Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

Marking The 25th Anniversary Of Jean Davison's 1983 Book "OSWALD'S GAME"

4 views

Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,

Apr 11, 2008, 3:55:33 PM4/11/08

This coming November will mark the 25th anniversary of the release of
Jean Davison's outstanding 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME".

In acknowledgment of that approaching quarter-century anniversary, I'd
like to once again say "thank you" to Jean for her exemplary book,
which offers up just about as good a biography on President Kennedy's
assassin as you're likely to find anywhere.

=====================================================

BOOK REVIEW............

"OSWALD'S GAME"

By:

Jean Davison

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

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

www.amazon.com/dp/0393017648

www.amazon.com/DVP/review/R3FTAF6Q657O77

http://i24.ebayimg.com/06/i/000/99/da/0d91_1_b.JPG

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

Anything I've ever seen written by Jean Davison merits high marks on
the "Common Sense" scale when it comes to evaluating the various
aspects of the John F. Kennedy assassination and Lee Harvey Oswald's
obvious involvement in that 1963 crime.

Davison is an expert on Presidential assassin Lee Oswald, and over the
many years since her 1983 book "Oswald's Game" was published, she 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
11/22/63 (as many, many conspiracy promoters believe).

As the pages of this book are turned, it becomes easier and easier to
climb inside the mind of Lee 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 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 in to 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

~~~~~~

"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

~~~~~~

"The assassination attempt against {General Edwin A.} 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 {on September 25,
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

~~~~~~

"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

~~~~~~

"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

~~~~~~

"{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

~~~~~~

"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

~~~~~~

"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.]

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 Kennedy.

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 Davison came out with this absorbing book twenty years after the
President's death.

It's true, of course, that this publication 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

======================================

ADDITIONAL JEAN DAVISON COMMON SENSE:

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bf3ae3c6c0993e13

======================================

YoHarvey

unread,

Apr 11, 2008, 6:42:55 PM4/11/08

As I've often stated on this newsgroup, conspiracy theorists are so
determined to lie and deceive, they do so at the expense of learning
and knowing who LHO was. One can assume perhaps they do indeed know
who Oswald was and what he represents but simply choose to ignore
it.......out of their own character flaws.

tomnln

unread,

Apr 11, 2008, 7:44:17 PM4/11/08

BOTTOM POST;

"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:77cf7172-7965-4f2f...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

Speaking of "Character FLAWS"

SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Walt

unread,

Apr 12, 2008, 12:58:40 PM4/12/08

On 11 Apr, 14:55, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> This coming November will mark the 25th anniversary of the release of
> Jean Davison's outstanding 1983 book "OSWALD'S GAME".
>
> In acknowledgment of that approaching quarter-century anniversary, I'd
> like to once again say "thank you" to Jean for her exemplary book,
> which offers up just about as good a biography on President Kennedy's
> assassin as you're likely to find anywhere.
>
> =====================================================
>
> BOOK REVIEW............
>

> "OSWALD'S GAME"--- It sucks!

> "{At 11:21 AM on Sunday, November 24, ...
>
> read more »

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Apr 13, 2008, 2:49:30 AM4/13/08

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/59e0102e1724be70

www.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=iWn_6iQAAAB6uR1AhfD76mWH5t66thYBmd5BS0ymwkRQOD8OrchCOADc5SNvGDDqiaKnSuIQPsc

JEAN DAVISON SAID:

>>> "Wow, what a nice surprise to come here and read those flattering comments. To David and all who responded...thank you very much. It means a lot to me." <<<

DAVID VON PEIN SAYS BACK:

You're very welcome, Jean....and it's great to see you (online) again.

I'm going to fully copy-&-paste the article below into this "I Love
Jean D." thread (~wink~)....because I believe it deserves to be
repeated occasionally, mainly for the large doses of CS&L (Common
Sense & Logic) that it contains from Jean Davison. This is one of the
articles/essays/posts (whatever you want to call it) that I treasure
the most from my personal collection of Kennedy-related material that
I've archived at my JFK Blog at www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com:

=========================================================

GERALD FORD, ARLEN SPECTER, JEAN DAVISON,
AND THE BEAUTY OF THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY:

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bf3ae3c6c0993e13

=========================================================

WHY DID GERALD FORD "MOVE" ONE OF JOHN KENNEDY'S WOUNDS?

WAS FORD ATTEMPTING TO CLARIFY THINGS? OR WAS HE PART OF SOME MASSIVE
"COVER-UP" (AS MANY CONSPIRACY THEORISTS SEEM TO BELIEVE)?.....

The subject of Warren Commissioner Gerald Ford "moving" the location
of President Kennedy's back wound has come up quite a bit in the wake
of Mr. Ford's death on December 26, 2006; with, of course, the CTers
of the world highlighting how Ford supposedly "moved" the wound for
some conspiratorial or "cover-up" purposes.

But if CTers were to examine the WHOLE record of the JFK back wound
(and the genesis of the Single-Bullet Theory), they'd realize that
Ford's moving of the wound (on paper) actually tends to do the SBT
more HARM than it does good!

I hadn't really realized that fact until just recently....with this
fact coming to the forefront via some JFK Forum postings written by
Jean Davison (the author of the 1983 book "Oswald's Game").

Why does the "Ford Move" do the SBT more harm than good, you ask?

Well, for starters, there's this photo of CE903 (showing Arlen Specter
with a probe/rod being held up for the cameraman to photograph)....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

....We can easily see that the metal rod does not indicate that JFK's
back wound is in the "neck". It's definitely in the upper back; with
an exit point JUST EXACTLY at the tie knot, perfectly matching the
SBT's flight path.

This CE903 evidence is something that I had seen many times before;
but I hadn't really thought about its significance too much. Most
CTers, in their usual "Everything Must Be Faked/Phony" style, scoff at
CE903, claiming it proves the SBT is "impossible", for some
reason....which is obviously a kooky notion, because it proves no such
thing.

In some recent postings at "The Education Forum", Jean Davison was
highlighting the significance of CE903, and reminding everyone who
would listen that the photo that is seen in CE903 actually does,
indeed, visibly show the general path/trajectory of the SBT, just
exactly how Specter (et al) purported it as happening.

And the CE903 photo is also is general agreement (location-wise) with
the autopsy photo showing John F. Kennedy's back wound....

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/sbt/hsca.jpg

To quote Jean herself:

"Both Morningstar and Kurtz claim that the entry wound HAD to be
raised to the "back of the neck" in order to make the Warren
Commission's single bullet theory work. But the assertion isn't
supported, it's simply a claim. Furthermore, the claim is false, since
there was no need to raise the wound into the nape of the neck. Here's
the official WC illustration of the SBT, Commission Exhibit 903:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

"Whether one agrees with it or not, that IS the WC's trajectory
for the single bullet, and as you can see, it doesn't require an entry
in "the back of the neck".

"I respectfully ask that you take another look at this issue. My
question is still, what evidence is there that Ford made his revision
in order to support the SBT?" -- Jean Davison; 12/31/2006

~~~~~~

"To my knowledge, {nobody} has ever explained how moving the
back wound up to THE NECK supports the SBT. Nobody CAN support it,
because moving the entry to the neck would destroy the WC's SBT
trajectory, not strengthen it.

"Again I'll refer you to CE 903. Although Specter didn't drill a
hole in the stand-in's body and drive the rod through it, had he done
so, the entry would be in the upper back, not in the neck. There's a
string on the wall above his hand that shows an angle of about 18
degrees -- that's the approximate angle measured by a surveyor during
the re-enactment and the one the WC used for its SBT. If the rod is
moved up to the neck, the bullet will exit well above the exit wound
under JFK's Adam's apple.

"Or take a look at this photo of JFK:

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/sbt/hsca.jpg

"Try drawing a line of c. 18 degrees backward from the knot in
JFK's tie. Where does it come out? Upper back, right?

"The claim that Ford's change "strengthens" the WC's SBT is
simply not true. If I haven't made my point by now, I give up." --
Jean Davison; 01/02/2007

JEAN'S ORIGINAL 2006-2007 POSTS AT "THE EDUCATION FORUM":
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8861&st=60

~~~~~~

Is it any wonder why I've always loved the woman named "Jean" who
wrote the above common-sense-filled remarks re. Gerald Ford and the
SBT?

Just excellent!

David Von Pein
January 6, 2007

=========================================================

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/252be5dd0610a57b

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c65419db537d4abf

=========================================================

0 new messages