Marking The 25th Anniversary Of Jean Davison's 1983 Book "OSWALD'S
David Von Pein
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/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
Related topic:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/66803e710380d800
~~~~~~
"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:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/9ff403dedacb5d4f
~~~~~~
"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
Related topic:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/64195df0086af9b4
~~~~~~
"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:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4a6b3390021d657c
~~~~~~
"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:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ea04b9e6141f0098
~~~~~~
"{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:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/606503e4d63e74ad
~~~~~~
"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:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/909b5b194cab1cbe
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7448f602cc9b26e3
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7a460183ae4c6c41
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4dd73f8e676a5db8
~~~~~~
"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
======================================
John McAdams
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.
>
>=====================================================
>
>
I'll certainly second that!
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
Jean and I are virtual polar opposites when it comes to our takes on
the evidence ... but she's a class act and I have always enjoyed her
posts and have had several great discussions with her in the past
years. She even ventured to the morgue with me for a great one on
cserve many years ago ... way out of her comfort zone, but she did it.
Yup ... a class act and a nice lady besides.
Barb :-)
>--------------
>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
James K. Olmstead
"Barb Junkkarinen" <barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:ona0041ab5gmo99l7...@4ax.com...
I agree Jean's a great one to discuss issues....haven't seen her around
for awhile, I hope she's well.
jko
>>--------------
>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:37:59 -0500, John McAdams
>
> >On 11 Apr 2008 21:09:25 -0400, 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.
>
> >>=====================================================
>
> >I'll certainly second that!
>
> >.John
>
> Jean and I are virtual polar opposites when it comes to our takes on
> the evidence ... but she's a class act and I have always enjoyed her
> posts and have had several great discussions with her in the past
> years. She even ventured to the morgue with me for a great one on
> cserve many years ago ... way out of her comfort zone, but she did it.
> Yup ... a class act and a nice lady besides.
>
> Barb :-)
Back in 1998 or '99, when many people were quite understandably ignoring
my numerous, severely misguided conspiracy-oriented posts, Jean took the
time to simply address some of the errors of fact contained in some. I
appreciated her efforts then, as I do now. I read her book a bit later and
found it well done and quite thought- provoking.
She is indeed a class act.
Dave
Peter Fokes
Jean one of the best LN debaters. I keep few books on my desk, but
Oswald's Game is one of them.
Too bad she didn't have access to the many documents released in
recent years.
Here's a toast to Jean with wine glass not raised fist!
Peter Fokes
Steve Bochan
I concur 100%, and would only add that she must have been one helluva
teacher. Her common sense approach was always refreshing for me as well.
Jean is one in a million and deserves the respect and admiration of all.
Wishing her the best, always,
STEVE
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c5852285-6eaf-40e6...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
W. Tracy Parnell
Great summary of a wonderful book. I checked it out of the library
years ago and I wish I had a copy. Congrats to Jean on the 25th year
mark. Another great book that is sometimes overlooked is "The Mind of
Oswald" by Diane Holloway.
Peter Fokes
<wtpa...@adelphia.net> wrote:
Indeed. Good book.
Published by Trafford if I recall correctly.
Some pages online here:
PF
Jean Davison
comments. To David and all who responded... thank you very much. It means
a lot to me.
Jean
James K. Olmstead
jko
"Jean Davison" <walter.jeff...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:8sdMj.4707$GO4....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
David Von Pein
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 person collection of posts that I have archived at my JFK
Blog at www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com:
=========================================================
GERALD FORD, ARLEN SPECTER, JEAN DAVISON, AND THE BEAUTY OF THE
S.B.T.:
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 6th, 2007
=========================================================
RELATED ARTICLES:
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/252be5dd0610a57b
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c65419db537d4abf
=========================================================
David Von Pein
Davison's fine book, "Oswald's Game" (a portion of which I just revisited
today---and it's as good as ever). Thank you, Jean!
http://Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com
-------
Here are many interesting discussions involving Jean Davison, archived at
my website (blog):
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Jean+Davison
BOZ
COMPLETE LIAR.
John McAdams
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane2.txt
Yes, OSWALD'S GAME is among a small handful of the best books on the
assassination.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
claviger
I both admire and try to emulate. Your work was a major influence on me
to be a more careful and diligent seeker of information. Both you and
Yeuhd had an major impact on me to be a more studious and careful student
of this case. Imitation is the highest form of flattery, so I endeavor to
adopt your calm demeanor, and equable communication style whenever
possible. Thirty-five years is quite a milestone.
Best regards.
Claviger
Anthony Marsh
considers her to be a current poster. I know that he allows his minions
to call former posters liars and criminals because the rules only apply
to current posters.
>