Saturday, July 7, 2018

James K. Lambert- Another WC Toady and Tool - Tries To Spin JFK Assassination Researchers As The Original Fake News Purveyors

Only a rank propagandist or imbecile would put wacko Alex Jones (left)  on the same conspiracy continuum as  the late conspiracy analyst Mark Lane.

"How do we know that our own rational rejections of conspiracy theories are not themselves infected with beliefs so strong that they are, in effect, conspiracy theories too?" - Matt Ridley in 'Maybe We're All Conspiracy Theorists', The Wall Street Journal, Sept. 10-11, 2011

It was frankly incredible - as well as appalling- to see James K. Lambert consume no less than six pages in SKEPTIC Magazine (vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 14-19) and end up saying very little of substance. Unless, of course, one regards blatant propaganda as substance.. To back up, it was only by sheerest serendipity I got the issue, as we had stopped in Barnes & Noble yesterday afternoon so I could use a birthday gift card Janice had given me.  It wasn't until we returned home and I read Lambert's recycled codswallop ('Conspiracy Theorists and the Harm They Do') that I realized the Warrenite toadies and apologists had descended to a new, vile low:  Now blaming JFK conspiracy researchers for actually launching the obscene fake news permeating so many outlets today.

So this hack wants us to believe the whole fake news cycle began with the advent of  sober conspiracy analysis following the assassination of John F. Kennedy.  This was when so many decent citizens questioned the PR whitewash of the Warren Report. Lambert  scribbles at the end of his balderdash, for example:

"From 9-11 to Sandy Hook, the paranoid and divisive view of the world that conspiracy theories promote has been gaining in popularity since the first 'false facts' about President Kennedy's death became widely accepted."

Actually, Sparky, the only false facts were to do with the effort to cover up the hit and blame it all on Lee Harvey Oswald.  In the single statement above, Lambert elides everything, including Alex Jones' insane Sandy Hook conspiracy (claiming a false flag operation using live child actors for dead kids) and ends up destroying whatever shred of credibility he might have possessed.

Recall in this regard, it was Barbadian psychologist Dr. Pat Bannister who once invoked the idea of  a "conspiracy culture",  to distinguish it from "conspiracy research community". The latter she envisaged as the province of mature, rational, educated adults. Serious people possessing some measure of intellect who brought their scientific, mathematical and other aptitudes to the investigation of multiple aspects of a putative real conspiracy - whether that be the BCCI banking conspiracy or the JFK assassination. These people put in real man hours and actually published their work in authoritative media and respected forums as opposed to spreading bunkum through the lowest dreg regions of the net.

 The "conspiracy culture"  by contrast was defined by the  resident "conspiracy theorist",  who put forward conspiracy conjectures  but didn't  advance adequate evidence or documents to  support them. Or, if such were advanced, they didn't meet elementary scientific standards for acceptance, including consistent data selection. For example, the nincompoops who claimed no men actually landed on the Moon and it was all filmed on a Hollywood lot.

Mark Lane, for example, who Lambert would have us accept as one of the original  fake news purveyors, was the first to expose the misdirection and artifice to do with Oswald's USMC rifle test scores. This was in conjunction with the Commission's questioning of Major Eugene D. Anderson in reference to Commission Exhibit No. 239.  Thus, the WC simply published Anderson's ambivalent speculations on what  weather conditions  for May 6, 1959 might have been, i.e. at first asserting "it was an ideal day".   But it was Lane who pointed out, 'Rush To Judgment', p. 124:

"Although the Commission adopted and published the major's speculation on what the weather 'might well have been'  there was no need for imprecision on this point. Whenever weather is a factor in a court case in the United States, the records of the United States Weather Bureau are subpoenaed and presented as a matter of course.  ... The Weather Bureau records show that the day was not 'windy, rainy, dark', it was sunny and bright and no rain fell."

 That, I submit, is the work of a serious researcher, not a wacko like Alex Jones.   But Lambert fails to make any distinction, any discrimination between the two classes at all, thereby revealing himself as a first class hack.   Indeed, speaking of the rifle test scores - Lambert fails to even mention as an aside the total failure of the Warren Commission to replicate Oswald's alleged shooting feat on Nov. 22, 1963.  See e.g.

But let's dig into some of his claims one by one, and let me begin with the photo shown below, appearing in the magazine, e.g..  

This is Commission Exhibit 903 which Lambert describes thusly in the caption for it, distinguishing it from the usual crooked path of the bullet, e.g. as portrayed by Robert Groden in 'The Killing of a President':  "By contrast in Exhibit 903 from the Warren Commission Report the path of the bullet is roughly estimated with  metal rod to be a straight line".  Before we continue, note where Arlen Specter is placing the entry point!  This is just above the base of the neck and higher than it was originally placed in an original WC sketch, e.g.

The upper inclined blue arrow shows the WC original positioning, with the trajectory of the bullet that would be needed (the WC first  believed) to account for BOTH the JFK neck wound AND the back wound. The problem was twofold: first, the throat wound was described by Parkland surgeon Malcolm Perry (who should know his business given having to deal with multiple Dallasites' gunshot wounds at Parkland) as an ENTRY wound.

The neck wound placement (from Perry) is shown in the collage below along with the JFK back wound.  Also included is the Zapruder film frame showing the instant JFK grabs at his neck, signifying the bullet impact.

 Second,  the Warrenites realized almost too late the placement was too low. The angle wasn't right and would have required a shooter firing from street level (e.g. upwards) when they needed an assassin at elevation, specifically six stories up in the Texas School Book Depository. Thus they were forced to make the placement, entry point higher, leading to the lower -angled yellow path instead.   The question of changing the position posed a conundrum: How to proceed, and how to justify it to an audience - fortunately, lacking in highly technical skills?  The solution was advanced by Commissioner Gerald Ford:  to slightly alter the wording of the autopsy draft report. The initial draft of the report had read:   

"A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine." 

But Ford altered it to read:  
"A bullet had entered the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine."

His actual changes are shown here in the draft:

Clearly Gerry Ford, doubtless with the agreement of other commissioners, needed the autopsy report to conform to the (downward trajectory)  path demonstrated  by Specter. It had to be made to fly so that even the most hardened WC skeptics and critics would swallow it.  But these toadies weren't prepared for the hard core conspiracy analysts of the future, such as Mark Lane, Robert Groden, Harrison Livingstone, Harold Weisberg. Peter Dale Scott, Richard Charnin and of course, yours truly!
NY Times account of Ford's changes.

The bottom line problem for Ford and his WC accomplices in this autopsy fakery and skullduggery was one of contradicting basic anatomy.  The original autopsy sheet, including the placement and description of the back wound, was signed and verified by Admiral George Gregory Burkley, personal physician to the president who directed the autopsy. He verified the BACK wound placement at JFK's   third thoracic vertebra   on November 24th.    By contrast, the neck has seven CERVICAL vertebrae and the observed and verified original wound (from Adm. Burkley) was described as three thoracic vertebrae lower then the neck itself.   But Ford's hocus pocus was intended to make us believe it was near the seventh cervical vertebra where the bullet had entered.  A contrivance and artifice which would force us to accept Ford actually knew MORE anatomy than Kennedy's physician, Adm. Burkley!  

 But one can instead accept- on the clear evidence- that Ford was a lying,  deceitful poltroon,  performing a fake news operation on the autopsy report when he wasn't even qualified to remove a splinter from his dog's paw. In this case,  the whole farce falls away of its own weight and the fake nature is exposed.   Thus, Arlen Specter's "straight line"  path (Exhibit 903) becomes pure fiction because it's based on a false anatomy, or rather the faking of the original autopsy draft from Adm. Burkley.

Make no mistake this is a major, indeed colossal, revelation - because it shows clearly the LIARS are all on the Warren Commission defenders side- which Lambert is clearly on. Maybe someone paid him to do this latest hit job on the truth, who knows? Maybe this was in accord with CIA Document 1035-960  which clearly advocates mischief, e.g.

"To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose".

Of course, Lambert will no doubt deny he's a CIA asset like John McAdams does.  Apart from the Specter - WC Exhibit 903 baloney Lambert also trots out the usual bunkum like trying to denigrate Lee Oswald as "a perpetual loser who couldn't hold down a job". By contrast we know from deep politics researcher Michael Parenti (The JFK Assassination  - Defending the Gangster State.):

Lee Harvey Oswald spent most of his adult life not as a lone drifter but directly linked to the U.S. intelligence community. All of his IQ tests show that he was above average in intelligence and a quick learner. At the age of eighteen in the U.S. Marines he had secret security clearance and was working at Marine Air Control in Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan, a top secret location from which the CIA launched U2 flights and performed other kinds of covert operations in China. The next year he was assigned to El Toro Air Station in California with security clearance to work radar. “

Lee Oswald then was no "commie" dupe but an intel operative. Most researchers who've delved into this in much more depth than superficial 'buffs' come away with the conviction Oswald was set up as part of ZR/Rifle.  The proof in the pudding was the letter ‘D’ – on the cover sheet of Oswald’s 201 file – indicating a  CIA Staff D  SIGINT or signals intelligence operation run in concert with the National Security Agency or NSA. As pointed out by Peter Dale Scott (Deep Politics Quarterly, Jan. 1994): “In 1961, when William Harvey headed Staff D, he was assigned the task of developing the CIA Assassinations Project, ZR/Rifle.”  To  be totally blunt, I seriously doubt Lambert knows anything about Oswald's 201 file or any of his other files, period.

Lambert later bitches about where all the bullets went and we already know most of that - such as for example, the fragment of one striking James Tague near the Triple Underpass, as well as leaving a bullet imprint on the curb. Another bullet left a dent clearly photographed on the limo windshield frame, e.g.     

Harold Weisberg and others (e.g. Noel Twyman, 'Bloody Treason', p. 104) have noted the FBI subsequently removed the curb  (in July, 1964) with the bullet imprint and dispatched it to D.C.   while good ol' LBJ had the limo dismantled so no evidence at all could be obtained including the bullet indentation shown. Twyman, on his photo page( ibid.) shows  an image of the curb section removed by the Feds and also other bullet impacts.

Lambert blabs:

"If they had a substantial case to make against the Warren Commission they would have made it, and they wouldn't need to grossly misrepresent what the Warren Commission actually found.

Well, what did it find? According to its own version of the head photos it found NO damage at all to the rear of the skull. However, the actual autopsy photo as it first appeared in David Lifton's 'Best Evidence' clearly shows the rear of the head blown out, e.g.

There the damned case pivots-  right there, on top of the back wound alteration lies by Gerald Ford!

The Parkland doctors cited with photographs of their hands - in 'The Killing Of A President' - all indicated the rear of the head as bearing the massive wound.  The doctors include:

-Dr. Robert McClelland

- Dr. Paul Peters

- Dr. Kenneth Salyer

- Dr. Charles Crenshaw

- Dr. Ronald Jones

- Dr. Charles Carrico

- Dr. Richard Dulaney

 The massive rear head damage is also substantiated by the fact Jackie was filmed launching herself  over the trunk of the limo. In her secret Warren Commission testimony Jackie insisted she was trying to salvage a dislodged bone fragment. 

Image result for brane space, Jackie in limo images"Image result for brane space, Jackie in limo images"
Jackie lurches over the rear of the limo trying to snatch a dislodged fragment of JFK's skull. Lambert doesn't mention this critical image at all, though it supports the Newtonian laws of physics for a frontal shot.

From the laws of physics, the fact she was moving to the rear means the head shot had to have come from the front. (The linear momentum transfer occurring from front to rear.) Why doesn't Lambert mention that image at all? Or, is he like John McAdams and wishes it never existed?   But maybe he has an alternative explanation for Jackie's rear motion, even contradicting that she herself insisted she was chasing a bone fragment, e.g.  in a 1964 taped interview with Arthur Schlesinger.  Maybe Lambert will argue Jackie suffered a sudden yen to lurch across the limo trunk, even at great risk to herself.

The massive REARward cavitation path was also documented by Floyd Riebe, the medical photographic technician at Bethesda,  who also described a "big gaping hole in the back of the head", and  reinforced it with the sketch below, e.g.  

Strangely, Lambert mentions none of this. Not Jackie's rearward motion over the limo trunk - explaining it fully - not Floyd Riebe's observation or the actual autopsy photos showing the REAR of Kennedy's head blown out.  Nor does he explain how it was that Parkland surgeon Charles Crenshaw also validated and confirmed the occipital region of the skull blown out.  

Dr. Crenshaw reported (see his book link below, page 10) being shown one of the Warren Commission autopsy photos by Garry Shaw of the Sixth Floor Museum, and was asked whether it matched what he observed while attending to JFK.  Crenshaw was incredulous, immediately spotting the fake, and ascertaining the head had been "manipulated"  exposing a conspiracy at work.  Readers are advised to read more in his book, 'JFK - Conspiracy of Silence' :

We can only conclude from these relevant, massive omissions that Lambert is part of the fake news- fake  history cavalcade, such as when he insists Oswald was lying when he claimed the backyard photos of him holding a rifle were faked. But I already showed this is exactly so, e.g.

As for Lambert's attempt to dismiss Lee's claim the police were in on it. one need look no further than the Oswald "ghost" photo recovered at the Dallas P.D. e.g.

The blank offered a perfect template with which to work photographic mischief and misdirection, but clearly Lambert isn't clever enough to see it, or grasp that the technical capacity was indeed available at the time.  In 1977, Canadian Defense Dept. Photographic specialist Maj. John Pickard noted the 99% probability the LIFE cover photo was a fake and noted each photo was taken from a slightly different angle. When superpositions of the images are performed, e.g. one photo laid atop another in succession, it is found that nothing matches exactly. As Pickard observed:

"Yet, impossibly, while one body is bigger - the heads match perfectly."

Again, this can be explained using the same "spliced out head"  re-incorporated into each image.

WC tool that he is, Lambert also dredges up the old curtain rods canard. That the package Oswald was carrying with him to work - riding with Buell Wesley Frazier- was actually a rifle and not curtain rods that Lee claimed.  But this claptrap was skewered by  Prof. David R. Wrone, whose review of Case Closed appeared in The Journal of Southern History 6 (February 1995), pp. 186-188:

"100 percent of the witness testimony and physical evidence exclude Oswald from carrying the rifle to work that day disguised as curtain rods. Posner manipulates with words to concoct a case against Oswald as with Linnie Mae Randle, who swore the package, as Oswald allegedly carried it, was twenty-eight inches long, far too short to have carried a rifle. He grasped its end, and it hung from his swinging arm to almost touch the ground. Posner converts this to "tucked under his armpit, and the other end did not quite touch the ground"(p. 225). The rifle was heavily oiled, but the paper sack discovered on the sixth floor had not a trace of oil. Posner excludes this vital fact."

The most despicable aspect of Lambert's whole, lame screed is near the end (p. 19) where he tears into the upstanding and honorable investigators of the House Special Committee on Assassinations, e.g.

"highly political investigation spearheaded mostly by people trying to advance their own careers in public office and make themselves look like heroes."

Which is total,  arrant balderdash. None of the chief investigators, including Gaeton Fonzi ('The Last Investigation') Danny Hardway, or Ed Lopez - who interviewed  Sylvia Duran   (tortured  by Mexican police because she refused to retract her original testimony that the person she dealt with as a consulate officer at the Mexico City Cuban Embassy was not Lee Oswald)  had a dishonest or career advancing bone in their bodies when it came to turning over the evidence. What they wanted above all was for the HSCA to do an honest investigation and not succumb to pressure from the CIA as well as Warrenites out to preserve their political cover story - intended to save LBJ's butt.   

As for the HSCA investigation, I already described in detail how it was literally compromised from the start, e.g.

 after Richard Sprague was replaced (he had intended to go full bore) and  after CIA "Information and Privacy Coordinator"  Jim Lawderman wrote ( on July 27, 1977)  the terms of the CIA’s control of Blakey’s investigation. (Mellen, J., ‘Farewell to Justice’, p. 345).  One of the terms cited was (ibid.):

Certain areas relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy should be entirely disregarded based upon our contention they are without merit or corroboration

.Of course, those "areas" included additional shooters and shots from the grassy knoll. As I noted in the previous link:

"The HSCA’s own acoustic tests showed it (kill shot) originated on the grassy knoll (also corroborated by the Parkland surgeon’s own testimony and the actual autopsy photos.)  Thus, the weird attempt of the HSCA to "square the circle" - finding for conspiracy while retaining the original Warren Commission location for the head shot's origin"

I believe then, as I do now, the HSCA contorted itself in order to try to satisfy Lawderman's  demands. And yet, incredibly, despite all that - the final HSCA conclusion was
for a conspiracy (96 % probability)  

Lastly, Lambert - ever faithful to his fake history mandate-   misrepresents the HSCA's finding which found for FOUR shots - not three. This was based on the Barger-Weiss (MIT)  team's  acoustic analysis of impulses.   Lambert claims that "the one piece of alleged evidence (the 4th impulse) that the HSCA did find in favor of an unknown co-conspirator was later refuted by every scientific expert that examined it"  - which is total,  palpable, fake history bullshit! 

 The truth is one set of "experts" - Norman  Ramsey's team - was brought in and they failed to overturn the initial Weiss and Barger findings.  The Ramsey Panel analysis was alleged to have  'refuted' the original Weiss -Barger study, but in fact only showed that the Weiss group had omitted some considerations. The Ramsey analysis certainly does not 'nullify' the Weiss/Barger analysis since up to now it has not been  reproduced, so cannot be accepted as a bona fide scientific conclusion. (Indeed, as per an email from another acoustic researcher, W. Antony Marsh, the Ramsey team even exceeded the claimed errors of the Barger team and at a more fundamental level)

The Ramsey insinuation and deliberate muddying had the effect of forcing the HSCA to now tie itself in knots - accepting enough of the MIT analysis to find for "96 percent probability of conspiracy" but not enough to shuck the idiotic WC version for the head shot (allegedly fired from the rear and the Book Depository when the rear of the skull was blown out - a physical impossibility).  

What we are left to conclude here is that James K. Lambert is the real offender, like his WC sidekicks, in triggering the suspicions of the American people about official accounts and validity of news sources. This was compounded by the Operation Mockingbird hijinks of the 1970s, e.g  

How the CIA Paid and Threatened Journalists to Do Its Work - The …

Perhaps the most pathetic  and desperate display in Lambert's fake history excursion was his (p. 15) excerpt from Chief Justice Warren's memoir in which he "tried to point out the absurdity of such conspiracy fiction".  Alas, the joke is on Lambert who either never knew, or ignored that Warren was co-opted by LBJ from the start. 

 Johnson's infamous words were caught on tape in a phone call to Sen. Richard Russell, after LBJ had been initially rejected by Earl Warren to lead his pet Commission. Johnson needed the credibility of Warren so the media would accept the commission as a bona fide government entity as opposed to a creature of Johnson's whim and machinations. (Johnson’s first kneejerk reaction was to form a “Texas Commission” to look into the assassination, with staff entirely composed of Texans.). 

 Anyway, Johnson's taped words were - after speaking to Warren (cf. Michael R. Beschloss, Taking Charge:The Johnson White House Tapes 1963-64, 1997, p. 72, as cited by Russ Baker, in 'Family of Secrets', p. 46):

"Warren told me he wouldn't do it under any circumstances...He came down here and told me 'No'...twice. And I just pulled out what[FBI Director} Hoover told me about a little incident in Mexico City....And he started crying and said: 'I won't turn you down...I'll just do whatever you say.'

So much for Earl Warren being any kind of reliable or credible source on the "absurdity" of conspiracy research.

If anyone is to blame for spawning the current fake news environment it is James K. Lambert and his cohorts like John McAdams, the now deceased Vince Bugliosi as well as Gerald Posner of 'Case Closed' fame  - whose book was already picked to pieces by true rationalists, and actual skeptic researchers. 

Posner's many oversights, lies, distortions and "fake facts" were revealed in an issue of The Electronic Assassination Newsletter. Several dedicated actual researchers  collated these assorted "Posnerisms"  mainly from his propaganda book, 'Case Closed' (1993).

You, the readers,  can be the judges of who are the real progenitors of current fake news:  honest, hard working JFK assassination researchers like Harold Weisberg, Richard Charnin, Mark Lane, Pete Dale Scott and many others....or those who defend liars and CIA disinformationists, like Gerald Posner, John McAdams and James K. Lambert.


JKL said...

I don't have time to take on all this nonsense but I do touch on a couple of your false point at:

Copernicus said...

Lambert, the only "nonsense" is what I exposed here in this post from your ludicrous 'Skeptic' article. As for the backyard photos I already showed their fraudulent nature using fractional calculus here:

Maybe you need to take a chill pill, examine the real evidence, and rewrite your codswallop.

Copernicus said...

To J.K. Lambert: I have more intellectual honesty in my pinky finger than you WC toadies have in all the gigabytes of disinformation you've churned out in your propaganda mills since 1964. I have proven all I need to and no longer intend to waste my time rebutting your endless drivel. (Which only seems to increase exponentially with each takedown) If you require an extensive examination and rebuttal of all the fake news, frauds and WC myths get hold of my book, 'The JFK Assassination - The Final Analysis'.

Copernicus said...

Some snippets from critical Amazon reviews of Lambert's illustrious film which he beseeched me to see:

"No real support for its thesis that LHO did it. Simply relies on saying that it is preposterous to think otherwise. Does not address the issues. Just calls names"

"The fact that this guy feels he has all the answers and is the representative of the final truth is embarrassing. Convinced that he is the only person who gets "the truth", he sets out to not only tell everyone else they're wrong but to tell them, essentially, they're stupid. This is unnecessary, immature, and just plain mean. His responses to others' questions were simply "Because I know the facts" or "Because I live in reality" and are not appropriate responses when trying to share an educated opinion on any subject. No one likes to be talked down to. As a viewer, this was how I was made to feel, regardless if I agreed with him or not.

Had I just heard the filmmaker say once "let's agree to disagree" instead of his pseudo alpha male "I'll just stare... instead of responding" then I would have respect for this piece of work. Thankfully I only paid $0.75 to rent it and all that really was wasted was my time."

"This is one of the most insidious pieces of pro-establishment nonsense that's ever been disseminated on the public regarding this issue. This man proceeds to corner and attempt to intellectually bully innocent people who are largely just in search of a reasonable explanation to a horribly distressing and mind-boggling event.

While some 'conspiracy theories' may in fact be unfounded conjecture and even more likely the results of disinformation campaigns on the part of those in power, the arrogant denial of this government henchman of a group of people's right to question the official account of an event that has been repeatedly refuted by a laundry list of circumstantial evidence, eye-witness accounts, and a series of cover-up maneuvers that would require either an obtuse stubbornness or outright stupidity to ignore."

"terrible journalism...the author has an obvious agenda, focusing on "dis-proving" conspiracy views, with no actual support of the official commission's report - total garbage not worth watching"

Conclusion: I've wasted enough hours vetting similar garbage to what these reviewers address, to know I don't need to see any more. You might also want to re-read Matt Ridley's quote at the beginning of this post - and let it sink in.