"Reclaiming History" Book Review (Updated...Again)(With Additional Hunks Of Common Sense Added)
David Von Pein
BOOK REVIEW..........
"RECLAIMING HISTORY:
THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY"
by
Vincent Bugliosi
(2007)
===========================================
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
===========================================
Among the 'common sense' added to my updated "RH" review is this
passage I tacked on to "Part 1" of the review in December 2007:
VB WROTE:
"The single most important discovery, and one that establishes
with absolute and irrefutable certainty that the autopsy photographs
have not been altered, is the fact that many of the photographs, when
combined in pairs, produce stereoscopic images. ....
"The only way a forger can successfully alter a detailed
stereoscopic image...without detection is to alter both images
IDENTICALLY, which is, {photographic expert and HSCA panel member
Frank} Scott said, "essentially impossible." ....
"The entire photographic panel of the HSCA concluded that "the
autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the
time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner."
This fact alone demolishes the conspiracy theorists' allegations that
photographic fakery was used to conceal the plot to kill the
president.
"It also destroys another prime conspiracy belief--that the
eyewitness descriptions of the president's wounds that were offered by
the Parkland Hospital doctors (and later by some eyewitnesses to the
autopsy) are proof that the autopsy photographs had been altered.
"Obviously, if the autopsy photographs are genuine and unaltered
(which all the experts agree), then eyewitness descriptions of the
president's wounds that contradict those photographs are not proof of
alteration, as some critics claim, but nothing more than examples of
understandable, mistaken recollections, or if not that, then
deliberate and outright falsehoods." -- VB; Pages 223-224 of Endnotes
~~~~~~~~~
DVP THEN WROTE:
"With respect to President Kennedy's X-rays, I'd like to take a
moment to highlight the autopsy X-ray linked below (which comes
straight from page #112 of Volume VII of the HSCA's supporting volumes
of evidence and exhibits),....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
....which is, as just mentioned above by VB, an X-ray that the HSCA's
photographic panel determined "had not been altered in any manner".
"That X-ray linked above shows the right side of John F.
Kennedy's head during his autopsy at the National Naval Medical Center
in Bethesda, Maryland, on November 22, 1963. And it also shows the
BACK portion of President Kennedy's head to be completely INTACT. The
large "missing" area of skull is all located to the RIGHT FRONT part
of the head, while the entire back part of the skull is STILL THERE!
"There is no large, gaping hole whatsoever to be found at the
back of Kennedy's head via that X-ray, which should probably make a
few conspiracy theorists stop and think, as they ponder the following
question: Could those witnesses at Parkland Hospital have been
mistaken about JFK's head wound after all?
"It's food for thought at any rate. (Certainly based on that
authenticated-as-unaltered X-ray I just linked above.)"
===========================================
aeffects
> BOOK REVIEW..........
>
> "RECLAIMING HISTORY:
> THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY"
>
> by
>
> Vincent Bugliosi
>
> (2007)
[...]
> DVP THEN WROTE:
[...]
as always, quoting himself and or quoting himself-quoting Vinnie....
<yawn>
Gil Jesus
reason why:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/201207Oswald.htm
David Von Pein
Lovely.
CTers should really try to figure out what the odds are of Dr. Guinn's
"2 Bullets Only" NAA-based conclusion being totally WRONG, even based
on 1970s-era data.
IOW -- If there had REALLY been more than just Oswald's 2 bullets in
that mix of 5 bullet specimens examined by Dr. Guinn, what are the
chances that his ultimate conclusion would be that JUST TWO BULLETS
FROM LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S MANNLICHER-CARCANO were in that bullet mix?
It would have been incredible for Guinn to have arrived at such a "2
bullet" conclusion, even via '70s standards for such determinations,
IF many additional bullets (from NON-Carcano) guns had indeed been
involved in the shooting of Kennedy and Connally (which is what most
CTers believe; with some CTers having a "Fireball" pistol being used,
plus a "Mauser", and God knows how many other non-MC guns).
Why CT-Kooks can't understand the above CS&L is anyone's guess.
But it's fairly obvious that conspiracy-loving people are simply
blinded by the "vast conspiracy" that they've convinced themselves
really occurred in Dallas.
Too bad more CTers don't ask more logical questions like this one (re.
NAA specifically):
A Replay......
"If there had REALLY been more than just Oswald's 2 bullets in
that mix of 5 bullet specimens examined by Dr. Guinn, what are the
chances that his ultimate conclusion would be that JUST TWO BULLETS
FROM LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S MANNLICHER-CARCANO were in that bullet mix?
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/36445c7040cec30d
Focusing additional attention on this important X-ray......
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
It boils down to this:
1.) The above X-ray of the right side of President Kennedy's head is a
fake.
Or:
2.) The Parkland witnesses (and the Bethesda "BOH" witnesses) were
wrong about the location of JFK's head wound.
Anybody choosing #1 will, of course, need to get around the many
members of the HSCA Photographic Panel, who all agreed that all of the
autopsy photos AND X-rays that they examined in 1977 and 1978 "had not
been altered in any manner" (7 HSCA 41).
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0026a.htm
The X-ray linked above also reveals another important fact -- i.e.,
even the few cracks and "fracture lines" visible on JFK's skull in
that X-ray (which radiate outward from the large wound on the right-
front of the skull and toward the top and rear of the head) are not at
all consistent with the observations of these "BOH" witnesses:
www.jfklancerforum.com/old_uploads/rear_head_wound_witnesses.jpg
The fracture lines and cracks in the skull that can be seen in the X-
ray do not affect the FAR-RIGHT-REAR portion of JFK's head at all!
There are no cracks or fracture lines visible in that RIGHT-REAR
section of JFK's head at all, which is where the many witnesses say
they saw a huge, gaping blow-out wound in the President's head.
And in many ways, that X-ray is a better piece of physical
(photographic) evidence than are the autopsy pictures taken of the
President.....because the X-ray, in effect, removes the scalp and
let's us see right to the BONE of the skull.
Therefore, upon viewing that X-ray, nobody can make the argument that
some doctor was pulling on a loose piece of scalp in order to cover
additional bony damage to the skull underneath that scalp.
That authenticated-as-"unaltered" X-ray linked above is, IMO,
verifiable physical proof of where the large wound was located in John
Kennedy's head. And it proves that the witnesses who claimed the wound
was at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head were ALL simply mistaken. That X-
ray couldn't make that fact any clearer.
aeffects
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/36445c70...
>
> Focusing additional attention on this important X-ray......
>
>
> It boils down to this:
>
> 1.) The above X-ray of the right side of President Kennedy's head is a
> fake.
>
> Or:
>
> 2.) The Parkland witnesses (and the Bethesda "BOH" witnesses) were
> wrong about the location of JFK's head wound.
>
> Anybody choosing #1 will, of course, need to get around the many
> members of the HSCA Photographic Panel, who all agreed that all of the
> autopsy photos AND X-rays that they examined in 1977 and 1978 "had not
> been altered in any manner" (7 HSCA 41).
>
>
> The X-ray linked above also reveals another important fact -- i.e.,
> even the few cracks and "fracture lines" visible on JFK's skull in
> that X-ray (which radiate outward from the large wound on the right-
> front of the skull and toward the top and rear of the head) are not at
> all consistent with the observations of these "BOH" witnesses:
>
> www.jfklancerforum.com/old_uploads/rear_head_wound_witnesses.jpg
>
> The fracture lines and cracks in the skull that can be seen in the X-
> ray do not affect the FAR-RIGHT-REAR portion of JFK's head at all!
> There are no cracks or fracture lines visible in that RIGHT-REAR
> section of JFK's head at all, which is where the many witnesses say
> they saw a huge, gaping blow-out wound in the President's head.
>
> And in many ways, that X-ray is a better piece of physical
> (photographic) evidence than are the autopsy pictures taken of the
> President.....because the X-ray, in effect, removes the scalp and
> let's us see right to the BONE of the skull.
>
> Therefore, upon viewing that X-ray, nobody can make the argument that
> some doctor was pulling on a loose piece of scalp in order to cover
> additional bony damage to the skull underneath that scalp.
>
> That authenticated-as-"unaltered" X-ray linked above is, IMO,
> verifiable physical proof of where the large wound was located in John
> Kennedy's head. And it proves that the witnesses who claimed the wound
> was at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head were ALL simply mistaken. That X-
> ray couldn't make that fact any clearer.
Dave,
You mean David Mantik MD., Ph.D-Physics doesn't know what he's talking
about? Yea or nay?
btw, nobody give a good fuck about YOUR opinion, Dave....
David Von Pein
If he thinks that the X-rays are all "fakes", then Mantik doesn't know
what he's talking about.
>>> "btw, nobody give{s} a good fuck about YOUR opinion, Dave." <<<
I wonder if they give a good (or even a bad) fuck about yours though?
Hard to imagine anyone being hard up enough for that to occur.
Burly...@gmail.com
Speak for yourself, filthy mouth!
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bud
Healy`s ongoing effort to prove he has donated his brain to illegal
substances. Calls for LN to discuss the evidence of the case, offers
ad hominem and "Mantik told me what I wanted to hear" when an LN does.
Is there a CT who isn`t an idiot with whom the case can be discussed
with?
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/fcd2a4b196c1ac0a
>>> "It is possible that the right-rear scalp (with loose shattered skull pieces still adhered to its underside) was pushed back into its proper position before the lateral x-rays were taken." <<<
Oh, sure....and this skull re-attachment took place with nary a hint
of any cracks or FRACTURE LINES showing up in this X-ray at the FAR-
RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head (which is the place where most of the
witnesses claimed there was a huge, gaping hole):
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
I see ONE curved "fracture line" extending a little bit toward the
right-rear of the head, which is obviously an extension of the longer
fracture line that can be seen at the center-rear portion of the
skull, which radiates, of course, from the only large HOLE in the
skull at all -- i.e., the hole in the right-front of the head.
How did Boswell, et al, manage to fool the X-ray machine and put back
multiple pieces of fractured skull onto JFK's head in such a smooth,
undetectable fashion, without the presence of multiple fracture lines
and cracks that would represent those pieces that were re-inserted
back onto the skull? How would such a thing be even remotely possible
given that linked X-ray?
I don't care what Boswell told the ARRB in '96....he didn't replace
any skull fragments at the back of the head. He must have taken a
couple of "senile" pills before telling the ARRB such a ridiculous
tale. Because the more one gazes upon this X-ray below, the more
obvious it is that JFK had just one good-sized hole in his head....and
it was ONLY at the RIGHT-FRONT of the head. .....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
David Von Pein
>>> "The autopsy x-rays show a skull that is just smashed up into a lot of pieces. It looks more like Kennedy was killed with a sledgehammer than a bullet." <<<
Why in the world would you say that?
The X-ray linked below shows just exactly what is reported in the
autopsy report. Plus it's an X-ray that perfectly conforms with what
we can see happening to JFK's head in the Zapruder Film, i.e., a
large, gaping wound at the RIGHT-FRONT part of the President's head,
with the BACK of his head COMPLETELY INTACT...WITH ALL SKULL STILL
THERE AT THE BACK OF THE HEAD.
This X-ray, which was authenticated and deemed unaltered "in any
manner" by the HSCA in 1978, is very important...because it's an X-ray
picture that proves, ALL BY ITSELF, that the many Parkland witnesses
were just flat-out mistaken when they claimed that President Kennedy
had a gaping hole in the BACK of his head:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0061b.htm
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/be46d0872dbcf3c6
>>> "Then, when David Lifton published his groundbreaking book "Best Evidence," the picture became clearer." <<<
Sure, if you want to actually believe that Kennedy's body could have
been whisked away from Air Force One (without a single non-plotter
noticing) and then taken to Walter Reed, where the bullet wounds were
perfectly re-arranged within a very short time period, in time to get
the body to Bethesda around 8:00 PM for the autopsy....with Humes,
Boswell, and Finck (all of them!) being totally fooled by the re-
arrangement surgery that had just been done in lickety-split fashion
on JFK's cranium.
Lifton's theory is utter nonsense of the first order. And Bugliosi
calls it such in his excellent chapter devoted to debunking Lifton and
his nutty theory within "Reclaiming History".
"One could safely say that David Lifton took folly to an
unprecedented level. And considering the monumental foolishness of his
colleagues in the conspiracy community, that's saying something." --
Vincent T. Bugliosi; Page 1066 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
================
A LIFTON ADDENDUM:
"The coffin was never unattended. Lifton's story is the biggest
pack of malarkey I ever heard in my life. I never had my hands or eyes
off of it during the period he says it was unattended, and when Jackie
got up to go to her stateroom where Lyndon Johnson was, Kenny
O'Donnell went with her, but we stayed right there with the coffin and
never let go of it. In fact several of us were with it through the
whole trip, all the way to Bethesda Naval Hospital. It couldn't have
happened the way that fellow said. Not even thirty seconds. I never
left it." -- David Powers (JFK's longtime friend and aide); June 1987
================
>>> "What I am interested in is: Does "Reclaiming History" address the wounds and the autopsy irregularities or does it just re-state the Warren Commission report like the Posner book did? I don't see any point in reading a lot of stuff about the life of Lee Harvey Oswald if he didn't pull the trigger on the fatal shot." <<<
"Reclaiming History" addresses every single thing about the JFK murder
case that a REASONABLE and SENSIBLE person could possibly need to know
in order to SOLVE THE CASE BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT.
And the final conclusion reached by Vince B. in "RH" is a conclusion
I've agreed with long before VB's brilliant 2007 book was published --
Lee Harvey Oswald, beyond ALL DOUBT, murdered JFK and J.D. Tippit, and
beyond all REASONABLE DOUBT did it alone. Hence, no conspiracy at all.
"In the {John F.} Kennedy case, I believe the absence of a
conspiracy can be proved to a virtual certainty." -- Vincent T.
Bugliosi; Page 973 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
>>> "Based on what is out there now, I'm no longer even sure he {LHO} was even on the 6th floor when the Connolly [sic] shot was fired." <<<
Huh? But you think Oswald might have been there a few seconds earlier
or later during the shooting timeline?
I've never heard this type of theory before. Perhaps you can explain
further.
aeffects
gigo is just that, garbage in - garbage out carry on troop!
aeffects
say toots-e-roll aren't you jecorbett1951 Just*pukes*me1952 younger
brother? Shall we treat you with maximum Lone Nut disdain (not
replying to you and ypour idiotic posts) you're not gay are you?
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
>
>On Dec 22 2007, 9:34 am, BurlyGu...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Dec 22, 3:52 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 21, 7:04 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/36445c70...
>>
>> > > Focusing additional attention on this important X-ray......
>>
>> > >http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA...
>>
>> > > It boils down to this:
>>
>> > > 1.) The above X-ray of the right side of President Kennedy's head is a
>> > > fake.
And BOH photo...
>> > > Or:
>>
>> > > 2.) The Parkland witnesses (and the Bethesda "BOH" witnesses) were
>> > > wrong about the location of JFK's head wound.
>>
>> > > Anybody choosing #1 will, of course, need to get around the many
>> > > members of the HSCA Photographic Panel, who all agreed that all of the
>> > > autopsy photos AND X-rays that they examined in 1977 and 1978 "had not
>> > > been altered in any manner" (7 HSCA 41).
LOL!!! These same members also admitted that they couldn't authenticate the
photos to the camera.
The X-rays "authentication" was faulty as well. Covered in quite some detail,
as I recall, by Livingstone.
Anybody choosing #2 will, of course, have to explain why over 40 medically
trained eyewitnesses, who corroborated each other - somehow confused parietal
with occipital.
>> > >http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA...
>>
>> > > The X-ray linked above also reveals another important fact -- i.e.,
>> > > even the few cracks and "fracture lines" visible on JFK's skull in
>> > > that X-ray (which radiate outward from the large wound on the right-
>> > > front of the skull and toward the top and rear of the head) are not at
>> > > all consistent with the observations of these "BOH" witnesses:
>>
>> > >www.jfklancerforum.com/old_uploads/rear_head_wound_witnesses.jpg
This is, of course, the LNT'ers problem.
That the strongest *LEGAL* proof contradicts the photographic & X-ray.
And because of this fact, they are forced to deny the eyewitness testimony, and
go with the forged photography.
Unless, of course, it's Altgen's #5.
>> > > The fracture lines and cracks in the skull that can be seen in the X-
>> > > ray do not affect the FAR-RIGHT-REAR portion of JFK's head at all!
>> > > There are no cracks or fracture lines visible in that RIGHT-REAR
>> > > section of JFK's head at all, which is where the many witnesses say
>> > > they saw a huge, gaping blow-out wound in the President's head.
Yep... simply unexplainable in non-conspiratorial terms...
>> > > And in many ways, that X-ray is a better piece of physical
>> > > (photographic) evidence than are the autopsy pictures taken of the
>> > > President.....because the X-ray, in effect, removes the scalp and
>> > > let's us see right to the BONE of the skull.
And neither is legally admissible without *EYEWITNESS* testimony. (Legal
citation available upon request ... actually, previously posted a number of
times)
>> > > Therefore, upon viewing that X-ray, nobody can make the argument that
>> > > some doctor was pulling on a loose piece of scalp in order to cover
>> > > additional bony damage to the skull underneath that scalp.
It was never a valid explanation to begin with... for the autopsy noted that
this area was DEVOID of bone and scalp.
This explanation came about from the eyewitnesses themselves, who were trying to
reconcile what they saw with what they thought was an authentic photograph.
>> > > That authenticated-as-"unaltered" X-ray linked above is, IMO,
>> > > verifiable physical proof of where the large wound was located in John
>> > > Kennedy's head.
"Verifiable" by what???
Certainly not the eyewitnesses.
>> > > And it proves that the witnesses who claimed the wound
>> > > was at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head were ALL simply mistaken. That X-
>> > > ray couldn't make that fact any clearer.
Yep... over 40, medically trained eyewitnesses - who corroborate each other, are
all "proven" wrong by a photo that can't pass the stereoscopic 3D test, and an
X-ray that is provably altered with a 'patch' of white that would ordinarily
have proven that JFK had no brains, but was bone from ear to ear.
I think I'll accept that JFK had brains, and that 40 medically trained
eyewitnesses got it right.
DVP can't defend this assertion against the truth.
David Von Pein
>>> "Over 40 medically-trained eyewitnesses, who corroborate each other, are all "proven" wrong by a photo that can't pass the stereoscopic 3D test..." <<<
"The single most important discovery, and one that establishes
with ABSOLUTE AND IRREFUTABLE CERTAINTY that the autopsy photographs
have not been altered, is the fact that many of the photographs, when
combined in pairs, produce stereoscopic images. ....
"The only way a forger can successfully alter a detailed
stereoscopic image...without detection is to alter both images
IDENTICALLY, which is, {photographic expert and HSCA panel member
Frank} Scott said, "essentially impossible." ....
"The entire photographic panel of the HSCA concluded that "the
autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the
time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner."
This fact alone demolishes the conspiracy theorists' allegations that
photographic fakery was used to conceal the plot to kill the
president.
"It also destroys another prime conspiracy belief--that the
eyewitness descriptions of the president's wounds that were offered by
the Parkland Hospital doctors (and later by some eyewitnesses to the
autopsy) are proof that the autopsy photographs had been altered.
"Obviously, if the autopsy photographs are genuine and unaltered
(which all the experts agree), then eyewitness descriptions of the
president's wounds that contradict those photographs are not proof of
alteration, as some critics claim, but nothing more than examples of
understandable, mistaken recollections, or if not that, then
deliberate and outright falsehoods." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages
223-224 of "RH" Endnotes (c.2007)
>>> "DVP can't defend this assertion against the truth." <<<
You're an idiot.
David Von Pein
>>> "David...you admit he {Vincent T. Bugliosi} is totally clueless about the back wound, when he agrees with Baden that it was below the throat wound. When he turns around and embraces that an autopsy photo studied by Baden and the HSCA FPP shows it to be above the throat wound, however, you assert he saw the light, even though this finding is in opposition to the findings of the HSCA and those much more qualified than him to make reach such a conclusion." <<<
Mr. Bugliosi positively goofed on "Reclaiming History" Pages 423 and
424 (regarding the anatomical locations of JFK's upper-back wound in
relation to the throat wound)....and I fully point out this error (in
some depth) in my review of the book near the bottom of the following
webpage:
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
But VB's error (or what I certainly THINK is an error by VB re. that
sub-topic of JFK's back/neck wounds, unless I'm just stupid myself and
unable to figure out the point VB was trying to put across) doesn't
totally TRASH the remainder of the book's LN conclusions, for Pete
sake.
A slight error or a piece of muddled writing doesn't suddenly ERASE
the Mount Everest of evidence which hangs Lee Harvey Oswald as the
only assassin.
I really have no idea what Vince was thinking (and still don't) when
he, seemingly, argues in favor of BOTH a higher AND a lower
"anatomical" back-wound location on JFK's back in relation to the
throat wound. Pages 423 and 424 of "RH" are still a mystery to me (and
I've read them multiple times since receiving the book in May 2007).
As I said in my review, all I can really do is throw up my hands with
respect to those particular pages and shrug my shoulders.
But one thing's for certain (and Bugliosi points it out as a kind of
LAST SALVO on Page 424 after probing the murky craziness of the HSCA's
findings on Pg. 423) -- the two autopsy photos linked below (when
looked at IN TANDEM) indicate that JFK's upper-back wound was
positively and irrevocably located ANATOMICALLY HIGHER than the wound
in John Kennedy's throat. And anyone who studies these two photos who
comes to an opposite conclusion must be living on Mars (or someplace
where "up" = "down" and "higher" = "lower"):
www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/jfk_zeroang.jpg
www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
aeffects
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx1YSP01LF3V5LS/4/ref=cm_cd_et_m...
>
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx1YSP01LF3V5LS/4/ref=cm_cd_et_m...
gigo is just that, garbage in - garbage out carry on troop!
aeffects
I quoted myself if you haven't noticed..... you'r espreading bad habits