer a self-extraction capability. This means that you can make a .ZIP file into an .EXE file. This file will in effect be able to extract itself. A PKSFX (PK-Self Extracting) file consists of a .ZIP file which has been transformed into a self-extracting file by the utility ZIP2EXE. There is no utility or file called "SFX" or "PKSFX", but the self-extracting file will show PKSFX on the banner in the same manner as PKUNZIP: PKSFX (R) FAST! Self Extract Utility Version 2 Copr. 1989-1992 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. PKSFX/h for help PKSFX Reg. U.S. Pat. and Tm. Off. Creating a Self-Extracting File In order to create a self-extracting file, you must first create a .ZIP file. Once this .ZIP file is created, use the ZIP2EXE utility to transform this .ZIP file into an .EXE file. D:\>zip2exe test.zip ZIP2EXE (tm) Self-Extract Creator Version 2 Copr. 1989-1992 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. ZIP2EXE/h for help TEST.ZIP => TEST.EXE D:\> As you can see, an .EXE file by the same name as the .ZIP file is created. The original .ZIP file is not deleted. Meet Junior ** Turning a .ZIP file into an .EXE file increases the size because of the included extraction program. The added size is approximately 13.5K bytes. If space is at a premium, and you are willing to sacrifice functionality for size, try PKSFX Junior(TM). The PKSFX Junior is somewhat smaller, and offers very few command line options due to this reduced size. The options which are available with the PKSFX Junior are indicated on the PKSFX command summary. To create a PKSFX Junior file, add the command line option -j when performing the ZIP2EXE step. PKWARE Inc. PKSFX/ZIP2EXE 57 D:\>zip2exe -j test.zip ** PKSFX Junior adds approximately 3K bytes to the .ZIP file. PKSFX Junior can handle a maximum of 512 files. Although PKSFX Junior has this limit to the number of files it can handle, there is no limit to the file size. PKUNZIP Junior PKUNZJR.COM The PKUNZIP Junior program is an extremely small stand-alone extraction program. It is used in the same manner as PKUNZIP but it has only the functionality of the PKSFX Junior self-extractor. PKUNZIP(R) FAST! Mini Extract Utility Version 2 Copr. 1989-1992 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. PKUNZIP Reg. U.S. Pat. and Tm. Off. Usage: pkunzjr [-o] filename[.zip] [output_path] PKUNZIP Junior has one option, -o. This option is the same as that for PKUNZIP (Senior). PKUNZIP Junior accepts the .ZIP file name on the command line, and may optionally accept an output path. PKUNZIP Junior cannot extract specific files, but must extract the entire .ZIP file. PKUNZIP Junior cannot extract a file containing more that 512 files, and does not support multiple volume .ZIP files. 58 Introduction PKZIP 2 PKSFX Command Summary Command line syntax and options are the same as PKUNZIP. The options listed below are offered by a self-extracting file. Syntax: pksfx [option] [d:\path] [file]* [file]* PKSFX indicates the name of the self-extracting file you are executing. No options are necessary if you wish to simply extract all files to the current directory. If you wish to extract the contents to another directory, indicate the drive and/or path the files should extract to. To extract only particular files, indicate the name(s) at the end of the command line. Options: @listfile.lst Specify list of files for extraction* -c[m] Extract to console* -d Re-create directories stored in .ZIP file* -l Display software license agreement* -n Extract only newer files* -o Overwrite existing files -p[a|b][c][#] Extract to printer* -s Decrypt with password* -t Test file integrity* *Indicates options not available in the PKSFX Junior and PKUNZIP Junior programs. Options should be placed after the self-extracting files name. If multiple options are used they must be separated by a space and each must have its own option indicator (either - or /). All options behave in the same manner as they do with PKUNZIP, with one exception. The -s option cannot accept keyboard entry. A password entered with a self-extracting file must be able to be entered from the command line. PKWARE Inc. PKSFX/ZIP2EXE 59 Modifying a Self-Extracting File A self-extracting file can be operated upon by PKZIP and PKUNZIP in a manner identical to normal .ZIP files. You will need to specify the full file name including the EXE extension. C:\>pkzip test.exe -f d:\*.* There is no difference between operating on a self-extracting file and a normal .ZIP file. A Note About Self-Extracting Files When you create a self-extracting file, you are adding a copy of the extraction code to that file. Since this code duplicates the functionality of the PKUNZIP program, it makes sense to use the self-extractor only when PKUNZIP will not be present on the machine to extract the file. If you create many self-extracting files for your own use, you will be using more space unnecessarily. Therefore it is recommended that you only use the self-extracting capability when you are sending a file to someone that you know does not have a compatible PKUNZIP. Stripping the PKSFX Code You may have occasion to want to keep the contents of a self-extracting file, but wish to turn it back to a normal .ZIP file. The ZIP2EXE offers an option to reverse the process. This is done with the command line switch -e: F:\>zip2exe -e test.exe ZIP2EXE will recognize normal and PKSFX Junior files automatically. Sending a Self-Extractor If you are sending a PKSFX file to somone who is not familiar with data compression and/or PKWARE products, we recommend you tell them to do the following: 60 Introduction PKZIP 2 With PKSFX Junior: 1) Create a temporary directory on the hard drive to hold the files contained in the self-extracting file. C:\>md temp 2) Change to the directory that was just created. C:\>cd temp C:\temp> 3) Place the diskette containing the self-extracting file into the A: or B: drive. 4) Type the name of the self-extractor, including the path to the floppy drive. C:\temp>a:test With normal PKSFX: 1) Place the diskette containing the self-extracting file into the A: or B: drive and change to that drive. C:\>a: 2) Type in the following; A:\>test -d c:\temp You may also wish to create a batch file or text file on the floppy disk containing the above steps. The contents of the self-extractor will be placed into this temporary directory. They can then examine or move the files at their leisure. The -d option ensures that any subdirectory information included will be re-created, and causes PKSFX to create the temporary directory for the user. A site license is required by a corporation, company, educational institution, or governmental agency for use of PKWARE software on the total number of computers that will use the software. Use of PKWARE programs for personal use is covered by your purchase of a single license for PKZIP. A Distribution License is required by a corporation, company, educational institution or governmental agency to use PKWARE programs to facilitate the distribution of software to outside parties. Please note that if a self-extracting file is used, a Distribution License is required, because PKWARE code is distributed in the form of the PKSFX program combined with the file(s) being distributed. Please contact PKWARE for more information if you intend to distribute self- extracting files. PKWARE Inc. PKSFX/ZIP2EXE 61 Confirm before extract If a PKSFX file has a .ZIP file comment attached, this comment is displayed before the file is extracted. By imbedding a Control-S character (Hex 13, ASCII 19), you can cause PKSFX to pause. The display will look like this: Searching EXE: XXXXX.EXE - . . . (ZIP file comment text) . . . Do you want to extract these files now (y/n)? Press 'Y' to extract the files, 'N' o abort. Note that the Control-S character is not displayed. This control character may be located anywhere within the comment. If the user aborts by pressing 'N', an exit code of 12 will be returned by PKSFX. PKSFX Junior will return an exit code of 8. See: PKZIP -z for more information on .ZIP file comments, Appendix D for more information on exit codes. Memory Requirements The memory requirements for PKSFX are similar to those of PKUNZIP. PKSFX Junior, and PKUNZIP Junior require a minimum of 50K RAM free, and a maximum of 64K RAM free. 62 Introduction PKZIP 2 USING LIST FILES PKZIP, PKUNZIP and PKSFX offer a powerful feature; list files. List files are simply listings of files. They are used to simplify command lines, and make repetitive tasks less troublesome. List files can allow you to perform some complex tasks which otherwise would not be possible. List files can not only be read, but can also be created by PKZIP and PKUNZIP. Also, list files can be created and used by other programs, such as StupenDOS", PKZOOM" and PKZMENU". PKZIP and PKUNZIP use List Files in two ways: files to be included and files to be excluded. If a List File is being created, the contents will reflect a listing of those files which would have been added, deleted, extracted or listed during a normal PKZIP/PKUNZIP operation. List File text may contain: -> Comments -> File Names -> Wild Cards -> Exact Path Names and Files -> Drive Letters List File text consists of plain ASCII. These files may be created using any text editor which can produce plain ASCII files, sometimes referred to as "DOS Text". All of the following lines would be valid in a List File: clowns.bmp *.exe project.* MSLR????.QWK ;This is a comment emp\census.txt ;This is also a valid comment D:\data\february.wk1 D:\games\majong\*.* D:\QWK\*.REP A line in a list file is treated in an identical manner to files specified on the command line. Note that only files and comments are valid in a list file. Both forward and backward slashes may be used in a list file. PKWARE Inc. Using List Files 63 Reading List Files A list file can be used in two different ways with PKZIP and PKUNZIP: -> Files to be acted upon in a ZIP operation. -> Files to be excluded from a ZIP operation. List files are usually specified with an @ (ASCII 64, normally above the 2 on your keyboard). The list file character can be changed by modifying the configuration file. Please note that the list file generation option (-@)) will also change to the selected list file character. Avoid using a character already used for another option. The simplest example of using a List File is when a .ZIP file is going to be created containing the files specfied. If a List File called "test.lst" was created containing the following lines: *.COM 300Z.TXT And then used in a PKZIP command: C:\>pkzip sample.zip @test.lst All .COM files in the current directory would be added to the .ZIP file "SAMPLE.ZIP", as well as the file "300Z.TXT" if it existed. The contents of a List File that is specified are included. The contents of a List File specified after a -x are excluded. Multiple List Files to be included and excluded may be specified on the command line in addition to file names being listed alone on the command line. Following are several example usages of List Files, each with a short description of what action would be caused. C:\>pkzip first.zip @abc.lst -x@xyz.lst All files specified in "abc.lst" would be added to the .ZIP file "first.zip". Any files that match the file specification in "xyz.lst" would not be added. C:\>pkzip second.zip -d @abc.lst -x*.txt All files listed in "abc.lst" would be deleted from the .ZIP file "first.zip". Any files matching the "*.txt" specification would not be deleted. C:\>pkzip -vc third.zip @xyz.lst 64 Introduction PKZIP 2 A file listing with comments will be shown for all files in "third.zip" which are listed in "xyz.lst" C:\>pkzip -rp backup.zip *.* -x@noback.lst A .ZIP file containing the entire drive would be created, excluding any files which match those in "noback.lst" ** Don't forget to use the @ in front of a list file name. If you do not use the @, the list file itself will be added to the .ZIP file. Generating List Files The Generation of list files can have many uses. Some suggested ways to use this feature are: -> Dividing Files to be Zipped into logical groups -> Easy exclusion of files already Zipped from a PKZIP operation -> Complex Batch File operations Keep in mind that a plain ASCII list file can be fed through other programs, like 'sort', and can be used by some other applications such as StupenDOS or PKZMENU. The list file generated by PKZIP or PKUNZIP when the -@ option is used contains the names of all the files which would have been acted upon in a normal ZIP operation. In a simple PKZIP command, the list file will contain a listing of all the files which would have been archived by PKZIP. If the list file is generated with a freshen or update command, the list file will contain those files which would have been added/updated in the .ZIP file. To generate a list file of your entire C: hard drive: C:\>pkzip dummy -rp -@cdrive.lst Note that the "dummy" .ZIP file name is necessary to have a valid PKZIP command. The list file generated by PKUNZIP will contain those files which would have been extracted. PKWARE Inc. Using List Files 65 Using List files to debug You may find the generation of list files helpful when you are testing batch files. Let's say you have created a batch file which should compress several files as a backup procedure. Perhaps these files are very large and it takes several minutes to compress each one. This means that if you were to test the batch file simply by running it, it could take quite a while to find a problem and fix it. By generating a list file of what would have been compressed, you can check very quickly to make certain that the proper files are being selected. List file size The size of a list file that may be processed is limited. The total size of the list file depends upon two factors. The first is path storage. If paths are specified in the list file and are NOT stored with the -P option, the list file size is limited to 7000 bytes. If paths are specified and ARE stored, the list file size is limited to 9700 bytes. If a list file has drive letters specified as part of the file names within the file, the maximum list file size is reduced. When paths are not stored the maximum List File size is 5100 bytes. When they are stored the maximum List File size is 6600 bytes. Note that this table corresponds to the total size of all list files being used in a single command. ͻ List File Size Limits No Path Storage Path Storage (-P) Ķ Drive Letters in List File 5100 bytes* 6600 Ķ No Drive Letter 7000 9700 ͼ *These numbers are approximate and may vary depending on your configuration. If the list file is too big, you will receive an "Insufficient Memory" error. If you have a list file which is too big, you may split it into two or more smaller list files and perform multiple PKZIP operations. 66 Introduction PKZIP 2 Be Creative The list file functions give you a whole new level of power with PKZIP. When defining a problem and searching for a solution, don't forget to consider the power of these features. Using the list file features can give you access to new abilities PKZIP would not have inherently. Here are some example situtations: Removing Old Files Suppose a .ZIP file 'work' contains 45 files. The contents of 'work' are extracted to a work directory and several of the files are deleted. How do you delete these files that are no longer necessary from the 'work' archive? Doing it manually would be very tedious. First create a list of the contents of the directory. By redirecting these file names to a list file you can capture an image of what needs to be kept in the .ZIP file. C:\work>pkzip dummy.zip *.* -@keep.lst The list file 'keep.lst' now contains the files we want preserved in the .ZIP file, files not in this list will be deleted: C:\work>pkzip work.zip -d *.* -x@keep.lstC:\work>del keep.lst The WORK.ZIP file now contains only those files which are also in the work directory. Sorting .ZIP Files Files will be added to a .ZIP file in the order that they are listed in the list file. This can be useful if you want the contents of a .ZIP file to be in a particular order. After generating a list file, bring it into an editor and modify it to meet your need. To create a .ZIP file that is sorted in alphabetical order, you would use the following series of commands: C:\work>pkzip test.zip *.* -@test.lst C:\work>sort < test.lst > sort.lst C:\work>pkzip test.zip @sort.lst C:\work>del test.lst sort.lst The SORT command used above is a standard DOS program. See your DOS manual for further information on this useful feature. PKWARE Inc. Using List Files 67 USING DATA ENCRYPTION The PKZIP utilities offer the ability to protect stored data through encryption. You should use PKZIP's encryption ability in place of any other encryption on files you intend to compress. This encryption ability has been made integral to the function of PKZIP and PKUNZIP to prevent the encryption from interfering with PKZIP's ability to compress. If you feel the need to encrypt your data to protect it, and are intending to compress the data as well, you should then use the encryption of PKZIP. Using the encryption capability of a spreadsheet or database program will prevent PKZIP from compressing the data efficiently. Encryption is enabled in PKZIP by use of the -s option. The encryption key, sometimes referred to as a "password", follows directly after the -s C:\>pkzip test.zip -ssecret d:\payroll\*.dbf Above, all the "dbf" files from the payroll directory have been compressed into a .ZIP file called "test.zip". During the compression they are also being encrypted based upon the key of "secret". The encryption scheme used by PKZIP is complex and robust. The encryption key is used to generate a number of binary encryption keys which are in turn used to determine how the compressed data is altered. Neither the original key or the derived keys are stored with the .ZIP file, nor are they retained anywhere else for that matter. This means you must remember the encryption key. ͻ IF YOU LOSE THE ORIGINAL ENCRYPTION KEY YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO EXTRACT THE FILE(S). ͼ It is also not possible to derive the original keys by examining the compressed data, or by analysis of original data versus encrypted data. This means that if you loose the key, there is no way to find it. PKWARE Inc. has no special means or technology for deriving the key or extracting the data without the key. Also note that a minute change in the key completely alters the encryption scheme. This means that the key must be exact. Any change in spelling, capitalization or punctuation causes a key to be completely different. Be certain that you know what the encryption key is and will not lose, forget, or mistype it. 68 Introduction PKZIP 2 ͻ DO NOT TRUST YOUR MEMORY ALONE. WRITE IT DOWN. ͼ Capitalization is also important. "Secret", "secret" and "SECRET" are all completely different encryption keys. You should realize that a person who knows you could attempt to extract a file you have encrypted by using words they think you will use or can remember easily. This would be items such as: Your Spouse's name Your Social Security Number Your Address Your Dog's name Etc... Long Keys It is possible to have extremely long keys, or keys with spaces in them. The length of the encryption key is limited only by the length of a DOS command line. To use a key with spaces in it, you must enclose the password in quotation marks: C:\>pkzip test.zip -s"mary had a little lamb" *.dbf Passwords of this sort may be easy to remember, while proving to be very secure. Remember to use phrases that are not obvious to someone who knows you. Complex Keys If PKZIP or PKUNZIP is specified with only the -s and no encryption key following, the user is prompted for an encryption key. PKWARE Inc. Using Data Encryption 69 C:\>zip test -s *.com PKZIP (R) FAST! Create/Update Utility Version 2 Copr. 1989-1992 PKWARE Inc. All Rights Reserved. PKZIP/h for help PKZIP Reg. U.S. Pat. and Tm. Off. Patent No. 5,051,745 Password ? ****** 80486 CPU detected. XMS version 2.00 detected. Novell Netware version 3.11 detected. Using Super Fast Compression. Creating ZIP: TEST.ZIP Adding: COMMAND.COM Deflating (36%), done. Adding: 4DOS.COM Deflating (34%), done. Asterisks are displayed in place of each character as you enter the encryption key. This feature offers added security in the event somone is watching as you type in the password. This method of entry may be easier or more comfortable to use. This also allows you to enter characters for the encryption key which cannot normally be entered from the keyboard. In order to enter one of these characters, hold down the [ALT] key and type the ASCII value of the character you wish to enter on the number pad. When you release the [ALT] key the character equal to the value typed will be entered into the Password field. The [TAB] key and other keys which could not normally be used since they would interfere with the PKZIP command line can be used when the password is entered in this manner. Passwords entered in this manner are limited to a maximum length of 64 characters. Multiple Keys Passwords can be used not only when creating a new .ZIP file but also when files are being added to an already existing .ZIP file. Let's assume you have a .ZIP file called "keyfun.zip" and it contains two files: june91.wk1 june91.wp We'll also say that neither of these files are encrypted. Now let's add another file to this .ZIP file, and encrypt it while doing so: C:\you take the photographs that they give you -- just in a nutshell, because I don't mean to split hairs with you here, but in a nutshell, take the photographs -- what do you think those photographs show about which way he was hit in the head?" "They don't! I mean, not conclusively. For example, they show us a photograph of the anterior-posterior view of the skull, with that semi-circular notch above the forehead, but they don't show us a view from the posterior-anterior. What's inside that semi-circular notch? Is there coning or beveling inside? What does that notch mean? Also, we don't know how much skull was removed at autopsy before that photograph was taken. The massive damage to the head, combined with the extensive fragmentation of the bullet, could indicate that, even if the shot came from behind, it was not the kind of ammunition that Oswald was using, so there's an argument right there. "You can give me that argument, but what do you think happened to Kennedy in Dealey Plaza, based on --- " Finally! A direct question. "Oh, my own personal belief is that he was shot from both directions, from both behind and in front, and I think it was exactly as some of the witnesses said: He was shot in the temple; I think that he was shot first from behind, and then another bullet hit him tangentially from the right front and shot the top of his head off." "You think he was shot twice in the head?" "Yeah." "And from the rear, where was that entry wound? "Exactly where Humes placed it." "Oh, in other words, you buy it that Humes -- you believe in the Humes entry wound in his testimony, his original testimony?" "Yeah." "And how come that Humes entry wound wasn't seen in Dallas?" For an instant, I considered rebutting this oft-repeated innacuracy, but I didn't want to prolong the conversation. "There could be a number of reasons for that. It could have been covered with hair or with blood -- any number of reasons for that." "And where was the exit for that?" Another leading question, which I decided to deflect: "It may not have exited. According to Sibert and O'Neill their original theory was that the extensive fragmentation of the head was caused by the impact of the bullet from behind, and that there was no exit, and that makes very good sense to me based upon the fragmentation of the bullet. How could any bullet have created that massive damage to the right of the skull?" We continued fencing, but it was clear that I wasn't going to convince him and he wasn't going to convince me of anything. As the conversation dragged on, Lifton repeated his view that the back wound was artificial. I could not agree. We also spoke about the photograph of the rear of the President's head. I argued that they were posed rather than faked. I was surprised to hear Mr. Lifton agree with me, since he has argued in public that these photographs are forgeries. Then, Lifton told me how he planned to revitalize the "Best Evidence" theory in a sequel. In his next book, he explained, he plans to augment his theory with a new angle that two of the Parkland Hospital doctors were involved in the plot to alter Kennedy's wounds, and that some of the alteration was done at the Parkland. Although he named the doctors, I will not repeat his assertions; to do so would only dignify the ludicrous. Another "clandestine interval?" As our conversation drew to a close, I tried to convince Mr. Lifton to stick to the evidentiary issues during our debate and avoid the discussion of theories. To emphasize the point, I followed up our conversation with an electronic mail message. Nevertheless, I had the distinct feeling of deja vu. Warren Hinckle of Ramparts had no better luck with Lifton twenty-six years ago: Hinckle tried to explain to him that "it is necessary to break the ice before you can go swimming in winter." (Hinckle, Warren. If You Have a Lemon, Make Lemonade, G.P. Putnam's Sons; New York: 1974, p. 227) It made no difference. Mr. Lifton states in his Compuserve essays that I hid my beliefs from him, and that I somehow implied that I wanted to win a position on some future JFK investigation. The reader can judge whether or not Lifton has been truthful. Comparing me to Arlen Specter, however, is the unkindest cut of all. After our conversation, Lifton called the convener of the Midwest Symposium, Douglas Carlson in an apparent attempt to have me removed from the panel. Carlson says that Lifton's written account of their conversation lost the flavor of the original: "He expressed some concerns. He indicated he thought you might take issue with some of his findings, and that your views might be contrary to his and there wouldn't be uniformity. I never expected that anyway." Mr. Carlson did not recall Mr. Lifton defending my presence on the panel. (Author's interview with Douglas Carlson, May 13, 1993) As those who were present remember, and the taped record of the event will reveal, Mr. Lifton was prepared with copies of our electronic mail exchanges to protect his work in the only manner he knows how: the false personal attack. Avoiding a substantive response to the questions and criticisms that I have directed toward his book and its theory of the assassination, Mr. Lifton in his essays persistently seeks to construct an argument that I hit him below the belt in Chicago, and that I have a personal vendetta against him, assumedly based upon some element of jealousy that he has published a book. This ad hominem approach should have a familiar ring to students both of rhetoric and the history of Germany in the Twentieth Century alike. Mr. Lifton bases his allegation that I hate him and have attacked him personally on his versions of certain quotations from the Compuserve Politics Forum's message board. For example, he quotes me as saying: **"It is correct to say that I do not like David Lifton.... I do not like his methods. I do not trust his motives. I do not believe he is objective. I do not believe he is sincere. I do not trust him...And, although it might have turned out otherwise, I do not believe that Best Evidence can be taken seriously as a work of scholarship, history, journalism, criticism, or other form of non-fiction." Mr. Lifton's use of ellipses significantly changed the meaning, color and tone of the the full quote, which was as follows: "It is correct to say that I do not like David Lifton. *However, since I only know him through his work on the case or through my personal dealings with him in connection with the case, and not socially, it is the functional equivalent of saying that I do not like his work.* I do not like his methods. I do not trust his motives. I do not believe he is objective. I do not believe he is sincere. I do not trust him. *I do not believe he has helped us (quite the contrary, I believe he has hurt us).* And, although, it might have turned out otherwise, I do not believe that BEST EVIDENCE can be taken seriously as a work of scholarship, history, journalism, criticism, or other form of non-fiction." (emphases supplied to accentuate Mr. Lifton's deletions) The clear thrust of this passage was this writer's opinion of Mr. Lifton's book and his role in the assassination controversy. In another example of Mr. Lifton's mangled use of brackets and ellipses to slice and dice a quotation, he completely eviscerated the central point of another of my statements: **"I sincerely believe that Best Evidence is one of the greatest publishing hoaxes since Clifford Irving's book on Howard Hughes. The theory of body snatching and body alteration has no merit whatsoever. I do not believe that [Best Evidence]...could have [been] written...in good faith." The unexpurgated passage, however, read as follows: "I sincerely believe that BEST EVIDENCE is one of the greatest publishing hoaxes since Clifford Irving's book on Howard Hughes. The theory of body snatching and body alteration has no merit whatsoever. *I do not believe that the same man who co-authored "The Case for Three Assassins" in Ramparts could have written BEST EVIDENCE in good faith. I do not believe that Macmillan exercised responsible judgment in publishing this book without critical analysis and fact-checking venturing beyond its exposure to a libel suit."* (emphasis supplied to accentuate Mr. Lifton's deletions) Part of the basis for my belief that Mr. Lifton has been pulling our legs, i.e., the dramatic variance between his theory in "Three Assassins" and the one he presents in "Best Evidence" was completely omitted by Mr. Lifton in his misuse of the quote, and he has failed to satisfactorily reconcile his earlier work with the semi-autobiographical account of his research in "Best Evidence." In this chapter, I have confined my examination to only those quotations or facts alleged by Mr. Lifton in connection with conversations or events that actually occurred, but were completely misreported by a writer who presents himself and his book to the public under the rubric of scholarship. Regrettably, Mr. Lifton also sees fit to engage in the invention of quotations that were never uttered and events that never occurred. These will be mentioned in passing during the ensuing portions of this study. CHAPTER FIVE ACT OF DESPERATION: "BEST EVIDENCE" AND THE DECLINE OF PRE-PUBLICATION REVIEW "I was particularly revulsed at what I thought were his totally unecessarily [sic] gory treatment of the medical aspects." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, February 13, 1968)(Re: Jim Bishop's book, "The Day Kennedy Died") It is difficult to separate Lifton's theory of the assassination and his concomitant conclusions about the medical evidence from his reconstruction of what he believes was done to the body of the President and how it was accomplished. The two areas are inextricably bound together; one predicates the other. To afford Lifton the full justice he is due, and to illustrate the grand sweep of his design, some abbreviated treatment of this aspect of his book is warranted. Lifton has always been an advocate of the grassy knoll assassin(s). His Ramparts piece in 1967 was one of the early "classics" of the genre. The dilemma which confronted him (and everyone else who has dealt with this evidence) is that, notwithstanding the Zapruder film, the Perry news conference, and abundant eye- and earwitness evidence, umpteen forensic specialists who examined the autopsy X-rays and photos prior to 1981 refused to lend their support to this theory. It is not a good enough conspiracy theory for David Lifton that Kennedy might have been shot from two directions, or perhaps even from the rear, albeit not from Oswald's alleged perch in the southeasternmost corner window of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building. In Lifton's view, Kennedy was shot from one direction only: the front of the limousine (page 349-350) (all page references are to the hard cover edition). Why this insistence upon rejecting any rear entry wounds? Lifton's "logic" is that there were no shots fired from the rear because the shots were fired from the front, and because it would be easier to fabricate downward slanting trajectories by adding rear wounds to the President's body later on. He never explains why the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald required that there be no rear shots, only front shots. (see around page 363) He is, of course, impressed by the Zapruder film's depiction of a violent backward jerk of Kennedy's head and torso, but fails to explain how this justifies his assumption that there was no hit in the President's back below the neck. The chief problem that Lifton encountered in attempting to prove his thesis was the discrepancies between the accounts of the Parkland doctors, the accounts of the Bethesda doctors, and what the autopsy photos and X-rays allegedly show regarding the nature of the President's wounds. In Lifton's world, it is necessary that alteration was pre-planned. Why did they have to plan to alter the body? Lifton's "solution" to the crime arose as the expedient method of overcoming the obstacle of the autopsy photography and concluding his personal odyssey. A reasonable argument can be made that the discrepancies are not so clear cut. To the presumed chagrin of Mr. Lifton and the Liftonites, the Parkland doctors and nurses are not in unanimity as to how the head wound looked. According to the Boston Globe, which interviewed many of them in 1981, six were in agreement with the so-called McClelland drawing of a large, gaping wound in the occiput (including McClelland himself) that was first published in Josiah Thompson's "Six Seconds in Dallas." Six other doctors stated that the autopsy photo that is reproduced as a tracing in the House Committee on Assassinations volumes was consistent with their recollections. That photo showed no gaping wound in the rear of the skull. ("Dispute on JFK Assassination Evidence Persists Eighteen Years Later," Boston Globe, June 21, 1981, Focus Section) There was a Parkland doctor who saw something on the skull that Mr. Lifton and his fans erroneously insist no human eye has ever seen. Dr. Robert G. Grossman, a neurosurgeon, worked next to Dr. Kemp Clark at Kennedy's head. He told the Boston Globe that he saw two separate head wounds: a large defect in the parietal area above the right ear, and a second, smaller wound located squarely in the occiput. Grossman suggested that the confusion surrounding the location of the massive head wound could be the result of the imprecision with which the term "occipital" is used: "There is this ambiguity about what consititutes the occipital and parietal area . . . It's very imprecise." And, he said, it's possible that his colleagues loosely used the word "occipital" in describing a wound that extended to the back fifth of the head, or that they assumed, without lifting up the head, that the defect did reach the back. ("Dispute on JFK Assassination Evidence Persists Eighteen Years Later," Boston Globe, June 21, 1981, Focus Section) Lifton alleges that the rear head entry wound was not fully apparent at first, but was reconstructed in its circumference with the bone fragments received by the pathologists during the late stages of the autopsy. He himself concedes that, if his theory is correct, the X-rays showing the hole had to have been made after the reconstruction (pp. 533-34), and probably after midnight (p. 526). This aspect of Mr. Lifton's theory of reconstruction is based upon a tenuous interpretation of the ambiguous remarks made by Humes and Boswell during a colloquy with some members of the HSCA's forensic pathology panel as they examined photographs. I have studied the transcript of that colloquy numerous times since it was published in 1979. It is unclear to me whether the pathologists were referring to piecing together the rear entrance wound or the wound which they maintain is an exit on the right-front of the head. At one point during the transcript, they state unequivocally that the occipital region was otherwise intact at the site of entry. The matter requires official clarification. Had the body been altered? Lifton also generally argues that the main damage to the President's skull was in the occipital region, and some of the top-back was blown off, but the top front was intact. He argues that the conspirators enlarged the head wound during their removal of the brain for the purpose of extracting bullets. The problem here is that a number of Mr. Lifton's autopsy witnesses describe the large wound in the head as being in the same posterior location as a number of the Parkland doctors have placed it. This, after the head was supposedly altered to remove evidence of a front-to-back hit. For example, radiologist John Ebersole said that when the body was removed from the casket there was a gaping wound to the back of the head, (p. 543) and photographer John Stringer told Lifton that the main damage to the skull was in the occipital. [Stringer's account would appear to agree with both Godfrey McHugh (a "Bethesda witness" and the so-called "Parkland version", although it disagrees with the autopsy photos. (pp. 515ff.) If the body was altered prior to autopsy, how were Ebersole and Stringer able to view this damage?] I. In groping for the unifying theme in this fugue, Lifton found his key in the report of two FBI agents who attended the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital, which has come to be known as the Sibert-O'Neill Report. J. Lifton became unhinged by the "surgery to the head area" reference in Sibert-O'Neill, which may have been someone's mere offhand (i.e., eyeball) reaction to seeing the wrapping on JFK's head when his body was removed from its Dallas coffin. K. Few of the hundreds of other researchers and writers who have pored over this document ever ascribed any greater significance to this language, but Lifton alleges that it signified to him (as early as 1966) a scheme to alter the President's wounds so as to conceal the true facts of the assassination. He spent the next fifteen years reasoning from this conclusion, which he dubs "trajectory reversal." L. Surgery statement 1. Lifton's reliance on the "head surgery" clause in the Sibert and O'Neill report rests on three implicit assumptions: a) an autopsy pathologist made the statement; and b) it was a diagnosis, not a question or an offhand response to some question; and c) it was made truthfully and accurately 2. What evidence does he cite that Humes made the surgery remark? Only J. Edgar Hoover's statement in November 1966 that the agents merely reported "oral statements" made by the autopsy physicians." Further, Lifton tells his readers that, "the only doctors present at the time the body was removed from the coffin were Humes and Boswell." (Chapter 12) 3. The Sibert and O'Neill report defeats him as he clearly proves in the same chapter. Admirals Kenney, Galloway and Burkley were in the morgue, as were Captains Canada and Stover, all doctors. 4. How did Lifton decide that "surgery" really occurred? He read a passage of Humes' Warren Commission testimony to a neurosurgeon over the phone. Later, as recounted in Chapter 10, he visited in person with the pseudonymous UCLA neurosurgeon, "Dr. Morris Abrams". In assisting the doctor's understanding of the brain lacerations, Mr. Lifton supplied him with the knowledge that two metal fragments were recovered from the forward right side of the head. But he either omitted to tell "Abrams" or omits to tell us about the passage in Sibert and O'Neill's report pertaining to the extensive metallic fragmentation (estimated at 40 particles) dispersed throughout the brain. Furthermore, while he presents the neurosurgeons comments as probative of surgery, Lifton was not dealing with a forensic specialist. 5. Lifton attempts to bolster his "surgery" thesis by arguing that Humes (to whom he attributes the surgery remark based on the hearsay public pronouncement of J. Edgar Hoover, see New York Times, November 26, 1966) was told a fragment of skull that had been brought into the autopsy room was "removed," another factoid gleaned from the Sibert and O'Neill report. Of course, the word "removed" might easily have been a euphemism connoting "blasted out during the shooting." Aside from Lifton's semantic foolery, however, this purported analysis was thoroughly dishonest because Mr. Lifton knew full well that Sibert and O'Neill reported that skull fragment as having been delivered "during the latter stages of the autopsy," whereas someone reportedly made the surgery remark at the very beginning. Paul O'Connor Paul O'Connor was a Navy 3rd Class Petty Officer attached to the National Naval Medical Center as a student medical technician. Prior to November 22, he had been working in the Bethesda morgue for six months on 24-hour duty. That meant that he was subject to call at any time. O'Connor told me last year that, at approximately 2 p.m., he and his partner, James Curtis Jenkins, were in the morgue when the Commanding Officer of the National Naval Medical Center, Admiral Calvin Galloway, came in and told them that they would be getting "a very important visitor." They immediately understood this to mean that President Kennedy's remains were being brought to Bethesda for autopsy. Galloway also told them that they were confined to the morgue for the duration. This would be O'Connor's first experience in working with a gunshot victim as a "Med Tech" student at Bethesda. (Author's Interview with Paul O'Connor, October 25, 1992) Mr. Lifton's account of the same beginnings to O'Connor's story omits his mention of "2 p.m.". Therein lies a problem, because, since Bethesda time was one hour behind Dallas, if O'Connor is correct, then officials at Bethesda knew the autopsy would be held there almost at the very moment that President Kennedy was being pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark at Parkland Hospital. My general observations of O'Connor were that he is sincere and truthful to the best of his ability; that he remembers vignettes or anecdotes about the autopsy, some of which he has obviously discussed with other participants; but that he has great difficulty placing the events of that night into temporal or sequential order and context. Considering the passage of years, this is hardly surprising, neither does it serve to completely discredit his recollections. It does mean, however, that his statements must be evaluated with great care and caution. O'Connor says that, at about 8 o'clock in the evening, the back door of the hospital burst open and six men came in carrying a "pinkish gray, nondescript, cheap, shipping casket." Surgery of the head: "You know something? That surgery of the head remark I think started with Sibert or O'Neill. Now what they meant by that, I don't know, but it seems like it's overridden everything else, and it gets involved -- there was no surgery of any kind. And I know what surgery looks like. Q.: Did you hear anyone ask a question like, "Did anyone do surgery to this head?" or was it a definite statement -- A.: There was a question asked somewhat to that effect, but I don't know who asked it, unless it was Humes. I don't know what he was referring to though." 3. He'd have to go out to the supply room to get supplies. 4. He went out of the room during X-rays (after measurements). 5. O'Connor allegedly told Lifton there were no brains left; the cranium was empty." (p. 601) 6. Says there was no brain, just brain tissue. 7. The difference between no brain, some brain, or very little brain shatters Lifton's theory, which holds that the brain was surgically removed before the body reached the autopsy. 9. The John Ebersole situation is both analogous and illustrative. He was nominally the radiologist in charge of X-raying the President's body and reading those X-rays. He told researcher Art Smith in 1978 that the throat wound was sutured at the beginning of the autopsy, but it was also his recollection that the autopsy began at 10:30 pm that night, a clear error that lacks any verification or corroboration and is universally contradicted by other available accounts. Taken in conjunction with O'Connor's recollection of throat-wound suturing, it becomes more plausible that the throat wound was sutured that night, not when the body arrived but during the course of the autopsy at the direction of Admiral Burkley. Ebersole, who was in and out of the room as part and parcel of the tedious process of taking the X-rays and then developing them at another area of the hospital, therefore most likely did see a sutured throat wound that night, but is confused as to just when he saw it. (The writer has been informed that Ebersole was recently interviewed by Dr. David Mantik, another researcher with impressive medical qualifications, and retracted the "suture statement.") 10. In similar fashion, O'Connor, who admits that he left the morgue during the taking of preliminary X-rays, and at other times to get supplies, may well be confused as to just when he noticed the nearly empty cranium. N. Researcher/writer Jerry Policoff makes the point that, if O'Connor says there was no brain, and he's right, then the autopsy doctors lied. Lifton can't have it both ways. O. James Curtis Jenkins: there was a brain. (HT2 92) P. Livingstone discusses conflicts in statements of Jenkins and O'Connor re the handling of the body prior to autopsy. (pp. 131-135) Q. Wouldn't any alteration scheme attempt to achieve maximal consistency with the observations of the Parkland doctors, incorporating into the plan of action the fact that the Parkland doctors did not turn the President over on his back? (Would this argument mitigate in favor of an after-the-fact ad hoc response to the situation, and against Lifton's before-the-fact pre-planned scenario? Yes.) Moreover, the Parkland doctors would have to be carefully questioned to test their observations -- which, in fact, they were, both by the Secret Service before it sent the "official" autopsy report to the FBI, and by Specter, before Humes testified. Therefore, any changes in the body could not create conflicts between the "Dallas evidence" and the autopsy evidence -- only the interpretation of that evidence as to the source and direction of the shots. Therefore, would any changes in the body be necessary? To put the question another way, was the conflict between Parkland and Bethesda a real conflict or a false conflict? T. The implication of Lifton's theory is that alteration/reconstruction of the wounds and the concomitant planting of bullet shells at the scene of the crime (and of a bullet on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, see p. 345) would be necessary. They would have advance knowledge of how President Kennedy would actually be hit by their infallible marksmen, and what alterations to the President's body would be needed to conceal the true facts of the crime. Lifton does not conceive of ad hoc improvisation (pages 362-64). U. One assumption implicit in this argument is that Lifton's conspirators were willing to gamble that a front shooter would hit his target, and that they never intended to shoot President Kennedy from other than in front. A further assumption is that the conspirators concluded it would be more desirable for them to fabricate downward trajectories than for a rear shooter to inflict them during the assassination. V. The Main Weaknesses of Lifton's Theory W. Texas Governor John Connally was unquestionably struck from the rear. "Lifton makes no attempt to explain Connally's wounds within the terms of his theory. He does not seem to notice the problem at all." (Powers, Thomas and Alan Rich, "Robbing the Grave", New York Magazine, February 23, 1981, p. 46) Would Lifton have us presume that Governor Connally volunteered to take a near fatal shot from behind in order to assist the conspirators in persuading the world that someone was indeed firing from the rear? Or, perhaps the assassins, throwing caution to the winds, chose to shoot Connally from the rear, but not JFK, to that same end, supremely confident in their ability to hit one but not the other by mistake. What if whoeever shot Connally (assuming as James Reston, Jr. does, that he was a deliberate target) had missed and instead shot Kennedy by mistake? X. Another, even more pivotal weakness of Lifton's trajectory reversal idea (p. 343) is that it rests upon the assumption that the three bullet shells which were found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository near the window from which the Warren Commission alleged that Oswald fired the shots were planted by conspirators, and upon the further assumption that the plan called for the number of wounds inflicted during the shooting to correlate perfectly with the number of allegedly planted bullet shells. Y. This, however, is not necessarily so: If more shells existed than wounds, it could be explained away that one or more of the shots fired had missed their target. If, however, less shells existed than wounds "attributable" to them, then the wounds would have to be correlated in such a way as to accommodate the number of shells. Moreover, Lifton makes no effort to address the weighty issue whether the three shells would have been planted before or after the shooting, let alone how or by whom. Z. Lifton acknowledges this problem: "One fact of my hypothesis was that it demonstrated, in theory at least, that the plotters could know, once they saw the body, how much ammunition was needed, and so could coordinate the planting of bullets with the fabrication of trajectories." (p. 359) AA. Really? How would they know how many bullet fragments to plant? Did they know how many times John Connally was struck? Could they plant fragments in Connally's chest, wrist and thigh? AB. Wasn't it necessary, in Lifton's world, to plant the three cartridge shells beforehand? Ignoring the faults implicit in his a priori reasoning, consider the consequences. I am grateful to researcher W. Anthony Marsh for pointing out that, if the conspirators had planted the three cartridge shells in the Book Depository, but "got lucky" and made the fatal hit with one shot from the knoll, the conspiracy would have been immediately exposed. As he further muses, the number of known or suspected separate and distinct shots far exceeded the three shells recovered (JFK's head and upper back/lower neck, Connally's chest and wrist, the limousine windshield and chrome topping, and bystander James Tague). AC. I agree with many students of the case that there are doubts about the legitimacy of CE 399. Looking at the totality of Lifton's ammunition-planting scheme, however, why plant a whole bullet on a stretcher, but only fragments in the car? What about the fragments that actually were found in the President's skull, or those that were too minute to recover? Were they planted (and perhaps "sprayed" through the brain) too? AD. How did the plotters know that a bullet fired from the front would not completely escape the limousine and later be recovered -- maybe hours or days after the shooting? AE. Further weaknesses AF. Bullets make tracks through the body, not just holes on the skin surface. Conspirators would have to chance that the autopsy pathologists would not be curious as to why fake rear bullet entries on the right side of the President's body and head did not make exits on the left front side of the body and head. AG. One of the earliest seeds of doubt concerning the case was the eye- and earwitness testimony that sounds of gunshots attracted their attention to the knoll. Also, Lifton's conspirators would have had to consider the possibility that a grassy knoll assassin would be apprehended by police or aroused citizens before he could either conceal his weapon or escape or do both. AH. What if Kennedy had lived? What if he had miraculously escaped from Elm Street with only a non-life-threatening throat wound? AI. What if Jacqueline Kennedy or someone else in the limousine had been hit from the grassy knoll or front by mistake? AJ. What if an innocent bystander had been accidentally hit by a grassy knoll bullet? AK. How does Lifton account for the fact that the President's back wound was too low to support a downward trajectory from the sixth floor of the Depository? How could such a crucial mistake arise in such an elaborate scheme? He answers that the back wound was a shallow one without an exit, and that it was artificially made by the conspirators during the alteration of Kennedy's body before anyone knew of the throat wound. It may be asked why, if the conspirators were ignorant of the throat wound, which could later be termed the exit for a bullet, they found it necessary to create the back wound at all? In other words, why deliberately create a wound for which there would be no apparent exit? Its sole purpose, according to Lifton, was to link the body to the allegedly planted bullet found on the stretcher at Parkland Hospital, not to conceal the true nature of any wounds to the front of the body. (see fn. page 347, and pages 372-374). AL. When the weakness and risks inherent in such a scheme are weighed, the argument appears preposterous: AM. It commits the conspirators to using up one whole bullet out of three (i.e., the shells found in the depository). AN. (Would not Lifton's conspirators have had to make absolutely sure, before planting the bullet, of how Kennedy indeed was hit? Wouldn't it be careless of them not to? In other words, Lifton wants it both ways: a careful, pre-planned scheme to alter the body, but with no immediate reconnaissance to determine what alterations would actually be needed or tolerable.) AO. It assumes that no Parkland doctor, nurse or orderly would even have the opportunity to observe the President's back; AP. It assumes the bullet would indeed be found and turned over to the Secret Service, not lost or pocketed by a souvenir hunter; AQ. It assumes Jacqueline Kennedy would be silent as to whatever she observed. AR. Why not, as a more elegant and obvious solution, simply embed a slug in the back wound and have it found at autopsy!! Would this not have provided the strongest possible case against Oswald? AS. "The plot was elegant in conception but bungled in execution," he is reported to have explained. "What was supposed to happen isn't what did happen . . . and that's why what did happen looked so chaotic and blundering." ("His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, The Assassination is a Labyrinth Without End", Los Angeles Times, November 20, 1988, Id.) AT. The Back Wound 1. Lifton's thesis: the back wound was fake and any evidence that it was real was invented for corroboration. 2. Notice how Lifton relies on the Secret Service description of the head wound, while rejecting earlier their description of the back wound. (pp. 311-312 3. Lifton theorized that the conspirators meant for CE 399 to be "paired" with the false back wound that they would create, so they planted the bullet at Parkland Hospital. (p. 345) Further, he theorized that this was the only purpose of the wound -- to link it to an "Oswald bullet," not to conceal the true nature of the wounds on the front of the body. Does this mean he thinks that the back wound was made before anyone knew of the throat wound? Yes. (see fn. p. 347). 4. Lifton theorizes that the mistake in placing the fake back wound too low was due to ignorance of the throat wound. (p. 374) But again, if they didn't know of the throat wound, which could later be termed the exit, why make the back wound at all? Why deliberately create a wound for which there would be no apparent exit? Why not embed CE 399 in the back wound and have it found at autopsy!! Strongest possible case. 5. "These Friday night data were inconsistent with the subsequent autopsy conclusion that the bullet passed all the way through ... " (p. 344). Wrong! Inconsistent only with a downward trajectory from back-to-front. 6. Harrison E. Livingstone will reveal in a book soon to be published that one of the Parkland nurses, Diana Bowron, who was within close proximity to the President at all times, has been located. She was one of those who washed and cleaned the body after death to prepare it for transport. She has been interviewed and has made a signed statement. She has also examined the purported photograph of the back wound. She says there was a bullet wound in Kennedy's back at Parkland, approximately six inches below the juncture of the neck and shoulder. AU. Glen Bennett (Chapter 11) 1. Bennett was sitting in the back seat of the Secret Service follow-up car. Since David Lifton's theory requires that President Kennedy was not shot in the back, because he alleges that shots were fired only from in front, Lifton had to insinuate that Bennett was in on the plot, and that his report of what he observed was intended to provide a "cover story" for the plotters. 2. Key point to make: Bennett saw the second shot hit. 3. Leave the plagiarism angle for the next section. Here I want to make the point that what Lifton did not consider was an equally plausible motive: Rowley telling the Commission that Kellerman's testimony was erroneous, perhaps even deliberately untruthful. AV. Clothes 1. Lifton alleges that the plotters created fake holes in the rear of the President's clothing. The holes in the clothing were artificially inflicted in the wrong locations, however, because the conspirators, not realizing the existence of the throat wound at the time, had committed the mistake of making the back wound too low. (Chapter 9) How does he dismiss the discrepancy in the holes' sizes? The conspirators made another mistake. 2. Lifton suggests an attempt to hide the throat wound (p. 545), but what about the holes in the shirt and nick in the tie? 3. "Minute traces of copper" were found around the edges of the holes in the back of the jacket and shirt. (FBI, Memo of Jevons to Conran, November 26, 1963, #62-109060-1086) AW. Windshield 1. He got Curry's book in December 1969. (Lifton, David. Postcard to Sylvia Meagher, December 13, 1969) AX. According to Lifton, the body first arrived in a gray metal casket. In a body bag with the head wrapped in a sheet. The throat wound was sutured and the body had no brain. AY. About the throat wound. If the throat wound was an entrance, then why would it make such a neat hole in the throat yet such a small tear in the lateral wall of the trachea? AZ. Lifton and the throat wound suture story 4. Ebersole quoted as saying the front of the body (=head) was intact. (p. 546) 1. Ebersole suture story (p. 541) 2. Ebersole, who thought the autopsy started at 10:30pm, says the throat wound was sutured at the outset of the autopsy. Lifton concludes that sometime prior to what Ebersole thought was the start, the throat had been sutured. (cf. pp. 541, 606) 3. O'Connor saw an open, unsutured tracheotomy wound. (p. 604) 4. O'Connor told Lifton he saw the *open* tracheotomy wound (unsutured). (p. 601) 5. How reconcile O'Connor with Ebersole? Lifton never satisfactorily resolves the problem. 6. Ebersole said the autopsy began at 10:30 p.m. (p. 519) 7. My interview with O'Connor Re Burkley: "When he came in he was very upset, very agitated... Q.: When you say agitated, in what way? Do you mean grieving, or angry, or what? A.: Well just about all those emotions, okay? Boiled into one. [He] paced back and forth, paced back and forth, walked back and forth. He'd go over to the phone and call the tower. Q.: How do you know he was calling the tower? A.: Well, later on we found out he was calling Bobby. Y'know, word gets around the hospital. So, he'd make his phone call and get back and say: 'The Kennedy family wants you to do this, that, but don't do this, that and the other.' So, he was talking to someone in the Kennedy family. We knew that because that's what his words were. 'The Kennedy family requests that you not do this, not do that, blah, blah, blah, blah. Q.: Did you personally overhear any of what he was saying --- A.: Oh, yeah, sure. Q.: --- at the time? A.: But I, verbatim? I couldn't really --- I remember that one conversation involved the neck: To make sure the neck wound was sutured and cleaned up real nice, words to that effect --- just leave it alone. We were prepared to dissect the neck, which meant we'd have to do more incisions. 8. O'Connor didn't remember any sutures. BA. The body bag 1. The President was wrapped in plastic in addition to a sheet. The plastic stuck against the throat and the back of the skull. (Bishop, Jim, The Day Kennedy Died, p. 452) (NEED CITATION. THIS COMES FROM WRONE. RE-CHECK) 2. Rubber sheeting was used to protect the casket. 3. Jim Metzler: there was no body bag (HT2 89) BB. Why wasn't there enough room in a 747-page hardcover book, or any of the subsequent paperback editions, to include the full five-page Sibert and O'Neill report upon which Lifton builds his empire? The only reasonable answer is that readers would then be able to see what deceptive use David Lifton makes of it. BC. The Ambulance Chase 1. In February 1989, University of Wisconsin History Profesor David Wrone showed this writer a draft of his own critique of David Lifton's "Best Evidence," entitled "Anatomy of the Most Successful Assassination Fraud." Examining the movements of Kennedy's casket from its arrival aboard Air Force One at Love Field, Dallas, to its arrival at Andrews Air Force Base, Professor Wrone painstakingly established the absence of any moment when the casket was left unattended by President Kennedy's friends and staff or the Secret Service, and also pointed to Lifton's failure to demonstrate the existence of any mysterious helicopter that his plotters could use to kidnap the body at Andrews. Noting that Lifton's two-casket theory was based on interviews with dramatis personae minor held sixteen and seventeed years after the event, Professor Wrone offered the professional historian's perspective: "Evaluating witness testimony in a crime as complex and infamous as the assassination of President Kennedy calls for mature judgment associated with common sense and much experience. The mind through memory tends to expand time frames, collapse and even intertwine events often with selective enhancements and embellishments, to the absolutely convinced correctness of the individual." 2. It is not necessary, however, to dismiss the witness whom Lifton interviews regarding the coffin movements (page 399 ff.) on the basis of the weakness of eyewitness testimony. It is Lifton's use of their "testimony" itself that is outrageous, as shown by an objective appraisal of his alleged reconstruction of the casket switch via the use of a "decoy ambulance" at Bethesda: 3. Corporal Cheek had only a vague recollection of trying to find the ambulance and finally catching up with it at the morgue entrance. Lifton quotes him, but does not cite his account in direct support of his thesis. 4. Felder echoes the decoy ambulance story, but he doesn't remember which of the two ambulances was the decoy. All he remembers is following the first ambulance from the front of Bethesda around back, losing it, returning to the front, seeing a second ambulance, returning to the rear again and unloading a coffin. Lifton quotes him, but does not dcite him in direct support of his thesis. 5. Mayfield (page 408) tells about chasing an ambulance around back, losing it, returning to the front and picking it up again. (He doesn't speak in terms of two ambulances, and Lifton doesn't say whether he asked Mayfield about a second -- or decoy ambulance.) Lifton quotes, but does not cite Mayfield in direct support of his thesis. 6. Notice Lifton's persistent questioning and his highly suggestive, leading questions to Clark (page 409). Clark says there was a decoy ambulance, but his recollection is vague, even under Lifton's prompting. Lifton does not cite him in direct support of his thesis. 7. Gaudreau (page 414) does not have an independent recollection of there being more than one ambulance until Lifton prompts him. He clearly cannot remember the details. Lifton quotes, but does not cite Gaudrea in direct support of his thesis. 8. From General McHugh, Secret Service Agent Greer and the presidential physician, Dr. George Burkley, Lifton produces nothing in support of his scenario. 9. His star witness is Dennis David, whom he interviewed in 1979. 10. David says the first "ambulance" came onto the grounds of the hospital from the back gate, bearing the body (page 571). He describes the first "ambulance" as an unmarked black Cadillac (i.e., a hearse) not a gray Navy ambulance (page 575). David says the casket it carried was plain gray metal (page 579). The second ambulance was the empty one arriving with the official motorcade (page 571). He did not, however, witness the arrival of the "second ambulance" at the morgue (page 573). David says that, after the black hearse arrived, he went to the front of the hospital and up to the balcony to the rotunda. From there he witnessed Jackie and Bobby's arrival. (Page 576) 11. Although he tells Lifton that he supervised the entry of a casket, unloaded from the first ambulance by a group of sailors (page 571), he admits that he has no personal knowledge that the body was in the first ambulance (page 581); he simply alleges he was told this by Commander Boswell, one of the autopsy pathologists (page 573). Furthermore, while Lifton cites his interview with David as support for the fact that Humes, Boswell, Admiral Kenney (Surgeon General of the Navy) and Captain Stover were in the morgue when the first casket arrived (page 580, it is not until a full nine pages later, however, that Lifton discloses that David "had emphasized that he had never entered the autopsy room itself." (page 589) 12. It is on the basis of such testimony by a man who knows nothing, and for whose tale no corroboration is offered, that Lifton makes his case. 13. Paul O'Connor (interviewed by Lifton on August 25, 1979) (p. 598), stated he saw a gray shipping casket enter the morgue at 8 p.m. Lifton arbitrarily concludes that O'Connor was describing events he witnessed at least an hour earlier that 8:00 p.m., and that his testimony dovetails with that of Dennis David (page 605), except that O'Connor said he thought the body was brought in by helicopter, one that may have landed in the rear of the hospital. Lifton quotes O'Connor in his book, but does not use him in direct support of the musical caskets thesis. 14. The two-casket entries/two audiences -- Lifton's developing theory (pages 585-586) 15. STEP ONE: 6:45 entry (gray casket) (first entry of the body). a) What evidence does he have that the body was taken in at 6:45? His only source is Dennis David. 16. The Navy Ambulance arrives at the front entrance at 6:55 pm (I did not have this in my original essay and may not need it to make the point.) 17. STEP TWO: 7:05-7:17 p.m., Navy ambulance and MDW "chase" a) Source: inference liberally drawn from Sibert & O'Neill - related FBI documents. b) Lifton's conclusion: the empty Dallas casket is brought to the morgue; Sibert & O'Neill barred; JFK's body transferred to the Dallas casket and put in the "correct" ambulance. c) 43 minutes elapse before, 18. STEP THREE: 8:00 p.m. casket team entry; MDW casket team and McHugh bring Dallas casket to morgue. a) Sources: casket team interviews, Wehle, McHugh, et. al. b) Conclusion: President's body is brought to the morgue in the Dallas casket for the official autopsy. The body has already been altered. 19. Queries: a) What happened to the empty plain gray metal casket? Where did it go? b) What if the casket team had caught up with the Navy ambulance before or during Step Two? c) If the body had been altered at Walter Reed, why the first entry? Why not simply transfer the body from hearse to ambulance? d) How does McHugh get into the "correct" ambulance? e) Isn't Lifton ignoring the time that was required for initial X-raying and photographing of the remains (7:17 p.m. - 8:15 p.m.)? BD. More on the Ambulance Chase 1. Sibert and O'Neill wrote "On arrival at the Medical Center, the ambulance stopped in front of the main entrance, at which time Mrs. JACQUELINE KENNEDY and Attorney General ROBERT KENNEDY embarked from the ambulance and entered the building. The ambulance was thereafter driven around to the rear entrance where the President's body was removed and taken into the autopsy room. Bureau agents assisted in the moving of the casket to the autopsy room. A tight sercurity was immediately placed around the autopsy room by the Naval facility and the U.S. Secret Service. Bureau agents made contact with ROY KELLERMAN . . . " A close reading of this passage raises the possible distinction between their use of the words "body" and "casket". 2. Humes and the team of Sibert and O'Neill, as well as other witnesses, have told us that there was a period of initial X-raying and photography. 3. Sorrell L. Schwartz, Potomac, Md. was a pharmacologist at the Naval Medical Research Institute,a component of the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md. On the night of November 22, 1963 he was recruited to serve with the duty officer. He wrote to Time Magazine (Time, February 16, 1981, p. 4): "[W]e did not lose track of the ambulance containing the bronze casket after it arrived at the medical center. On that night there were a large number of spectators around, and our intention was to get the ambulance to the morgue before the crowd gathered. The honor guard, along with a Navy enlisted-man driver, the other duty officer and me, rode to the morgue on the guard truck at high speed, believing that the ambulance was following. When we got there, the ambulance was not seen. Since the Secret Service driver was unfamiliar with the grounds, we decided he was lost. Retracing our path, we found the ambulance still at the front of the hospital amid many onlookers. In our haste we had left without confirming that the ambulance was behind us. On the second try we did it right. "At no time was the ambulance out of sight of at least several hundred people, from its arrival at the center until the bronze coffin was unloaded at the morgue." 4. Donald Rebentisch (Coopersville, Mich., a mechanic at a General Motors plant in suburban Grand Rapids), a former petty officer stationed at Bethesda, said that two ambulances carrying two caskets were employed -- one of them empty and one with the body of Kennedy -- in a deliberate charade to slip the President's body into Bethesda Naval Hospital. Rebentisch said "his commanding officers told him the secrecy was planned to avoid the media and other onlookers." "The empty casket was brought in the front door, he said, while the casket carrying Kennedy's body was wheeled in the back where medical officials were to perform an autopsy. "'It was about 4:30 p.m., when our chief petty officer came to me and about five other petty officers and told us to go to the back of the hospital. I'm talking about the loading ramps where they used to bring in supplies.' [note: rear door] "'He told all of us that we were going to be there and we were going to bring the President's casket into the mortuary. We were told not to leave our posts. "'The chief said we got all the ... ghouls and reporters and the TV and everybody at the front of the hospital. he said there would be an empty casket in the ambulance. He said the President's body would really come in the back. "'This made sense to me. I felt there was nothing wrong with this. I just bought it, as did the rest of us.' "Rebentisch said Kennedy's body was brought to the back of the hospital in a black 1958 Chevrolet hearse. "'We took the casket out ... and pushed it down a long, illuminated hall. Now this is a service area, not the main part of the hospital.'" -- "Two of Rebentisch's former colleagues in the Navy -- Richard Muma and Paul Neigler -- both corroborated the former petty officer's story. "'It was common knowledge that there were two caskets,' Muma said." (United Press International, January 24, 1981, AM cycle) 5. For Rebentisch, there was no big secret. Rebentisch was studying dental and medical equipment repair at the hospital at the time. He said he and five other officers wheeled the President's coffin through a rear freight entrance, 35 or 40 minutes before another coffin was taken through a mass of reporters and photographers at the front door. "Rebentisch said he doubted most of Lifton's claims." Confirmation: Robert Muma, 45, treasurer and comptroller for the northern Michigan resort town of Charlevoix. "'There were two ambulances that came in,' said Muma, who was a Bethesda staff dental technician. 'One was lighted. It came up to the front door. The second one they kept dark and it went around to the back. That was the one that had Kennedy in it. It was common knowledge that there were two caskets.'" (The Associated Press, January 23, 1981, AM Cycle) BE. The Two Casket Entries 1. According to the report of the casket team leader, the casket team unloaded the casket into the morgue at 8 p.m., one hour and five minutes after the Secret Service reported it had arrived at the front of the hospital. (p. 406). According to Humes, he received the body at 7:35 pm, so Lifton's question is: What did the casket team carry in? Sibert and O'Neill say that the preparations for the autopsy began at 7:17 pm, and the autopsy itself began at 8:15 pm. (p. 484) These are the bases for Lifton's finding time unaccounted for (approximately 45 minutes) and concluding that there were two separate casket entries. 2. Query: Who was the second entry intended to deceive? 3. Lifton concludes that the details are less important than establishing a break in the "chain of possession" (p. 422) 4. O'Connor thought the body was brought in by helicopter, one that may have landed int he rear of the hospital." (p. 605) BF. The phony burial theory 1. Weisberg: "To promulgate his case of a shell game with caskets, Lifton makes a big thing of his representation that there was no corpse of a colonel for another casket and seeks to support this by alleging that he colonel was not buried in Arlington, as had been reported. To make this appear credible he had an associate call Arlington Cemetery and ask if a colonel had been buried the next day. He claims the response was that nobody was buried the next day. Inference, the stories were false. "The falsity is Lifton's. He fails to inform that the next day was a Saturday and that there were not burials at all at Arlington on Saturdays. (Weisberg, Harold. Letter to Edwin McDowell/New York Times, February 4, 1981) BG. The Back Gate 1. Dennis David told Lifton that the first ambulance came onto the hospital grounds from the back gate. This is the one he says had the body. (p. 571) 2. According to Dennis David, it was allegedly an unmarked black cadillac. (p. 575) The Recollections of Dr. Russell Madison (personal interview) 3. He was attached to the Air Force Radiological Institute. When he left work, he noticed that the helipad was lit. He was leaving at approximately 6:30 p.m. 4. Customarily used back gate at the end of each day's work because it was closer to his home, and because it enabled him to avoid heavy rush hour traffic on Wisconsin Avenue.. This night it was locked and no guard was posted. Only time that he was unable to use this back gate. BH. Photo and X-ray Alteration 1. Was the body altered to deceive the autopsy surgeons? Or to deceive the camera? 2. Lifton theorizes that the rear head wound seen in Dallas was "erased" by restoring the back of the head, at least on the autopsy photos and X-rays (p. 505-506) 3. Lifton suggests "Lens 3" -- the photo and X-ray record was created after midnight. 4. If the medical forgery was so good, why substitute faked photos and X-rays? 5. How does he deal with the fact that the medical technicians say the autopsy photos are fake? 6. "Custer has repeatedly said that the X-rays now in evidence are not the ones that he took and are not of President Kennedy." (HT2 130) BI. Three vehicles, two coffins, exits and entrances BJ. No direct evidence BK. Thomas Powers: "This is something he *figured out*." (Powers, Thomas and Alan Rich, "Robbing the Grave", New York Magazine, February 23, 1981, p. 46) BL. "The contemporary has no perspective; everything is in the foreground and appears the same size. Little matters loom big, and great matters are sometimes missed because their outlines cannot be seen." (Barbara Tuchman, "When Does History Happen," New York Times Book Review, March 8, 1964.) BM. Summary 1. Lifton's conspiracy theory, which earns a new definition for "internal logic," requires assassins firing frangible bullets only from somewhere in front of Kennedy for the purpose of leaving the rear of his body unmarked, and for leaving only shallow entrance wounds later to be enlarged to appear as exits, and further calls for post hac accessories to the crime manually creating rear entrance wounds to mislead the autopsy surgeons. 2. His assassins could not risk firing from behind Kennedy for fear of creating undesired trajectories (although rear-to-front trajectories are exactly what they wanted!) 3. In Lifton's arcane world, everyone purposefully acts in a certain way to achieve diametrically opposite results. 4. Lifton ignores that the autopsy X-rays and photos were secreted away, and that physical specimens from the autopsy are still missing, and that the chain of possession of all these items is muddled. Why would these events have occurred if, as Lifton asserts, a perfectly planned medical forgery framing Lee Harvey Oswald went undetected? 5. Certainly it could not have been Lifton's personal qualities which endeared him to Macmillan. Lifton proudly admits how he misrepresented himself as a law student so as to get witnesses to talk (page 398). He also freely admits to surreptitiously taping his interstate telephone conversations. 6. Lifton claims to enjoy a profound psycholinguistic empathy and rapport with Dr. Humes, the chief autopsy pathologist. No matter what Humes has said in his testimony, Lifton always seems to know what he really means. 7. As Professor Wrone has concluded, "In hiding his determinative philosophy, his irrationalities, aberrations, and hasty, wrong judgments [Lifton] is dishonest with the reader. . . 'Best Evidence' . . . is not the objective search of a scholar, plastic in formulation, changing with the evidence, honest with his past." 8. Why does Lifton conceal the fact that he had gone down to lecture the staff of the House Committee for the better part of a day, and fully apprised them of the theory he was pursuing? Or that he refused their request to make his manuscript available? (page 554) 9. Is it mere coincidence that this book appeared so soon after the House Committee investigation? 10. There is a striking parallelism between the treatment accorded to Warren Commission critics by both HSCA Chief Counsel G. Robert Blakey and David S. Lifton. 11. Blakey held a weekend conference with several Warren Commission critics in September 1977, purportedly to elicit their views under conditions of strict secrecy. He never called upon them again throughout the course of the committee's investigation, but after the committee had issued its findings, he cited this conference as evidence that he had given their critics their day. 12. Lifton picked the brains of the critics for fifteen years, adopted some of their approaches to the evidence as his own, and then purported in his journal of self-discovery to dismiss all of them. ("I felt isolated and, for the first time, saw the other Warren Report critics as mere tourists engaged in an academic exercise. I had found something fundamental -- I had glimpsed the possibility of treason." (page 240) 13. Both the HSCA and LIfton exonerated everyone in sight of complicity in the murder, and of the cover-up of the crime, leaving only sinister ghosts to blame for the assassination. 14. An Odd Official Silence 15. The sequestration of the House Committee's files created the very environment which made possible the publication of "Best Evidence." 16. Lifton's allegations cast such a stain on the integrity and reputation of the national government and the rule of law that one might think a forthright response would by now have been made by the government. 17. Perhaps the official silence is due in some measure to the fact that Lifton's book is not wholly without merit. 18. He mounts, for example, a searing indictment of the House Select Committee on Assassinations for its refusal to make public the contents of its behind-the-scenes interviews with various dramatis personae in the assassination controversy, a brazen step beyond even the Warren Commission's penchant for secrecy. (None of this material is subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, which applies only to agencies of the Executive Branch.) 19. He also offers a painstaking and up-to-date analysis of the gross variance betwen what the autopsy X-rays and photos show, what the Bethesda doctors wrote in their report, and what the Parkland doctors in Dallas observed while vainly attempting to save the President's life. 20. At bottom, however, Lifton's book belies the conceit that the assassination of President Kennedy can be "solved" through evidence that is incomplete, ambiguous and thoroughly tainted. As the late Thomas Stamm suggested, preoccupation with such evidence is equivalent to focusing on the magician's diversionary technique, which is intended to conceal and cannot explain the mechanics of his tricks. The tragic irony of David Lifton's work is that, like the Warren Commission itself, he was constrained by the lack of solid fact to resort to speculative improability in constructing a "logical" explanation for the assassination. 21. It is noteworthy that this technique achieved currency in several more recently published works. 22. Sadly, Lifton's book inaugurated a trend in the publishing industry, whereby it has seemingly become impossible for a serious, responsibile student of the assassination to see his work commercially published unless he posits a neat and fanciful solution to the crime, witness such books as Reasonable Doubt by Henry Hurt; Contract on America by David Scheim; Mafia Kingfish by John H. Davis; On the Trail of the Assasins by Jim Garrison, and -- in the realm of fiction -- Libra by Don DeLillo. To date, no critique of the methodology and conclusions of the House Select Committee on Assassinations comparable to earlier published books and articles about the Warren Commission's Report has appeared in print, and it has grown increasingly unlikely that any will in the forseeable future. Thus, the public controversy initially stirred by Edward Jay Epstein's scholarly and understated book, Inquest, which began as a thesis for his Master's Degree at Cornell University, has been fueled by pap. It is, to borrow the title of a popular song, "running on empty." 23. Serious valid criticisms of the medical evidence in John Kennedy's assassination have been raised by several researchers and authors, and the subject is indeed worthy of further study. Unfortunately, the erstwhile House Select Committee and the Congress as a whole have blocked our access to those very materials which could appreciably advance our knowledge. These include staff counsel interviews, sworn depositions and affidavits of participants in the creation of the medical record -- resources which cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be regarded as highly classified or related to the protection of national security. The most logical step toward satiating our hunger for the solution to a case which cannot be solved through the available evidence is to demand access to that which continues to be withheld. He manipulates his facts in the interest of his system. CHAPTER SIX "THE ORIGINAL WORK OF A SCHOLAR" Aside from his "head surgery" on direct quotations, Mr. Lifton also demonstrates a propensity toward egregious errors on the simplest facts capable of the simplest verifications. The following examples should suffice to illustrate the point that Mr. Lifton apparently has difficulty in establishing dates, times and chronologies, an ability that is undoubtedly quintessential to the split-second timing of his reconstruction of events on the night of November 22, 1963 in "Best Evidence": He contends that I met the late Sylvia Meagher in the Spring of 1975, when I was 27. I first made her acquaintance in 1974, when I was 26. He cannot state with any degree of certainty whether he and I met face-to-face in 1976 or 1977. It was 1977. He says I was about 28. I was 29. He alleges that I attempted to interview former Warren Commissioner John J. McCloy while I was working for CBS. As I clearly stated in my Third Decade article, "The Greatest Secret I Ever Learned About The Kennedy Assassination", which Lifton has read, this happened after I left CBS. He says, "Sometime around 1977, Feinman was accepted at Yeshiva University, where he began in 1978, at age 30." I began studying law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in late August 1977, at the age of 29. He alleges that I graduated from law school in 1981. It was 1980. He describes a dinner of several critics, not including Mr. Lifton, with Oliver Stone as taking place on Friday evening, April 2, 1993. It was Thursday evening, April 1. Weisberg's clothes Were Too Big: The "Z-202/Willis #5 analysis" --------------------------------------------------------------- Lifton carefully read and analyzed Whitewash II, and circulated an analytical memo about it to his friends. (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, January 2, 1967) Weisberg and Lifton were out of sorts, however, over Jim Garrison's investigation of Lifton's friend, Kerry Thornley (also a former Marine buddy of Lee Harvey Oswald). Lifton described the effect of his rift with Weisberg upon his work: "His work manifests itself in my own effort, only to the extent that I have been able to make use of his published material." Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, October 13, 1969) In "Best Evidence," discussing the reasons for his conclusion that Secret Service Agent Bennett lied about witnessing a shot strike Kennedy's back, Mr. Lifton liberally grafted and presented as his own work the detailed and original analysis of the photographic evidence that Harold Weisberg included in Chapter 17 of his second book, Whitewash II (self-published in 1965 and republished as a Dell paperback in 1966) without acknowledging or attributing Weisberg, as if the same thoughts had spontaneously popped into his head. Weisberg found a correlation between Zapruder frame Z-202 and Willis #5, which is the fifth photograph in a series of pictures taken by bystander Phil Willis. Lifton observed that in Willis #5, Bennett is seen looking toward the right instead of at President Kennedy, and that, since the first shot presumably occurred at Z-210 and Willis took his fifth photo less than a second earlier, Bennett allegedly could not have seen the first shot hit the President. Unlike Weisberg, however, Lifton stopped short of telling his readers that Willis testified before the Warren Commission that it was the sound of the first shot that caused him to squeeze the camera shutter and take that photograph. If so, as Professor David Wrone has pointed out, the bullet would have been fired before Z-202/Willis #5 because bullets travel faster than sound. Weisberg set the time for the first shot to coincide with Z-190 (the House Select Committee thirteen years later put it at Z-189). This would mean that Bennett could very well have seen the first shot strike the President and then, as seen in Willis #5 taken two-thirds of a second later, immediately turned in reaction to the sound of that shot. Regardless of the strained relations between Mr. Lifton and Mr. Weisberg, the practice of attribution is not based on whether one is estranged from the originator of the source material. Lifton's rape of Thomas Stamm's work in "The Case For Three Assassins" -------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Lifton was not estranged from Thomas Stamm, a New York researcher (deceased, 1980) whose letters and monographs approached the highest standards of literacy on this subject. Stamm was one of the first researchers to view the Zapruder film at the National Archives. He wrote of his observations, and Sylvia Meagher decided to quote a major portion of his essay in her manuscript, "Accessories After the Fact", which she wrote during 1965 - 1967. Mr. Lifton had access at the offices of Ramparts to a copy of Sylvia's as yet unpublished work when he was writing "The Case For Three Assassins" for the magazine. The Ramparts article included the following quote from Stamm's essay: "[T]he sudden explosive violence with which President Kennedy is slammed back against the rear seat is unmistakable." This is credited to Stamm in a footnote. The following language appears two paragraphs later in Lifton's article: "The violent backward and leftward thrust of Mr. Kennedy's head begins at the instant of impact of the fatal head shot; the two events appear to be simultaneous and to have a relationship of cause and effect. That the backward thrust could have resulted from a bullet fired from behind and above would seem a manifest impossibility. . . . This entire paragraph was lifted practically verbatim from Stamm's September 1965 essay, but was not credited to him. It is presented as the original written work of the article's authors. Here is the relevant passage from Stamm's original essay: "The violent backward thrust of President Kennedy occurs, to the eye, at the instant of impact of the fatal shot. The two events appear to be simultaneous and to have the obvious relationship of cause and effect. The service of truth requires no other explanation. "That President Kennedy could have been thrust back violently against the rear seat in consequence of a bullet fired from above and behind him seems a manifest impossibility. . . ." I knew Tom Stamm during the last five years of his life. To the best of my knowledge, Tom shared his work generously with his colleagues throughout his study of the assassination. I never knew him to request or receive money for his incisive work. I never knew him to court the admiration and respect that he surely deserved. At the very least, people should know who, and how talented, he was. CHAPTER SEVEN DON'T LET DAVID LIFTON SEE THIS CHAPTER (Wherein Lifton suddenly recovers from his selective amnesia to revise an alleged self-revelation in Best Evidence ["And then I thought, and then I knew, and then I had an insight, and then it hit me, but I couldn't be sure, so I thought about it some more, and then I couldn't remember when I thought about it the first time, et cetera, et cetera."]) One of the very few correct statements that Mr. Lifton makes in his essays pertains to our discussions in the late Seventies: "Feinman's focus was on Dr. Burkley, and his posture at the autopsy." Lifton says about him: "[B]oth at the autopsy and in the report he wrote the next day, Burkley apparently treated that hole on the body (i.e., the wound at the front of the throat) as nothing more than a tracheotomy [sic]. (Note: In Best Evidence, I explain this in terms of Burkley's honestly not knowing about the throat wound, because he arrived several minutes late in the Emergency room and the wound was hidden by the trach tube. See Chapter 14, "The 'Low' Back wound question...", p. 375 in hardcover.) "Because Dr. Burkley supposedly possessed this knowledge, yet hid it from the autopsy doctors, in my conversations with Feinman, I (or he, I don't remember who) dubbed this the "I've-got-a-secret" hypothesis." It was Feinman, and it was at that time a working hypothesis. For reasons that I explained at the Midwest Symposium, I now regard it as a virtual certainty. Mr. Lifton discussed his understanding of the "I've Got A Secret" hypothesis in "Best Evidence" as though it were another idea that had simply popped into his head -- an original conception -- without ever mentioning my name. I raise that point in order that readers may judge his protestations that he wanted to credit me for the Perry transcript, and that he would have credited me with any other research that I might agree to give him. Here is how Mr. Lifton's book dealt with the hypothesis: "If to avoid altering the body, the doctors were recruited into a plot, then, to deceive the bystander witnesses, the doctors would also have to sham the autopsy -- for example, bend over a body which showed frontal entry and pretend not to see what was really there. Indeed, they would have to make false oral statements, at least for the benefit of the FBI, as they performed the examination. "If the body was unaltered, and the autopsy doctors both shammed the examination and then falsified their report, still another problem would remain: the X-rays and photographs.* ................................................................ * In any homicide investigation, the autopsy X-rays and photographs are an integral part of the autopsy protocol. In this case, Chief Justice Earl Warren declined to make them a part of the Warren Commission's evidence, but that was purely his option. He could have decided otherwise. Indeed, one reason the Warren Commission attorneys said they felt confident the autopsy doctors could not have lied was that they could not have known whether the Commission would ultimately demand to see that evidence." ............................................................... "It was easy to say such evidence could be faked, but in practice the technical problems were anything but trivial. X-rays of the head might be tested for authenticity through dental identification, and photographs of the head wounds would have to be convincingly faked from several angles -- a near impossibility. "From a technical standpoint alone, it made no sense to attempt such a feat -- in effect, to leave the most important evidence, the body, unaltered, buried in a cemetery, where an exhumation would readily reveal the lie -- when to avoid these problems it was only necessary to recognize that the body was evidence and make plans to alter it prior to autopsy." (Best Evidence hard cover, p. 458) Maybe not, if they didn't know of the throat wound until later in the course of the autopsy, or believed the wounds were unrelated. What is even more irritating, however, is Mr. Lifton's invention of facts and post hac revision of his book. First, there is not a scintilla of evidence to support Mr. Lifton's current assertion that, at the autopsy, "Burkley apparently treated that hole on the body ... as nothing more than a tracheotomy", and so far as we know, Dr. Burkley did not write a report the next day. If Lifton is aware of such a report, let him produce it. Second, but far more crucial, Mr. Lifton did not write in "Best Evidence" that Dr. Burkley arrived "several minutes late in the Emergency room." He asserted that Burkley arrived at 12:53 p.m., some 15 - 20 minutes after the President's arrival, and too late to observe the throat wound. Dr. George G. Burkley, the President's official White House physician and a Navy Admiral, was doubly distinguished as the one medical doctor who was with John F. Kennedy throughout the day and night of November 22-23, 1963. Burkley was the only physician who was close to both the pre- and post-mortem treatment of the President, but he was never called to testify before the Warren Commission. It does not appear that he was ever interviewed by representatives of the Secret Service or the FBI. Although he was interviewed by the HSCA, those interviews have been sequestered. Burkley, formerly portrayed as a passive bystander in the events immediately following the assassination, was in fact an active participant. Moreover, Burkley seems to have been an important, busy and knowledgeable figure in the events immediately following the assassination: Of prime significance to our discussion of Mr. Lifton's "Best Evidence", Burkley was the link between Parkland and Bethesda which has never been officially acknowledged; he was present in the emergency room at Parkland Hospital, where he witnessed and assisted his medical colleagues' efforts to revive the President; and, he was present during the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital that same night. In this chapter, I shall examine the evidence to support the proposition that Burkley had the opportunity to see, learn or know about the wound in the President's anterior neck during the emergency treatment at Parkland hospital. The significance of this issue is cataclysmic: The autopsy pathologists have claimed ignorance of that wound at the time they performed their examinations as their excuse for having failed to trace the alleged course of a missile from the presumed entrance wound in Kennedy's upper back, through the upper thoracic region, and out the throat. After surveying the evidence, I shall then discuss the manner in which Mr. Lifton chose to deal with this subject. Overview -------- Burkley rode in the rear of the Dallas motorcade in the "VIP bus". (CE ll26) The Warren Report tells us that "Admiral Burkley, the President's physician, arrived at the hospital "between 3 and 5 minutes following the arrival of the President", since the riders in his car "were not exactly aware what had happened" and the car went on to the Trade Mart first." (WR 53) Burkley later confirmed this statement (George G. Burkley, recorded interview by William McHugh, October 17, 1967, page 16, John F. Kennedy Library Oral History Program) In their testimony, several of the Parkland Hospital doctors recalled Burkley being in the Emergency Room. For example, Dr. Charles Carrico: "Admiral Burkley, I believe was his name, the President's personal physician, was there as soon as he got to the hospital." (3H 363) Several nurses also reported seeing Burkley in the Emergency Room. Admiral Burkley actually participated in the President's treatment. He supplied the treating doctors with hydrocortisone because of JFK's adrenal condition. "Burkley produced three 100-mg vials of Solu-Cortef from his bag, murmering, 'Either intravenously or intramuscularly.'" (Manchester, William. The Death of a President. Harper & Row, New York: 1967 [Hardcover], page 184.) Admiral Burkley arrived in Trauma Room One before Dr. Perry arrived. Dr. Perry performed the tracheostomy. Therefore, Admiral Burkley arrived in time to see the undisturbed throat wound. The analysis breaks down to two simple questions: What were Burkley's movements immediately following the shooting? Did Burkley actually arrive at Parkland too late to render any assistance to the dying President, as Mr. Lifton states as fact? The presidential limousine arrived at the ER loading dock at 12:34 p.m. (Report of SS Agent Emory Roberts (CE 1024 at 18 H735); Rowley's report (CE 1026 at 18H 810)) There was a delay in getting treatment for the President. The delay in removing JFK from his car probably consumed much of the concomitant "delay" in Burkley's arrival. Consider the testimony of Secret Service Agent Forrest V. Sorrels: "We went around to the emergency entrance. I jumped out of the car, and I expected to see stretchers there, out waiting, but they were not. And I ran to the entrance door there, and at that time they began to bring stretchers out, and I said, "Hurry up and get those stretchers out," and someone else, probably one of the police officers, also said to hurry up and get the stretchers out. "There was a lot of confusion around at that time." (7H 347) On November 29, 1963, Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman, who rode in the front seat of the presidential limousine, filed a report on his activities, which was reprinted by the Warren Commission as Exhibit 1024. On page two of this statement, he reported that Secret Service agents ran into the hospital to get a stretcher. (Commission Exhibit 1024 at 18H 725) Here is Roy Kellerman's testimony on this matter: "Mr. Specter. With respect to the state of readiness of Parkland Hospital at your arrival, how long after you got there were stretcher bearers at the front door? Mr. Kellerman. To the best of my knowledge, there were no stretcher bearers at the car--none. Mr. Specter. At your arrival? Mr. Kellerman. Yes, sir. Mr. Specter. Did some come shortly after you arrived? Mr. Kellerman. No, sir. Mr. Specter. Well, what sequence did follow with respect to the arrival of the sretchers? Mr. Kellerman. When we arrived at the hospital I had called to the agents to go inside and get two stretchers on wheels. Between those people and police officers who also entered the emergency room, they brought the stretchers out. I did not at any time see a man in a white uniform outside, indicating a medical person. Mr. Specter. When did you first see the first indication of a doctor? Mr. Kellerman. When we got in the emergency room itself proper. Mr. Specter. And do you know which doctor that was? Mr. Kellerman. Not by name or sight; no, sir. Mr. Specter. How many doctors did you see at that time? Mr. Kellerman. The room was full. Mr. Specter. Who were the individuals who brought the stretchers on wheels, if you know? Mr. Kellerman. Agents who were in the followup car, police officers who were ahead of us on motorcycles." (2H 102) UPI White House Correspondent Merriman Smith was in the press pool car, the sixth and final vehicle in motorcade (Manchester, op. cit., p. 167. Smith provided this eyewitness account in a memoir published on the third anniversary of the assassination: "Not until we pulled up at the Parkland Hospital emergency entrance in a screaming skid and I ran to the side of the Kennedy car did I know for certain that he was badly hurt. "When I saw Mr. Kennedy pitched over on the rear seat and blood darkening his coat, and Gov. John Connally of Texas slumped face up on the floor with brownish red foam seeping from his chest wound, not one hospital orderly, doctor or nurse had reached the vehicle. Several careless authors would have their readers believe that medical attendants were on the scene at this point. They were not. I was there." (Washington Post, November 20, 1966 pp. E1, E5.) William Manchester wrote, "There wasn't an attendant in sight." (Manchester, op. cit., p. 169) Dave Powers, Clint Hill and Roy Kellerman attempted to remove Kennedy from the car, but Jackie refused to let him be moved. (O'Donnell, Kenneth and Powers, David, "Johnny We Hardley Knew Ye", Little Brown and Co., Boston: 1972, p. 31; Manchester, William. The Death of a President, Harper & Row, New York: 1967, [Hardcover] p. 170) Moreover, they could not have removed him without first removing Connally from the jump seat. Connally, who recovered consciousness from the jarring of the limo's brakes upon arrival at the loading dock, was removed from the jump seat of the limousine first. (CE 1024, id.) Jackie held on, conversing with Secret Service Agent Clint Hill. (Manchester, op.cit., p. 171) Hill put his coat over JFK's head and coaxed Jackie out of the limousine. Manchester discusses the "second wave" of arrivals at Parkland "Parkland was still recoiling from this first invasion when the second, denser wave arrived from the Trade Mart. The interval was bound to be brief because the buildings were so close, and two circumstances virtually eliminated it. The first was the motorcade schedule. Drivers had been told that the procession would pick up speed after leaving Main Street, and in the excitement which followed the shots they accelerated so rapidly that during the twelve seconds of Officer Clyde Haygood's pistol-in-hand ascent of the overpass embankment every vehicle in the caravan, including the Signals car, swept past him. The second factor was communications. Curry's alarm had been intercepted by all Dallas police radios at the Mart. The men there who had heard it were preparing to escort any member of the Presidential party who could establish his credentials." (Manchester, op.cit., page 173.) The route from Dealey Plaza to the Trade Mart was cleared. (Sorrels testimony, 7H 347). Manchester's narrative continues: "There were some stragglers..... "Among the last to learn that anything had gone awry were the passengers of the hapless VIP bus. They had been instructed to go directly to the rear of the Trade Mart. But there were no Dallas policemen at the rear entrance. The guards were Texas state policemen who weren't tied into the radio network and didn't know what had happened. None of them, moreover, had seen a White House pass. They had been told that Secret Service agents would vouch for bona fide Kennedy people. But most of the agents had left for Parkland after picking up Kellerman's distress signal over the Charlie network. The result was an icy reception for Dr. Burkley . . ." "Suddenly Dr. Burkley vanished. Burkley had never deserted Evelyn [Lincoln] before but he sensed that something terrible had happened. The atmosphere was ominous. Strangers were reeling around in circles....With his chief pharmacist's mate in tow, the doctor flagged Agent Andy Berger, who was about to leave in a police cruiser. The physician had just tossed his black bag on the floorboard when Chuck Roberts of Newsweek ran up. "Let me go with you," Chuck begged. Burkley, usually gentle, slammed the door in his face; the cruiser skirred into Harry Hines Boulevard and dropped the doctor outside Parkland's emergency entrance minutes after the President's disappearance within." (Manchester, op.cit, page 174.) In the meantime, Parkland nurse Diana Bowron went out to the Emergency Room loading dock to meet the presidential limousine. She helped take the stretcher carriage bearing JFK back inside to Trauma Room 1. Carrico was there. Nurse Henchcliffe was already setting up IVs. So, it was just the three of them there at first, when Kennedy was wheeled into the room for treatment: "Mr. Specter. And who was in the trauma room when you arrived there? Miss Bowron. Dr. Carrico. Mr. Specter. Where did Dr. Carrico join you? Miss Bowron. At the -- I couldn't really tell you exactly, but it was inside major surgery. Miss Henchcliffe, the other nurse who is assigned to major surgery, was in the trauma room already setting the I.V.'s -- the intravenous bottles up. Mr. Specter. And were there any other nurses present at that time when thee President arrived in the trauma area? Miss Bowron. I don't think so, sir. Mr. Specter. Were there any doctors present besides Dr. Carrico? Miss Bowron. I didn't notice anybody -- there may have been. (6H136) Dr. Charles Carrico was the first doctor to reach Kennedy: Mr. Specter. Who was the first doctor to reach President Kennedy on his arrival at Parkland Hospital? Dr. Carrico. I was. Mr. Specter. And who else was with President Kennedy on his arrival, as best you can recollect it? Dr. Carrico. Mrs. Kennedy was there, and there were some men in the room, who I assumed were Secret Service men; I don't know.(6H 2) The Warren Report concluded: "The first physician to see the President at Parkland Hospital was Dr. Charles J. Carrico, a resident in general surgery." (WR 53) There were also two nurses in attendance. (ibid.) This is corroborated by Perry's testimony. (3H 367) The President was being wheeled into T-1 when Carrico first saw him. (3H 359). Drs. Don Curtis and Martin White were also present (ibid.) Because of the President's inadequate respirations and the apparent airway injury, Carrico inserted a cuffed endotracheal tube into the mouth and down the trachea past the injury. The cuff was inflated and the tube was connected to a respirator. This was the Bennett machine-- also known as the Bird machine (an anacronym). (6H 3) After this procedure, Carrico listened to the chest: "Breath sounds were diminished, especially on the right, despite the fact that the endotracheal tube was in place and the cuff inflated, there continued to be be some leakage around the tracheal wound. For this reason, Dr. Perry elected to perform a tracheotomy, and instructed some of the other physicians in the room to insert chest tubes, thoracotomy tubes." (6H 3) Dr. Perry went to Trauma Room 1 from the dining room accompanied by Dr. Ronald Jones. (6H 8; 3H 367) When they arrived, Carrico had just inserted endotracheal tube. (6H 8) Carrico was attaching the Bird respirator. (6H 9; 3H 368) Interim Assessment: ------------------- The delay in getting treatment for President Kennedy obviously consumed several precious minutes. The initial rescuscitative attempts performed by Dr. Carrico before the arrival of Dr. Perry must have consumed several more minutes. No one was keeping a record of the time which had transpired, but it is reasonable to conclude that Dr. Burkley's detour to the Dallas Trade Mart did not prevent him from arriving in the Parkland Emergency Room at an early point in the President's emergency treatment. Despite the lack of "a clock", it is nevertheless possible to identify a specific event upon which we can more precisely peg Burkley's arrival at the side of his patient through reconstruction of the sequence of the President's treatment. The key to this analysis is the hydrocortisone. The Administration of Hydrocortisone ------------------------------------ Initially, Dr. Charles Carrico received credit for the administration of the drug as "quick thinking" under pressure. Carrico somewhat ambiguously accepted the credit: Mr. Specter. Dr. Carrico, was any action taken with respect to the adrenalin insufficiency of President Kennedy? Dr. Carrico. Yes, sir; he was given 300 milligrams of hydrocortisone which is an adrenal hormone. Mr. Specter. And what was the reason for the administration of that drug? Dr. Carrico. It was recalled that the President had been said to have adrenal insufficiency. (3H 361) Perry clearly assumed the Carrico was responsible for the decision. He told the Warren Commission: "It is to Dr. Carrico's credit, I think he ordered the hydrocortisone for the President having known he suffered from adrenal insufficiency and in this particular instance being quite busy he had the presence of mind to recall this and order what could have been a lifesaving measure, I think." (3H 370) ............... "Mr. McCloy. You said something to the effect that, of knowing the President had an adrenalin insufficiency, is that something you could observe? Dr. Perry. This is common medical knowledge, sir, that he had in the past necessarily taken adrenalin steroids to support this insufficiency. Dr. Carrico, at this moment of great stress, recalled this, and requested this be given to him at that time, this is extremely important because people who have adrenalin insufficiency are unable to mobilize this hormone at the time of any great stress and it may be fatal without support from exogeneous drugs." (3H 377) And see Perry's interview with the staff of the HSCA (from the staff summary): "Dr. Perry stated that Dr. James Carrico, then a first-year resident, recalled that the President may have had Addison's Disease and therefore administered steroids to combat any possible shock that may have occurred....Dr. Perry could not recall if Dr. Burkley, the President's physician, had also given the Parkland doctor steroids to administer to JFK." (7 HSCA 295) But Burkley has disputed this, claiming credit for himself in his oral history interview: "I gave them some hydrocortisone, to put in the intravenous which was being given, and also told them his blood type." (George G. Burkley, recorded interview by William McHugh, October 17, 1967, page 16, John F. Kennedy Library Oral History Program.) "McHugh: Doctor, were the doctors in Dallas familiar with the illnesses that the President had? Burkley: The doctors in Dallas would have no reason to have any knowledge of that, and they had no need to have any knowledge of that, because the question was one of assassination by gunshot and his previous history, other than the fact, that I gave them the neo-cortef to put in the solution, which also would be used in anyone, possibly, who had such a wound, to give them additional support. But as far as any knowledge, their need to have any previous knowledge, it was not indicated and therefore, in addition to that the inquiries concerning the medical background of the President by people who were dealing with the Warren Commission and the assassination are absolutely unfounded, because they have nothing to do with the assassination. McHugh: I see. They did make an attempt to find out though, did they not? Burkley: They had no time to find out. I told them, they didn't -- I went in and told them that this I wanted to put in the intravenous that was being given... McHugh: Surely. Burkley: And they made no questions at all. There's a statement in one of them, that one of them ought to do this, but that is not true, because I was the one who came in and gave it to them, and the doctors in Dallas never even mentioned that I was present. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter to me, because there was no reason to interject myself in a procedure which at that time was hopeless. In addition, I was not part of their team, and it would have interfered." Burkley's version is corroborated by the testimony of Dr.Paul Conrad Peters. Dr. Peters was at Parkland preparing a lecture he planned to deliver to a group of medical students and residents when he learned that President Kennedy had been shot. He went to the emergency room to offer assistance. When he entered Trauma Room 1, "Mrs. Kennedy was in the corner with someone who identified himself as the personal physician of the President--I don't remember his name." Assistant Warren Commission counsel Arlen Specter questioned him about this recollection: "Mr. Specter. Dr. Burkley? Dr. Peters. I don't know his name. That's just who he said he was, because he was asking that the President be given some steroids, which was done. Mr. Specter. He requested that. Dr. Peters. That's right, he said he should have some steroids because he was an Addisonian. Mr. Specter. What do you mean by that in lay language? Dr. Peters. Well, Addison's disease is a disease of the adrenal cortex which is characterized by a deficiency in the elaboration of certain hormones that allow an individual to respond to stress and these hormones are necessary for life, and if they cannot be replaced, the individual may succumb. Mr. Specter. And Dr. Burkley, or whoever was the President's personal physician, made a request that you treat him as an Addisonian? Dr. Peters. That's right--he recommended that he be given steroids because he was an Addisonian--that's what he said." (6H 69) [Note: The testimony of Dr. Peters implied that, when he arrived in TR-1 the tracheostomy was in progress, suggesting perhaps that Burkley arrived after the incision was made. This was the only such reference I found in a search of both the official and unofficial record. In his 1992 reconstruction of the clinical details of the President's treatment, however, Dr. Charles Crenshaw indicated that Peters arrived before the tracheostomy (Crenshaw, Charles, et.al., Conspiracy of Silence, Signet. New York: 1992, p. 79) Dr. Crenshaw saw Burkley's open kit bag containing the steroid vials, and also saw him give three 100 mm. vials of Solu-Cortef to Carrico. (Ibid., p. 82; Remarks of Dr. Crenshaw at ASK Symposium, Dallas, October 1992) "He gave the cortisone to Jim Carrico to give to him in the emergency ward." (Livingstone, Harrison E., High Treason 2. Carroll & Graf, New York: 1991, p. 111) Crenshaw was not called to testify during the Warren Commission investigation. In view of the weight of the other evidence presented here, I have concluded that Peters' testimony was mistaken on this point.] Manchester also agrees that it was Burkley who provided the hydrocortisone: "Burkley, because he was acquainted with the patient's medical history, carried his special drugs in his black bag, and knew the proper dosage levels." (Manchester, William. The Death of a President. Harper & Row, New York: 1967, page 183.) Carrico told the HSCA staff that Burkley gave him steroids. "Purdy/Flanagan: Why was President Kennedy given steroids? Dr. Carrico: Because we had, there had been an argument in the local papers a few weeks previously that raised the question of whether or not he had adrenal insufficiency. If one does have adrenal insufficiency and is injured, then you need extra steroids. Purdy/Flanagan: Is there any risk to giving the person extra steroids if they don't need it? Dr. Carrico: Very little. Virtually none. Matter of fact, the amount he was given is the amount that your or my adrenals would excrete in time of maximum stress. Purdy/Flanagan: How harmful would it be for a person with adrenal insufficiency not to get steroids at a time like this? Dr. Carrico: No one really knows. The current medical opinion is that you need that adrenal support to respond to the stress. And without that kind of support, one could go into shock. If one really wants to get esoteric, you can argue about whether that's really true or not. But in general, the current medical practice would be to give them. And if one were going to do an operation on someone with adrenal insufficiency, you would give steroids prior to enduring the operation. Purdy/Flanagan: Did Dr. Berkeley [sic] give you any advice as to whether or not steroids should be given? Dr. Carrico: Sometime during the course of resuscitation, and I've honestly forgotten how far along, he came in, asked if the President had steroids or not, I answered something like -- I've forgotten what. He handed me some vials and said, "give him these." Purdy/Flanagan: Did you give him those? Dr. Carrico: I handed those to the nurse, and said "go ahead and give them." Purdy/Flanagan: Did Dr. Berkeley say that President Kennedy was an Addisonian? Dr. Carrico: I don't recall him saying that. He just asked if he'd had them or not and I answered in the affirmative." (7 HSCA 274-276) Conceivably, both physicans directed the administration of hydrocortisone, but the more reasonable answer is that it was done at Burkley's direction. I have reached this conclusion not only on the basis of the available testimony, but because I find it dubious that a second-year resident physician such as Carrico would have taken the responsibility for the administration of this drug in its specific dosage on the basis of some vague recollection of hearing or reading about the President's adrenal insufficiency, which had been a secret generally well-kept from the public. Three hundred milligrams of Solu-Cortef (Hydrocortisone sodium succinate) was a massive dosage. A total dose of 300 mg of hydrocortisone over 24 hours is regarded as adequate to treat any kind of stressful situation that precipitated the acute adrenal insufficiency crisis. (Himathongkam, et. al., "Acute Adrenal Insufficiency", Journal of the American Medical Association, December 2, 1974, Vol. 230, No. 9, page 1317) Consider the contemporary wisdom of the medical profession in this regard: In an adrenal crisis 200 mg. in 5% glucose solution intravenously. If intramuscularly, a total initial dose of 200mg. (Beison & McDermott, eds., Textbook of Medicine, W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia: 1963, page 1393) Burkley's activities are only dimly lit by the public record. In 1975, Harold Weisberg published copies of the Secret Service's original versions of autopsy-related Warren Commission exhibits bearing Burkley's handwritten verification. (Weisberg, Harold. Post Mortem. Privately published. Frederick, MD.: 1975) Burkley's notations were redacted from the exhibits admitted and published by the Commission. On the theory that someone was interested in suppressing Burkley's role in the events of that day, it would be interesting to know whether Carrico was requested by officials to assume public responsibility for the administration of hydrocortisone to the President. This is only, however, a theory. Regardless of whether Burkley or Carrico was responsibile, however, the hydrocortisone was administered at the beginning of the emergency treatment, before Perry arrived. Carrico's testimony: "At the beginning of the resuscitation attempt intravenous infusions had been started using polyethelene catheters by venesection, lactated ringer solution, and uncross-matched type O RH negative bloods were administered and 300 mg. of hydrocortisone were administered." (6H 4) ---------------- "At the same time we had been getting the airway inserted Dr. Curtis and Dr. White were doing a cutdown, venous section using polyethelene catheters through which fluid, medicine and blood could be administered. Mr. Specter. Will you describe in lay language what you mean by a cutdown in relationship to what they did in this case? Dr. Carrico. This was a small incision over his ankle and a tube was inserted into one of his veins through which blood could be given, fluid." (3H 360) Perry asserted this shortly the weekend of the assassination. In his interview with United Press International at his home in McAllen, Texas on November 27, 1963, he confirmed his belief that Carrico had given hydrocortisone before he arrived. (New York Times, November 28, 1963). He implied as much to the Warren Commission. Describing the scene he encountered upon his arrival in TR 1, Perry testified: "Blood transfusions and fluid transfusions were being given at this time, and through the previous venesections that had been done by Dr. Jones and Dr. Carrico. Also, the President had received 300mg of Solucortef [sic] in order to support his adrenal glands, since it was common medical knowledge that he suffered from adrenal insufficiency." (6H 10-11) [In fact, it was not common medical knowledge, and his Warren Commission testimony reveals no personal knowledge.] He confirmed this three years later in an interview with CBS News: "He had been previously started on intravenous fluids and blood, and given hydrocortisone by Dr. Carrico; and assisted respiration was in progress." Source: Eddie Barker Interview with Dr. Malcolm Perry, page 2. In a written report on the resuscitative efforts for President Kennedy written on the day of the assassination, one of the treating physicians, Dr. Marion T. Jenkins, wrote: "the patient received 300 mg. hydrocortisone intravenously in the first few minutes." (20H 252; Exhibit No. 36) Appraisal of the Facts: ----------------------- Burkley arrived at the President's side earlier than is commonly understood. He arrived before Dr. Perry entered TR 1. It was Dr. Perry who performed the tracheotomy incision across the wound. Therefore, the wound was undisturbed when Burkley arrived. He had an opportunity to personally observe the wound. [Burkley also had the opportunity to observe the wound in the President's back. He supervised the transfer of the body from carriage to casket. He was in the room with only the nurses and an orderly at the time.] How Lifton Murdered the Truth ----------------------------- Except for the oral history interview of Burkley, the CBS interview with Perry, and Crenshaw's book (all of which are merely corroborative of what was long ago in the public record), each resource that I have cited in this analysis was readily available to David Lifton during the 15 years that he says he researched and wrote his book, and he also worked with each of those resources. He acknowledges that I tipped him off during our discussions in the late-Seventies. Nevertheless, he discusses none of the above primary or secondary source material in his book. Other than by vacuous ridicule, how does he refute this reconstruction? By throwing dust in his reader's eyes. Lifton and Burkley - The UPI copy --------------------------------- Lifton absolves Burkley of knowledge of the throat wound on the specious basis that it is not mentioned in his death certificate. This is evidence for nothing more than Burkley's failure, for whatever reason, to record the throat wound on the certificate. The death certificate's purpose, however, is not to detail the wounds but to state the cause of death. (See, "Best Evidence", Chap 14, p. 478) Lifton also cites a teletype dispatch by UPI's Merriman Smith. "Since each UPI transmission had a time stamp, the UPI ticker tape is an accurate source of chronological data." ("Best Evidence", p. 479) Under Lifton's interpretation, a UPI dispatch timed at 12:53 pm reporting Burkley's arrival at Parkland means that Burkley arrived at the door of the emergency room about fifteen minutes after Kennedy's logged-in arrival at 12:38 pm. Lifton states: "At 12:53 P.M., UPI reported: 'A few minutes later [referring to '12:50' mentioned in the previous sentence] Rear Admiral George Burkley, USN, the White House Physician, rushed into the hospital. He headed for the emergency room. . . ." A single piece of UPI wire copy, dictated by a man whom Lifton did not even interview (Merriman Smith is now dead), a piece of evidence that Lifton either doesn't understand or has deliberately thrown up as a smokescreen to protect his precious theory and murder the truth -- this is what he proclaims as scholarly precision in his work. The facts, however, reveal the shoddiness of this device. First, Manchester tells us that, when Smith entered the Parkland Emergency Room, he commandeered a telephone in the cashier's cage. (Manchester, William. The Death of a President, Harper & Row, New York: 1967, p. 168) This stakeout was 25 yards removed from the entrance to the Emergency Room. In the crush of officials, newsmen and others, Smith could not abandon his line for fear of being unable to find another. Therefore, while keeping his phone connection, he had to rely upon the advices he received from random passersby for the news that he dictated to the teletype operator at the other end of the line. In other words, he was relying on hearsay rather than personal observation. (Manchester, op.cit., p. 191) Second, contrary to Mr. Lifton's assertions, the time stamp on a wire service story is not indicative of the time that an event occurred. Rather, it represents the time that the teletype operator transmits the story to subscribers of the service (e.g., newspapers, radio and television stations). Moreover, stories are not transmitted in the order that they occurred. Therefore, the tape is not an accurate source of chronological data. Finally, I have examined a complete set of the wire copy to which Mr. Lifton refers. His statement, "'A few minutes later [referring to '12:50' mentioned in the previous sentence]..." is one of the most artful fabrications in the entire book. There is no "previous sentence" in the transmission which he cites. That transmission is a single sentence. The wire copy consists of a number of separate, short transmissions containing fragments of information that would later be combined and edited by a rewrite man into a coherent story, and there is no clear reference in the sentence Mr. Lifton quotes to what comes before or after on the tape. As we have seen, and others have noted, Mr. Lifton is highly selective in his use of evidence, emphasizing what supports his case and discounting conflicting facts and possibilities. ("Television" (column), San Francisco Chronicle, November 18, 1988, p. E1) Whereas a genuine scholar accepts his obligation to deal as honestly with the facts as he knows how, Mr. displays the same ability to disregard facts without feeling any sense of inconsistency that allows a devout religious mind to believe in miracles or a child to believe in fairy tales. Mr. Lifton, however is no monk, and he is no child. CHAPTER EIGHT "I HAD TO HAVE THAT DOCUMENT" (Wherein Lifton trips himself up in a serious contradiction about how he obtained the Malcolm Perry news conference transcript) I obtained a copy of the Perry news conference transcript during the period that I was employed by CBS News. Since no audio recording of the event has survived, from a research standpoint I regarded it as an unverified document in that it had no official markings, and I had not received it from an official source. So, I had to authenticate it. I sent copies to Tom Wicker of the New York Times, and Robert MacNeil of public television, both of whom had attended the news conference. Wicker checked his notes and confirmed the transcript's validity. MacNeill did not reply. I was still unsure. The transcript contained the time notation "3:16 p.m. CST." I decided that this was a simple clerical error, since the press conference is known to have occurred earlier: Both NBC and CBS reported Perry's statements at about 2:35 p.m. (CST) (NBC, op. cit., p. 11). Dr. Clark testified that it occcurred at approximately 2:30 p.m. (6H 21). Dr. Perry recalled that it was around 2 o'clock (3H 374). The most likely answer, then, is that the press conference started at 2:16 p.m. (CST). At the top of each page of the transcript was the number "1327-C", signifying that this was the 1327th news conference of the Kennedy White House. An inquiry to the John F. Kennedy Library in Waltham, Massachussetts brought the reply that the transcript was not part of the Kennedy papers. (Letter to the author from Sylvie Turner, Research Archivist, May 6, 1976) Immediately, I received a copy from the Lyndon B. Johnson Library in Auwtin, texas. At the top of the first page of the Austin transcript, the number "1327-C" had been crossed out and replaced by the number "1". The 1327th news conference of the Kennedy White House had been re-designated the first news conference of the Johnson White House. Efforts to learn who authorized the re-designation were unsuccessful. Former White House Press Secretary Pierre Salinger, then living and working in Paris, dcid not respond to my questions. Wayne Hawks was dead. (I was disappointed to see that David Lifton completely overlooked this troublesome issue in his book.) The transcript remained on file in the White House Press Office, available to anyone with press or Secret Service credentials, until 1969, when it became part of Johnson's presidential papers. I gave copies of the document to Harold Weisberg, the late Thomas Stamm, and the late Sylvia Meagher, my closest associates at the time, as well as a handful of other critics. It was Stamm who, through a combination of excitement and a simple misunderstanding of the "ground rules" of our relations, informed Mr. Lifton that I had the Perry transcript. With an unrestrained desire to impugn my character (as though to do so would answer any of the questions I raised about his book) through endless non-sequiturs, Mr. Lifton picks up the story from his end; he says he telephoned me for a copy of the Perry transcript during the summer of 1976. I choose not to dispute his timing of this call, for it will presently serve to illustrate a point. Mr. Lifton admits he told me that the transcript was vital to his work and that he had to have that document. I do recall this very clearly. It is also true that I initially refused to make it available to him, and that, at first, I did not explain to him where it could be obtained. Indeed, I did not tell him how I obtained it. Mr. Lifton also admits that he told me, "I was more than willing to protect a source." In fact, it was only under his assurance of confidentiality that I confirmed to him what was already public knowledge anyway, i.e., that CBS had the transcript and had obtained it from the White House press office. This much is reported by Mr. Lifton in Chapter 3 of "Best Evidence." Mr. Lifton says, "After some bickering, Roger revealed that the document was publicly available at the JFK library ...." The "bickering" that Mr. Lifton mentions consisted of the following: he said to me that, unless I agreed to give him the transcript, he would call the senior management of CBS News and tell them that I was passing a CBS News document to other critics. Now, Mr. Lifton had no way of knowing the source and origin of what I had shared with Weisberg, Meagher, Stamm and others, i.e., whether it came from CBS' files or elsewhere, but the fact remains that CBS did have a transcript, and were Mr. Lifton to have carried out his stated intent, I would most likely have been fired immediately by CBS News because of its policy against making internal documents available to outsiders. Under the circumstances, I agreed to send him a copy of the LBJ Library transcript. It is here that we stumble over Mr. Lifton's major, self-defeating error. Mr. Lifton alleges that I directed him to the JFK Library, but that he decided instead to send off to the LBJ Library for his own copy of the transcript. He implies that the LBJ copy I sent him was merely duplicative of what he already obtained through the kind of far-reaching deduction that pervades his book. Mr. Lifton accuses me of attempting to suppress the truth about the Malcolm Perry news conference transcript. Let's consider the iron facts: As Mr. Lifton himself notes, Walter Cronkite referred to the transcript on the air during the June 1967 documentary. As Mr. Lifton is probably aware, a CBS flack mentioned it again in a book based on the series. (White, Stephen. Should We Now Believe the Warren Report? Macmillan Company, New York: 1968) Mark Lane discussed CBS's refusal to disclose the transcript in his 1968 book, "A Citizen's Dissent" (Lane, Mark. A Citizen's Dissent. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York: 1968), as did Harold Weisberg in "Post Mortem" (1975). Numerous magazine articles published prior to 1978 dealing with the CBS series also mentioned it. [Note: It should not escape the attention of serious students of the assassination that Macmillan, the company that brought us "Best Evidence" also published Stephen White's equally glib apologia for CBS News and the Warren Report. In many subtle ways, Mr. White's denigration of the critics of the Warren Commission echoes resoundingly through Mr. Lifton's tome.] I even provided Mr. Lifton with a copy of the transcript, albeit unwillingly. Therefore, what, in Lifton's twisted view, was I trying to suppress? What does he insist I tried to conceal? Here is clear and irrefutable evidence, provided by David Lifton himself, that he finds deeper meanings and hidden motives in nearly everything -- the key to his book, "Best Evidence". He called me while he as working on the final draft of his book. He said that he wanted to write that I had provided him with a copy of the transcript that I had discovered in the files of CBS News. As previously discussed, this was an erroneous statement. Moreover, in view of certain legal entanglements that I had with CBS at the time, it might also have been prejudicial to my posture. It is simply a wholesale invention on Mr. Lifton's part that I refused to cooperate with him for any competitive reason, neither was there any way that I could prevent him (or anyone else) from writing about a public document. Mr. Lifton says I wrote a several-page letter. Another inaccuracy. It was two pages, dated September 22, 1978. I said: "From time to time during the past two years you have called and expressed an interest in crediting me with the discovery of the transcript, and you have asked me how it would be appropriate to do so. I have told you that you could properly and accurately say that, "Roger Feinman, a researcher (or Roger Feinman, while working at CBS News in 1976), discovered the transcript at the Johnson Library in Austin, Texas." "But the excerpt of your manuscript which you read to me is totally at variance with my understanding of what you intended to write, and with my recollection of what I told you would be both proper and accurate to write. . . .*[Y]ou would be seriously misguided, and also in breach of the privacy of our communications*, if you quoted me as the authority for a fact that I cannot attest to, when I have asked you not to so quote me. "It is very important to all of us who are concerned with the assassination problem that your book reflect the highest standards of investigative reporting. I have learned in my own researches that part of the task is learning how to cope with off-the-record discussions and communications with discretion." Writing his Compuserve essays for an audience he apparently regards as feeble-minded, Mr. Lifton leaves his readers with a loaded impression that I have something to hide. This is not the style of a scholar who knows his duty to state plainly and not evade the serious implications of what Lifton will only insinuate. Unlike Mr. Lifton, I do not consider myself free to pick and choose when I might divulge the confidence of a source according to situational ethics, exigent need, personal pique or an urge to vengeance. Rather, I have no choice: I cannot divulge the identities of those who afforded me access to information, partly because to do so might inflict great harm upon them, partly because it is my First Amendment right, and partly because it is simply the way I was taught. There was nothing to prevent Mr. Lifton from giving proper credit for the discovery of the transcript. I never asked him for protection, and I did not ask him to hide anything. I merely asked him to tell the truth. He continually insisted upon writing that I had provided him with internal CBS materials, which was not the case. Instead, he told the story his way, regardless of the facts. Interestingly, Mr. Lifton contacted me about the passage in his book regarding the Perry transcript several months before he permitted Macmillan Company to see the first 10 chapters of his book (the transcript is discussed in Chapter 3). Thus, he represented to his publisher that he had independently unearthed the document at the LBJ library rather than that he first received it from me. Mr. Lifton then asks our credence for the statement that he called again to ask if he could say that I gave him a copy of the CBS transcript. This allegation is both highly unlikely and contrary to my recollection. He did call me again during his preparation of the later chapters of his book to request one last time that I show him a manuscript. As Mr. Lifton himself recounts, he would not permit the conversation to terminate. It is fair to conclude, therefore, that he was desperate for competent assistance as he struggled to find a conclusion to his book. Surely, in thinking about our very limited personal dealings and my relationship with Sylvia Meagher and other first-generation critics of the Warren Commission, Mr. Lifton has wondered, "Why did they trust this guy from CBS?" The answer apparently having eluded him, he has clearly focused his hostility on one who played no part in his ostracism. But it is simply this: I was forthright and honest and withheld nothing from those few with whom I chose to associate, sharing whatever I knew and striving to earn their trust and friendship, which they returned in kind. In the final analysis, I knew that I could not maintain two different relationships with hostile camps and remain true to my principles. Mr. Lifton seems to have had difficulty balancing his own priorities. A few words about Lifton's comments on my article for The Third Decade, "The Greatest Secret I Ever Learned About The Kennedy Assassination." It had to do with the publication of material that I submitted to the House Select Committee on Assassinations Mr. Lifton read the article. He purports to analyze it, mangling quotes as is his wont, but even after he finished writing his essays for Compuserve, Lifton had still not seen the Village Voice piece to which my article referred. Somewhat like a child trying to conceal its folly, after he posted his essay on Compuserve and sent copies through the mail to various critics, he frantically called researcher/writer Jerry Policoff (whom he had tried in vain to plumb for derogatory information about me) and asked for a copy of the Voice article. My Third Decade essay is available from its publisher, Professor Jerry Rose, Department of Sociology, State University College at Fredonia, New York. I wrote it because I believed that a friend of mine made an uncharacteristically serious mistake in judgment during the haste and excitement of answering the news media's attacks on Oliver Stone's film, and in the process jeopardized the reputation and privacy of a party innocent of any personal wrongdoing by making use of the documents that I had submitted to the House Select Committee on Assassinations for investigation. My name was on some of those documents. Knowing beforehand what the Voice planned to print (the galleys were read to me) and what they did print, and being unsuccessful in my attempts to reason with the Voice's principal reporter, and its editor (who, according to a source close to the development of the article, was blinded by a rabid urge to get even with his father, a former LIFE Magazine official), I could not permit a woman to be needlessly hurt by something that I had set into motion years earlier in the expectation that discretion would be used. So, I warned those involved of what was about to happen. This is something I guess Lifton will never understand. He stands in pompous judgment, but the co-author of the Village Voice piece and I are still friends. Finally, Lifton hides from his readers his rich hypocrisy about the subject of the news media's treatment of the assassination controversy. What is Lifton's take on the news media? Lifton has been reported as telling his college audiences that the news media were "duped" into believing official reports and the Warren Commission's ruling that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone when he shot Kennedy. ("Media 'Blew It' On Assassination, Columbus Dispatch, November 22, 1988, p. 05B.) Only in his recent Compuserve essays does he deride this writer for modifying his views on the nature of CBS's role. When will Mr. Lifton admit to his true views about the Warren Commission? Even if he were to do so now, who could believe him? CHAPTER NINE I CAN'T STOP DREAMING ABOUT ROGER FEINMAN, YET HE REBUFFS ME ("Play Misty For Me") By Lifton's own admission, our personal contacts were minimal, although I remember receiving during the mid- to late-Seventies somewhat more than just the three telephone calls from him that he indicates. Nevertheless, he evidently devoted a great deal of thought to me while he was working on his book. Who is Roger Feinman? What is he doing? What is he thinking? Why won't he tell me? In his Compuserve essay, he goes so far as to construct an imaginary theory that he attributes to me, even purporting to give it a name: the "method actor" hypothesis. Likening himself to some worldly-wise mentor challenging a laggardly pupil, he also confesses that he used to wait for me to call him ("I wondered whether the phone would ring one day, whether it would be Roger Feinman, etc."). Why didn't it ever dawn on Feinman that the body was altered? Well, I had read Newcomb and Adams' article in Skeptic in 1975. Why would I believe such a nutty idea? I'm an intelligent human being. It seems to me as strange now as it did back in the late Seventies that Lifton, after years of diddling with his notes and memos and a failed manuscript, would fasten upon an obscure critic who, as he clearly implies, wanted nothing more than to avoid him, and whose views Mr. Lifton now so easily distorts and then then dismisses. One of the keys to this mystery may lie in the subjects I was exploring: the role of Dr. Burkley (which seems to have eluded Lifton [see Chapter 7]), and the possibility of post-autopsy manipulation for the purposes of the photos and X-rays. He incessantly requested, both over the phone and in person, access to whatever research files and whatever draft manuscript I had on the case. He insisted on coming to my apartment. I refused to allow it. We met in a student lounge at the New School for Social Research in Greenwich Village, and then went to a nearby coffee shop, both well-populated areas where I would feel safe. It will not escape the attention of alert readers of Mr. Lifton's Compuserve essays that, virtually all of our contacts were initiated by him, not by me. What may not be quite so obvious (but nonetheless evident from his essays) is that, while Mr. Lifton was writing his book -- after a dozen years of researching, interviewing, thinking, and even drafting a first, albeit unpublishable, version of his manuscript -- he seems to have obsessed over what I was thinking and doing, imagining conversations between us that never did and never would occur. Lifton says that if I had showed him my work, he would have given me full credit in the text of his book for anything he had not found, and list it in the bibliography. (Just ask Newcomb and Adams, or Harold Weisberg.) Lifton admits to his refusal to share his research with me. It seems he expected others to disclose their analyses to him, but he would not reciprocate in kind unless they spoke his language. I did not regard that as a suitable basis for collaboration. He supposes that everyone envies him, from Sylvia Meagher, who was widely acknowledged to be the preeminent critic of the Warren Commission and the arbiter of factual disputes concerning its work, to Roger Feinman, a practicing attorney and virtually unknown critic, who insisted upon meeting him in a public place instead of inviting him home, and presumably others. [Note: I do not recall requesting Lifton to mention my name to anyone at the HSCA, unless it was some casual remark in connection with Lifton's speaking to the staff about the medical evidence. I had my own contacts with them during the Gonzales-Downing-Sprague days, and also sent Chief Counsel Blakey some materials relating to John J. McCloy that I thought ought to be explored. Sylvia Meagher and Jerry Policoff, both friends of mine who had good relations with members of the committee staff, would have been more likely choices than David Lifton to ask, but it might have happened as he says.] CHAPTER TEN HOORAY FOR HOLLYWOOD! (Wherein we ask whether having breakfast with David Lifton pushed Greg Stone over the edge, and how David's name became associated with Oliver Stone's film "JFK") In his Compuserve essays, Mr. Lifton has issued an account of our dealings that is replete with factual errors, distortions, wild assumptions and innuendo, hardly hesitating to drag into his broad firing range the memory of a very tragic young man, Greg Stone, about whose life and death, including his relationship with Sylvia Meagher, David Lifton knows next-to-nothing. Sylvia held Allard Lowenstein in great affection and esteem. Al was known toward the end of his life for his crusade to reopen the Robert F. Kennedy assassination. Greg Stone was one of his close aides. It is not nearly as well known that Al Lowenstein also developed an interest in the JFK case toward the end of his life, and was interested in keeping the momentum of the HSCA investigation going. He came to Sylvia several times to educate himself about the case. (That's how she met Greg Stone.) She naturally saw in Al a potential leader and spokesman for the interests of the critics. His murder devastated Sylvia, especially since it came on the heels of the death of another of her close friends. Greg Stone was also shaken by Lowenstein's death, and he resolved to pay tribute to his mentor by continuing the effort to reopen the RFK case. Greg had no deep commitment to assassination research, and never expressed any interest in Sylvia's work on JFK. He wanted only to finish Al's work. To this end, he accomplished much, most notably the release of the Los Angeles Police files. From time to time, Greg and Sylvia would keep in touch. She expressed the concern many times that Greg was pursuing the RFK case to the exclusion of developing a career for himself. Both she and I shared the view that the RFK case did not hold the same potential for a breakthrough as the JFK assassination. She worried that, if Greg came to a dead end in his researches, he would have nothing left to keep him going. Therefore, she gave him "a project" to work on, just in case. She left him in charge of her files and her book, hoping that, if he would only look through her materials, he would become interested in her work. Greg Stone last contacted me by phone on January 7, 1991 to say that he had been approached that same day by Jane Rusconi, Oliver Stone's research assistant, about purchasing the film rights to Sylvia Meagher's book. A certain sum of money was mentioned. He wanted to know what Sylvia would do. At the time, few people outside of Oliver Stone's inner circle knew that his planned film centered around Jim Garrison; indeed, we knew virtually nothing, Stone's people weren't talking. I told Greg that unless Stone's people agreed to disclose the nature of their project, he could not agree to lend Sylvia's book and her name to a film that might run counter to her views, and if they refused to disclose the script or a synopsis to him, he would have to decline the offer. I asked my friend and colleague, Jerry Policoff (another of Sylvia's close associates), to follow-up with Greg during a business trip he took to L.A. a few days later, and Jerry met with Greg to convey our thoughts. I never heard from Greg again. He died on January 21. David Lifton met Greg Stone for the first and last time less than three weeks before the suicide, but apparently believes himself capable of judging Greg and his needs: "I always wished that had I met Greg earlier [sic], because I might have prevented this, because mucking around in assassination research is a highly charged affair, and Greg needed someone who knew how to handle it, and still lead a decent life. I had been doing that for years. (If any reader of this thinks he is getting obsessed, come to me. I'll tell you my secrets. I don't charge very much.)" What, one might reasonably ask, would David Lifton possibly have in common with the late Greg Stone that they should have ever crossed paths? Greg never manifested any interest either in the JFK assassination in general or Mr. Lifton's work in particular, and Mr. Lifton has never manifested any interest in the RFK assassination. Mr. Lifton implies that Greg came to him out of the blue for advice about whether to sell the rights to Sylvia Meagher's book to Oliver Stone. He claims that he tutored Greg in Sylvia's views about Jim Garrison. From this we are asked to infer that Mr. Lifton had a sincere interest in safeguarding the integrity of Sylvia's work, and in ensuring that Greg did not make any misstep. In his middle-age, Mr. Lifton now offers himself as mentor to the inexperienced and naive. As with Mr. Lifton's other fictions, this fanciful scenario abruptly clashes with his invectives about Sylvia Meagher, the record of life in the real world, and the truism that a zebra cannot change its stripes. Mr. Lifton says he called me after Greg Stone's death because he thought I "might have some say in the disposition of [Sylvia Meagher's] estate." Why the disposition of her estate would be of the least concern to him, he fails to disclose in his essay. But I will tell you, only because Mr. Lifton has recast our conversation out of snippets of what was actually said, adding phony inventions of his own. He was fishing for whatever he could glean about Oliver Stone's plans, what kind of movie he was making, how much he had offered Greg and others for the rights to books about the assassination. Lifton told me he had written a screenplay and was shopping it around Hollywood. He had submitted it to Warner Brothers (Stone's studio), but Oliver Stone was refusing to take his calls. The essential facts were reported in a later newspaper account: "Lifton wrote a screenplay based on his book which Stone eventually read and turned down. 'I was shunned, I was definitely shunned,' Lifton says." ("Taking Potshots at 'JFK'; Conspiracy Theorists Voice Loud Objections to Stone Film", Allentown Morning Call, December 21, 1991, p. A54) Lifton spoke to me for what seemed an interminable length of time about how a producer might purchase the rights to a book merely to avoid lawsuits over misappropriation. He wanted to know how much Oliver Stone had offered Greg. I knew, but didn't want to tell him. Greg had given me one figure, but he had also given Harold Weisberg a different figure. So I asked Lifton how much he thought the offer was. It is odd, as well as deplorable, that Lifton has chosen the Oliver Stone/Greg Stone matter as a basis for attack, since a number of researchers, including me, recall Lifton spreading his theory during the Winter of 1991 that Oliver Stone was the cause of Greg's death for tempting him with what Lifton assumed was a large sum of money for the rights to Sylvia's book which he had to turn down, a despicable insinuation that belies Lifton's ignorance and stupidity. Mr. Lifton explained his theory to me during the telephone conversation he mentions in his Compuserve essays. It was at that point which Mr. Lifton quotes me, but only partially, as saying that "Greg probably had to think twice about it, etc." But I told Lifton that I thought his theory about Oliver Stone's culpability for Greg's suicide was off the wall. At the time of our conversation, no one knew what arrangements -- if any -- Greg may have made for Sylvia's work in the event of his death. There had been a written agreement made between Greg and Sylvia regarding its disposition. One of the things that Greg was supposed to do was to review her papers in order to make sure that anything potentially harmful to third parties (such as the stuff about Lifton that I've thoroughly enjoyed using in this manuscript) would be sequestered for an appropriate length of time. Greg never got around to it. I wanted to be able to intelligently advise the executrix of Sylvia's estate in the event any action on her part seemed necessary to safeguard my friend's life work. Sylvia was not only a friend, but at times a client. Sometimes, it may seem to lay people that lawyers are too dispassionate at sorrowful times. The plain fact is that I knew Sylvia much longer and better than I knew Greg Stone. As shocked and sorry and as I felt for his tragedy, I was more concerned about seeing to it that what I knew were Sylvia's basic wishes would be carried out, especially since Oliver Stone was trying to co-opt her work for -- as it turned out -- a project that she surely would have opposed. In emphasizing my distaste for Stone's glorification of Jim Garrison, Lifton seems to imply that he defends it, as well as the book upon which it was mainly based. Here again, reality defeats him. He struggled to distance himself from "JFK" in the press: "I always thought Garrison was off the wall. His case was fraudulent." ("Taking Potshots at 'JFK'; Conspiracy Theorists Voice Loud Objections to Stone Film", Allentown Morning Call, December 21, 1991, p. A54) "Stone is in the position to say, 'When I'm right, I'm right, and when I'm wrong, I'm an artist.'" "Another Angle on JFK: 'Cosmetic' Surgery?, Arizona Republic, February 7, 1992, p. E4 "My attitude is: right message, wrong messenger. I think (former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison was a poor choice of a hero for Oliver Stone. But it was his $40 million." "Another Angle on JFK: 'Cosmetic' Surgery?, Arizona Republic, February 7, 1992, p. E4 If, as Lifton has said, Garrison was a poor choice for a hero, what was there about Oliver Stone's "message" that Lifton found right? Could it then be Stone's depiction of a triangulated crossfire, which Lifton's book argues never occurred? If not, what else about "JFK" did he find "right"? These public statements were tame, compared to what Lifton had to say about Garrison at the time of the New Orleans prosecution: "I am now convinced that Garrison's total investigation is a hoax and a fraud, based on nothing more than meaningless threads he is attempting to weave together which in fact have no meaning whatsoever when viewed in their proper context. (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, May 15, 1968) The real mystery in all of Lifton's gibberish about Greg Stone and Oliver Stone, however, is how David Lifton got his name on the closing credits of "JFK" as an adviser to the film. Lifton has claimed that Oliver Stone offered him a consulting contract worth "several thousand dollars", but that he turned it down. "'I wanted to remain neutral," he reportedly said to one reporter. ("Taking Potshots at 'JFK'; Conspiracy Theorists Voice Loud Objections to Stone Film", Allentown Morning Call, December 21, 1991, p. A54) In fact, according to a source close to the "JFK" film project, Mr. Lifton was paid $50,000 as a consultant. At the Midwest Symposium, I told Oliver Stone's assistant, Jane Rusconi, that I had this information and asked her why he would have done such a thing, as I could find no evidence in either the "JFK" script or the film that Lifton had contributed anything. She told me, "Because he was making a pest of himself." Lifton invents out of whole cloth comments he alleges I made about Sylvia Meagher's knowledge of the case. He purports to divine my feelings and reactions to the death of Sylvia Meagher. I was never designated either an executor or a co-executor of her estate, nor was I ever supposed to act in those capacities, as Lifton claims, another of his numerous blunders in his blind quest for a fact about matters of which he knows nothing. It is Lifton who hardly conceals his deep and abiding animus toward one who can no longer reply to his loathesome, frenzied and hate-filled derision of her stature as the preeminent scholar in this subject area, which he can never hope to match. After her initial reading of "Best Evidence", which was frequently interrupted by gales of laughter, Sylvia soon came to regard Mr. Lifton's book as nothing more than "junk", an opinion in which I concurred then and still do. From the earliest days of the case, Lifton -- and, much later, his book -- were little more than chicken feed to this woman. To imagine, as Lifton does, that she was somehow jealous of him and his book is so pitiable a delusion of grandeur that one easily discerns in Mr. Lifton's plain words a desperate unhappiness from which decent and self-possessed people can only recoil. Mr. Lifton also gives an inaccurate account of my behavior toward Oliver Stone (no relation to Greg) something for he could not possibly have first-hand knowledge, since he was not invited to the dinner. I have spoken to three other members of the dinner party. Two of them specifically recalled that, as soon as Stone and I were introduced, I looked him in the eye and told him that I was the man responsible for seeing to it that he did not get the rights to use Sylvia Meagher's book or her name in his film. After that, we had a very pleasant dinner conversation. (The third member with whom I spoke had no independent recollection of any of the greetings.) By the way, Mr. Lifton's name was never mentioned. CHAPTER ELEVEN COME TO ME WITH YOUR PROBLEMS. BRING YOUR MANUSCRIPT. "[M]ucking around in assassination research is a highly charged affair. . . If any reader . . . thinks he is getting obsessed, come to me. I'll tell you my secrets. I don't charge very much." -- David Lifton (1993) "In Best Evidence, my own experiences during this extraordinary period of my life are faithfully recorded." -- David Lifton (1993) In a January 26, 1981 televised interview on NBC's Tommorow Show, host Tom Snyder asked Lifton whether he did not take a conclusion and set out to support it. Lifton replied, "No, I looked for evidence to support the FBI report. If I hadn't found it, there'd be no book." (Author's notes) Mr. Lifton, whom Macmillan sent for tutoring in how to handle such public appearances, evaded Snyder's question and was less than candid with his audience. The personalization of Mr. Lifton's book may ultimately prove to have been one major cause of its downfall. It requires scant reflection to realize that, no matter how honest one's intentions might be at the outset, the natural desire and inclination to present oneself and one's work on such a serious subject as the Kennedy assassination in the most favorable light can yield to a compulsion toward self-justification and compromises with fact, threatening the integrity of the whole. Moreover, a work that purports to lead its readers through the labyrinthine thoughts and associations of its author as a device used to validate both its biographical motif and its conclusions, necessarily loses a great deal of its force in argument when all or some of the "connective tissue" that both anchors and impels the train of thought turns out to be wholly missing, or significantly disrupted in continuity. Such a book poses a dilemma to the critic and historian: When the alleged journey is interwoven with its destination, i.e., when the line of demarcation is blurred -- and willfully so -- for alleged commercial considerations, is anything about the author's detours, e.g., his collateral research activities and theories, that he has failed to disclose "off limits" to scrutiny, evaluation and comparison with the final work so as to determine its precision and fidelity to the facts? Since selectivity is the prerogative -- and some might argue the duty -- of an author, I think not, for the reason that such undisclosed information is relevant to assessing bias, maturity of judgment, motive and method. As Lifton himself told radio announcer Ben Baldwin, substituting for Larry King during a Mutual Radio interview on January 30, 1981, "[There's] some point where there's a line between the deceivers and the deceived." (Author's notes from radio program.) The purpose of this section is to demarcate that line. There are several revealing aspects of Mr. Lifton's experiences, insights, and theories in the course of his research that he neglected to include in "Best Evidence", which considered, illuminate its direction, structure and substance so as to afford a more cohesive picture of Mr. Lifton's systematic approach to the Kennedy assassination. Instead, he seeks to persuade his readers that he is almost apologetic for having to offer up the shocking theory of the book by portraying his early motivations as benign: "When I began my research, I found it difficult to believe the authorities would lie, and my initial interest stemmed more from being intrigued with the event as an unsolved crime, and my somewhat naive and abstract interest in seeing that 'justice' was done, than from any political or ideological motivation." (Chapter 4) Lifton moreover implies that it was not until late October 1966, when he appreciated of the "head surgery" statement in the Sibert and O'Neill report, that he became convinced of a high-level plot. (End of Chapter 7) A Band of Little Men in the Woods --------------------------------- David Lifton called Sylvia Meagher late on the night of October 30, 1965, explaining that he wanted to show her that he was "not far out and not a kook." (Meagher, Sylvia. Memo of Telephone Conversation with Dave Lipton [sic], Saturday night, 30 October 1965) Dutifully, Sylvia recorded for posterity the early manifestations of Mr. Lifton's propensity to explain all things in the assassination in terms of disguise. "Dave is certain that the [Moorman] photo was doctored -- probably by someone high-up in the Times-Herald, on instructions from LBJ, before it was ever released, so as to conceal the betraying details on the original." (Meagher, Sylvia. Memo of Telephone Conversation with Dave Lipton [sic], Saturday night, 30 October 1965) "Dave believes that there was a massive camouflage-and-guerrilla operation, involving perhaps 100 men, and that the assassination was a "high Texas" and "Army-military" attempted coup, and that LBJ was forced to cover it up, because if the high Texans were exposed, no one would believe that LBJ was not involved, even if he really was not. "He believes that the trees on the grassy knoll were camouflage; men were concealed in capsules; they may have remained there until dark and then made their escape. He believes there was a trench in front of the concrete structure, with phony hedges; and a trench also on the other side of Elm Street, where gray and black shadows and swatches appear on the Zapruders [sic] without any natural explanation. ... I asked him also if it is possible that the elaborate engineering job (which he thinks was in progress for several days before 11/22/63) and the camouflage-and-guerrilas could have escaped penetration by all of the numerous witnesses who were present. ...He believes...that they all saw what was really going on on the grassy knoll; and that they are maintaining silence for the same reason that no one helped Kitty Genovese when she was being murdered under the eyes of many witnesses." (Meagher, Sylvia. Memo of Telephone Conversation with Dave Lipton [sic], Saturday night, 30 October 1965) Aside from the possibility of their indifference, it seems that Mr. Lifton also considered that some of the witnesses were intimidated by authority. For example, In the case of Zapruder's secretary, Marilyn Sitzman, who was steadying Mr. Zapruder as he took his film, and who told the Dallas Sheriff's office that the shots came from the Texas School Book Depository [See, Decker Exhibit 5323, page 535 -- RBF], Mr. Lifton was "certain that the guerrillas were right behind Sitzman and probably spoke to her, warning her to say nothing or she would be killed -- otherwise, how account for her saying that the shots came from the TSBD, while all the others including Zapruder thought the shots came from the grassy knoll area?????" (Meagher, Sylvia. Memo of Telephone Conversation with Dave Lipton [sic], Saturday night, 30 October 1965) Sylvia was so dismayed by Mr. Lifton's call that she wrote him: "I am sorry to say that you succeeded with one phone call where the massive propaganda of the Warren Commission and the news media had failed -- you made me wonder for the first time if Oswald was not the lone assassin after all." (Meagher, Sylvia. Letter to David Lifton, November 2, 1965) Once again, this writer anticipates the charge of unfairness and ill motive in calling attention to what might at first blush appear the nascent follies of a young and enthusiastic assassination researcher. Some of us have momentarily toyed with theories which, in hindsight, seem appalling to us now. This, however, is emphatically not the case with Mr. Lifton, for while he downplayed his adherence to the "paper mache trees" theory (which he self-effacingly prefers to call "the men in trees" theory), in later correspondence and conversations with Meagher, it resurfaced time and again, after his studies had far progressed and become more sophisticated: In a 1967 memorandum synthesizing his analysis of the JFK head snap in the Zapruder film, Mr. Lifton confronted the theorists who believed in a double-head-hit based on the forward motion of Kennedy's head during Z312-313, followed by the backward thrust. He argued that the entire motion of Kennedy's head could be explained as the result of a forward/high-angle shot from the grassy knoll area. A portion of this memorandum is adapted as narrative in "Best Evidence", although significant portions are omitted. For example, Mr. Lifton's memo recalled that he had concluded in August 1965 that the hedge rows in front of the concrete wall on the knoll, as well as whole trees, were fake devices constructed to house men and equipment, and that the knoll had been excavated to install a proper foundation. Beneath the surface of the knoll were "bunker-like" structures with men and material in them. Lifton now argued, "The 312-313 [forward] motion means one of two things: either camouflage was used, or the double-head-hit theorists are correct." (Lifton, David. Memorandum Re: Head Snap Phenomenon and Zapruder Film Frame Sequence, March 20, 1967) As will be discussed in a later chapter of this work, Mrs. Meagher attempted to dissuade Lifton from promulgating his theory, lest it subject the critics to ridicule. Her worst fears were realized, however, when Lifton was interviewed on June 7, 1967 by an associate producer involved in the preparation of CBS News' four-part documentary on the Warren Report. Robert Richter reported that, "Lifton has been specializing his interest in the photographic evidence. He plans to write a book over the next couple of months on this and other matters he was reluctant to discuss. But he intimated he would have proof in his book of the involvement of people 'very high up' in the federal government "He suggests that camouflage may have been used in Dealey Plaza and left there, at least for a few days. He suggests that this may have been arranged with cooperation from the Dallas Mayor, Earle cabell, because his brother Richard Cabell was one of the leaders in the CIA Bay of Pigs operation. "The camouflage may be, according to Lifton, in the form of additions to trees on the knoll. He concedes this is a 'radical approach' but he believes it could make sense for the basic reason that in frames 313 and following in the Zapruder film, Kennedy's head snaps back and to the left, strongly suggesting a shot came from the knoll area. . . . "Another claim for possible camouflage is a report Lifton got from Liebeler from the FBI of a big crane being moved thru [sic] Dealey Plaza late in the evening of Nov. 22. the men who had been running the crane thru the plaza had a large piece of concrete in tow, which they told police officers on the scene was for their plan to build a monument for Kennedy. When the police insisted they move on, the men got out of the crane cabin and fled. It turned out to have been a stolen crane. Lifton wildly speculates that the crane may also have been designed for use to remove the camouflage that night, and he says the peculiar incident was never checked out. . . . "At this time, and perhaps at all times, he cannot be taken seriously." (Richter, Robert. Memorandum re David Lifton, June 7, 1967) Exactly two years after his last letter mentioning the camouflage theory, Mr. Lifton wrote Sylvia Meagher: "About trees. You know, I haven't pushed that, but in my heart I think thats [sic] how it was done. . . . The concept is so outlandish and ridiculous sounding that, even if it were done, the only way it will ever be proven is through direct evidence of its installation at a previous hour." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, March 21, 1969) The Impersonations of Kellerman and Greer ----------------------------------------- Lifton's association with Wesley Liebeler, and his penchant for secrecy strained the Lifton-Meagher relationship to a nearly complete breaking point. The breach began to heal, and relations between them improved, as Lifton demonstrated his ostensibly sincere interest in researching the Warren Commission's unpublished documents. By the early summer of 1970, however, the relationship between Meagher and Lifton finally collapsed under the crushing weight of her efficient demolition of his newest insights. Late April or early May, 1970, Lifton revealed to Sylvia Meagher that he believed there had been a switch of Secret Service Agents in the presidential limousine at some point along the motorcade route through downtown Dallas, and that neither Secret Service Agents Kellerman or Greer were actually in the presidential limousine at the time of the assassination. (David Lifton Letters to Sylvia Meagher, May 16 and 27, 1970) In fact, he said, he had called both men to ask them if it really was them in the limousine. (Ibid., May 16, 1970) Of course, this fantasy tempts us to ask: How could David be sure that he was actually speaking to Kellerman and Greer? Conversely, were they sure it was him? Why could there not have been an agent switch at the other end of the telephone line (much easier than executing such a maneuver in full view of thousands of spectators lining the streets of Dallas) or an alter ego substituting at Lifton's end? Or both? He could have gone to the beach, they could have watched a ball game, and the substitutes could have had an interesting conversation. Even at this late stage in his work on the case, Mr. Lifton returned to his theory of camouflage on the knoll: "I still suspect that camouflage was employed, to some extent, on the plaza, to conceal shooters. None of this will appear in my work. . . . I feel it is more important to . . . let what one suspects play the role of directing ones [sic] investigation, as time permits. "I am well aware of the public relations blunder it would be to voice my suspicions in the absence of definitive proof, in a manuscript." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, July 19, 1970) Mr. Lifton's theory of the Kellerman and Greer "switch" was tied to his theory pertaining to the Zapruder film, i.e., that it had been altered to conceal a stop by the driver of the presidential limousine during the assassination sequence, as reportedly seen by a few witnesses to the crime . Mr. Lifton believed those witnesses. "[T]he film shows *every indication* that both men up front [Kellerman and Greer] are waiting, aware of, the next shot about to come." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 27, 1970) Furthermore, according to this theory, the film had been spliced to conceal the car stop (ibid.), and faked to conceal the rear (Parkland) head wound after Z-313. (Lifton, David. Memorandum re: Head Snap Phenomenon and Zapruder Film Frame Sequence, March 20, 1967) But how? Lifton theorized that the film had been intercepted before reaching LIFE Magazine at the local F.B.I. and Secret Service level in Dallas. "Doing the alterations is merely a technical problem." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 27, 1970) He pointed to Secret Service agent Forrest V. Sorrel's shepherding of the Zapruder film through processing and printing, as well as the F.B.I.'s alleged complicity in its canvassing of the Dallas area for spectators' films during the weeks following the assassination. Of necessity, the theory required that the surviving occupants of the limousine (including Kellerman, Greer, and the Connallys) were liars and perjurers, except for Jackie Kennedy; she "was so panicked and frightened that she would not possibly be able to remember." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 27, 1970) (Compare this with his reliance upon Jackie's Warren Commission testimony to corroborate the location of Kennedy's head wound in "Best Evidence") Sylvia Meagher pierced this nonsense with ease. I will simply summarize here the questions that Mr. Lifton was obviously unprepared to answer: First, Did anyone know on the afternoon or evening of the assassination just how the Zapruder film ought to be doctored? Who would have done it? (Lifton's interception theory assumed that the Army, or NASA, or some Hollywood-type facilities and accomplices would have to be involved.) What motive did the Secret Service have to participate in the assassination? Was the F.B.I. so thorough in its investigation of the case that it could be relied upon to gather all the assassination film available? What if some bystander were to take his film directly to the media and reveal footage irreconcilable with the doctored Zapruder film? And, why go to all this trouble to distract attention from the grassy knoll, when dozens of still available witnesses thought the shots came from the knoll, and hundreds rushed there in the immediate wake of the shooting? Meagher suggested that, if Lifton were the Captain on the sinking Titanic, he would ask the ship's carpenter to fix a broken chair. Mr. Lifton went to extraordinary lengths during his early career to gather evidence for his theory that the Zapruder film had been altered. In late 1968, associates of Lifton obtained a copy of the copy of the Zapruder film that Jim Garrison had subpoenaed from LIFE Magazine for the trial of Clay Shaw in New Orleans. (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, March 17, 1969) Scratches on that copy from repeated projection, as well as petty squabbles among some of the West Coast researchers over possession of the film, impeded Mr. Lifton's research. In June 1970, he engaged in a plan to induce LIFE to afford him access in Los Angeles to a first-generation duplicate of the original Zapruder film, as well as transparencies. An inspection of the original in New York City was also arranged, but apparently never realized. The cooperation of a Hollywood film producer was secured in trumping up a phony bid to purchase the film from LIFE. The producer gave Lifton and his cohorts access to an office and letterhead stationery. (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 17, 1970) On Monday, June 22, 1970, LIFE flew two copies of the film and many slides to Los Angeles by courier for the producer's inspection. Mr. Lifton and his associates headed for the producer's office. By pre-arrangement with Lifton, the producer was absent from his office when the courier arrived, but he placed a phone call to his office timed to coincide with the courier's arrival, in order to excuse himself and introduce Mr. Lifton and company as his representatives in the proposed transaction. As Mr. Lifton examined the 16 millimeter copy of the Zapruder film LIFE had sent, the courier left the room for several minutes. One of Mr. Lifton's associates then whipped out a camera and began shooting pictures of the transparencies arrayed on a light box. When Mr. Lifton and his associates left the producer's office, a 16 millimeter reel of the Zapruder film left also, and a reel of electrical extension cord wrapped in tissue was left in its box. (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 25, 1970) It merits attention that Mr. Lifton goes to considerable lengths in "Best Evidence" to conceal his early preoccupation with the theory of Zapruder film alteration, and his 1970 stunt to find evidence for it. In a lengthy footnote in Chapter 24, he describes an examination of a 35 mm print of the film at Time-Life's Los Angeles offices in 1971, implying that he first discovered theretofore unknown splices during that inspection. He says that, only then, did he begin to explore "the possibility that the Zapruder film itself had been altered" before it went to either Time/Life or the Warren Commission, yet another example of Mr. Lifton's rewriting the history of his activities in a book marketed as non-fiction. Mr. Lifton proposes in his book a theory that the "blob" seen on the right-front of the President's head during the fatal wounding sequence of the film is fake. One of my colleagues has suggested that Lifton suffers from "selective amnesia". He suggests that Mr. Lifton and his readers take a look at the WFAA-TV interview with Zapruder on the afternoon of the assassination in the commercially-sold video tape, "The Day the Nation Cried". There, Zapruder describes what he saw while looking through his viewfinder, including the wound at the right-front of the head. The imagery of people and objects associated with the assassination being moved around by unseen forces as pawns in a game of chess occurs several times in Lifton's correspondence with Meagher. It may well be the organizing principle of Mr. Lifton's work on the assassination. I do not emphasize this point, but mention it in passing as a possible channel to the depth of abstraction in his pattern of thought about the case. One may discern in the Marx Brothers-like reconstruction of casket movements in "Best Evidence" a degree of difficulty in reconciling neat abstractions with real-world constraints. Understandably, while Mr. Lifton writes about the toll that his assassination research took on his personal life, educational and career development, he nonetheless omits to mention in his book that, by January 1966, as his infatuation with the theme of surreal illusion in the assassination grew, he became temporarily incapacitated from his normal and customary pursuits. (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, March 21, 1969; Author's conversations with Sylvia Meagher; and conversation with Raymond Marcus, early 1989.) In the unexpurgated, real-life version of "Best Evidence", the chips did not merely fall into place over time, some of them fell off the game board to the floor and had to be picked up. The Cat Among the Pidgeons --------------------------- Camouflage of the President's wounds is the motif of "Best Evidence", not the interposition of multiple disguises upon the scene of the assassination which preoccupied Mr. Lifton during the late Sixties. Still, in presenting his deconstruction of a medical forgery, it is Mr. Lifton himself who guardedly camouflages his preconceptions and political ideology. This is the second major cause of his book's downfall. The conspiracy theory in "Best Evidence" is, indeed, a hypothesis structured on a political theory of sorts which germinated during the height of the Vietnam conflict -- that Lyndon Johnson was involved ["I am of the opinion and hold the theory that LBJ and Rusk were involved before the fact, heavily involved, in the plot to kill JFK." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, August 12, 1968); "The JFK assassination was a high level plot, possibly involving personalities such as LBJ, Rusk, and Dulles." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, August 7, 1969)], and that the Secret Service was intimately associated with its execution ["I believe that some of the agents on that followup car are involved ..." (Lifton, David. Letter to Sylvia Meagher, June 27, 1970)]. It is this political theory which guided Lifton's search for evidence. "[T]oday, it is more important to me to communicate correctly and optimally the theme that the motive for the assassination was to change our foreign policy (and specifically, Vietnam) and that high level hands were secretly manipulating the course of the ship of state in effecting the assassination and the subsequent policy change, than to hinge my case (or even apUSGcW(˨Z8sĬy`?=`KNTTZq>>$mqrУ}'n5MmrM?Nc4 }CjZ3]l%M6T$[/bG izD/%9feݨ'+{lf kL}l}Ndٟ^6/Ȧu}FʝEkCK AD D:BESTEV.EXEC}k?tU [eZJ"\ƙ6RXX͈6m;,k%WmP󺪔l9p؃͉֥ۺ޴k?Ңâ"*rKQD[TdmB&r&"MOvK&mIlSL _d~7ӲX6^7PؠH$P/8} bNm:!PPJ5x F:<+ʷ7\)e뛵ΨCx"`dcVOI6ꉼ?_)@7@%t$J ^]/˷EY⛜ieJHF 7w߮;ç] % p~e+|`'8T}%5ihWlpO4,ofa/o n/^E#Vnpq?^Ի要]dz/' jRDK<'*ab# Μ=k c/4t̜温'7 Z,V|[S6&pW`G/|5AXwu8`!xoEnEȲ7seًdzKT=]b>i~>hb{̖cy Ь%$zyZ-euP|_\}7u]f?c?l,Q}Q.pp_Ogk)((MXɐS^>qvݷp+3S8uP"qQ yq.fk;O x"-Bh/)BON;#ܠk>!6&mzF5΢GMv"D{-Dp*`[:Mbv\cG:P_r x:cSٖʲjز9&cy/ *GMGQa"hoX?슰[6Յ&_ I ,Ь11>7Ԣ^[N0v`i <|+8T5H3CSAɣFV1RrvFjy@{DI<9^Og܁_-fA8WzًfH+*SܒLT 'c䬨aw^uZF>߸uS Po`K6 v]V"h0 !WEν-R֋ Hρa[LFv+ 1SIzҗNkv4 -'Ne<4mp&M>'&eSu Bofd]1xDd}lKDW& `"Ӽf.uXm2zCuk2e0%a~l|K *i{tRn $:"$ʅѱLaVŪۤ$x[1 ry.]Jgv'$KBgL)2yG0A eP=<٩|?'A%d?qƝ{m/^}1FڭVo+ԝF,Fp -u=N22Q/aUFc&ŲK?;fwE ZxoID6&FwW!*[U'P!{ɼcPdHs"a )\,Wx%D ^}\k "M ށX Cw_Z< )ie&<ջ@8+iZQ+r2C=GfR_1UX3nT5ޣ S 3TFQܔClrxQ&RA9A80fnIoLceWr gp " ٲb։"2# /h&7x8uE7U̺`9|R 4=$//"vxhƮmCiTgkCS04o%%Z!.9HٹCT.kIxʊ }f;![߀ Ûm4X||B5=Pĺm![mMh[gU\p?_gn|8=={LdF|+ZD83 {ÓSWb4a%&Nc n ?^]yZ_6x B5{peytֺq֒^jH$ap?Zrl7՜J_g/_&FHn+I'\ %֦.8U{e4 36YuOS4l䛪cf?x1<`s ,g܋CLS-Tڝ˽T(hZE$ׇ?mJ5R-EMή5 > 4};*τSAU2*^]Gk QSS C]5aO)ٲpnIKm9yJu..H lOE7ХG i,{īy|vMƼGP9#7scȶz[LhsYP; EX{CDy/VaYY6 b#b[7lG 8Oړr~ ތ(Ҏh/EI|j?~q:y?z9a* u-rK_M>"z:HϠ^VUcX<' n Dz%CwOuY><;`))WW-5pvYĮchf~|]7MfWmۉ4Q[sґf%%G*-v@i l>LpgاK`#o iECHUϺaNCZ >8">F3{>([J/}Jtn3svDڒ |@v9@<U2S ti<13 RR39d^/i26 Z &?A%]ȡȑ\%Jl߸b5$œCሪXs덾 % N&>T3 aD^\4a.͋FXf xShNќbKtbCY6#*מ(S2M<]ovKd=Y8V le; G٪KN@jqnr,嚣D)~v AVsD ݗ^k=,$xL'St"+W~˓mD~]Ts!&֟b 鍻g="-0"Ԑm"ƩGʡ܃ 8b Vz$㝕q?LJp1JpP2m]uf6/軽5 겁gS<^2'PA1 R&ٚ J~a,كl7yJC$0#_9D}H"MZ5{_e*SWmyT kGmt>c,'.tptM5 >+/U_b̄Fea#t.&3^pĴ P9axw 3XML=k{V^\ԽhW݀>y}Տ>LOPyjKqͻ;%پ$asQ%. QD&D#y"€hnNؤgk&,Qc s;U^ۆiI*`u]M7A9ƼDjA }dB#{A3KؚBYuZ ѷwMRK9_f|4Ɇ/^sUDM#p#/I>r Xaq[ ~Z/y5t,k)YT:g^6eX*iMp˱M1}5o&1b"Z|惇:F&PgЖVhdD1  +x~v yޅ ˏ2-v"ƒr r&;`WvغˡWӧpw}2[9DġA9óimKQ5@M9 $Ԃ cft"1`53Ʋ룦YAd9V`dɱ2c@lhfkx4ˏLBKG͢ \.*b6kIoA?y}hUۉvB@&mZ˔#NE3|$SSyXz2a$N,Te?1cy4 ^Hف0/W$eDɁHK(A7ٝlfF $)5mskɽ${q%;jᣈ @;ECb OӖٳG\C[(Իȏ g!H~!P=LC0L* s2 vֻQ=s5"Pl;ć_SH4vw| =W7YVnyCHԪoOpR^U>]QУDH*WX/j28!aÑ; |K{Ő7Rf=B,2Yh1cpQYC ۆEj݉&oB5q#*.XUSD'ސhyQV<]tZM Vod.VNjB)/dmC^_dFɻʩMG.Z/X"EP+ 8pI Y6%9YUu$@<Ūgy&,0\NGE Әk|wG*鞓@s=zq7~2=n^T>1ypi:<{"$W7>[gD cJFc ($Ē`r<һ 7#:o.7'of )E`Qb`Mb?ƥwd Ջ_c7SyfI*shk DQ h1T̈AEI+q]̫f6Q /v%=lނb? OYwō*70nu7cbV,#2w vɛB2FXު=AH򛨤qͶs YS HNY?(7:QH#O!s7r~ 78c`hөYR K}[KaR*QtQ4Ωܭҙ٨w2e$JXݷMJmۤTظ2}3;:m48:i}4ބJWilaL5]S(U%,Iř SDTNZs|-:~`~gWU5\Gc)0v|n,>LpL{)3L'|j$RjSM3iY}k1 cL_NCPK MVY   &PCMDATA.INCPK ]sXhY  X1SEARCH.INCPK ]a  6W4DCONV.INCPK C^4  ;W4WCONV.INCPK V-~   TBWORDWRAP.INCPK P-Ύ  KWP51CONV.INCPK cYD4|j.  RWRICONV.INCPK QWm4 >fmW h D:RMAIL401.ZI0iYvbeyPK G3 READMAIL.EXEMZp[(de(J LZ91U >uß]ö R~ W~WPP 8FPPP>Ӛ ]6F0 ӈaԨ ܍c l/FRN0`sP~p18 : au˿8ٚH6Se0-FW1Қ0RSPП?+™Y^_XZ\;>ٿ%(TYOY>>)u xIK^ C`x`=S J) L5ё  ^v@  X ԧ &:F+!L@@k(҈樧PcȬ g\!t.sJ! 1Z?,9'Զ#P{[ɿfèm9ݚ 8F!Sr1ݲ~8xu~:\({d`Wax t*"7 _&=QQ5ٻ #k TtBU T-.m-RF:Fvfk򲱶{d SиPXg YVerifyCancel ? (Y/N)YCN@~PFJF{8M 8Q˝oE ;⼧ C J e ]V Vv   cƆ҈:wePP( 8 w OZYO(uut7HQE>+t>   ! Ә O No Un?ender2Uܛ0!G-LinesB=>*G$abcfghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ1234567890!@#$%^&*()٠<uP{ <  ukom< V< ?< [(< ] :}z#)? F1 - Help   lÁ: ~t#bCc!de߿ >Y<t0d]Ѹ F˪dvFHeܰ[C(Pm ^&ŭm ! [ + %;5?ArH {Q,TW)Ǔ%@Ye/)a:ts7Yd{Z Gð$Ps._.oQ~VL=Anޭܹ藙 mm۶mZ`z۶   U y;°tA㙆̍kگX{J [;vlX iߠm@ ἀ>u̚Xa~ ;z(ZH6׶ˍ}w‘7) u%ے يވucʸ U蓓;TGt0  Gk uHitu{3i4z1 XuF3 ReadM:3.0 1 Upgre info5has und an ols#etupfe,converitb941rmat.2H[9ahtviewf thmopsimpn!optiz |?s:"[D]`sbusJqө6>6[B =فbook mrkKׄdocu@Dߥ/Ie0E6.!kl=a1D(whǙdg)rH@L sw.)83Fu$=aZln-vp.Y!tBkeaonnuuT@ڿA*vy ~x } By IU ! & UU + 0 5 : UU ? D I N UU S X ] b UU g l q v Uv { 뿗U4s Z _ UU d i n s U x } YU Dp u wt6p 8|ڋ6Z>\<ȋwQ+ C H UU M R W \ z%TyBq澏] B/lӓޖF %m &oNwI)1R<ۮ-\..𪱸  ֺB k$% %FJL ` = = > u;w=Wg RS'tC+™Y^_XaZ\; 5Ɔ~♄>@ MR›6c6a~~Ǡ&2" z l lF^_|Pſ*?E@Bu1*n [} W}nb ~V PVI|=YM~MO0ž96e h Nz-z%p/3u@ +{*#2uɹu( ڠ M=e2鰼;8tዃ>up uVp~B ku~j-Ֆ?|  2wX v _#7^^}W^ EyOf*u$_ #Fa}H' u *a>-;|Cr鋕;|;rC@m md7dU]" yF5, Y k k+ k/ {VVNVGY}}4-v-vv ~ &~~+ᙹ0o-N p6TVV: Ľ  Ws uNp j ) N^" c+} o̻`\v DirQoryEnZargS :ɱ\*.*6E \]TzlF<<EːݻŚq1ř V5 ɨ {rP(ޏA;̀>u 7>1(uΠ]8\teÇ2b4~i9c3>u:% t0fT.ǜf\VOhTθ@Iz}U|qӼj,1o6E 1)~Tt}}iF//?l㋾Z iKL_ۇYםtHP :No/Atch^C:;.@ ;-:, ,by1 t9,wUSڿҗ4y ]>u90F~*t^Z;v~ԌFֿէ/yу~~X@Ԫ@3x#~r H+b  "܈YE ;. P5j ٘-FQ ޳,*,  @ *,-嬊FQ_ +Իq\԰bFm&$t! jyʝh|I.<Cp_kXk̝11{} vjcӲOo fF1ҹdBc! : Q~83 EUF:Z-_E ,(RPڐ Hydp v_N%U%-@(}kƔׁKKᢖX Ua(ƀt#xWW p kuņRE: I aR? <u8@-vUîwĒ+ښlaZ:l,6&ןכ v8FP4_1 .@R  .^u/$~D: t〠 8T o֬ oz`5]_i(L~ 85PU| ն p<6U]Yes t$nF 4<4"uRhyd |e?y˃RLW= 8 status Syem info:Di?splay lEGA/V s:C_olor dSnow_ checkMo">elled ax mv|i} rIScKav+SId tiv} FaMCurPFtypDOSUNIXBookma!rkletup RF2 ~e"=NJC/ttyUHU43FA 3D VP rٿ:`V.E-. 2nu 2>2\ 2Spϰ> ( w6bԢ9":-JR`a(bU /P#Դ*z+ * ~iPi *8=ڿ4 [rdQzkrǿ׮ U :*ҮVvY_~R - (C) 19;91 Jeroen S ppXGոũb:M Қk h]b XԿWB 㓴FѶ3ٮ VO  H;°@>uXU胼D 1  ,] VFS[Ks uX q ~:Us ` YBk젩{砵ᠻߠ㠴[k栶ޭQQކQ頲8x *¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ޢ ¢ ¢ ۢ 'Hs1|n U UUmߵUlUURg:p!K!QAAAAAAAu|pupu…duX uLu@.\u4u(puu῟u93I9:FvNVm@@!p Y34?} <o3 k5Nde|y2!n@?>zThis whatlMike: Z& )NUMF1=Help7:35:13 pm SQion 1mw 2 3 4 6 Badž  aexampLQthe1tt.)- # ?NormalRopCwpiow.. Sghlt sW܀E|J|c.}tO"PLI9#|KUn&IJI0#K ۪Md~T}_Nj1u   j J j ˡ sj,I> ݡjRB Um W j.FU I[G퇜  0P$Jn8 ޏ a5la 4+mH a 5qPYa aߏ a ?  Cho_o5ya  x EkTd BZd8{ Po Hvު  * nSk LiWUcurs!t!ove.$WhnkyouL \rnd, pv#[ENTER]A:i~q .%R$[%!]rwY^!D?Xjdefaul".HχVefyKeep --i ? (Y/N)YN-@ ancelrdɻ"FjWIBKJU+a} +ے4d@ X'ET@AɿN'Ufi9׶޲wtE:=4{uuUJa=OCC  ɍM wqq!lP41 "LVim  ,۶ Q g } F#F؄auZQaqCMux ~<u QU69REML,FӢGBu ;Hu< ǏId<1} JS< KcLB< cL1< M <_NΓup!u>#]0suT!>G g JGe>&=uE8 Z} b ^ e(P XbRqMa[iy>Ssyr.Hs/鬓{$P~ T!1Fb;^}bݡ@cdQe`?M@u7.%Z:?TuVs0U+=8X$6Cbau `f񚜕/fa~Xu]RЙ!T<$/6YM >*HCũd!Xe4-K߿EFiAnot fou?V.A: .Na Ci.A>sGWUnab*opiUDb(A&~We^nՌ?}"żˬʠaP"ݳkh }SCZ fZ>m{Yu$#Һ Loadnam Typ.[^:#([F8]I t,9 DirRory)A{mģu vĉ-#ɥT(>ò,&pCrU7R% tHn6_Ěy: A =>ՋX! {3k3!$t C;NXɶU(5& YES7 NO*Qg_<_mfhnLLYP$ݧ@ѥj}D `ш!yV3Y H&n["N H; Q < `]E|6ԣʼKEEPFAjM ,XFKDONTSENDUBJ[礢;X C z :3S* +Explodi wdow7{:n"moza%coed ln!!StDmhՠ (s) Tabpac^strAlwa7!Oi bookmark0BѠ-Su[ESCx#$.\ '# .qil6itemk]rI7T! ,aie9s&ˀ& (i`vuw) |l_d)!(Yvi%zk$~@Z?l)(OnlJ3XdEGA/V)b/HXr e)(D''Su}bjbsE%r) (dU0Ls] 3)"Obbra #(CE5s b몡ehãwi- [B]+READMAIL.EXE*|U{y Hjkǘ cb Nd/ [ rmơiq* lQ *c  0 ƪX ` \i` N ' NHj 3i y *` əRP.Ө Bi1 +81Q"{D~ x z ڶy 0fl ?qE| ȇ>puoE[qrA RV8 43PwRk 8WQ.;$Q;N N]w L(mav+ 6CC CKC2)ePlD#zm}U}  } 4}I]#IL} F^awZIw ,pw qQ@瑃ÿ`q qA7qZ횘ґ+b P蝴gR17ZEZ!iLҷii&P{eٴ\7R߾>ō ?P Q>~BO] @ 8*.*UnrBQ=R AllbN屾tL\N)~PR(_KFAtpK<4]`~!;|;s ^3P?iYBF[ZX 3 uv;*u/OZ׏ٲmD Ɔ(}sQIBsj)uo=qNR虄tvwommercially acceptable theory leaves his listeners entertained, enthralled and filled with wonderment, but by morning's light the winding details of his saga vaguely meld into the sense memory of a good time had by all. That is hardly the full extent of his conseqence, however, since it is clear to this writer that celebrity in the Media Age confers legitimacy, wherefore Mr. Lifton has gathered a faithful flock of passionate believers to his aimless cause. And therein lies the danger of a foolish idea run amok. David Lifton's attempt to persuade the American public to buy this hideous, ghoulish, sick, perverted, twisted and insane fantasy of body-snatching, postmortem wound infliction, and alteration mocks the assassination researchers and critics of the government's case. He clearly intends to resurrect the "Best Evidence" theory with further ideations that will continue to mock and debase serious criticism of the government's posture and subvert our efforts to achieve a reversal of the official verdict. Here, then, is David Lifton: Is he the scholar and role model for the present and future generations of researchers that he aspires to be? Is he, in the words of the popular song, merely "still crazy after all these years?" Does he sail under false colors, seeming to explore for truth as he leads us far astray? Or is he little more than an commonplace liar, plagiarist, thief, con artist, extortionist, and fraud? I cannot decide, neither am I interested in passing judgment and affixing labels, but this much I do know and deeply care about: Whatever or whoever David Lifton may be, he is the perfect public spokesman for the assassination research community, only if we look at things from the perspective of both the government and the established news media. His publisher said it checked his citations. It consulted lawyers, a forensic pathologist, and a neurosurgeon to examine the book for "potential factual errors", none of whom have ever been identified. (The New York Times, January 2, 1981, Section C, p. 17) What did any of them know about the case that David Lifton did not tell them? Mr. Lifton remains his own best expert in support of a scheme that all the special effects laboratories in Hollywood could not effectuate. Curiously, Macmillan does not vouch for the book, (ibid.) only for its own mechanical effort to verify isolated facts as though it had neglected to comprehend the insanity of the whole. Granted for the sake of this analysis (for I have no intention of personally verifying his footnotes), his citations were correct, his thinking profound. He was "right" in everything but his conclusions. Developments since the publication of "Best Evidence" in 1980 ignored him, as he has them. And, just as America went to the moon without David Lifton, we too must now leave him standing still on the side of the road to our destination in the study of President Kennedy's assassination. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance and/or advice of Kathleen Cunningham, Mary Ferrell, Jerry Policoff, Randall Robertson, Harold Weisberg, Cyril Wecht, and Kevin Walsh. Further acknowledgement is owed to Professor David Wrone, Department of History, University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point, who generously shared with the author his 1989 draft critique of "Best Evidence". Special thanks to Steve Geimann, Executive Editor of United Press International, Washington, D.C., and the research librarians at Columbia University School of Journalism and the State of Wisconsin Historical Society. And to my friends on Compuserve, who always give back more than they take. The author acknowledges Harrison E. Livingstone for the Bowron information and David Lifton's letter to the President of Emerson College. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Roger Feinman began a career in journalism while he was still in college, reporting on local campus disturbances for a Long Island radio station. He went on to become a film producer, graphics editor and newswriter at WPIX-TV in New York City. From December 1972 until September 1976, he worked for CBS, Inc., mostly within CBS News at its New York headquarters, where his responsibilities included assisting in the production of "The CBS World News Roundup with Dallas Townsend." In 1975, he was consulted by 60 MINUTES for an assassination segment that was killed by CBS News senior management. After leaving CBS, he attended law school and now practices law in the areas of insurance, excess and reinsurance coverage disputes; media errors and omissions; entertainment liability; trials and appeals. He has extensive experience working with the Freedom of Information Act in researching the Kennedy assassination. He is currently working on projects involving the medical evidence and the news media's treatment of the assassination controversy.