new book: Oswald did it (promoted in NYT)

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

new book: Oswald did it (promoted in NYT)

Postby wordspeak2 » Wed May 16, 2007 9:38 am

Phew, well, I've glad we've laid this one to rest!



http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/14/books ... ref=slogin

Who Killed Kennedy? One Man’s Answer
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: May 14, 2007

LOS ANGELES, May 13 — The prosecutor who put Charles Manson behind bars now wants to solve another crime — a really simple one, he insists. So simple that it takes only 1,612 pages to prove his case.

Vincent Bugliosi has written a book about the Kennedy assassination.

Vincent Bugliosi, whose prosecution of Charles Manson in 1970 led him to write one of the best-selling true-crime books of all time, “Helter Skelter,” has now turned his attention to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

And that is his full attention: 20 years of research, more than one million words, hundreds of interviews, thousands of documents and more than 10,000 citations. The result, “Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy” (W. W. Norton), is due out tomorrow. His conclusion: Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy, and acted alone.

Why would such a simple conclusion require so much argument?

“Because of the unceasing and fanatical obsession of thousands of researchers over the last 43 years, from around the world but mostly in the United States,” Mr. Bugliosi said in an interview at the cafe of the Sportsmen’s Lodge Hotel in Studio City, Calif. “Examining under a high-powered microscope every comma, every period, every detail on every conceivable issue, and making hundreds and hundreds of allegations, they have transformed this simple case into its present form.”

Mr. Bugliosi likes to tell a story illustrating why he believes this book is necessary. In 1992, less than a year after the debut of Oliver Stone’s conspiracy-minded film “J.F.K.,” Mr. Bugliosi was addressing a group of trial lawyers when a member of the audience asked him about the assassination.

Mr. Bugliosi asked for a show of hands of how many people did not accept the findings of the Warren Commission, which had investigated the assassination and concluded that Oswald was the killer. Close to 90 percent of the 600 lawyers raised their hands, he recalled. Then he asked how many had seen “J.F.K.” or read an account that argued in favor of a conspiracy; a similar number raised their hands. Finally, he asked how many had read the Warren Commission report. Only a smattering of hands went up.

“The first national poll that came out shortly after the assassination showed the majority of Americans accepted the Warren Commission,” he said. “But all people have seen throughout the years is one book after another propounding the conspiracy theory. It has penetrated the consciousness of the American people and convinced them that the Warren Commission’s a big joke, and that Oswald was either innocent or just some patsy who was framed by some exotic group of conspirators, ranging from anti-Catholic Cuban exiles to organized crime working in league with U.S. intelligence. And the majority of Americans now, 75 percent, believe there was a conspiracy.”

Prominent proponents of alternative assassination theories are already prepared to dispute Mr. Bugliosi’s conclusions. Mr. Stone, for example, said that most Americans believed the assassination was more than the work of Oswald alone “from the very beginning.”

“President Johnson didn’t believe the Warren Commission; nor did Robert Kennedy, as David Talbot’s new book ‘Brothers’ shows,” Mr. Stone said in an e-mail message. “In 1979, the House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations determined that President Kennedy ‘was probably assassinated as the result of a conspiracy.’ The Warren Commission, deservedly, has not stood the test of time.”

But Mr. Bugliosi maintains that the American public has been conned into believing Oswald was framed, and that among the victims is Oswald’s widow, Marina, whom Mr. Bugliosi interviewed in 2000. After telling the Warren Commission that she believed her husband was guilty, she has slowly changed her story over the years.

“She’s never changed the facts upon which her initial conclusions were based,” Mr. Bugliosi said. And, he added, he is convinced that the tempestuous nature of Lee and Marina Oswald’s relationship played a part in the murder. The night before the assassination, Mr. Bugliosi writes, Oswald, then separated from his wife, visited her and asked her to come back to him, which she refused to do.

In 1986, Mr. Bugliosi participated in a mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald in London, produced by a British television company. Acting as prosecutor, he faced off against Gerry Spence, the famed defense lawyer. The case was tried before a jury of Americans who were flown over for the event. The jury found Oswald guilty.

That experience led Mr. Bugliosi deeper into the assassination files. In addition to the Warren Commission report, he scoured the files of the House committee on assassinations and dug into reams of other documents in the National Archives. He conducted scores of interviews. In addition to his 1,612-page book, he compiled nearly 1,000 pages of endnotes, which are included on a CD-ROM.

Who Killed Kennedy? One Man’s Answer
“No one was thinking in terms of a book like this coming out and laying all questions to rest,” he said. “Even questions that people wouldn’t dream about, I think, are answered in this book. It’s the only book that covers the entire case.”
Of course, other books have reached the same conclusion, including Gerald Posner’s “Case Closed” in 1993. While Mr. Bugliosi called that book a “valuable contribution” to the assassination literature, he criticized Mr. Posner’s methods, accusing him of taking quotations out of context and omitting contrary evidence.

At 72, Mr. Bugliosi is anything but retiring. Though he has lived most of his life in Southern California, he retains traces of the Midwestern accent that betrays his early years in Hibbing, Minn. He has been married for 52 years. With deep blue eyes, close-cropped gray hair and an inevitable desert tan, he looks a bit like Henry Fonda.

As a deputy district attorney in Los Angeles, he tried more than 100 cases, winning nearly all of them. That experience, he said, gives him a unique ability to address a case as sprawling as the Kennedy assassination.

“The assassination literature is so vast that people spend years of their lives just concentrating on one little aspect of it: Oswald, Ruby, the Warren Commission, Jim Garrison’s prosecution of Clay Shaw in New Orleans, the C.I.A., the mob,” he said. “I took on the whole thing here.”

The Warren Commission, for example, did not deal with the issue of acoustics. Mr. Bugliosi addressed that in a 65-page endnote, which itself has dozens of footnotes. The House committee, he added, did not deal with all the conspiracy issues.

The effort, Mr. Bugliosi said, has taken a toll. “One thing about this case is that there’s no bottom to the pile,” he said. “I hope I’m wrong, but I feel that the book has taken a physical toll on me, and I’ve always been someone who can tolerate a tremendous amount of work.”

Part of the physical toll might be traced to the fact that all of those million-plus words were written in longhand on a yellow legal pad, and then typed up by a secretary.

Mr. Bugliosi said he did not expect anyone to sit down and read the book from beginning to end. The way it is broken into sections makes it an easily accessible reference book (albeit one that is priced at $49.95). “If you’re reading about the Zapruder film, that has nothing to do with the autopsy,” he explained.

And if anybody does read the whole thing, Mr. Bugliosi said, one conclusion will be inescapable. “It’s my view that it’s impossible for any reasonable, rational person to read this book without being satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone,” he said.

Mr. Bugliosi says he does not believe he will convince all the conspiracy-minded people out there. But as for the 75 percent who believe there was more to it than Oswald, he said, “I think we’re going to knock it down substantially.”
wordspeak2
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:20 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby streeb » Wed May 16, 2007 11:22 am

triple post!
Last edited by streeb on Wed May 16, 2007 11:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
streeb
 
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: Zona, BC
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby streeb » Wed May 16, 2007 11:27 am

aaarghhh
Last edited by streeb on Wed May 16, 2007 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
streeb
 
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: Zona, BC
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby streeb » Wed May 16, 2007 11:29 am

Bugliosi has come to do the Devil's work!

From Lisa Pease's Real History Blog:

As I said recently, disinformation season is upon us. The timing makes sense, as we are heading into the 40th and 45th anniversaries of JFK and RFK's assassination next year. Disinformation needs to be in place in advance so the chosen pundits can source and quote their crap from the likes of Posner, Ayton, and most recently, Vince Bugliosi, who wrote a 1600 page defense of the Warren Commission's verdict that Oswald acted alone. But as we all know, as a former prosecutor, Bugliosi is not about presenting both sides, but presenting only the facts that fit his case. WHY he felt the need to devote his later years to this effort remains an exceedingly interesting question.

At any rate, many glowing reviews are appearing in the media, which is really laughable, since I would bet hard money not one of the reviewers read all 1600 pages. Even the review copies have only just become available so that's quite a feat! And if they managed to read 1600 pages in that time, you can bet they had NO time to read any contradictory opinions to inform their coverage.Roger Petersen, a longtime writer and activist on this case, with a keen eye for sound judgment as well as illogic, took on Edward Wyatt's "review" (i.e., propaganda) and wrote this great response. I'm posting it here with Roger's permission.

Mr. Wyatt:

"It's impossible for any reasonable, rational person to read this book with being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone," says Bugliosi.

I guess I should give up.

But then I know an MD who also holds a PhD in physics who has proven that the Bethesda X-rays were deliberately faked.

He gives me reasonable doubt.

And another physician looked at all the testimony of his colleagues in Dallas and Bethesda and showed how the Warren Report deliberately summarized that testimony in contradiction to what the physicians actually said.

Black and white.

What did they actually say?

That JFK was hit from the front.

And yet another physician examined the bone fragments and said it was obvious JFK's head was hit twice, almost simultaneously, once from the front and once from the back.

This all gives me reasonable doubt.

And then that claim that Oswald was a sad lone nut who decided to kill the president, and he was a crack shot, it's been said.

So why did he use a beat-up rifle that Italian soldiers said frequently malfunctioned and why didn't Oswald shoot when the limo was coming directly at him in the street below. Much easier shot, even with a bad rifle.

No, he waited instead to shoot through a blinding tree.

That gives me reasonable doubt about those Oswald claims. After all, all other presidential assassins were quick to admit they did it and were proud to say so.

Not Oswald.

Isn't that curious.

And then there's that other lone nut, Ruby, who felt so bad about Mrs. Kennedy having to testify.

So he decided to pull together some sudden moral outrage, put aside his sordid morality in Chicago and Dallas, and do Mrs... Kennedy the favor of taking out Oswald.

Of course, these two guys had nothing to do with each other, the WC [Warren Commission] said, but we still had to lock up all the information on them for 75 years.
That definitely gives me reasonable doubt.

Many witnesses who swore they saw smoke in front of the limo, and heard shots, were never interviewed by the I've met them; they are reasonable and rational people. I doubt such omissions of testimony were reasonable, if a thorough investigation was intended.

And we can't forget a bullet that has zigged and zagged its way into countless comedy routines, including Seinfeld.

Irrationality makes good comedy.

I can't help but have reasonable doubt about why the Dallas police did not stake out the building tops and have the windows closed, standard procedure elsewhere.

Mr. Wyatt, I do not deal in conspiracy theories.

I deal in facts, as researched and presented by physicians, forensic pathologists, engineers, and army intelligence people.

Anyone who dismisses the countless oddities of the government's investigation as mere coincidences can rightly be dismissed as a coincidence theorist.

Roger Peterson


More here: http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com
User avatar
streeb
 
Posts: 1061
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: Zona, BC
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby StarmanSkye » Wed May 16, 2007 2:25 pm

Great article and additional info @ Real History blog link, Streeb; Thanks!

Bugliosi's tome is shown for what it really is -- a shady put-up job that shamelessly ignores the wealth of evidence disproving the Warren Commision's single-shooter conclusion. There's SO much reasonable doubt that Pease (among others) have provided that Bugliosi (and other non-conspiracists) is left totally discreditted.

Devil's Work aka disinfo, indeed.

I found Pease's repost of a classic 60's-era CIA 'talking points' pamphlet (Responding to disinfo: A Quick Template) re: debunking JFK conspiracy and arguing against Warren Commission critics to be VERY interesting -- hadn't read it before. VERY telling that the CIA took JFK assassination pro-conspiracy beliefs to be a national security issue! Since the late 70's, American belief in a widespread assassination conspiracy has grown from 40-46% to as much as 90%.

Pease makes an excellant point which I've long held, ie., the lies and fraud and disregard for truth & accountability that surrounded the JFK assassination and subsequent cover-up has directly led to the massive abuse of authority, executive branch/corporatocracy/MIC corruption that has 'allowed' the US to prosecute it's criminal wars. The truth about things DOES matter.


Also, I share her 'take' on how screwed-up the system is that it's not amenable any longer to courtroom justice.

Lisa Pease, re: Kucinich et al's Articles of Impeachment against Cheney:
I just saw the film "Shooter" last night which, surprisingly, had a Cheney look alike, and deals with the horrible blood sacrifices offered on the altar of Big Oil. I'm always heartened to see Hollywood put up money for such politically charged stories, even when couched as action-thrillers. And as with V for Vendetta, the movie makers admit that the system is so broken that no courtoom justice is possible. That's a really strong point, not to be lost. People who massacre people in other countries for oil are never held accountable.
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Kennedy killed by lone nut

Postby yathrib » Wed May 16, 2007 2:38 pm

Every few years something like this comes out... Remember Posner and "case closed?" In regard to Posner, I find it amusing and interesting that he can't accept that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy, or that there *might* have been the tiniest bit of official malfeasance involved in 9/11, but is totally capable of believing that the Saudis (literally) have a Doomsday Machine.

When the bit about the Doomsday Machine came out, my parents were sure I believed it, because I'm a "conspiracy freak." I guess they were a little disappointed that I ridiculed it.
yathrib
 
Posts: 1880
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 11:44 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Retirement money.

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Wed May 16, 2007 3:47 pm

Bad times for the cryptocracy when they feel they have to distract us over old crimes to take the heat off their latest ones like 9/11.

Bugliosi must've been offered a nice fee to front this stinker. I figure that a good retirement nut to stash had to have been offered.
Bet Morgan Reynolds got a similiar deal.

Same with last year's 'Oswald-done-it' disinfotainment book fronted by former LAPD Detective Mark "N-Word" Fuhrman.

Fuhrman's Lone Gunman stinker was cranked out as a ricochet shot against Emilio Estevez's 2006 RFK movie 'Bobby' which was just a soap opera feely movie with no crime-solving involved...although there was a three-second appearance byThe Polka Dot Dress just before the movie's end to signal the director's savvy of the crime to the knowing audience, a tactic also used by Oliver Stone in his 9/11 movie.

The ricochet effect comes from the public in their minds linking Fuhrman to the LAPD's trial of OJ who everyone thinks is guilty as hell but still free. So the overt idea that the >LAPD Got The Right Man< is transferred over to the covert implication that this was also true with Sirhan Sirhan who was really framed for the murder of RFK with LAPD complicity.

That's killing two birds with one stone, a sign of professional work.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Skip it...

Postby stoneonstone » Wed May 16, 2007 4:14 pm

Strangely enough, saw this doorstopper yesterday in the bookstore...randomly opened it, read about half a paragraph, and put the fetid, bloated thing back.

An awful lot of money still sticking fingers in the dike...it amazes me all these years on.

But the current testimoney from Comey should be the focus of American outrage. So clearly high level confirmation of real criminal offences (I love how guys like Comey, and Mineta, probably suffereing tremendous personal anguish about telling the truth, and hoping it starts the disinfection....and then...waiting....waiting...waiting....realizing that it was all for naught.

Kinda like Haldeman giving us a rosetta stone to Watergate and JFK...and then likely going to his grave thinking 'well, I DID tell them. Is it my fault nobody did anything with it'.

Cheers,
GH
User avatar
stoneonstone
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chiggerbit » Wed May 16, 2007 7:42 pm

Hmmmm, I was a bit surprised to find this in the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

Study Questions Bullet Analysis Used to Conclude JFK Assassination

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 16, 2007; 5:36 PM



In a collision of 21st century science and decades-old conspiracy theories, a research team that includes a former top FBI scientist is challenging the bullet analysis used by the government to conclude that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in assassinating President John F. Kennedy in 1963.

The "evidence used to rule out a second assassin is fundamentally flawed," concludes a new article in the Annals of Applied Statistics written by former FBI lab metallurgist William A. Tobin and Texas A&M University researchers Cliff Spiegelman and William D. James.

The researchers' re-analysis involved new statistical calculations and a modern chemical analysis of the same batch of bullets Oswald is purported to have used. They reached no conclusion about whether more than one gunman was involved, but urged that authorities conduct a new and complete forensic re-analysis of the five bullet fragments left from the assassination 44 years ago.

"Given the significance and impact of the JFK assassination, it is scientifically desirable for the evidentiary fragments to be re-analyzed," the researchers said.

Tobin was the FBI lab's chief metallurgy expert for more than two decades. He analyzed metal evidence in major cases that included the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the explosion of TWA Flight 800 over Long Island in 1996.

After retiring, he attracted national attention by questioning the FBI science used in prosecutions for decades to match bullets to crime suspects through their lead content. The questions he and other raised prompted a National Academy of Sciences review that in 2003 concluded the FBI's bullet lead analysis was flawed. The FBI agreed and generally ended the use of that type of analysis.

Using new guidelines set forth by the National Academy of Sciences for proper bullet analysis, Tobin and his colleagues at Texas A&M re-analyzed the bullet evidence used by the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations, which concluded that only one shooter, Oswald, fired the shots that killed Kennedy in Dallas.

The committee's finding was based in part on the research of now-deceased University of California-Irvine chemist Dr. Vincent P. Guinn. He used bullet lead analysis to conclude that the five bullet fragments recovered from the Kennedy assassination scene came from just two bullets, which were traced to the same batch of bullets Oswald owned.

To do their research, Tobin, Spiegelman and James said they bought the same brand and lot of bullets used by Oswald and analyzed their lead using the new standards. The bullets from that batch are still on the market as collectors' items.

They found that the scientific and statistical assumptions Guinn used--and the government accepted at the time--to conclude the fragments came from just two bullets fired from Oswald's gun were wrong.

"Matches of bullets within the same box of bullets are shown to be much more likely than indicated in the House Select Committee on Assassinations' testimony," the researchers wrote. "This finding means that the bullet fragments from the assassination that match could have come from three or more separate bullets.

"If the assassination fragments are derived from three or more separate bullets, then a second assassin is likely, as the additional bullet would not be attributable to the main suspect, Mr. Oswald," the researchers said.
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

huh

Postby wordspeak2 » Wed May 16, 2007 9:41 pm

Well, that's interesting...
Annals of Applied Statistics..
wordspeak2
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:20 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Blog: View Blog (0)

Bugliosi and Fuhrman.

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Thu May 17, 2007 1:30 am

Ah. Now I see that Bugliosi wrote the intro to Fuhrman's 1997 book, 'Murder in Brentwood.'

Bugliosi wrote that he didn't approve of any racism expressed by Fuhrman but that his police work was unimpeachable.

And now they've both lied about JFK and exonerated local police for their role in the cover-up. Nice.

At some point in life one's credibility is outweighed by guaranteed sales and helping out the Secret Team, I suppose.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Sweejak » Thu May 17, 2007 2:17 am

These JFK Solved, Oswald Did it stories emerge as if on schedule. What's up with that? Pease calls it a 'season'.
User avatar
Sweejak
 
Posts: 3250
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:40 pm
Location: Border Region 5
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby StarmanSkye » Thu May 17, 2007 2:31 am

At some point in life one's credibility is outweighed by guaranteed sales and helping out the Secret Team, I suppose.


A-yup & Right-oN.

That brings a word to mind: lowlifescumbagtraitorselloutjunkiewhore.

Helluva career accomplishment.

I suppose now some 'civic-minded foundation' (or three) will facilitate the donation of Bugliosi's book to thousands of public and academic/institutional libraries -- thus the 'guaranteed sales', eh? A convenient created audience 'demand'. Resulting in a measure of hyped-prestige as well as gracious Royalties that will supplement Bugliosi's speaking fees and the Secret Team's no-doubt-lucrative advance. I sure don't expect serious JFK researchers nor the curious public will be leaping to snap-up Bugliosi's frankly inept fantasy epic -- there must have been some subtle coercive armtwisting (and/or minimum pre-sale orders) involved to get the publisher onboard -- most likely following long-established standard operating procedures for getting this kind of disinfo crap into the pop culture eye by the Secret Team's anonymous PR managers.

Too Steenking Much.
And so it goes ...
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu May 17, 2007 1:05 pm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... eheadlines

Scientists Cast Doubt on Kennedy Bullet Analysis
Multiple Shooters Possible, Study Says

By John Solomon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 17, 2007; Page A03

In a collision of 21st-century science and decades-old conspiracy theories, a research team that includes a former top FBI scientist is challenging the bullet analysis used by the government to conclude that Lee Harvey Oswald alone shot the two bullets that struck and killed President John F. Kennedy in 1963.

The "evidence used to rule out a second assassin is fundamentally flawed," concludes a new article in the Annals of Applied Statistics written by former FBI lab metallurgist William A. Tobin and Texas A&amp;M University researchers Cliff Spiegelman and William D. James.



Scientists originally saw no evidence of a second assassin based on analysis of the bullets that killed President John F. Kennedy. (Associated Press)



Democratic presidential hopeful, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, delivers his remarks at a gathering of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Wednesday. (AP)


SEE FULL COLLECTION


Feedback



In Today's A Section
» More in Today's Print Edition


Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
Daily hotchpotch
Slog's Journal
BuzzFlash - Daily Headlines and Breaking News | Progressive News and Commentary with an Attitude


Full List of Blogs (29 links) »


Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web


Save & Share Article What's This?

DiggGoogle
del.icio.usYahoo!
RedditFacebook

The researchers' re-analysis involved new statistical calculations and a modern chemical analysis of bullets from the same batch Oswald is purported to have used. They reached no conclusion about whether more than one gunman was involved, but urged that authorities conduct a new and complete forensic re-analysis of the five bullet fragments left from the assassination in Dallas.

"Given the significance and impact of the JFK assassination, it is scientifically desirable for the evidentiary fragments to be re-analyzed," the researchers said.

Tobin was the FBI lab's chief metallurgy expert for more than two decades. He analyzed metal evidence in major cases that included the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island.

After retiring, he attracted national attention by questioning the FBI science used in prosecutions for decades to match bullets to crime suspects through their lead content. The questions he and others raised prompted a National Academy of Sciences review that in 2003 concluded that the FBI's bullet lead analysis was flawed. The FBI agreed and generally ended the use of that type of analysis.

Using new guidelines set forth by the National Academy of Sciences for proper bullet analysis, Tobin and his colleagues at Texas A&amp;M re-analyzed the bullet evidence provided to the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations to support the conclusion that only one shooter, Oswald, fired the shots that killed Kennedy.

Now-deceased University of California at Irvine chemist Vincent P. Guinn. told the committee that he used bullet lead analysis to conclude that the five bullet fragments recovered from the Kennedy assassination scene came from just two bullets, which were traced to the same batch of bullets Oswald owned. Guinn's conclusions were consistent with the 1960s Warren Commission Report that found Oswald had acted alone. The House assassinations committee, however, concluded that Oswald probably was part of a conspiracy and that it was possible a second shooter fired one shot that missed the president.

Tobin, Spiegelman and James said they bought the same brand and lot of bullets used by Oswald and analyzed their lead using the new standards. The bullets from that batch are still on the market as collectors' items.

They found that the scientific and statistical assumptions Guinn used -- and the government accepted at the time -- to conclude that the fragments came from just two bullets fired from Oswald's gun were wrong.

"This finding means that the bullet fragments from the assassination that match could have come from three or more separate bullets," the researchers said. "If the assassination fragments are derived from three or more separate bullets, then a second assassin is likely," the researchers said. If the five fragments came from three or more bullets, that would mean a second gunman's bullet would have had to strike the president, the researchers explained.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Buying a shred of credibility.

Postby Hugh Manatee Wins » Thu May 17, 2007 1:37 pm

The USG-controlled press is desperately trying to scrape up a shred of credibility due to being recognized by many Americans as complicit in war crimes and lying to the public.

So they are offering just a taste of truth on a 44 year-old crime that most know was a multi-shooter conspiracy.

Too little. Too late. The Operation Mockingbird press is guilty guilty guilty.
CIA runs mainstream media since WWII:
news rooms, movies/TV, publishing
...
Disney is CIA for kidz!
User avatar
Hugh Manatee Wins
 
Posts: 9869
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:51 pm
Location: in context
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 160 guests