BOOK REVIEW -- "RECLAIMING HISTORY: THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY" (1 Viewer)

[Joseph DeMartino]

1) No matter how good your experts are, there is danger inherent in firing guns in the middle of a downtown business area. Neither the police nor the insurance company would have allowed any such thing.

2) Even if objection (1) could somehow be overcome, there is just something ghoulish about re-enacting a murder - particularly this one - complete with exploding surrogate head and spewing grey-matter in public and on the spot of the actual killing. Just as they did not show the fatal head shot from the Zapruder film (even when doing the graphic comparison between the film and their test shot), the producers would never have done a public live-fire re-enactment in the plaza itself. It would just have been too creepy for words.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

It's odd again that there isn't more emphasis put on the notion that the "conspirators" would have had to use additional Carcano rifles. Apparently a .30-06 takes the head off. Even more to the point, recovering ANY bullets other than a 6.5 mm Carcano from the crime scene would be instant proof of a conspiracy.

I have a Carcano and a box of ammo. For non-gun-nuts, it's hard to get across what an oddball rifle it is. The cartridge is part way in kinetic energy between a .22LR and a high-powered centerfire round. If JFK had been shot with a .22LR, his head would have been intact although a shot may have been fatal. If on the other hand he had been shot with another miliary surplus round, e.g. 8 mm Mauser or .30-06, there would have been little left of his head. The reason the "magic bullet" makes sense is that the Carcano cartridge is of medium power and therefore wouldn't have disintegrated on impact. It simply had less kinetic energy to dissipate.

 

[Paul McElligott]

But even if you use identical 6.5mm Carcanos, you're left with the problem that bullets from one rifle will not match bullets from the other, again exposing the presence of a second shooter. And that's assuming the wound tracks would not have pointed in two different directions. Again, the simplest way to pull this off is to use a single shooter, even if there were a conspiracy.

 

[David Von Pein]

This, again, is a weak argument, IMO (especially considering what could have been gained by doing physical tests like these right at the murder scene).

Anyway, it was pretty ghoulish as it was -- staged in California. Placing the exploding heads where they should have been placed for a scientific demonstration like this one -- in Dealey Plaza itself -- was certainly not an impossible task. And it would have provided quintessential accuracy (with respect to heights, distances, angles, etc.). It's a shame they missed a golden opportunity to duplicate the fatal head shot with even more accuracy than we could have hoped for out in California.

Don't get me wrong, the Discovery Channel program was very good, as I said in my review. It proved beyond virtually all doubt (with not just one "Knoll" test shot, but two--using two different type rifles) that JFK was not and could not have been shot in the head from the Grassy Knoll area of Dealey Plaza.

IMO, those "Grassy Knoll" simulated shots were really the best part of the whole program, because those two shots proved that the head damage that would have been sustained by either of those shots would have been totally different than the wounds sustained by JFK in '63.

And when you've eliminated the Grassy Knoll as a firing point (which the Discovery special certainly did do)--then what's left? Certainly not the crazy SOUTH-side firing choices.

What remains, therefore, is the truth of the matter -- JFK was shot in the head from behind and only from behind.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Yeah, because the CTers would never have claimed that the reconstruction was inaccurate, or that the wind conditions were different or the sun got in their eyes...

Face it: If you could take some people back in a time machine and let them stand in every possible shooting spot they still would find something to nitpick and they'd go off to craft yet another theory.

And I don't think the HCA simply shot up Dealy Plaza.

I'd have to check the details but I believe their acoustic tests were either done with blanks or by shooting into balastic slug-catchers a few feet from the barrell of the gun.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

Ah youse guys just don't understand how fiendish the conspiracy really was. The other shooters were just backup for LHO. They were only going to shoot from the grassy knoll if LHO missed. But when they saw the effects of LHO's shots, they promptly skedaddled out of there. This left LHO holding the bag - a "patsy" as it were.

 

[Paul McElligott]

Good point. They also represented Congress, not a cable channel. That probably gave them a little more leeway when it came to firing live ammo.

I don't think it could have been blanks because part of the report of a rifle is the mini sonic boom generated by the bullet actually breaking the sound barrier. You would at least need the bullet to fly a few feet to do an accurate sound test.

 

[David Von Pein]

Yes, Joseph, you're probably right about that.

I'm sure you've probably heard the joke about the JFK case....which goes:

Even if God Himself sent down word from heaven that Oswald was the lone assassin, the conspiracy believers would be mumbling to themselves -- "Gee, it looks like this conspiracy goes even higher up than we thought."

Hey, just for laughs, let me tell you about one of the conspiracy kooks I battle regularly at the alt.conspiracy.jfk newsgroup (I'm not making this up, I swear):

This guy/nut is firmly of the opinion that JFK was shot in the throat by a frontal gunshot (apparently being fired by a cloaked sniper in the middle of Elm Street, because I cannot see any other way of this occurring) at the equivalent of Zapruder Film frame #161 (which is what is shown in a photo taken by bystander Robert Croft).

This conspiracist in question also says that the Croft photo proves his theory. He claims that that photo (linked above) shows a piece of white shirt coming out of JFK's back, thus proving that Kennedy was hit by a shot from the front--entering his throat and exiting his back (a Single-Bullet Theory in reverse, sort of, minus Governor Connally's wounds).

Kennedy then continues to smile and wave to the crowd for about 30 more Z-frames (about 2 seconds) after he was just skewered by a bullet.

The same kook also believes that witness Howard Brennan claimed that the TSBD shooter was located on the WEST side of the Depository, instead of where Oswald was (the east end). And, naturally, the shooter Brennan saw wasn't Oswald, per the conspiracy believer. Of course, Brennan never testified to anything even close to what that kook said -- the conspiracist is just making up his own crazy brand of evidence and testimony.

And that's what is so maddening about people like that -- they don't even have the decency to feel the slightest bit embarrassed when confronted with the obvious fact that they are attempting to rewrite history in their own unique way with their non-stop silly theories about things that never happened. And they surely--deep down--must know that these things never occurred...but I guess they've convinced themselves that they need to interject their OWN theories about the case, theories that differ from all the others in some ways.

Mark Fuhrman is a good example of this type of thing from the "lone assassin" POV, too. Fuhrman wrote a book on the JFK murder that came out one year before Vince Bugliosi's (called "A Simple Act Of Murder"), in which he decides that the SBT is all wrong, but that Oswald did it alone anyway.

In my review of Fuhrman's book, I provide many, many reasons why his anti-SBT theory cannot possibly be correct. In other ways, however, Mark wrote a good book. At least he doesn't subscribe to the theory that has TSBD employee Danny Arce (who was 18 years old at the time) shooting Kennedy from a FIFTH-floor WEST-end window, while fellow TSBD worker Bonnie Ray Williams was waving a useless, unfired rifle out of a FIFTH-floor EAST-end window to--get this!--attract witnesses' attention to the WRONG FLOOR of the building before the motorcade arrived, in order to frame the proverbial "patsy", who will be framed with evidence (later) on the SIXTH floor.

The above scenario is yet another ultra-nutty one that I have encountered on the Internet in the last few years.

The CTers' favorite TV show must be The Twilight Zone -- because they enter that Zone each time they open their yaps.

 

[Paul McElligott]

I'm beginning to believe that JFK was killed by Colonel Mustard in the library with the candlestick.

 

[David Von Pein]

No, no, Paul -- it was Jimmy Files in the conservatory (close to "Depository") with a dart-throwing umbrella.

 

[Paul McElligott]

You know... if we were really sick, we could probably come up with a JFK Conspiracy board game, sort of like Clue but with all the locations in Dealy Plaza (with side trips to New Orleans, Miami, Mexico City and Havana). Whoever uncovers together the largest conspiracy wins.

We'll be rich, I tell ya, rich!

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Unfortunately (for us and for the sad, sick CT'ers), it is a self-fullfilling prophesy. The more outlandish the scenario, the more "unique" the person coming up with the theory appears and, in turn, the more "special" their level of "knowledge" must be. For people who so obviously crave recognition, it's easy to see how their tenous grasp on reality can readily slip away.

 

[Paul McElligott]

Interesting. The two-hour Kennedy Assassination special on the History Channel tonight was just the Peter Jennings ABC special for 2003, but without Peter Jennings' narration. It's nice that the channel has taken some steps to correct the damage done by their interminable airings of The Men Who Killed Kennedy, but odd that they went through the trouble to replace Jennings' voice with someone who, frankly, sounded a lot like Peter Jennings.

 

[David Von Pein]

Yes, Paul, I've also heard portions of that re-dubbed Jennings special that aired on non-ABC networks. Didn't they use a British narrator in the History Channel version?

And, of course, the newer version was forced to drop the "Peter Jennings Reporting" part of the title.

 

[David Von Pein]

Some interesting images from the 2008 Discovery Channel
"Unsolved History" documentary,
"JFK: Inside The Target Car":


http://reclaiming-history.googlegrou...eePd 7zpGv9tg


REVIEW -- "JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" (2008 DISCOVERY CHANNEL DOCUMENTARY) - alt.conspiracy.jfk | Google Groups

 

[David Von Pein]

MY KENNEDY PHOTO ALBUM:



CBS-TV COVERAGE OF JFK'S ASSASSINATION:



1964 CBS SPECIAL -- "THE WARREN REPORT":



1966 NBC WHITE PAPER -- "THE AGE OF KENNEDY":



DISCUSSING THE JFK ASSASSINATION:

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

What a pair of idiots. The "Mauser" issue (or, "German Mauser" issue - like there were lots of non-German Mausers floating around) is laughable and always has been. It isn't like there were many people in the United States in 1963 who would recognize a Carcano at a glance. It was a seriously obscure weapon that looked more like a Mauser than it did any of the common American bolt action rifles that a bunch of Dallas cops or citizen would be familiar with. So the witnesses did what people normally do - they assumed. It looked like a Mauser at first glance, it must be a Mauser.

Imagine a bunch of witnesses and even cops being interviewed after a drive-by shooting. Many of the people refer to the handgun used as a Glock 9mm. When the suspect is arrested he is found to have a 9mm that is a cheap imitation of a Glock. How far do you think his lawyer is going to get claiming that this "mistake" sinks the prosecution's whole case - especially if the guy in question had no alibi for the time of the shooting, was seen in the area, had previously attempted another drive-by shooting and in the course of escaping the scene of the current crime, shot and killed a local cop in front of witnesses?

And that lots of news reports carried the mistake is equally meaningless to anyone who knows how the news business works. One AP or UPI story or one Dallas PD press release with that tidbit in it and every news report would have called the gun a Mauser - until a correction came down.

I'm sure there was even worse ahead, but I stopped the recording about halfway through, because my gag reflex was kicking in.

Regards,

Joe

 

[David Von Pein]

If you think that was bad, you should hear about all the stuff he mangles in Parts 3 and 4 of my "Battling A Kook" series. It's hilarious. And pathetic. (Particularly when such distortions are coming from a person--DiEugenio--who supposedly is highly informed about the facts of the case.)

 

[Cees Alons]

To change the subject for a tiny second: Happy Birthday, Joe!

Now take that pie (to revert your gag reflex)!


Cees

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Thanks. I opted for ice cream cake.

Joe