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 Historical content remains viewable.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

Re: JFK'S HEAD WOUNDS (AGAIN)....AND SOME AMAZON.COM TALK

8 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 16, 2009, 3:52:52 AM3/16/09
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/1cbfdef1d81df4c7


>>> "Well, after I replied to you earlier, I became curious regarding any reviews that were written for [William] Law's book ["In The Eye Of History: Disclosures In The JFK Assassination Medical Evidence" (c.2004)]. Holy cow--I wonder if your review is longer than his book?" <<<


I really wouldn't know. I never read the book. I never purchased it,
and never will.

Many of my pre-2007 JFK-related Amazon reviews are merely excuses to
plop down a lot of my general anti-conspiracy thoughts and essays
about the JFK assassination.

Yes, that's unethical, I know. But I really feel that this particular
subject (the JFK assassination) could use some "general" anti-
conspiracy balance (and basic common sense) in the reviews posted at a
place like Amazon, which features reviews that heavily favor (in
general) the pro-conspiracy stance when it comes to the way JFK died
in 1963. And that's really a shame, too....especially considering the
average "star" ratings that some of the outright crap has received at
Amazon.*

* = Here are just a few examples (for the record):

1.) James H. Fetzer's 2003 book of 100% fantasy and dreck, "The Great
Zapruder Film Hoax: Deceit And Deception In The Death Of JFK", has
garnered an average Amazon rating of "3 Stars" (on a 5-Star rating
scale), as of this writing on 3/16/09. And that's absolutely beyond
belief, considering the laughable content contained within Prof.
Fetzer's 480 pages of sheer "Hoax" idiocy.

www.amazon.com/dp/081269547X

www.amazon.com/DVP/review/R229R23VW1NJF7

And, no, I've never laid eyes on any of Fetzer's ridiculous books,
including "Hoax". But my "review" linked above is 100% accurate just
the same. YMMV.

2.) Joan Mellen's pile of Garrison-loving excrement, "A Farewell To
Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK's Assassination, And The Case That Should
Have Changed History", has earned an average rating at Amazon that's
far too high -- "3.5 Stars".

How anyone could have enough guts (in 2005!) to write a 608-page book
that attempts to prop up a fraud like Jim Garrison just defies all
logic and common sense (and defies all belief). But, I guess there was
still a little cash to be squeezed out of the man who ruined Clay
Shaw's life in 1969. So, Joan decided to squeeze. Pathetic.

No, I've never touched Mellen's book. Only a torture chamber, with a
deranged Vincent Price as the torturer, could induce me to read a
single word of that publication.

www.amazon.com/dp/1597970484

www.amazon.com/review/RPDTG2NUIPS7C

3.) David Lifton's "Best Evidence: Disguise And Deception In The
Assassination Of John F. Kennedy" (1980) has gotten an average of "4
Stars" from its 42 Amazon reviewers (to date), which is outrageous, of
course, given the foolish and impossible theory espoused within that
747-page volume.

Incredibly, though, even in the 21st century, Lifton's book of
nonsense is still attracting several 4-Star and 5-Star reviews.
Amazingly silly indeed.

"Best Evidence" is one of the few pro-conspiracy books I've actually
read, so I've got two reviews for it at Amazon currently.

www.amazon.com/dp/0451175735

www.amazon.com/DVP/review/R1D4Z3F61ZRGWA

www.amazon.com/DVP/review/R1PL73WIQORC62

4.) And possibly the most outlandish example of all -- the DVD for the
absolutely-abominable and vomit-inducing so-called "documentary"
entitled "JFK II: The Bush Connection" has received an average Amazon
rating of "4 Stars", as of March 16, 2009.

That piece of pure trash known as "JFK II" deserves a NEGATIVE star
ranking! It's positively one of the most distasteful, dishonest, and
disgusting hunks of crap I've ever seen.

And, yes, I have indeed seen this pro-conspiracy item (much to my
chagrin). I didn't purchase the DVD, but I saw the whole film a few
years ago via the Internet. I certainly wouldn't have spent a nickel
to buy the DVD, of course.

www.amazon.com/dp/B000AAIUWA


www.amazon.com/DVP/review/R2YL59N142YC2J

AMAZON ADDENDUM:

Since March 2006, I've been archiving all of my JFK essays, articles,
and comments online at the Usenet forums and at my own JFK Blog
(www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com), so that I rarely feel the need to
spread the general "anti-conspiracy" word at Amazon.com anymore.

But, in my (partial) defense here, I certainly know enough about the
evidence in the John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald
murder cases to know one thing for certain -- ALL pro-conspiracy books
are dead-wrong when it comes to their bottom-line conclusions
regarding "conspiracy" and "cover-up" in the death of President
Kennedy.

And the above paragraph is true whether I've read every (or any) pro-
conspiracy book on the subject or not.

YMMV. So be it.

>>> "David, why don't you set aside the BOH wound controversy and focus on the entry location issue (which is easier to settle)...keeping your mind open to the reasoning that, if Fisher et. al. were wrong about the entry, then they could have been wrong about there being no BOH wound." <<<

There's virtually no chance at all that they were wrong about there
being no BOH wound in Kennedy's head. And the X-ray linked below
proves beyond all reasonable doubt that there was no "BOH wound" in
JFK's cranium.

Yes, I know you're sick of seeing me post this X-ray over and over
again. But that's just too bad, because it's an official X-ray of the
President's head that's here, and it's here to stay. And it's an
official "unaltered" X-ray that proves that Mr. John Canal is simply
incorrect. Period. .....


http://reclaiming-history.googlegroups.com/web/011b.+JFK+HEAD+X-RAY?gda=-WSRREYAAAAVlk2Xfx8sVjADRR-uPdeJB-qlpGWEO4PHQ1C68B80F6PlYm89YSDeyQ8tKODzyAoWKo62F5uyu956xNc8ZALZE-Ea7GxYMt0t6nY0uV5FIQ


>>> "You asked me a good question not too long ago--"If the entry was near the EOP, why then is there so much hair/scalp between the red spot and the hair line?" " <<<

John, I'm nearly positive that you've got me mixed up with somebody
else on this forum -- because I cannot recall asking you that question
in the past at all.

It's a good question though....it's just that I don't remember asking
it. Maybe I asked a similar question, and you've re-worded it. Is that
possible? If you can provide a link to my specific post which contains
that inquiry, I'd appreciate it. (Just to satisfy my own curiosity
about it.)

And, as an addendum question (which I'm sure I did ask you in the
past, with your answer being one that was not satisfactory at all, in
my opinion) --- How on Earth can the back of JFK's head (his scalp in
particular) look as pristine and undamaged as it does in the autopsy
photograph below and yet have your own pet theory about a large-ish
BOH wound still be viable and accurate?:


http://reclaiming-history.googlegroups.com/web/011.+JFK+AUTOPSY+PHOTO?gda=pF1Uc0gAAAAVlk2Xfx8sVjADRR-uPdeJB-qlpGWEO4PHQ1C68B80FxZ5oknr4PK9NRubH_RFRg6DH7k_HBP_EtyS7XaNp0ALGjVgdwNi-BwrUzBGT2hOzg


(You really don't need to answer my last question, John. I just felt
like asking it....yet again. Just for my own files/blog....yet
again.) ;)


www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A1FDW1SPYKB354


0 new messages