Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
- - - - -

BOOK REVIEW -- "OSWALD'S GAME"


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 of 4 OFFLINE   David Von Pein

David Von Pein

    Producer



  • 5,736 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002

Posted June 22 2009 - 09:10 AM

BOOK REVIEW:

"OSWALD'S GAME"

AUTHOR: JEAN DAVISON

Posted Image

--------------------------------------------------------------

BOOK STATS:
  • Publisher: W.W. Norton & Co.
  • Year Published: 1983.
  • Foreword by Norman Mailer.
  • 343 Pages.
  • 18 Chapters.
  • 13 Pages of Illustrations and Photographs.
  • 29 Pages of Source Notes.
  • 11-Page Index.
  • Bibliography.
  • Hardcover (1st Edition released in November 1983).
--------------------------------------------------------------

Jean Davison's "Oswald's Game" is 343 pages of impeccably-researched material detailing the very unusual 24-year life of Lee Harvey Oswald -- the man who was charged with assassinating President John F. Kennedy.

During the many years since this 1983 book was published, Davison has defended her "Lone Assassin" position (at a variety of public JFK forums) with grace, dignity, and (above all) a wealth of facts to support the idea that Oswald was anything BUT an innocent "Patsy" on November 22nd, 1963.

As the pages of this book are turned, it becomes easier and easier to climb inside the mind of Lee Harvey Oswald, and assess what probably was going through this strange man's head when he took it upon himself to carry a cheap mail-order rifle into work one day in 1963 and change the course of history.

It's also interesting to note (via these intriguing pages) how Oswald has been severely mischaracterized by conspiracy theorists over the years as a person who could easily be manipulated (i.e., a "dupe" who could easily fall prey to some kind of "Patsy" plot).

When, in reality, Lee Oswald was, himself, an expert "manipulator". This book details many, many verified instances where Oswald would cleverly manipulate his wife Marina to serve his own self-serving purposes....and how he manipulated the officials at the American Embassy in Russia, in order to secure the proper papers so that he could return to the United States in 1962 after defecting to the USSR.

There is a clear and distinct PATTERN over many years of Oswald "using" people to serve his own needs and desires. This man Oswald was no brain-dead dupe....and would certainly have not been stupid enough to be suckered into some assassination plot in November 1963, whereby he would willingly take his own rifle into his own workplace for the purpose of handing it over to some co-conspirator, who would in turn use it to kill JFK.

Conspiracists have too often (almost always, in fact) totally ignored the type of manipulative and scheming person Lee Harvey Oswald HIMSELF was in the months and years leading up to November 22nd, 1963.

After reading "Oswald's Game", it's very nearly impossible to NOT say to yourself dozens of times throughout these chapters: This guy Oswald was just EXACTLY the type of crackpot Marxist who just might want to take a potshot at the President of the United States if given THE GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO (which he was afforded -- on 11/22/63 in Dallas, Texas).


Here are some of my favorite passages and quotes from "Oswald's Game":

"Is it possible that Castro's warning to American leaders gave Oswald the idea that Kennedy should be killed? ... Oswald was quoted as telling a consular official [in Mexico City] that he wanted to 'free Cuba from American imperialism'. Then he said, 'Someone ought to shoot that President Kennedy. Maybe I'll try to do it'. [Daniel] Schorr had uncovered two sources that reported Oswald's threat." -- Pages 22-23

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"This book will present evidence that Castro's public warning did, in fact, inspire Oswald to assassinate the president. Furthermore, the full context of Oswald's life directed him toward this reaction. In the final analysis, the assassination was a natural outgrowth of Oswald's character and background -- and of the American-backed plots to kill Castro." -- Page 23

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The argument that Oswald was the tool of a high-level conspiracy does seem plausible, until one tries to fit it into the context these theorists always leave out -- the personality and background of Lee Harvey Oswald, the individual." -- Page 25

Related topic:

Lee Harvey Oswald's Motive For Killing JFK


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Ten days after his interview with Priscilla Johnson, Oswald wrote a second, remarkable letter to [his brother] Robert. ... He advised his brother of the following: 1. In the event of war I would kill ANY American who put a uniform on in defense of the American government -- any American." -- Pages 38-39

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"For one thing, this model [from "the St. Elizabeths Study"] at least provides a framework for looking again at Oswald's breathtaking arrogance -- for instance, the manner in which he threatened to give away military secrets at the U.S. Embassy and then loudly complained that the embassy had acted illegally in refusing to let him sign away his citizenship. Oswald expected his adversaries to abide by the letter of the law, whereas he did as he pleased. ... The cumulative details of his life reveal more about him than any category we might use to explain him." -- Page 68

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"[On the subject of "Death", Oswald told George DeMohrenschildt]: 'I have had enough time in this short existence of mine. What shall I do with eternity? When a rich man dies, he is loaded with his possessions like a prisoner with chains. I will die free, death will be easy for me'." -- Page 112

Related topic:

"Well, They Say It Just Takes A Second To Die" -- Lee Harvey Oswald; November 22nd, 1963


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The assassination attempt against [General Edwin] Walker, like his defection, revealed Oswald's extreme dedication to his political beliefs. All else was secondary to him -- his family, even the question of whether he lived or died." -- Page 131

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"These credentials [presented by Oswald himself within his "resume"] indicate that [Oswald] saw himself as an experienced political operative who was qualified to work for the Cuban revolution as a soldier, lecturer, organizer, agitator, translator, or spy. ... He expected to be welcomed aboard, and he would then go out and distinguish himself in the Communist world and work his way up. ... For someone who couldn't hold a job in the United States, he had some extraordinary ambitions." -- Page 180

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"When these men visited [Sylvia] Odio's apartment [in September 1963], Kennedy's trip to Dallas had not even been scheduled, let alone announced. ... No one on earth could have known that Oswald would ultimately land a job in a building that would overlook a Kennedy motorcade.

"But the frame-up theory's ultimate weakness involves the critics' conception of Lee Harvey Oswald. In every conspiracy book, Oswald is a piece of chaff blown about by powerful, unseen forces -- he's a dumb and compliant puppet with no volition of his own. If the man Odio saw was an impostor, how could the plotters be certain no witnesses would be able to establish Oswald's presence somewhere else that evening -- unless they ordered the unsuspecting patsy to stay out of sight?

"And if the real Oswald was used, how did the anti-Castro plotters get their Marxist enemy to stand at Odio's door to be introduced as a friend of the Cuban exiles?

"No one has come up with a plausible scenario that can answer those questions. ... The point to be stressed is this: Sylvia Odio gave testimony of obvious, even crucial importance, and no one could explain what it meant." -- Pages 193-195

Related topic:

Was Oswald "Planted" In The Depository By Evil Conspirators? Such An Idea Is Total Rubbish!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"I began to see how similar [Oswald's] encounters with Bringuier and Odio were. Oswald had approached each of them as an eager volunteer. ... The age-old role of the provocateur is to encourage acts of violence that will discredit the group he has infiltrated. ... In other words, the mysterious Odio incident was another of Oswald's attempts to infiltrate the anti-Castro underground. The intended victim of this enterprise was not Lee Harvey Oswald, but Sylvia Odio and the Cuban exiles. Oswald was plotting against the exiles, not the other way around.

"Unlike the explanations offered by the Warren Commission and its critics, this solution FITS THE REST OF THE EVIDENCE ABOUT OSWALD. And it makes better sense, after all, that Oswald went to see Odio for some reason of his own, than that he was impersonated or duped by his enemies." -- Pages 195-196 [Emphasis is Jean Davison's own.]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"At 12:30 P.M. [on November 22, 1963], Lee Harvey Oswald entered history. Three shots from a sixth-floor Depository window hit Governor Connally once and the president twice." -- Pages 241-242

Related topic:

Lee Harvey Oswald's Sole Guilt -- Point-By-Point


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Marina could tell that he was guilty. If he hadn't been, she thought, he would have been loudly protesting his arrest, and besides, she sensed that he was saying goodbye to her with his eyes." -- Page 249

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"[Dallas Police Detective James R.] Leavelle told the [Warren] Commission the prisoner [Oswald] seemed very much in control of himself at all times and added, 'In fact, he struck me as a man who enjoyed the situation immensely and was enjoying the publicity and everything [that] was coming his way'." -- Page 253

Related topic:

Lee Harvey Oswald's Many Lies


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"[At 11:21 AM on Sunday, November 24, 1963, Jack] Ruby rushed forward and shot him [Oswald] once in the abdomen. ... When the crowd outside heard what had happened, it let out a cheer. ... A raised fist was Oswald's last comment." -- Page 254

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Although the solutions proposed by [David] Lifton and [Michael] Eddowes are more farfetched than some, they use the same style of reasoning found in other conspiracy books. All these theories are based on unexplained discrepancies in the record. ... Alternative explanations and the overall pattern of the evidence are given little attention, if any." -- Pages 274-275

Related topic:

The "Frame Oswald As The Lone Patsy" Lunacy


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The reader [of pro-conspiracy books] will understand the difficulty these writers have sidestepped if he or she tries to invent a story that explains why an INNOCENT Oswald went to Irving for 'curtain rods', left his wedding ring behind the next morning, brought a package into the Depository, and so on. Because the evidence against Oswald is strong, any detailed reconstruction that argues a frame-up will inevitably sound less plausible than one that argues his guilt." -- Page 276

Related topics:

These Two Things Prove Lee Harvey Oswald's Guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt

Why Do So Many Conspiracy Theorists Believe In Such A Silly Plot?

About Those "Curtain Rods" Of Oswald's

Every Single Thing Lee Oswald Did Following JFK's Assassination Says "I'm Guilty"


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The conspiracists' methods produce a surreal world. Every discrepancy is interpreted as a crack in the official stone wall through which one may glimpse the ugly truth of what happened. Behind the wall are disconnected scenes, each with its own set of conspirators. On close examination, many of these scenes evaporate." -- Page 277

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The assassination of John Kennedy was neither an act of random violence nor a conspiracy. It was carried out as a result of Oswald's character and background interacting with circumstance." -- Page 297

[END BOOK QUOTES.]

--------------------------------------------

I challenge anyone who reads this book to then come away from such a reading with the following mindset: "There is no possible way to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed John F. Kennedy by himself on November 22, 1963."

Such a mindset should forever be eliminated from a reasonable person's head upon the completion of reading "Oswald's Game".

The physical evidence of Oswald's guilt in the JFK assassination has been rock-solid since the day the murder occurred in Dallas. But the question of "Why would he want to shoot the President?" had been dangling in the breeze -- never fully explained in a detailed manner -- until Jean Davison came out with this absorbing book twenty years after the President's death.

It's true, of course, that "Oswald's Game" will not convince every last person on the planet that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK all alone....but it should increase the percentage of "LNers" by a goodly number. Of that, I am certain.

Thank you, Jean Davison, for your excellent book "Oswald's Game"....and for the "high road" that you have taken since writing it when dealing with critics of your work regarding Oswald. I've yet to read an article or a newsgroup posting by Jean that didn't brim over with common sense and reasoned thinking with respect to John Kennedy's assassination.

--------------------------------------------

IN A (LONE) NUTSHELL:

1.) This book shows (beyond a reasonable doubt, in my opinion) that Lee Harvey Oswald had it WITHIN HIMSELF the desire to shoot President Kennedy.

2.) The physical evidence positively indicates that Oswald's very own Mannlicher-Carcano rifle WAS the one and ONLY weapon used to kill JFK.

Those two things go together like bread and butter. When adding #1 to #2 above, it's pretty clear that Lee Oswald was not the "innocent patsy" that so many conspiracy theorists seem to want to believe he was. Instead, numbers 1 and 2 above, when merged, are telling the world that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin of President John F. Kennedy.

David Von Pein
February 2006
January 2007

THE ASSASSINATION OF JOHN F. KENNEDY: A LONE-GUNMAN VIEWPOINT

--------------------------------------------------------------

[img]http://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/7/70/htf_imgcache_43234.gif">

Kennedy Books, Videos, DVDs, & CDs

JFK Photo Gallery

DVD Review -- "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald"

Book Review -- "Reclaiming History"[/b]



Edited by David Von Pein - 7/4/2009 at 09:56 am GMT

#2 of 4 OFFLINE   Dennis Nicholls

Dennis Nicholls

    Lead Actor



  • 8,278 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 1998
  • Real Name:Dennis
  • LocationBoise, ID

Posted June 22 2009 - 09:51 AM

David,

I may wish to quibble about your characterization of the LHO Carcano as a "cheap mail order rifle" as this may play into the hands of the conspiracy theorists.

Here's a link to a mail order catalog from 1964 posted by a hobbyist.

Herb's Fantasy Mil-Surp Gunshop

After WWII and Korea, the US market was flooded with surplus bolt-action rifles from all over the world. You could have purchased:
German Mauser KAR 98 $32.50
US 1903 Springfield $50
Italian Carcano 1891/38 short rifle $17.50 (LHO special)
Russian Mosin-Nagant 91/30 $12.50
British Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk. 1 $25

The Carcano was not the cheapest of the available military surplus rifles.

Having familiarity with all the above types, I would theorize that LHO specifically picked the Carcano for his nefarious plans because it was accurate, small, and easy to conceal - by far the easiest to conceal of the above group of rifles.
Feline videophiles Condoleezza and Dukie.


#3 of 4 OFFLINE   David Von Pein

David Von Pein

    Producer



  • 5,736 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002

Posted June 22 2009 - 10:17 AM

That's quite possible, but I'm not sure that Oswald knew for certain he'd even be getting a "Mannlicher-Carcano" when he sent a coupon from this ad to Klein's in Chicago. The ad doesn't specifically say "Carcano". It says "6.5 Italian Carbine".

But, since I'm not an expert on firearms in any way, shape, or form....perhaps I'm in no position to say that Oswald possibly didn't know what brand name of rifle he would be receiving, since it's possible (for all I know) that "6.5 Italian Carbine" must mean "Carcano".

But does it?

Did Italy produce 6.5 carbines that were not "Carcanos" specifically?

~shrug~

One thing we do know for sure, though....Klein's didn't ship Oswald the exact rifle he ordered. Oswald ordered a 36-inch weapon, and received a 40.2-inch model Carcano.

My guess is, however, that Oswald never noticed the difference. But the conspiracy theorists love to make a huge mountain out of that 36-inch vs. 40-inch molehill.

But another guess I have is this -- It couldn't be more common for firms like Klein's Sporting Goods Co. of Chicago to substitute a slightly-different product on occasion during mail-order transactions.

It's quite possible that Klein's didn't even realize that they had shipped Oswald a 40-inch model rifle instead of a 36-inch variety. Mistakes happen....all the time. And I doubt that Klein's Sporting Goods, circa 1963, was immune to making one.

#4 of 4 OFFLINE   David Von Pein

David Von Pein

    Producer



  • 5,736 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002

Posted July 10 2009 - 09:46 PM


www.Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users