GARY MACK, JAMES DiEUGENIO, AND "INSIDE THE TARGET CAR"
David Von Pein
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14511&st=0&p=169029&#entry169029
J. RAYMOND CARROLL (AT "THE EDUCATION FORUM") SAID:
>>> "There [is nothing] sinister about Dave [Perry] helping Gary Mack to land the Curator's job at the Sixth Floor Museum. Sounds like Dave Perry is a good neighbor." <<<
GARY MACK THEN SAID (VIA AN E-MAIL SENT TO CARROLL):
>>> "Dave Perry had absolutely nothing to do with me gaining the Archivist (now Curator) position at The Sixth Floor Museum. Folks forget that I was one of the original unpaid consultants for the Museum beginning two years or so before it opened in 1989. For the newly-created position I had to make a complete career change and, if I got the job, had to take two years of entry level archival and curatorial training at area universities. [James] DiEugenio’s review – and “facts” - are absurd." <<<
REPEATING GARY MACK'S LAST SIX WORDS (FOR EMPHASIS):
>>> "DiEugenio’s review – and “facts” - are absurd." <<<
DVP NOW SAYS:
I agree, Gary. Very much so.
James DiEugenio has probably spent more time trying to debunk,
undermine, and trash the Discovery Channel's 2008 documentary "JFK:
INSIDE THE TARGET CAR" than it took to produce the program itself.
DiEugenio's oversized 3-part "Target Car" review is completely
meaningless (and I'll explain why in a moment):
www.ctka.net/2009/target_car_jd.html
www.ctka.net/2009/target_car_jd2.html
www.ctka.net/2009/target_car_jd3.html
Regardless of the conspiracy-oriented spin that people like Jim
DiEugenio continuously want to apply to the "Inside The Target Car"
program, it won't change the following bottom-line fact:
The November 2008 "Target Car" documentary achieved one of its
ultimate goals by answering this question --- COULD PRESIDENT KENNEDY
HAVE BEEN SHOT IN THE HEAD FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL?
To repeat what I said earlier this month on this issue:
"The conspiracy nuts/retards act as if Gary Mack ALL BY HIMSELF
is holding the "lone assassin" scenario together with his bare hands.
As if Gary Mack...or ANY single person...needs to do ANYTHING at all
in order to hold together the facts of the JFK assassination...with
those facts being: Lee Harvey Oswald killed two people in Dallas on
11/22/63, and he almost certainly acted alone. (And so did Mr. Ruby.)
"Gary Mack could retire tomorrow and the "LN" scenario wouldn't
crumble to bits. How could it? It's built on a bedrock of facts --
facts that Gary Mack HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH.
"As for the "JFK: Inside The Target Car" program -- it served
its main purpose very well (despite Mr. DiEugenio's and Ms. [Milicent]
Cranor's seemingly-endless efforts to rip the program to pieces with a
million meaningless words of criticism).
"And that "main purpose" was to try and find out (via actual
tests with various types of rifles) if President Kennedy could have
been shot in the head with a gunshot that came from the FRONT of his
automobile.
"And the answer to that question is a firm and undeniable "No",
the President could not possibly have been shot in the head with a
rifle bullet that came from anywhere in FRONT of his car.
"As the "Target Car" program amply demonstrated via actual
tests, if a frontal shot had hit JFK in the head, his head would have
probably either been completely blown off of his neck or would have
resulted in obvious damage to the LEFT side of his head (if a lower-
powered rifle like Oswald's Carcano had been used by a frontal
gunman). ....
"The remainder of the "Target Car" program, other than the two
"From The Knoll" tests, is not very important at all (in my opinion),
because once it can be established that President Kennedy COULD NOT
have been shot in the head from the FRONT (which is a fact that was
definitely established, very firmly, in the "Target Car" program),
then the math concerning the fatal head shot becomes pretty simple to
perform....even for hardline conspiracy theorists. ....
"A secondary "purpose" that was accomplished during
the...documentary was to see if Oswald's 6th-Floor gunshot to JFK's
head could be duplicated within a reasonable degree of accuracy. And
it was. ....
"But I'm sure that the conspiracy kooks of Planet Earth will
continue to cry "FOUL" when examining every single test that has ever
been done in trying to simulate the wounds of President Kennedy,
including all of the Discovery Channel specials...[which all favor]
the likelihood of a single assassin named Lee Oswald being able to
perform his wicked deed of murder in 1963." -- DVP; June 22, 2009
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8217880bc4f4e937
==========================================
RELATED LINKS:
"JFK: INSIDE THE TARGET CAR":
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/24ba8fc851da4e27
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/701242d562279b80
"JFK: BEYOND THE MAGIC BULLET":
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/69758897e673c5a2
JAMES DiEUGENIO VS. VINCENT BUGLIOSI (AND DVP):
www.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/4de239e56e02f210
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/10311d20ec887eac
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/089724b74596fdd1
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f40f7c3d2563783f
==========================================
aeffects
> http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14511&st=0&p=16...
>
> J. RAYMOND CARROLL (AT "THE EDUCATION FORUM") SAID:
>
> >>> "There [is nothing] sinister about Dave [Perry] helping Gary Mack to land the Curator's job at the Sixth Floor Museum. Sounds like Dave Perry is a good neighbor." <<<
>
> GARY MACK THEN SAID (VIA AN E-MAIL SENT TO CARROLL):
>
> >>> "Dave Perry had absolutely nothing to do with me gaining the Archivist (now Curator) position at The Sixth Floor Museum. Folks forget that I was one of the original unpaid consultants for the Museum beginning two years or so before it opened in 1989. For the newly-created position I had to make a complete career change and, if I got the job, had to take two years of entry level archival and curatorial training at area universities. [James] DiEugenio’s review – and “facts” - are absurd." <<<
>
> REPEATING GARY MACK'S LAST SIX WORDS (FOR EMPHASIS):
>
> >>> "DiEugenio’s review – and “facts” - are absurd." <<<
>
> DVP NOW SAYS:
>
> I agree, Gary. Very much so.
oh shithead, you'd crawl in bed with Satan to get another review out
to support Vin Bugliosi's publishing disaster... who the hell are you
trying to kid? You're simply using Gary AND Gary's bandwagon here...
( Jim D. beat the snot out of your icon Bugliosi regarding his boat
anchor called Reclaiming History) Facts being what they are, I don't
believe Vin Bugliosi would dare debate case facts, would he shithead?
Every where you turn your meeting LN/WCR/SBT/LHO resistance. What's
the matter, the charade continues to crumble? LMFAO
<snip the repeat DVP aka Dave Reitzes bullshit>
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/29faf3895ef6ca77
Hey, look at that! Mr. Crackpipe (that's David G. Healy, of course)
actually wrote a post without the words "No free advertising,
shithead" in it.
Somebody give Dave a snickerdoodle!
>>> "Jim [DiEugenio] beat the snot out of your icon Bugliosi regarding his boat anchor called Reclaiming History." <<<
Maybe you'd better re-think that position, Dave. Jim didn't beat the
snot out of anybody. In fact, some of DiEugenio's beliefs about the
assassination are mind-bogglingly stupid (and just plain dead-wrong).
Here's what I mean:
www.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/4de239e56e02f210
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/10311d20ec887eac
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/089724b74596fdd1
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f40f7c3d2563783f
>>> "Facts being what they are, I don't believe Vin Bugliosi would dare debate case facts, would he shithead?" <<<
He's already done the "debating"....within the 2,700+ pages of
"Reclaiming History". (Shithead.)
And he's debated the facts of the case with some conspiracy theorists
in many of his 2007 radio and TV appearances too, shithead:
www.YouTube.com/view_play_list?p=C1BE7E1B8F16F8C2
>>> "Everywhere you turn[,] your [sic] meeting LN/WCR/SBT/LHO resistance. What's the matter, the charade continues to crumble?" <<<
Mr. Shithead (er...Healy) thinks that the rock-solid "LN" case against
Lee Harvey Oswald is in dire straits and is "crumbling" before our
very eyes. [LOL intermission.]
And Healy probably believes that the lone-assassin truth is
"crumbling" to bits because of ridiculous reviews that have been
written for "Inside The Target Car" and Mr. Bugliosi's "Reclaiming
History" by the likes of Jim DiEugenio (and others).
Think again, Mister Crackpipe. Think again. (If that's possible with
the rusty equipment on your shoulders.)
I think that Louis Nizer put it very nicely during a spirited debate
with Mark Lane in 1967 when he said (paraphrasing) that Lane and other
conspiracy theorists were attempting to knock down a solid marble
structure (i.e., the Warren Report) by beating against its foundation
with a teeny-tiny hammer.
It seems as though the conspiracy kooks of the world don't care that
the marble structure is standing as erect as it ever was -- despite
the pathetic and meager attempts of conspiracists to make it tumble.
www.YouTube.com/watch?v=ra017WxoYFg&feature=PlayList&p=17171C7C9C68172A
aeffects
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/29faf3895ef6ca77
>
> Hey, look at that! Mr. Crackpipe (that's David G. Healy, of course)
> actually wrote a post without the words "No free advertising,
> shithead" in it.
shithead, I expect nothing less from a old fart still living with Mom,
not to mention, a blithering coward......
and... no free advertising, shithead"
<snip the nutter-troll nonsense>
David Von Pein
Thanks for not letting me down, Mr. Crackpipe. I knew a "no free
advertising" hunk of silliness would be coming from your Kook Keyboard
very shortly.
And thanks for the "free advertising" over at The Education Forum too.
I appreciate this plug:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14511&view=findpost&p=169054
aeffects
...
> I think that Louis Nizer put it very nicely during a spirited debate
> with Mark Lane in 1967 when he said (paraphrasing) that Lane and other
> conspiracy theorists were attempting to knock down a solid marble
> structure (i.e., the Warren Report) by beating against its foundation
> with a teeny-tiny hammer.
>...
before I forget....
THAT is the BEST YOU can do? Your not only a wannabe writer (who can't
find a contract)....a teeny-timy hammer? LMFAO
Yet you STILL can't close the 45 year old LN/SBT/LHO did it all by his
lonesome deal? What kind of incompetents do you have on your side?
That's right, the latest entree: Vin Bugliosi and multi-million
dollar, 20 year book deal (book publishings worst ever printing
debacle) so 45 years and still no BEEF - gotta be the fish, eh?!
aeffects
so shithead, listen up.... when I speak, you run so remember your
place shithead, you need me, I do not need you!
lazu...@webtv.net
David Von Pein
"PAM" SAID:
>>> "The very expensive dummy head in the ITTC ["Inside The Target Car"] tests sat on a neck that did not move. This alone renders any actual conclusions invalid, as there is no way to duplicate the head movement of the fatal shot." <<<
DVP SAYS:
Excuses, excuses. That's what CTers are made of--excuses.
"Pam" must think that if the dummy heads had been affixed to a
"spring"-like neck device, it would have made Yardley's two "From The
Knoll" shots interact totally differently with the dummy heads. Is
that it, "Pam"?
Does "Pam" think that Yardley's "From The Knoll" test bullets (one
from a Winchester rifle; the other from a Mannlicher-Carcano similar
to Oswald's) would NOT have either blown the head of the dummy off its
simulated neck (which the Winchester bullet accomplished) or cause
damage to the left side of the dummy head (which the Carcano bullet
did) if the heads had been situated on more true-to-life "necks"?
In short -- the conspiracy theorists who continue to want to paint the
"Target Car" program as being totally worthless are looking very, very
foolish in their efforts to do so.
Because regardless of the mistakes made in the program (Jackie's
positioning in the car for one), the BOTTOM LINE is crystal clear and
undeniable, despite the paper-thin protests of conspiracy theorists --
and that bottom line is:
A gunshot hitting President Kennedy in the head from a position in
FRONT of JFK's limousine would have caused damage to the LEFT side of
Kennedy's head. And since the President did not suffer any damage to
the LEFT side of his head (or brain)....just do the simple math from
there.
Conspiracy-happy kooks, unfortunately, always manage to score an "F"
when taking this easy "Where Did The Head Shot Come From?" exam. And
I haven't even yet added in the irrevocable "One Shot Hit JFK In The
Head From Behind" autopsy results and the autopsy photographs.
When the autopsy report and the pictures are ADDED to the "Target Car"
head-shot simulations, it then becomes fairly obvious that it's time
for the disgruntled clowns in the CT camp to give up the idea that JFK
was hit in the head by a make-believe Grassy Knoll gunman.
aeffects
shithead you're assuming AGAIN.... Bad, BAD habit of yours! Hell,
shithead, you can't even get Rosemary (VinnieB.'s ghost secretary) to
post here..... ya simply cant deliver shithead, all nutter-trools have
the same problemo....
And btw, no fucking advertising, shithead!
aeffects
> Subject: More Nonsense From Jim DiEugenio On "Black Op Radio"
> Date: 7/3/2009 1:35:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time
> From: David Von Pein
> To: Gary Mack
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> I just felt like writing to you today to give you my support with
> regard to the 2008 Discovery Channel program that you were a part of,
ah David, nice to see you bending over and grabbing both ankles....
you should be ashamed, what is Rosemary going to say?
<snip the nutter-troll nonsense AND the dumb-shit advertising>
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/2a06fb95cf172309
Subject: More Nonsense From Jim DiEugenio On "Black Op Radio"
Date: 7/3/2009 1:35:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Gary Mack
---------------------------------
Hi Gary,
I just felt like writing to you today to give you my support with
regard to the 2008 Discovery Channel program that you were a part of,
"JFK: Inside The Target Car", which is a documentary, despite a few
errors, that served its purpose very nicely (i.e., it demonstrated,
via actual rifle tests, the direction from which the fatal head shot
to President Kennedy must have come -- FROM BEHIND).
I've enjoyed reading some of the e-mails that you've been sending to
various people in the last several days concerning "Inside The Target
Car" (which have then been formatted into Internet messages),
including the following very good excerpt culled from one such e-mail
message:
"During production of 'JFK: Inside the Target Car' a year ago, I
told the producer that the conspiracy buffs will either love me or
hate me depending solely on what the tests revealed. Since the results
proved the fatal shot came from behind and that JFK was not hit from
the front, the buffs have resorted to trying to discredit me since
they cannot criticize the science behind the experiment. Perhaps they
expected me to phony the results? Such crazy rantings demonstrate to
me who the nuts are, making it easy to differentiate between real
researchers and everyone else." -- Gary Mack
===============
I also wanted to remind you (in case you didn't know) that conspiracy
theorist James DiEugenio was once again spouting his usual anti-Gary
Mack and anti-"Target Car" nonsense on Len Osanic's "Black Op Radio"
laughfest on July 2, 2009 [links below].
www.blackopradio.com/black430b.ram
www.blackopradio.com/black430c.ram
Near the end of the 7/2/09 Black Op program (as DiEugenio was winding
down his interminably lengthy and meaningless critique of the "Inside
The Target Car" program), DiEugenio issued a challenge to four people
with whom Jim said he would like to have a debate about the "Target
Car" documentary [and Jim also said he would debate any of these four
"LNers" with respect to any of the material that DiEugenio has written
in his multi-part review of Vince Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming
History"].
The four people Jim challenged are: John McAdams, Dave Reitzes, Gary
Mack, and David Von Pein (that's me, even though host Len Osanic and
DiEugenio seem to think that Reitzes and I are the very same person;
and according to Osanic's comments on July 2nd, I guess I'm supposedly
John McAdams in disguise too!; that type of "alias" silliness never
seems to end either).
As far as my own opinions about the "Target Car" program, I've pretty
much laid out all of my thoughts in print form, at the four Internet
articles linked below:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/701242d562279b80
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8217880bc4f4e937
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/357ca6b5ac159dba
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/60526b2684b200ba
And Mr. DiEugenio is beyond all mental help if he thinks he can debunk
and undercut the logic (and truth) that resides in this excerpt from
one of the above-linked Internet posts:
===============
As far as appearing as a guest on "Black Op Radio" in order to
"debate" James DiEugenio's ridiculous and subjective (and flat-out
loony) thoughts concerning the "Target Car" show [and Jim's nitpicking
points regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book], I doubt the day will ever
come when I'll actually have a desire to enter Mr. Osanic's playhouse
of conspiracy-oriented silliness known as "Black Op Radio".
Mr. DiEugenio, however, seems to consider the Black Op "pigpen" his
home away from home.*
* = I put "pigpen" in quotes there, because Jim D. called John
McAdams' alt.assassination.jfk Internet newsgroup a "pigpen" on
multiple occasions during the latter portions of his lengthy "Black Op
Radio" appearance on July 2nd. So, I was merely reciprocating.
Evidently, according to Jim D., the "only place" that lone-assassin
believers such as myself and Prof. McAdams and David A. Reitzes can go
to promote our common-sense thoughts about Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt
is to the "pigpen" that McAdams moderates at alt.assassination.jfk.
I guess DiEugenio doesn't realize that Mr. Reitzes and I (and probably
Mr. McAdams too) have posted at several other JFK fora around the
Internet over the years too.
I was a member of Debra Conway's JFK-Lancer forum for several years,
up until July 28, 2005, which was the date when my posting privileges
were suspended due to the fact that Ms. Conway got tired of having TWO
different "LNers" posting a lot of lone-assassin facts on her forum at
the same time.**
** = Another lone-gunman believer had joined the forum just 11 days
earlier and began posting a lot too. This became too much common sense
for the conspiracy kooks at Lancer to bear, so we both got kicked out
the Lancer door on the same day.
I've found that such restrictive anti-"LN" actions are commonplace
around the Internet. In other words -- the conspiracy theorists want
the whole field to themselves, and to hell with common sense and the
actual EVIDENCE and the RAW FACTS of Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt.
With respect to debating Mr. DiEugenio on the subject of Vincent
Bugliosi's book, that is something that I've already done (to a large
extent) right here on the Internet during the last ten months, via a
series of lengthy "Battling DiEugenio" posts that took me many, many
hours to compose (plus a 6-part audio/video series I put together that
amply destroys several of Mr. DiEugenio's absurd notions concerning
the JFK assassination):
JAMES DiEUGENIO VS. VINCENT BUGLIOSI (AND DVP):
www.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/4de239e56e02f210
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/10311d20ec887eac
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fb486bcbb592bacf
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/089724b74596fdd1
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f40f7c3d2563783f
======================
A couple of other things:
An additional hilarious (and stupendously silly) comment made by James
DiEugenio on the 7/2/09 Black Op show was this one:
"If I ever met Hugh Aynesworth, I'd probably spit in his face.
[He's] been dedicated to the [JFK assassination] cover-up from the day
it happened."
That's hilarious, Jim. Hilarious.
DiEugenio also referred to Oswald's 19-year-old Book Depository co-
worker, Buell Wesley Frazier, as a "suspicious character" during the
July 2 Black Op program.
That's the kind of paranoid conspiracy theorist Mr. DiEugenio seems to
be. Unbelievable.
Anyway, I just wanted to write to you and talk about the latest round
of horse manure that surfaced on Osanic's conspiracy-laden radio show
this week.
And a friendly piece of advice -- If you decide to take DiEugenio up
on his "debate" offer, please don't forget to wear your wading boots
and your gas mask -- because the bullshit that's dished out on "Black
Op Radio" every week is at least a mile deep....and not exactly
pleasant to sniff.
Best regards,
David Von Pein
www.ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com
==========================================
Subject: RE: More Nonsense From Jim DiEugenio On "Black Op Radio"
Date: 7/4/2009 8:37:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: Gary Mack
To: David Von Pein
---------------------------------
Dave,
Thanks for your thoughts. The show's ["JFK: Inside The Target Car"]
premise was quite simple: bullet goes in, matter comes out. We
weren't trying to disprove anything. We merely tested the official
story and the most likely second gunman theory. The results spoke
eloquently. As I mentioned in the show, IF there was a second gunman,
he missed. There may still have been a conspiracy, but the man who
killed President Kennedy fired from the TSBD window. Those who
disagree are free to perform as many scientifically valid tests as
their minds can envision.
As for why the test shots weren't fired in Dealey Plaza, there was no
reason to do so. Such actions would be dangerous, pure exploitation
and probably against the law, since the Plaza is a city park and a
National Historic Landmark.
To minimize the horrific aspect of the test, we decided to have the
brain matter and blood changed to unnatural colors; we also asked to
have faces essentially featureless. I got JFK's hat size from the
Kennedy Library and our Aussie scientists did the rest.
Michael Yardley's ammunition came from a collector who had Carcano
rounds from the same lot as Oswald's, and his rifle was very close to
the one Oswald bought from Klein's. The TSBD distance, angle and
elevation are well known, as is the Love Field weather bureau
information I supplied for the wind speed and gusts recorded at
12:30pm just a few miles north of Dealey Plaza. As a final check, I
referred to the Muchmore film of the head shot, which shows Hill's and
Moorman's coats blowing parallel to the limousine. That visual
confirmation matched the weather bureau's records.
You may also wish to review the comments I made on the Discovery
Channel's website (which have since been removed):
Q&A with Gary Mack
November 17, 2008
JFK assassination expert, Gary Mack, served as a consultant for the
Discovery show, "JFK: Inside the Target Car." Producer Tracy Staedter
asked Gary five questions about his experience with the assassination
and the making of the show.
1. The investigators involved with "JFK: Inside the Target Car"
approached this decades' old controversy with an arsenal of experts,
science and technology. What did they bring to the table that, in your
30-plus years of experience, you hadn't seen before?
GARY: The study offered the ability to examine the assassination in a
new way, one that had never been done before. If we accurately
recreated the physical aspects of the fatal shot to Kennedy’s head, we
could observe whether the bullet’s effects match what appears in the
Zapruder home movie of the shooting.
2. What was your favorite part of this experience?
GARY: The recreations in Dealey Plaza where the assassination actually
happened, and those at a California gun range for our test shots. In
Dallas we had actors assuming the approximate positions of those in
the presidential limousine. With Kennedy, however, we had to place our
actor in the exact posture for both a suspected grassy knoll shot by a
second gunman and the window shot from the former Texas School Book
Depository.
3. Given the modern day approach to this answering the controversial
question, did you think that the investigators might find something
new? Why or why not?
GARY: We had no idea what would happen and that’s what made the
experience quite an adventure. We set up our targets and shooters as
accurately as possible and stepped back to see and report on the
results. We hoped our tests would be conclusive one way or another;
the worst result, of course, would have been for the studies to have
been inconclusive and, therefore, would not contribute to today’s
knowledge of what really happened.
4. Even though the Discovery investigators used a slew of advanced
technology and science, they still came up with the same results as
the Warren Commission. What, in your opinion, does that say about the
Warren Commission's tools as investigators?
GARY: The Warren Commission relied primarily upon trained FBI, Secret
Service, Dallas Police and other investigators. Despite popular
opinion and numerous revelations over the years of unanswered
questions and unfollowed leads, no hard, unquestioned, evidence has
surfaced showing anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald killed President
Kennedy. It is fair to question, however, if he was working with
others or whether he was the one firing. No test could answer those
questions, of course.
5. Do you think that using more sophisticated techniques to draw
essentially the same conclusion as the Warren Commission was a wasted
use of technology? Why or why not?
GARY: Public opinion surveys have shown, starting that weekend in
1963, that most people do not believe only one man was responsible for
the death of a president. What’s obvious in hindsight now is that
government apparently believed most would accept the findings and move
on to other concerns. That didn’t happen, so others, both private
citizens and a second government investigation in the late 70s, delved
further into the assassination. The result has been a blur of
conflicting theories and opinions over the years that may or may not
have any basis in fact. Oliver Stone’s “JFK” film popularized the
“back and to the left” observation of the shooting that seemed to
prove a second gunman fired from the front. Our test examined what
crime scene investigators would have done in 1963 had they had been
able to study the car before it’s evidence was disturbed. We also had
the new ability to recreate a human head and fire actual bullets at it
to observe the results. There could be no such study, and this program
could not have been made, without high technology being able to
duplicate the mass and density of a human head. We may have
demonstrated a new way to analyze crime scenes and thus give law
enforcement one very effective new tool!
Gary Mack Answers Blog Comments
November 21, 2008
Gary Mack, curator at The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, was
asked by the producers to oversee the production and content of the
Discovery Channel show, "JFK: Inside the Target Car." We asked for his
personal comments about the program and answers to some of the
questions following the premier broadcast. For brevity, the questions
have been reworded.
Q: Why didn’t your test include Kennedy being knocked back and to the
left as seen in the film?
A: That movement, which is so obvious in the Zapruder film, was a
separate response. We only tested the initial effect of the bullet
striking the skull and where the blood spatter went. For test-to-test
consistency, it was important to have the heads mounted in the exact
same position each time, so we mounted them on a rigid platform.
Q: I noticed that Jackie Kennedy was not in the right position with
regard to Kennedy in your Dealey Plaza test.
A: She wasn’t and we didn’t catch it at the time. At the moment of the
fatal shot, Jackie’s head was in front of JFK, whereas our actor’s
head was behind him. However, that error had no bearing on the purpose
of the recreation in Dallas. The only actor who needed to be seated
correctly was JFK, and he was perfectly placed. After all, we were
only trying to show whether or not a sharpshooter could see his target
-- Kennedy -- from the various locations.
Q: You said you had four target skulls, but I only saw three of them
being shot. What happened to the missing target?
A: The “cutting room floor,” as they say, removed for time and clarity
by Discovery. Their decision was reasonable, as there wasn’t enough
time to include everything. The show’s producers and I very much
wanted the scene to be shown; for that reason, it will be included in
the DVD release of the show. But you can also see it below, as posted
to YouTube or you click the hyperlink to see it on the Discovery
Channel News site. For that shot, fired from behind, Michael missed
the spot on the skull slightly, resulting in damage on the right side
of the skull. Nevertheless, the blood spray pattern was very similar
to the second attempt from our Depository window.
The fourth target skull didn't show up in the televised show. But you
can see it here: (removed)
Want even more video? Click here: (removed)
Q: So what happened to the bullets you fired? Were they examined after
the shots?
A: Michael Yardley fired four times, but only one bullet was
recovered. One bullet, of course, fragmented as it was designed to do.
Two of the other three were never found. The two bullets fired from
behind went through the target and continued through the mock
limousine and struck the ground. One went off down the gun range and
the other lodged under the tire of the wind machine. It was
significantly deformed, but that could have happened when it struck
the ground first.
Q: So the bullets that hit the head did not fragment like Oswald’s
did?
A: No, and that was quite a surprise. Carcano bullets are military,
metal jacketed bullets designed not to fragment upon impact. Oswald’s
did, but ours did not. We do not know why that happened.
Q: Why did you choose such odd colors for the brain interior?
A: We did not want to use red, since that would have been rather gross
to watch. And we couldn’t use a clear liquid since that wouldn’t show
up on camera. For best visibility on television, we used bold colors
that were easy to see. The HD version of the show has clearer images
than the regular TV version.
Q: Why did you use a Mannlicher Carcano rifle for the grassy knoll
shot? Wouldn’t a gunman there use something smaller or less noisy?
A: As mentioned by our narrator, we could have used almost anything,
since we were dealing with a hypothetical situation. We decided on an
identical rifle to Oswald’s because, if he had been framed for the
assassination (Oswald claimed he was “a patsy”), it seems likely that
another gunman would use the same ammunition. If a different weapon
were used, investigators would find that evidence and conclude there
were two guns. A conspiracy to frame Oswald would want investigators
to think there was only one gun.
Q: How do you really know the wind was blowing straight at the car? I
know you referenced the weather bureau data, but maybe the wind gusts
came at an angle?
A: A home movie by Marie Muchmore, taken from the other side of the
street from Zapruder, shows the moment of the fatal head shot.
Eyewitness Jean Hill appears near the limousine and her coat is blown
directly to her right, thus indicating the precise direction of the
wind at that moment in time.
Q: I noticed that your depository shot severely damaged the top right
of the target skull, but that’s not what happened to Kennedy. Why the
difference?
A: Although our test shot struck very, very close to the actual
bullet entry hole, no such test can be absolutely exact. What’s more
important is the effect of the bullet and whether or not the blood
spatter matches the film of the actual shooting or not.
Q: Why did you ignore the "magic bullet theory" that Kennedy and
Connally were both wounded by one bullet?
A: We tackled that theory in the third of four Unsolved History
programs for the Discovery Channel. In that program, Beyond the Magic
Bullet, the producers concluded that the "magic bullet" was possible,
though the results may not have been as conclusive as the test in
"JFK: Inside the Target Car."
Best regards,
Gary Mack
==========================================
Subject: Re: More Nonsense From Jim DiEugenio On "Black Op Radio"
Date: 7/5/2009 3:38:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: David Von Pein
To: Gary Mack
---------------------------------
Hi again Gary,
Thank you for your very (very) detailed return e-mail regarding the
"Inside The Target Car" program. There's a lot of good and informative
stuff in that Q&A.
I'm sure that the hardline conspiracy theorists, however, have already
claimed that all of your answers are "not good enough", but that's to
be expected from people who desperately want a conspiracy (and a
Grassy Knoll gunman) in the JFK case.
Thanks again.
Regards,
David Von Pein
==========================================
aeffects
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/2a06f...
>
> Subject: More Nonsense From Jim DiEugenio On "Black Op Radio"
> Date: 7/3/2009 1:35:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time
> From: David Von Pein
> To: Gary Mack
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> Hi Gary,
>
> I just felt like writing to you today to give you my support with
> regard to the 2008 Discovery Channel program that you were a part of,
> "JFK: Inside The Target Car", which is a documentary, despite a few
ah David, nice to see you bending over and grabbing both ankles....
pjspeare
are real problems with the show. I deal with many of them here:
http://www.patspeer.com/chapter16c%3Aconfirmationanddisappointment
Any explanations offered up by Gary will be added to the chapter. He's
written me in the past, but has failed to do so since my addition of
this chapter. I wonder why.
On Jul 5, 2:03 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/2a06f...
>
> JAMES DiEUGENIO VS. VINCENT BUGLIOSI (AND DVP):www.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/4de239e5...www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/10311d20ec887eacwww.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fb486bcbb592bacfwww.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/089724b74596fdd1www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f40f7c3d2563783f