Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

Kennedy Assassination Latest

Kennedy Assassination Latest

Well, I have been at it again - recreating the Kennedy assassination in Dallas for a Discovery Channel documentary. The more I look at this tragic incident, the more suspicious it all gets. Regular readers of this magazine may remember that some years back, I was also in Dallas on the Kennedy trail. On that trip, I proved that the shots could be made with the 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano rifle allegedly used by Oswald and fitted with a cheap ‘tin-whistle’ 4 power telescopic sight.

I made them repeatedly (half a dozen times) in the required 7-8 second time frame firing from the correct height, at the correct ranges at a vehicle moving at the correct speed using an exact replica of the Oswald rifle and scope and identical ammunition. On the first run, I hit the head target as a crossing shot at about 45 yards (which apparently Oswald missed), I also connected on the next two shots at 60 plus 90 plus yards respectively. [We did the shooting on a specially built range at the levy in Dallas - where Oswald is believed to have practised for the shooting.]
 

The declared second shot - if you believe the Warren Commission official Report - was at an oblique angle (the famous magic bullet shot). It allegedly went through JFK’s back exited at his throat and went on to hit Governor Connally. The third shot - and many have suggested that there may have been more - was the killing shot where JFK’s head apparent is pushed back (leading to many suggestions that there was a second gunman positioned forward of the presidential cavalcade).

Mike sitting with cigar and rifleHere’s my bottom line from experience of using the weapon system. The Carcano is a poor gun, and the optical sight found upon it (as presented as evidence) was even worse - the sort of cheap thing with a moving reticule that was once used on air-rifles (I had something similar on my BSA Airsporter when I was a kid). The gun is up to the task, however - just. And, the shots with it are possible within the given time frame. I have made them again and again. Other reports not withstanding, I believe any competent rifleman would have had a good chance of connecting at least once.

That does not mean that Oswald himself shot on the day. I tend to think he did., though. But, I do not believe he was a ‘lone nut’. His background is deeply suspicious.

Can we really believe a guy working as a radar technician on the U2 spy plane project - the most secret thing on the planet in the late 50s - was studying Russian and Marxism whilst he was in the Marine Corps?

He then gives up on the American way and heads off to Moscow via London and Helsinki. He spends time in a Soviet mental institution, gets job in a sheet metal factory in Minsk and marries a KGB colonel’s daughter and is given a Soviet hunting license.

He then becomes disenchanted with Marxist Leninist life, packs his bags and returns to Texas. Three weeks before the assassination he goes to Mexico City visits Russian and Cuban legations and shortly after gets the job in the Texas Book Depository.

 

I suspect, but cannot prove, that he was being run as someone’s agent on that fateful day in November 1963. It is also quite possible that there was a second (or third) gunman but it is hard to prove. There is, however, some compelling evidence for some sort of conspiracy beyond the mere fact that Kennedy’s head appears to move rearwards as the bullet impacts.

  1. It is deeply suspicious that the only complete bullet (a round nose Winchester Western FMJ) was found intact and in near perfect condition on the trolley that Governor Connally had been on in the hospital - no bullet was removed from JFK, Connally, or the vehicle. Nor, was any other bullet found.
  2. Various bullet fragments were however found. This of itself is deeply suspicious. One bullet is, all too conveniently, found intact - with no evidence of distortion whatsoever, just rifling marks. As well as this, a significant number of fragments are found in both Kennedy‘s and Connally‘s body.

It simply does not add up. FMJ bullets don’t tend to fragment when shooting through people (though they may distort a bit). A Dr Kurtz has done some research in this area and concludes the fragments are unlikely to have come from a medium velocity, mid-power, rifle like the 6.5 Carcano. He notes:

The x-rays of the skull [of JFK] reveal massive multiple fractures of the skull on both the right and left sides. There is extensive fragmentation of the bone, and several pieces of the skull are missing. This type of damage is not produced by ammunition like that allegedly used by Oswald [Winchester Western 160 grain FMJs]. Copper-jacketed bullet commonly penetrate straight through objects, leaving only small tracks and causing little in the way of bone fractures. Wounds ballistics tests performed for the commission confirmed this. . . . .

The skull x-rays also depicted extensive bullet fragmentation within the skull. This type of fragmentation is not typical of full-jacketed military ammunition.

That ammunition was specifically designed to remain intact when passing through a body. Lead, or hollow-point, ammunition is the type that causes fragmentation. . . .

Dr Kurz also notes:

World War II films of men being shot in the head by Mannlicher-Carcano rifles reveal absolutely no massive explosion of brain tissue and also show quite graphically that the men invariably fell in the same direction as the trajectory of the bullets that struck them. Autopsy photographs and x-rays of some of the victims of Mannlicher-Carcano-inflicted head wounds also showed no bullet fragmentation, no serious disruption of brain tissue, and very small exit wounds. (CRIME OF THE CENTURY, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1982, pp. 91, 104)

All of which brings me to what I was actually doing in Dallas on this latest trip. A number of forward positions have been postulated over the years - including the famous Grassy Knoll. Soon, I am going to California for some new ballistic tests based on high- tech flesh and bone stimulant targets that have been made at great expense to consider if the historical record matches the actual ballistics with regard to splash pattern, bullet fragmentation etc.

To do this we will be using both an original Mannlicher Carcano 6.5 as Oswald allegedly used with original ammunition, and, a .264 pre-64 style Winchester. Shilen in Texas, famous for their barrels, have made this gun. It is also a ‘6.5’ (although the Carcano actually has a bullet diameter of .265” and the Winchester .264”). I have had this built because it is cutting edge for its day and the sort of weapon that I believe a professional assassin might have used (it is no difficulty to swage down the Carcano bullets to .264, although the assassin might have had a superior rifle chambering the Carcano round - I liked the idea of a high velocity 6.5 because it would be much more likely to create fragments - especially if the FMJ ammunition was modified (for example longitudinal drilling).

You will hear about these tests when they are completed. Meantime, back to Dallas and Deeley Plaza. Thanks to the resources of the Discovery Channel and the co-operation of the Dallas Police Department, I was able to sight a rifle on a replica Lincoln Continental SS100X limousine. For these tests I used the .264 Winchester Magnum by Shilen (a great company by the way) and modern Leupold 3.5-10 optic. The idea was to test the practicality of the various potential firing positions. The results were most interesting.

You cannot make the shots from the side of the Plaza opposite the Texas Book Depository (which now contains the ‘6th Floor Museum run by historian Gary Mack - well worth a visit if you are ever in Texas). Nor, can you make the shots from the walk way in front of the presidential cavalcade that runs parallel with the railway tracks that run parallel. In all these positions - about 100 yards forward of the cavalcade - the windshield of the vehicle obscures the presidents head - leaving but 2-3 inches of scalp and hair visible at best.

You can however, make a clear shot from the grassy knoll - either forward of the vehicle near the walk way at about 75 yards (where it is suggested a gunman might have been in a drain and popped up to make the shots) or in the classic grassy knoll position which is but 33 yards from the target. I would also comment that although this is a slightly oblique shot, it is the easiest of all the options and offers the best cover with fences and vehicles (present on the day) to aid with concealment. If there was a second gunman, it would be my bet he was at this position. I have now had the most unusual privilege of being allowed by the Dallas Police to try this position twice - rifle in hand - with a moving and stationary target and with the Dallas Police being obliging enough to stop the traffic to help the experiment.

The next part of this story, and I don’t know the outcome yet, will be to see what happens when we fire at the carefully constructed targets. Will the bullets fragment from the Carcano? I very much doubt it. The only credible explanation for fragmentation on the scale observed is that another higher-velocity was in use. But, we will see….

The House Select Committee on Assassinations - a US congressional committee set up to investigate widespread concerns about the murder of JFK - reported fifteen years after the Warren Commission:

"[T]he FBI's investigation of whether there had been a conspiracy in President Kennedy's assassination was seriously flawed. The conspiracy aspects of the investigation were characterized by a limited approach and an inadequate application and use of available resource." (footnote 12)

The Committee found the Warren Commission's investigation equally flawed: "[T]he subject that should have received the Commission's most probing analysis — whether Oswald acted in concert with or on behalf of unidentified co-conspirators the Commission's performance, in the view of the committee, was in fact flawed."

Part 2

Last month we looked at my recce of Deeley Plaza for a new investigation of the Kennedy assignation by the Discovery Channel. I had been to Dallas before, some years back, for another programme and had proven that the shots allegedly fired by Lee Harvey Oswald can indeed be made within the 7-8 time second time frame required. But, the ballistics remain fishy – one of three bullets is recovered perfectly intact – pristine save for rifling marks on the hospital trolley upon which Governor Connally had been placed. A collection of fragments was also recovered, but why should an FMJ bullet fragment?

My Dallas mission for Discovery was to explore some of the proposed spots where a second gunman might have been placed. We had an exact replica vehicle full or actors, I had a telescopically sighted rifle – a pre-64 style, Shilen barrelled, .264 Winchester with which to track the vehicle and try the feasibility of the shots (with an unloaded rifle with the bolt removed). As you might imagine, it took all the resources of the Discovery Channel to persuade the Dallas police to allow us to this. But, we did, and we discovered that you cannot make the shots from the side of the Deeley Plaza opposite the book depository or from the so-called walk-way, but you can make them from at least two spots on the famous grassy knoll at ranges between 35-75 yards.

Holywood

Our action now shifts to Hollywood. The filming in Dallas had only been concerned with the possibility or otherwise of shooting from the various positions that been suggested over the years. The project in California was even more interesting – live firing tests – both with the .264 (a super 6.5) and an original Mannlicher Carcano 6.5 – on ballistic models created to replicate JFK’s body and head. Would the official version of events match modern ballistic testing under very carefully controlled experimental conditions?

The creation of the targets had been the responsibility of an Australian firm T&E systems who make simulated tissue targets for the police, mainstream military and special forces to test their weapons. Dr David Thompson and his team had created an exact replica of JFKs head with brain, bone and skin stimulants. The bony part of the skull was made from real bone in composite. A model was created that would react exactly as a human skull – grim, but necessary. David brought 4 skulls from his laboratory in Adelaide to Hollywood – happily, customs did not ask him what he had in his cases!

My problem was to deliver the bullets to the right place as requested by JFK historian Gary Mack and Discovery director, Robert Erikson. This was quite a challenge. Robert told me he wanted 100 yards accuracy plus or minus ½”. This was too much to expect of the Carcano which, at best, might group to 2 or 3”. For this reason, I had built a second rifle with the help of Shilen in Texas, a great company which I would heartily recommend to anyone looking for super accuracy from a hunting or target rifle. The beautiful rifle they helped to craft from a commercial Winchester was certainly well up to minute of angle or better performance with the right ammunition, but, I had another problem. The experiment required that I use fmj bullets for most of the shots. This required load development. I did not have the opportunity to this myself, I had to direct operations from the other side of the Atlantic. It would not have been possible without help from a great team including Mike Gibbons, Tom Bender and John Reeves.

What a team they were too. Mike is armourer to tinsel town and had just finished a 3 month project with Tom Cruise. Tom is an FX man extraordinary, I shall only say that he has a mushroom cloud on his business card, and John was a 30 year vet of the LAPD. They were fantastic guys and working with them was a privilege that I will never forget. There are some other people I want to thank as well, the boys at Fultons at Bisley, David Little of Kynoch, and, not least, to Pete Marcovicci, a friend of David Little’s, who was been kind enough to pull a quantity of fmj bullet heads for me from some ancient ammo of his so that I could make up some special loads for the .264. the sort of thing second gunman might have used to imitate the Carcano.

Creative Differences, the production company making the film for Discovery, had scouted a range outside of LA in a canyon area which also accommodated various gun clubs. As ever with shooting clubs, there were some political issues with our presence but, thanks to John’s diplomatic efforts, there were quickly smoothed out. The range offered the right angles and distances and became the primary California location. My task was simple, arrive LAX from Heathrow, de-jetlag, finalise the loads for Winchester and Carcano and go up in to the wild blue yonder in a scissor lift on a hill and put the bullets exactly where required with cameras whirring and targets – only the 4 – at $5,000 a time. Simple stuff really, and no pressure.

Hmmmmmm...the first issue was the Carcano. We had decided to put a modern optic on it. It was only a delivery system after all. I had already replicated the moving vehicle shots with an original tin-whistle scope in the previous show. The issue here was all about accuracy, putting the bullets where they needed to be on the head target and noting the precise effects with high speed photography. The first problem when I got to Mike Gibbons extraordinary armoury was the mount for the Carcano. It was a cheap pressed steel affair and despite our best efforts, one of the threads stripped when we got the rig to the range and check tightened the screws. This was easy enough to remedy (we put a machine screw through the hole and a nut on the otherside – it did not look much, but it worked).

Mike up a TowerThe next problem was that despite physically bending the crude side mount for the Carcano (which allows for the use of a stripper clip) using rather more force than I would have liked, we still could not get adequate bore alignment. But, after taking everything to the limit, I managed to achieve a 100 yard zero where, if I aimed at the top of the head, dead centre, the bullet would be delivered to the upper right quadrant of the skull – where the fatal bullet probably hit JFK.

The next issue concerned developing ammunition for the .264. Thanks to Pete Marcovicci, we had been able to create some fmj loads for the Winchester. These worked with tolerable accuracy. I also zeroed the .264 with factory soft points. Time was the problem. I had only two days to get everything sorted before filming. There was no room for error, and no excuses would be accepted. When the cameras rolled, the bullets had to be delivered with perfect accuracy – the whole show depended on it. I had been brought in, the director, told me to guarantee the result. This was of course a compliment, but it was also a huge responsibility. Like many others I have a genuine interest in this case. I had a responsibility to myself, to the crew, to history, and not least, to JFK to make sure that I did my bit to find out what really happened. The opportunity would not come round again. Huge efforts and large amounts of money had been expended to create our ‘laboratory.’   

Next Part Coming Soon


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Nov 05, 2013] Oliver Stone on 50th Anniversary of JFK Assassination & the Untold History of the United States

Democracy Now!
Three-time Academy Award-winning director, producer and screenwriter Oliver Stone joins us for the hour to discuss the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's assassination on November 22, which was chronicled in his blockbuster film, JFK. A Vietnam War veteran, Stone has made around two dozen acclaimed Hollywood films, including Platoon, Salvador, Born on the Fourth of July, Nixon, South of the Border and Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps. A commemorative edition of JFK comes out next week. Most recently, Stone has co-written the 10-part Showtime series, Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States, and companion book with the same name, co-written by Peter Kuznick, professor of history and director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University.

TRANSCRIPT:

AMY GOODMAN: This month marks the 50th anniversary of an assassination that continues to haunt the nation. On November 22nd, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was hardly past his first thousand days in office when he was fatally shot as his motorcade passed through Dallas, Texas. His death is marked by still unanswered questions. We'll look back at Kennedy's life and legacy with our guest for the hour, acclaimed film director Oliver Stone. His 1991 political thriller, JFK, examined the events leading to Kennedy's assassination and the alleged subsequent cover-up through the eyes of former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, played by Kevin Costner. This is the trailer of the film JFK.

NARRATOR: A shocking assassination of a president.

JIM GARRISON: [played by Kevin Costner] John F. Kennedy's murder was probably one of the most terrible moments in the history of our country.

NARRATOR: The outrageous murder of a suspect.

JACK RUBY: [played by Brian Doyle-Murray] Oswald!

REPORTER: Oswald's been shot!

NARRATOR: The total obsession of a district attorney.

JIM GARRISON: Who killed the president?

DAVID FERRIE: [played by Joe Pesci] Oh, man!

JACK MARTIN: [played by Jack Lemmon] Do I have to spell it out for you, Mr. Garrison?

NARRATOR: Who will risk everything.

LIZ GARRISON: [played by Sissy Spacek] I think you care more about John Kennedy than your own family.

NARRATOR: To find the truth.

X: [played by Donald Sutherland] Why was Kennedy killed?

DAVID FERRIE: There's a death warrant out for me, you know?

X: Who benefited?

DEAN ANDREWS: [played by John Candy] The government's going to jump all over your head, Jimbo.

X: Who has the power to cover it up?

NARRATOR: Who killed JFK?

JIM GARRISON: Now we're through the looking glass here, people.

WILLIE O'KEEFE: [played by Kevin Bacon] People got to know.

JIM GARRISON: Y'all got to start thinking on a different level, like the CIA does.

WILLIE O'KEEFE: People got to know why he was killed.

JIM GARRISON: The truth is the most important value we have.

LIZ GARRISON: I just want to raise our children and live a normal life. I want my life back!

NARRATOR: Kevin Costner.

JIM GARRISON: Nothing is going to keep me from going ahead with my investigation of John Kennedy's murder.

NARRATOR: In an Oliver Stone film.

JIM GARRISON: I say let justice be done or the heavens fall.

NARRATOR: JFK.

AMY GOODMAN: Part of the trailer to Oliver Stone's 1991 film, JFK. When Kennedy was killed, the official narrative was immediately questioned. Nearly five decades later, a new poll has found a clear majority of Americans still suspect there was a conspiracy behind the assassination. However, according to the Associated Press JFK poll, the percentage of those who believe accused shooter Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone is at its highest level since the mid-'60s. The survey, conducted in mid-April, said 59 percent of Americans think multiple people were involved in a conspiracy to kill the president, while 24 percent think Oswald acted alone, 16 percent are still unsure. A 2003 Gallup poll found 75 percent of Americans felt there was a conspiracy.

We're joined for the hour by three-time Academy Award-winning director, producer, screenwriter, Oliver Stone. A Vietnam War veteran, he's made around two dozen acclaimed Hollywood films, including Platoon, Wall Street, Salvador, Born on the Fourth of July, JFK, Nixon, W., South of the Border and Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps. A commemorative edition of JFK comes out on Blu-ray next week as the 50th anniversary of his assassination approaches on November 22nd. Most recently, Stone has co-written a multi-part Showtime series called Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States, which is also available on Blu-ray and includes a companion book with the same name.

We're also joined by Peter Kuznick, a professor of history and director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, co-author of The Untold History of the United States.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Oliver Stone, let's begin with you. As we move into this 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination, your thoughts?

OLIVER STONE: Thank you, Amy, for having me back. It's nice to see you again. Hello, Peter.

PETER KUZNICK: Hi, Oliver.

OLIVER STONE: My thoughts. I saw the film inside these last few days, and I've been able to assess it again, and I've followed the cases more or less from the outside. I haven't been inside. It's amazing to me that people still deny it. As you know, I was in the infantry in Vietnam. I had a fair amount of combat experience. I saw people blown away in action. When you look once again at the basics of the film-the bullets, the autopsy, the forensics, the shooting path-and stay away from all the other stuff-Oswald's background and Garrison, etc.-just follow the meat, the evidence, what you see with your own eyes in those six seconds, it's an amazing-it's all there. It doesn't need to be elaborated upon. You can see it with your own eyes.

You see Kennedy make his-get a hit in the throat. Then you see Kennedy get a hit in the back. Then you see him essentially get a hit from the front. When he gets the hit from the front, which is the fourth or the fifth or the sixth shot, he goes back and to the left. That's the basic evidence. You see a man fly back because he gets hit right here. Many witnesses at Parkland and at the autopsy in Bethesda saw a massive exit wound to the rear of his skull, to the right side. The people at Parkland, including the young doctor, McClelland, saw his cerebellum, his brain, go out the-almost falling out of the back of his skull. Later, when he gets taken-illegally-to the-to Bethesda, Maryland, the military-

AMY GOODMAN: Why illegal?

OLIVER STONE: Via what?

AMY GOODMAN: You said when he was taken illegally.

OLIVER STONE: He was taken immediately, I mean, within an hour or two, he start-but it takes four hours to fly there, plus the autopsy doesn't go off until later that evening. And it's manipulated. It's-the doctors at the autopsy are not in charge of the autopsy. They're naval-naval technicians, surgeons. The military is telling them what to do.

And when this whole thing emerges, what we have are weird shots of-the back of his head is patched up, basically. And the shot-they're trying to justify the shot from the rear to the front. So they're saying that the shot from the back came into his back and hit Connally. There's-they talk about three bullets. One missed. The magic bullet, that was devised by Arlen Specter and others, devises a path that's impossible. It's seven wounds in two people, in Kennedy and in Connally. The bullet hits Kennedy-

AMY GOODMAN: This was John Connally.

OLIVER STONE: -in the back, goes out his throat, zigs to the right, hits Connally in the left, goes down to Connally's right wrist. It bounces back into his left knee. It's a farce. And they got away with it, because it's a lot of mumbo-jumbo, and they used scientific evidence. But when people are in combat, they see things. They see people-they go with the bullet wound. It's essential. And this was a-Kennedy was shot right before Connally in the back. Connally gets shot. Then Kennedy-

AMY GOODMAN: Governor Connally.

OLIVER STONE: -gets the head shot. So there's at least five shots here. And this is what you have to go in-look at the Zapruder film over and over again, even if they altered it, which-

AMY GOODMAN: And for young people who don't know who Zapruder was, and the film-

OLIVER STONE: Oh, Zapruder was a-was a local man who shot this film, that was taken by the CIA and the Secret Service, and it was altered a bit, I think. There's a lot of evidence to that effect. You have to-you're getting into scientific now. But the Zapruder film, even now, is the best signpost. It's the timing of the-it's the timing. It shows you the, how do you call, the time frame of the assassination.

And we have a scene in the movie where you see the man trying to do what Oswald did with a bolt-action Mannlicher-Carcano rifle from World War II, which is a very bad weapon, Italian weapon, infantryman rifle. And you have to fire the shot, through a tree, at a moving-at a target moving away from you. You can't do it. Two teams of FBI experts tried to do it, plus CBS, I believe, and various other organizations have tried to simulate that shooting in less than six seconds. It's not possible. So, this was a sophisticated ambush. There had to be a shot from the front, from that-from that front, that fence, and at least one shooter from the front. At least one.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to go back to a clip from your film, JFK, when former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison watches a TV news report about Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged killer. Then he makes a phone call to his associate and tells him to investigate Oswald's connection to New Orleans a little bit further.

REPORTER: ... of Lee Harvey Oswald.

MATTIE: [played by Pat Perkins] A fine man.

REPORTER: After a stint in the Marines, he apparently became fascinated by communism.

BOB: He is still believed to be a dedicated Marxist and a fanatical supporter of Fidel Castro and ultra-left-wing causes. He spent last summer in New Orleans and was arrested there in a brawl with anti-Castro Cuban exiles.

REPORTER: And apparently, Bob, Oswald had been passing out pro-Castro pamphlets for an organization ...

JIM GARRISON: Hello, Lou? Yeah, sorry to disturb you this late.

LOU IVON: [played by Jay O. Sanders] That's all right. I'm watching it, too.

JIM GARRISON: Yeah, a matter of routine, but we better get on this Oswald connection to New Orleans right away.

LOU IVON: Mm-hmm.

JIM GARRISON: All right, I want you to check out his record, find any friends or associates from last summer. Let's meet with the senior assistants and investigators day after tomorrow, all right?

LOU IVON: That be on Sunday?

JIM GARRISON: Sunday, yeah, at 11:00.

LOU IVON: All right.

JIM GARRISON: All right, thanks, Lou.

LOU IVON: Mm-hmm.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Kevin Costner, who played Jim Garrison, who is actually the central figure in your film. Why Jim Garrison, the DA?

OLIVER STONE: Well, Jim Garrison was the only public official who brought charges in the case. He started this case. It was a very difficult thing to bring charges against the covert operations of a U.S. government, which he thought it was. You know, now that we've lived a little longer and we're older, we know about how difficult that is. We know Snowden's case. We know WikiLeaks's case. We know Manning's case. All these people have been-can't get it out. I mean, they had trouble. People disbelieve it. When Garrison believed the story, as I did-I was younger-years go by, three years later Garrison-Garrison calls in David Ferrie. He-very suspicious things happened in New Orleans. But he was suspicious , but the FBI dismissed all-dismissed all the witnesses he called. Three years later, he got into the case because Senator Russell Long of Georgia told him that he didn't believe this-this Warren-

AMY GOODMAN: Of Louisiana.

OLIVER STONE: So, Garrison started to read the whole Warren Commission, and he started to see all the inconsistencies of it, and he started to call in the witnesses. He got into some hot water. The CIA watched this thing very closely. We now know that they had files on Jim. They bugged his offices. They stole the files. They had informants on his staff. It was an impossible case. Three of his witnesses died. Others-others just were not called. They were-the subpoenas were denied, etc. He called Allen Dulles. He called several members of the CIA. That was not allowed.

AMY GOODMAN: Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA.

OLIVER STONE: Yeah, Allen Dulles had been the head of the CIA, had been fired by Kennedy and was the head of the Warren Commission and ran the commission, which is a very bizarre-

AMY GOODMAN: And the Warren Commission is the one that had investigated-

OLIVER STONE: Yeah.

AMY GOODMAN: -done the so-called independent investigation.

OLIVER STONE: Yeah, you're asking me to go through the whole case here. Yeah, the Warren Commission is the-is the Rosetta Stone of this country. It's another one of these mists that covers up.

You know, look, this case is very similar, that scene you showed-when Snowden was first described as a lone, fame-seeking narcissist, you find very much the similarities to the Oswald case. Oswald was identified right away, on that Friday afternoon. They had the profile ready. This is a lone nut, Marxist sympathizer, who obviously was not only alienated, but disliked Kennedy-none of which is true, because he was none of these things. And we go-you can find that out by reading or looking at the movie. But the first label seems to stick, whether it was the WMD in Iraq, when you put that first story out there. And there's something about that, whether it's the Tonkin Gulf Resolution that kicks off the Vietnam War or the-for that matter, the blowing up of the Maine in the Spanish harbor. These stories spread, and that first impression stays. And that's-it's a shame. It's like the Reichstag fire in Germany.

And Oswald has been-what bothers me the most is that people who are intelligent, The New York Times, the Vanity Fair fellow, the guy in The New Yorker, they write these long pieces, and they just-and they say, essentially, in the article, "Well, we-history has sort of shown us that Oswald is the-the consensus is that Oswald did it alone." Well, but they don't read the books by Bob Groden or Cyril Wecht or James Douglass's JFK and the Unspeakable, or they don't deal with the ballistics, which is very important because the argument-Bob Groden has done the best photographic analysis of the bullet wounds and the photography. And he can show, in his last book-his most recent book is called Absolute Proof. It's coming out right now. Bob Groden has done-has been on this thing 30 years. He's the best. Talk to the people who really have studied pathology, autopsies and photo evidence.

AMY GOODMAN: And, Oliver Stone, why does this matter 50 years later?

OLIVER STONE: Ah, good question. Good question. What was Kennedy doing? Peter and I address this in a larger text in our Untold History of the United States. A very important president. Keep in mind, this is 13 years after the national security state starts. We are massively armed. Between 1947, Truman, and Eisenhower in 1960, we go from 1,000 nuclear weapons to 30,000 nuclear weapons. By 1960, we are supreme. We are the sole superpower, truly. We have the ability at this point, after many crises with the Soviet Union, many nuclear threats made by Eisenhower-several, five, six-John Foster Dulles believed in brinksmanship-you remember that policy?-taking things to the brink. We called it a containment of communism, but really we were forcing back, rolling back. We were aggressive. We wanted a war, basically, because we knew that the Soviets would arm up after 1960, they would catch up with us eventually. We feared that. They never did, but we feared it. We knew in 1960 that in a first-strike situation we could win, and we could-we could sustain the retaliation. So we had a very hopped-up Pentagon.

We saw in Berlin there was an anger at Kennedy for what they called being soft on communism, which meant that he allowed the wall to be built. Remember when the Berlin Wall went up, Kennedy had a great quote. He said, "I'd rather have a wall than a war." And he was looked-he was looked on as a young man, not up to Eisenhower's military status, not up to snuff. When Cuba came around, he failed to support the Bay of Pigs invasion. And then he failed to go into Laos, which was expected of him. And then, when the October crisis rolled around in '62, he backed down. That was their viewpoint of it. He backed down, and he said no to invading Cuba, to going in and bombing the missile sites.

AMY GOODMAN: It's interesting, Oliver, when we put out yesterday that you were coming on, we were just inundated with questions and-

OLIVER STONE: It's a very important issue.

AMY GOODMAN: On our Facebook page, Ronan Duggan posted this question to you: "Would you agree that much of the history of JFK has been romanticized and he has been transformed into a sort of liberal hero? The truth is he was a horrific warmonger," said this person on Facebook.

OLIVER STONE: No, no. Kennedy, on the contrary, he did-had to-you could not become president in 1960, I mean, by being soft on communism. You had to be a hardliner. It was the only way to get elected. Yeah, he went to the right of Nixon at that point, true, and-but he did not know the missile gap. He believed the missile gap existed, that was being talked about. When he got into office, within six weeks, he hired Bob McNamara, an outsider from Ford, to be his defense secretary. He had McNamara go into the Pentagon and find out where we were. And he found out that it was all a myth, that in fact we were way ahead of the Soviets, on every level-on every level-and that we could have, unfortunately, a first strike against the Soviet Union. He realized, in that atmosphere, that his generals were up to-were really gearing up for a war, because if they didn't fight the Soviets in 1960, their thinking was that the Soviets are going to catch up, and we're going to have these crises in Berlin, Vietnam, Laos for the rest-it will-there will be a war sometime in the near future, by 1970. So they're thinking about let's do it, let's do it now. And you remember the Dr. Strangelove movie about the whole thing about the retaliation? You remember Jack Ripper, the Sterling Hayden character? That's based on Curtis LeMay, who was the chief of staff of the Air Force, and Thomas Power also, who was later the chief of staff. He was an Air Force general. These people wanted war. Or Arleigh Burke of the Navy, Lemnitzer, who was the chief of the-the head of the whole thing, chief of staff at the beginning. This new book, Bob Dallek, who's an establishment historian, doesn't agree with our assassination concept, he goes into detail in Camelot's Court, this new book, about how Kennedy was fighting, for those years, with the military on all fronts.

AMY GOODMAN: We're going break and then come back. Our guest is Oliver Stone, three-time Academy Award-winning director, producer, screenwriter. Among his films, JFK. This month is the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy. When we come back, we'll also be joined by Peter Kuznick, history professor at American University. Together, they did Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States. This is Democracy Now! We'll be back in a minute.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman. Our guests for the hour, Oliver Stone, many-time Academy Award-winning director, producer, screenwriter; Peter Kuznick, history professor at American University. They co-authored the many-part series, The Untold History of the United States. It's in both book form as well as DVD. It's a Showtime series. I want to go right now to this clip from Untold History of the United States, which recalls a close call that happened October 27, 1962, during the Cuban missile crisis, when it was ultimately a Soviet colonel who averted nuclear war.

OLIVER STONE: On October 27th, an incident occurred that Schlesinger described as not only the most dangerous moment of the Cold War, it was "the most dangerous moment in human history." The Russian ships were heading toward the quarantine line. One of four Soviet submarines sent to protect the ships was being hunted all day by the carrier, USS Randolph. More than a hundred miles outside the blockade, the Randolph began dropping depth charges, unaware the sub was carrying nuclear weapons. The explosion rocked the submarine, which went dark except for emergency lights. The temperature rose sharply. The carbon dioxide in the air reached near-lethal levels, and people could barely breathe. Men began to faint and fall down. The suffering went on for four hours. Then, the Americans hit us with something stronger. We thought, "That's it. The end." Panic ensued.

Commander Valentin Savitsky tried, without success, to reach the general staff. He assumed the war had already started, and they were going to die in disgrace for having done nothing. He ordered the nuclear torpedo to be prepared for firing. He turned to the other two officers aboard. Fortunately for mankind, the political officer, Vasili Arkhipov, was able to calm him down and convince him not to launch-probably single-handedly preventing nuclear war.

AMY GOODMAN: Oliver Stone narrating The Untold History of the United States, which was co-written by Oliver Stone and our guest, Peter Kuznick, as well, history professor at American University. Just continue on this 1962 moment and how-

OLIVER STONE: Yeah.

AMY GOODMAN: -nuclear war was averted, Oliver.

OLIVER STONE: Well, it was during this crisis in October, it-Eisenhower told Kennedy, through an intermediary, to go, to bomb. But we had no concept of what the Russians-there was 40,000 Russian troops, hardened troops, under the command of the commander of the-of Stalingrad during World War II. There were a rough, tough unit. They would have gone the distance. They had a hundred nuclear-battlefield nuclear weapons. A hundred. We didn't know that. McNamara admitted all this much later in his life. The Cubans were armed, like 200,000 Cubans, so that we would have faced far more significant casualties going in there than we thought. It would have evolved into a real nuclear confrontation in the Caribbean, and it probably would have spread, most likely spread quickly, because we had bombers armed to go over China, drop bombs on China, from Okinawa. We were ready to blow off the Soviet Union. That was Eisenhower's plan, was essentially-because what Eisenhower did in his eight years of office was to make nuclear weapons a alternative to conventional weapons, because we didn't have the size of the conventional weapons of the Soviets, so we were ready to use nuclear. We were ready to go, and Washington was in the sights. The whole world, I don't-I think, would have gone up.

Khrushchev and Kennedy, at the last second, through their-through Dobrynin and his brother Robert, said no, basically, to their hardliners. And it cost both men dearly. The generals were furious with Kennedy. LeMay was raging at the meeting that was described by McNamara and others. They thought-LeMay said, "We lost. We lost. This was our moment." And Khrushchev was criticized by his own people, but the Soviets were inferior in strength. And they-but they built up after that crisis. They built up significantly, so by the late 1970s they were almost achieving parity. So, in other words, Kennedy and Khrushchev saved-what we're saying is Kennedy and Khrushchev saved the world at a very key moment. We owe him a lot.

AMY GOODMAN: Peter Kuznick, this is also the beginning of the Cuban embargo that exists to this day, 1962. Can you explain how that happened?

PETER KUZNICK: Well, the United States policy was really to overthrow the Castro government, to do everything it could to sabotage, undermine, overthrow the Castro government. The fear was that you were going to have similar kinds of revolutionary movements throughout Latin America, that they would stand as an example. The United States policy since that time has been not only to isolate the Cuban government, but to attempt to prevent similar kind of left-wing uprisings from occurring elsewhere.

We do overthrow other governments down there. For example, the way we treat Vietnam in our Vietnam episode, episode seven, is we put it in a different context. We want to show that Vietnam is not an aberration, so we begin with the overthrow of the government in Brazil in 1964. We then go to the overthrow in the Dominican Republic in 1965. We show the U.S. role in the bloodbath in Indonesia in 1965. We talk about the escalation of Vietnam. And we also talk about U.S. overthrow of the Allende government in Chile.

The big concern for the United States was not Cuba itself; it was the possibility throughout Latin America, in our own backyard, for a series of communist revolutions and for radical movements down there. We work, under Kissinger, with the right-wing governments in Latin America in something called Operation Condor, which was basically an operation to set up death squads throughout Latin America to kill not only revolutionaries, but reformers and dissidents. We see this policy continue through the 1980s under the Reagan administration throughout Central America, the U.S. working with the right-wing government in El Salvador, the U.S. role in Guatemala, the U.S. support for the Contras in Nicaragua. So Cuba is only a small piece in it.

But as Oliver is saying, the Cuban missile crisis is a crucial turning point, and it's a crucial turning point in Kennedy's mind and in Khrushchev's mind. Khrushchev, afterwards, writes a letter to Kennedy in which he says, "Evil has done some good. Our people have felt the flames of thermonuclear war. Let's take an advantage of this." He said, "Let's remove every possible area of conflict between us that can lead to another crisis. Let's stop all nuclear testing. Let's remove all the problems between us." So, Khrushchev then says, "Let's get rid of the military blocks. Let's get rid of NATO. Let's get rid of the Warsaw Pact." He reaches out to Kennedy. This is actually a moment, as he says that, evil can bring some good, because what Kennedy and Khrushchev both understood from the Cuban missile crisis was that despite all of their efforts to prevent a nuclear war, when a crisis like this occurs, they actually lose control. They both-we came very close to nuclear war despite the fact that both of them were doing everything they could to avert it at that point. So Khrushchev says, "Let's get rid of anything that could cause another conflict."

And what happens over the next year, until Kennedy's assassination, is they do begin to cooperate on a number of issues. As Oliver was saying before, Kennedy had a lot of enemies. And the reason why he had so many enemies is because he stood up to the generals, to the joint chiefs, to the intelligence community, to the establishment, time after time after time. And then, in this period, we reach out. We conclude the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty. The joint chiefs were furious about the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty. It was the first nuclear arms control treaty we had. He begins to reach out to Cuba for rapprochement with Cuba at the end of his life. Castro was very, very disappointed when Kennedy was assassinated. He talks about pulling the U.S. forces out of Vietnam. In NSAM 263, he wants to pull a thousand troops out by the end of the year, get all the troops out by 1965. His signature initiative, in many people's mind, is the space race. Kennedy says, "Why should we be competing with the Soviet Union for who's going to be first to get into space? We should work together jointly for a joint mission of space exploration and putting a man jointly on the moon." And in his American University commencement address, he basically calls for an end to the Cold War.

So, the Kennedy of 1963, in response to that person who posted on Facebook, Kennedy of 1963 was really very much of a visionary. And Oliver and I believe that this was the last time we had an American president who was really willing to-wanted to change the direction of the country, stand up to the militarists, stand up to the intelligence community, and take the United States in a very different direction. So, the tragedy of Kennedy's assassination is not just that we lost this one man, but it's that the United States and the Soviet Union were both looking to take the world in a very, very different direction. And Kennedy is assassinated. Khrushchev is ousted the next year. And as we say-Kennedy, in his inauguration, says we're going to pass the torch forward to a new generation, and we say that now the torch has been passed back to the old generation, the generation of Johnson, Nixon, Eisenhower, and the world goes back very heavily into Cold War.

AMY GOODMAN: Let's go back-

PETER KUZNICK: Johnson wastes little time.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn to a clip from The Untold History of the United States, where you look at the transition from JFK to LBJ.

OLIVER STONE: With the ascension of Vice President Lyndon Johnson, there would be important changes in many of Kennedy's policies, particularly towards the Soviet Union and Vietnam.

PRESIDENT LYNDON JOHNSON: I will do my best. That is all I can do.

OLIVER STONE: In his inaugural address in the morning of that decade in January 1961-

PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY: Let the word go forth, from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans.

OLIVER STONE: But with his murder, the torch was passed back to an old generation, the generation of Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Reagan, leaders who would systematically destroy the promise of Kennedy's last year, as they returned the country to war and repression. Though the vision Khrushchev and Kennedy had expressed would fall with them, it would not die. The seeds they had planted would germinate and sprout again long after their deaths.

AMY GOODMAN: Oliver Stone narrating The Untold History of the United States.

OLIVER STONE: Yes, yeah. It's five years of my life. It's perhaps my most ambitious project.

AMY GOODMAN: Why is this so important to you? It begins actually in what, 1898? The year after my grandmother was born.

OLIVER STONE: It begins with-it begins with the Spanish-American War and the first, really, effort overseas by America to expand. We take the Philippines, and we basically take Cuba. This whole series, from 1898 to 2013 is-in a sense, it's a mourning. It's a mourning for a country that could, after World War II, have taken another direction. And if Roosevelt had lived a little longer, it may well have, or if Henry Wallace had been the-had been the real vice president. And when I think-what we're doing, Peter and I, is we're really-after George Bush had been in office two terms in 2008, we said, "What is-is he an aberration, or is he a continuation of a pattern?" So we went back to our early lives in the 1940s and studied this whole pattern. And we see a pattern. If you look at all chapters together quickly, in 12 hours, you feel the dream, the fever dream, the aggression, the militarism, the racism towards the Third World-it doesn't end-the exploitation.

AMY GOODMAN: In fact-

OLIVER STONE: There's good things, too. I'm not saying only bad things. We try to point out the hopes.

AMY GOODMAN: In fact, didn't this project start around you wanting to tell the story of Henry Wallace? Most people who are watching right now don't even know who Henry Wallace was.

OLIVER STONE: Henry Wallace is a wonderful character, but not the only character in this thing. No, the-what for me was the important thing-I was born right after it-was the atomic bomb. I always had accepted, like I accepted the story of Kennedy's assassination, I accepted that we needed to drop the bomb to win World War II, because the Japanese were fanatics. Well, we've got to go back to that myth, and we explore it in depth. And we have it-I think we show that our use of the bomb was criminal and immoral. And we proved to the Soviet Union, as well as to the world, that we could be as barbaric as the Nazis were.

AMY GOODMAN: Explain why you think the world would be a very different place if this vice president in the 1940s-

OLIVER STONE: Right, right.

AMY GOODMAN: -Henry Wallace, had actually continued to be the vice president under FDR?

OLIVER STONE: Yeah. Well, because he was a-he was a peace seeker. He was a man of international vision. He spoke of the century of the common man in-it was a counter to Henry Luce of Time magazine that made a speech about this is the American century. Luce talks a lot like Hillary Clinton these days. So, Wallace countered with, "No, America should stand for the common man throughout the world." He was very much an internationalist-women's rights, labor rights, believed in-hated colonialism, hated the British Empire and all of what Winston Churchill was fighting for in World War II. They were enemies. Roosevelt agreed with a lot of them, but Roosevelt was sickening and weakening, and the country was becoming more fearful of postwar issues. Wallace hung in there, although he had been robbed of the vice presidency by a fixed convention in '44. He hung in there as secretary of commerce under Truman for as long as he could, fighting for peace after the war. Of course, he was called a communist and all that stuff, but he was really a liberal. And-

AMY GOODMAN: He ran for president in 1948.

OLIVER STONE: Yeah, as a third party.

AMY GOODMAN: But in '44, he was knocked out, and Truman was the vice-presidential candidate of FDR.

OLIVER STONE: Yeah, and Wallace was the most popular man in the-at the Democratic convention. He had 65 percent of the Democratic voters liked him. And he almost won that first night, but he was blocked. The convention was closed down. Fire exits were closed, or something like that. Truman had 2 percent of the vote. Truman was a nonentity who overnight became-and didn't know much about what Roosevelt's plans were. But the-the Grand Alliance-

AMY GOODMAN: And the significance of the ascension of Truman after FDR died in office?

OLIVER STONE: Yes. And he-

AMY GOODMAN: He is the one who dropped the bomb.

OLIVER STONE: Truman, within two weeks of becoming president after Roosevelt's death, insulted the Soviet foreign minister. I mean, it was-within 11 days, our policy towards the Soviet Union shifted and stayed that way. And, you know, if you read all the revisionist historians who have written about this in depth, the United States took a hostile-Roosevelt had a vision, and it was a Grand Alliance between the Soviets and the British. Perhaps that was very hard to maintain. It takes a big man. Roosevelt was that kind of thinker. Wallace was. And we're saying Kennedy was. And I urge you to rethink your-the fellow who said he was a warmonger, please, rethink Kennedy and look at everything here we're talking about. This is a big issue. But we've lost that Grand Alliance. We've lost that-we've lost that leadership that's bigger than simply ideological economic factions, is what we have in the United States. We've given in to what Peter called militarism, as you know very well.

AMY GOODMAN: When we come back from break, I want to ask you about this next chapter of American history, about surveillance and drones, about President Obama and where you think he stands, and also about this next project that you'll be working on around Dr. King.

OLIVER STONE: Sure.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! We're with Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick. Stay with us.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: Our guest for the hour, three-time Academy Award-winning director, producer, screenwriter, Oliver Stone, did Born on the Fourth of July and Platoon and Wall Street and Salvador and JFK, as well as a 10-part series for Showtime called The Untold History of the United States, now out in DVD form with two extra chapters. Our guest also, Peter Kuznick, who co-wrote the book and worked-co-authored the series, a history professor at American University. Peter Kuznick, what this next chapter looks like today, what we are experiencing today in the United States?

PETER KUZNICK: It's a continuation of the trends that Oliver and I were talking about from the 1890s up to the present. We had a lot of hope for Obama when he was elected in 2008. I guess we were somewhat naive, because Obama, rather than breaking with the patterns of American empire and American militarism, has continued most of them. Ari Fleischer, Bush's press secretary, said that this is actually George W. Bush's fourth term that we're experiencing now. And in some ways that's true, and disappointingly so. Obama, from the beginning, surrounded himself with very, very conservative advisers. His economic team was considered - The New York Times called them a constellation of Rubinites, followers of Robert Rubin. His military team, his defense policy, foreign policy, were mostly hawks-people like Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, General Jones-and his policies have reflected that.

Oliver and I see him as simply a more efficient manager of the American empire, not somebody who's breaking with the empire. He doesn't even think in different terms. For example, he recently called for a 13-year commemoration of the Vietnam War, in which we're going to reposition our understanding of the Vietnam War. And that's very, very dangerous. A recent poll showed that 51 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds now think that the Vietnam War was worth fighting, see the Vietnam War as an American interest. Those people our age, about 70 percent say the Vietnam War was a mistake or even worse. But the fact that younger people are not learning history and are seeing the Vietnam War in more positive light is symptomatic of what Oliver and are concerned about, that people's understanding of history is distorted in such a way as to perpetuate the trends that we find very, very objectionable.

This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.

[Oct 27, 2013] JFK Has Been Shot by Charles A. Crenshaw, Jens Hansen, J. Gary Shaw

amazon.com
"A SPELLBINDING, CHILLING ACCOUNT OF MEDICAL FINDINGS IN THE TRAUMA ROOM OF PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL!"By Geraldine Ahearn TOP 500 REVIEWERVINE VOICE on October 2, 2013

Format: Kindle Edition Amazon Verified Purchase

Doctor Crenshaw, a renowned surgeon, who attended to JFK in the trauma room of Parkland Memorial Hospital, chronicles a comprehensive and detailed analysis on the medical findings on the shooting of JFK. Doctor Crenshaw, along with a team of E.R. doctors, desperately tried to tend to the medical needs of JFK, shortly after the fatal bullets blasted through the president's head. Doctor Crenshaw portrays the horror of November 22, 1963 in Dallas, that paralyzed the nation. The author describes the devastating health condition of the president in his last moments of life, as he describes a political and personal catastrophe of one terrifying weekend in his medical career, that has haunted him for several years. Doctor Crenshaw reveals how the government sought closure, how despair filled the air, how much the American people demanded the truth, and offers through facts of how and why it happened. The assassination of JFK sparked an outrage as Camelot was shattered, and the colorful portrait of truth in a government vanished in an overwhelming impact of the tragedy, and its results on our country as it suffered a stunning blow of credibility. The author presents documentation on a critical failure, and how the WC report was less than sincere in fulfilling its mission. Doctor Crenshaw discusses how the WC failed to engage in a thorough investigation, how the FBI concluded that Oswald was a lone gunman, and how the resulting investigation was a sham, as credible witnesses were ignored. This compelling presentation recounts the firsthand observations and analysis of medical procedures and findings in the Trauma Room, as Doctor Crenshaw documents these events with medical precision.

The author reveals tracks of bullets and exits passing in-and-out of the president's body, and the condition of his head wounds. The Doctor's participation in Trauma Room 1, made him an important witness in the truth-finding process, yet he was never called to give testimony to the WC, as well as his colleagues. The writings and diagrams, based on expert medical findings, were never used to give testimony. Most important, the fatal shots that killed JFK entered his body from the geographical right front area, and not from the rear, which was noted as the Texas school book depository. In conclusion, these findings contradicts the central theme that Oswald shot JFK from the rear, as the motorcade passed the depository building. Doctor Crenshaw's opinions were invaluable in the search for truth, yet the Commission did not call him. This compelling account presents the case for shots fired from the grassy Knoll area, situated in front, and to the right of JFK. The author offers his expert opinion, with persuasive and corroborating evidence as he describes a sudden, unexpected life-altering horror, along with the murder of Oswald live on TV. In conclusion, Doctor Crenshaw shares with his readers, the experience of the most poignant moments in his entire career. In addition, he offers information on a conspiracy of silence, in which the doctors were not interviewed by the WC. The critical, unforgettable events portrayed by the author will be thought-provoking, long after this book is closed. Thrilling, informative, comprehensive, and concise. Highly recommended!

5.0 out of 5 stars Eisenhower warned us., October 27, 2013 By

A. Borrelli "FIZZY" (SUBURBAN PHILADELPHIA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: JFK Has Been Shot (Kindle Edition)

On 11/22/63 the military corporate complex , in conspiracy with the imperial oligarchy, staged a successful coup, which has resulted in the entire government, executive, legislative, and judicial becoming little more than the puppets of string pulling intelligentsia, backed by a Gestapo like military and police structure that has waged over 50 wars and pre emptive assaults without a formal declaration of war, trampled over civil and human rights, and murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent non combatants (usually called "collateral damage"). All done with the blind support of sheep like citizenry seeing nothing but flag waving and crucifixes. If JFK lived, we would have pulled out of Vietnam before the lies of the gulf of Tonkin saving 56000 American lives and a hundred thousand southeast Asian lives. We would also have restored relations with Cuba allowing those people to live their lives free of United fruit company and mafia oppressors. This was something the empire could not allow. Every president since JFK has been hand picked by the oligarchy in cahoots with organized religion and knows that to step out of line means death . Robert Kennedy and george Wallace found this out and you better believe Obama knows it too,which is why got no I still engaged in torture and drones are bigger than ever. Abortion,gays,guns,and God are just hot button diversions. Vote any way you wish. The guy elected will do just as he is told in the issues that really matter such as banking,foreign policy and controlling the flow of knowledge. Whether it is Dr. Crenshaw or Edward Snowdon, to expose the international conspiracy and the "unseen hand"of global imperialism is to risk everything including your life.

[Nov 1, 2011] Last Word My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK by Mark Lane, Robert K. Tanenbaum

Amazon.com

Mark Lane tried the only U.S. court case in which the jurors concluded that the CIA plotted the murder of President Kennedy, but there was always a missing piece: How did the CIA control cops and secret service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza? How did federal authorities prevent the House Select Committee on Assassinations from discovering the truth about the complicity of the CIA?

Now, New York Times best-selling author Mark Lane tells all in this explosive new book-with exclusive new interviews, sworn testimony, and meticulous new research (including interviews with Oliver Stone, Dallas Police deputy sheriffs, Robert K. Tanenbaum, and Abraham Bolden) Lane finds out first hand exactly what went on the day JFK was assassinated.

Lane includes sworn statements given to the Warren Commission by a police officer who confronted a man who he thought was the assassin. The officer testified that he drew his gun and pointed it at the suspect who showed Secret Service ID. Yet, the Secret Service later reported that there were no Secret Service agents on foot in Dealey Plaza.

The Last Word proves that the CIA, operating through a secret small group, prepared all credentials for Secret Service agents in Dallas for the two days that Kennedy was going to be there-conclusive evidence of the CIA's involvement in the assassination.

Great Book! A Must Read!!! By Cecil Small on November 2, 2011

Format: Hardcover Amazon Verified Purchase

What a treat, another great book from Mark Lane, after all these years. He exposes more true flakes and criminals involved in JFK: Phillips, Bugliosi, Robert Blakey, Posner, Howard Hunt, Nixon, CIA, Wesley Liebeler, Arlen Specter, David Belin, LBJ, Gerald Ford, George Bush Sr, the warren ommission, Sidney Gottlieb, Ed Clarke...

Hopefully this is not Mark Lane's last word on JFK because there are many Americans who would like to see LBJ, Hoover, the CIA, and all the Texas lawyers and businessmen who were complicit in the JFK assassination exposed BIG TIME. Especially Texas lawyers Ed Clark and Don Thomas. Also, Mark Lane should add the books Me and Lee by Judyth Vary Baker, Files on JFK by Wim Dankbaar, and Blood Money and Power by Barr McClellan to his evidence. It's pretty certain that Malcomb Wallace, BERNARD BARKER/James Files, Chuck Nicoletti, Billy Seymour(Oswald double), and Roscoe White were the main shooters; lets not beat around the bush any more. Mark Lane makes it clear, correctly so, that the fake Secret Service ID's facilitated these shooters escape.

The walkie talkie communication (the plaza up to Ruth Ann Martinez(radio operator) on the 6th floor needs to be discussed more; a CIA tech guy has admitted to setting these up; with antennas attached to the operators legs; and a communications hub at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall...

LBJ and Hoover are frying in hell for signing off on this assassination at Clint Murchison's the night before, Oh, and Nixon, of course, among others.

A GREAT BOOK BY MARK LANE.

Hoover and LBJ and Nixon need to have their names stripped off all public monuments, buildings, foundations, libraries, etc; be exposed, big time, and the CIA needs to be re-chartered, with a more civil and peaceful oriented direction to accommodate our shrinking world.

FOR THOSE OF US WHO LIVED THROUGH THIS AWFULL ASSASSINATION, THERE WILL NEVER BE A LAST WORD ON IT, NEVER.
GREAT BOOK.

NEWS BULLETIN: LEE OSWALD WAS NOT A BAD GUY; HE NEVER KILLED ANYONE IN HIS LIFE; HE WAS A U.S. MILITARY INTELLIGENCE SPY, NOT A KILLER. THE CIA HAD OPERATIVES, WHO HAD KILLED MUTILPLE TIMES, POSITIONED ALL OVER DEALEY PLAZA. COME ON...FIGURE IT OUT AMERICA! COME ON!! WAKE UP!!! LEE OSWALD PUT ON HIS SEMPER FI RING, FOLLOWED CIA ORDERS (HOWEVER MISGUIDED), AND DID HIS DUTY TO THE TRAGIC END. HE DID WHAT HE WAS ORDERED TO DO; FOR FEAR OF HIS OWN LIFE, AND THAT OF HIS WIFE, KIDS, AND FRIENDS. HE WAS A GOOD MAN; HE TRUSTED THAT HIS COUNTRY WOULD RESCUE HIM, RIGHT TO THE END. AND WHAT DID HIS COUNTRY DO? THEY CONSIDERED HIM EXPENDABLE, AND KILLED(SILENCED) HIM. HE TRIED TO WARN THE FBI OF THE ASSASSINATION, AND HE WAS IGNORED. LEE OSWALD WAS A HERO, LIKE IT OR NOT, AND THAT'S A FACT.

CIA HITMEN: ROSCOE WHITE, FRANK STURGIS, MAC WALLACE, OZZIE(LARRY CRAFARD), AND MOB HITMAN CHUCK NICOLETTI KILLED JOHN F. KENNEDY.

CIA HITMEN: GARY MARLOW AND ROSCOE WHITE KILLED J.D. TIPPIT IN A CIA 'NEED TO KNOW' SCREW-UP, ORCHESTRATED BY DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS AND ED LANSDALE.

THE LESSON HERE IS THAT IF WE CONTINUE TO HAVE AN AGENCY (CIA), FUNCTIONING BEHIND THE SCENES, WITH 'THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS' PHILOSOPHY, EVENTUALLY IT WILL BE YOU THAT GETS IT, OR, THAT'S RIGHT (VERY GOOD) ME. IF THEY WILL KILL OUR PRESIDENT, YOU AND I, ARE NOTHIN BUT CHOPPED LIVER.

5.0 out of 5 stars Important New Work by the only Defense Attorney courageous enough to write a defense brief for Lee Harvey Oswald, October 12, 2013 By

Phillip - See all my reviews

This review is from: Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK (Hardcover)

I wanted To title this review "Important New Work By the Only Defense Attorney Courageous enough to write a defense brief for Lee Harvey Oswald and Cross Examine evidence and witness testimony in Warren Commission Hearings and was then Labeled An Enemy of the State by J. Edgar Hoover" but the software program imposes space limitations on Review titles.

Mark Lane was contacted by Margarete Oswald to represent her son because his civil rights had been violated. Oswald repeatedly asked for Counsel, his legal right to due process of law and was denied an attorney. Isn't it at all interesting that Margarette Oswald, who was portrayed by both the Warren Commission and the Media as being an opportunistic "nutcase",by such career journalists as Hugh Answorth, with whom Lane corresponded always insisted to the public that her son, portrayed as a "Loner" who was actually married with two children had been an agent for U.S. intelligence and then all of the current relevent scholarship and evidence simply seems to prove that he was! I am going over the historical record as to emphasize what Mr. Lane is doing in this very important book. One of the complaints against so called "Conspiracy theories" in the Kennedy Murder is that the evidence is circumstantial yet the increasing amount of documented evidence in fact seem to point to the CIA,which is exactly what defamed, harresed, libeled former District attorney Jim Garrison, whose case against Clay Shaw, was obstructed by the Justice Department and who is quoted as saying "everything pointed to the CIA" an organization orchestrating covert, intelligence operations to assassinate foreign leaders all over the world including implemeting Pinochet's miltary Dictatorship in Chile, which resulted in the "dissapered' death of 1000's of Chileans.

It is also interesting that the term "conspiracy theory" comes from a 1966 CIA memo circulated to demean, harress and counter critics of the official U.S. Government account of the JFK murder. I am going over all of this material as a way to emphasize how important what Mr. Lane is doing in this work. Other Kennedy scholars simply refuse to admit that the CIA is involved in political murders and tortue all over the world. Even Bill O'Reilly, whose "Oswald was the sole assassin, the evidence is overwhelming' account of the JFK assassination I in no way, shape or form vote for, will admit that Allen W. Dulles, who made the CIA, after Wild "Bill" Donovan's World War II OSS, was one of Kennedy's enemies. I am writing this review as it is posted. I am not finished with it and please try to understand that it will be long because I am trying to emphasize how important Mr. Lane's book is to an understanding of President Kennedy's murder. An important example of the torture conducted by the CIA, also in relation to the Kennedy murder, is the case of Yuri Noresenko, a former KGB agent who defected to the United States and who wanted to testify to to the Warren Commission.

Norisenko, told the FBI that the KGB suspected Oswald of being a "Sleeper" or "Dormant" agent, ie. someone who would be activated at a later date. Norisenko also told the FBI that Oswald "couldn't hit the the left side of barn with a shotgun." After Norisenko's meeting with the FBI, Richard Helms, told the Warren Commission that the CIA could not allow Norisenko to testify, because he was suspected of being a "false defector" or mole who was giving false information from the KGB.

All the relevant research confirms Oswald's involvement with US Intelligence. Norisenko was then confined and tortued by the CIA for the next two years. I am giving all of this information as to link and understand how important Mr. Lane's book is. Mr. Lane is an attorney, and what he is doing in this book is not acting as a counsel for the defense, but a prosecutor, and the case he is wanting to prosecute is the murder of President Kennedy by the CIA, and there is increasing evidence for this.

The title of Mr. Lane's new work is taken from the San Fransico Chronicle endorsement of his landmark book " Plausible Denial: Was the CIA Involved in the Murder of JFK" in which the Chronicle said " The last word on the Assassination." Mr. Lane is an attorney. An indictment is something that is issued in a felony case after it has gone to the grand jury. The grand jury has weighed that there is enough evidence to prosecute a crime and what Mr. Lane is doing in this book is wanting to prosecute the CIA for the many crimes and human rights violations they have committed and that there is enough evidence for this for his case against the CIA in the murder of JFK for the case to actually go to a real grand jury and get an inditment.

Presidents Come and Go: The CIA Lasts Forever, April 15, 2013 By Larry Rochelle

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK (Hardcover)

Mark Lane visits some new territory with his concise, lawyer-like approach:

1. Tom Hanks is producing a 13-part JFK series for Fall 2013, the 50th anniversary of JFK's assassination.
2. Tom Hanks is relying on the script from a highly inaccurate book by Vincent Bugliosi.
3. Tom Hanks is part of the continuing cover-up by the CIA.
4. Tom Hanks is a jerk.
5. Vincent Bugliosi is a fraud.
6. If elected in 1968, Bobby Kennedy was going to re-open the JFK investigation.
7. The Secret Service had many southern boys who took a vow not to protect Kennedy. None did.
8. Three assassins were arrested on the grassy knoll. All were released because they had CIA-Made Secret Service credentials.
9. Harry Truman wanted to curtail the CIA.
10. Dwight Eisenhower warned about the CIA.
11. John Kennedy wanted to dissolve the CIA.
12. Dick Nixon tried to stop the CIA.
13. The CIA has an air force that rivals the USA Air Force.
14. The CIA has Obama under control.
15. No one is ever elected to the CIA.
16. Congress cannot control the CIA.
17. Congress gives money to the CIA but never knows how it's spent.
18. The USA media has been neutralized by the CIA.
19. William Buckley was CIA.
20. James Buckley was CIA.
21. George H.W. Bush is CIA.
22. Pete Williams is CIA.
23. Walter Cronkite and other media assets followed the CIA line.
24. JFK was murdered. MLK was murdered. RFK was murdered.
25. CIA drones assassinate the innocent around the world.

Help other customers find the most helpful reviews

Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion Initial post: Aug 31, 2013 7:03:09 PM PDT J. HARMON says:

Some of your listed comments might go a tad too far... but you are correct in your overall assessment. So then the question must be "why?"

Because the CIA is the only governmental agency that is not solely controlled by the government. The old cabal of CIA leaders (Dulles, Bissell, Donovan, Buckley, Hunt, etc.,) had just as much control from business tycoons (particularly those within the so-called Military Industrial Economic Complex (as termed by D. Eisenhower before the word Economic was ordered removed from his speech), which has the ability to govern in shadows and quietude. The CIA was not the mastermind of the assassinations of John, Bobby and Martin, but the agency tools within were used by the power elite. That is how they are able to ensure that no politician that stands against them are ever allowed to rise into positions of genuine power of our state and federal governments.

Geaton Fonzi wrote something of particular poignancy within his book, the power elite chose to use gunfire as the method to kill to send a message to all that follow, of what the consequences would be should they oppose the power elite. The power elite had the unfettered access to President Kennedy to use injections of poisons or other subtle (and untraceable) methods for murder... but chose the horrifyingly visible method to ensure that a Jimmy Carter or a Barack Obama never attempt to divulge family secrets.

And one other thing... once a CIA agent, always a CIA agent as the company uses an agents own directed activities against them to ensure continued compliance and adherence well after retirement. Research Robert Baer's original 60 MINUTES interview in which he lambasted the Clinton administration for its failures to eliminate Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Then read his book in which he broadens the spectrum of barriers. Now, he writes that the Republicans and the Democrats are the same... and that our power elite manipulates its soldiers and spooks for the purposes of ensuring its continued prosperity, and that they are simply pawns in a game much larger than they can comprehend as dedicated warriors for freedom and democracy.

So go back and find who controlled the CIA... H.L. Hunt, Clint Murchison and the Texas and Miami tycoons whose corporations needed the Cold War to continue unchallenged.


http://www.amazon.com/Last-Word-Indictment-CIA-Murder/product-reviews/B009LPY0G0/ref=cm_cr_pr_btm_link_next_3?ie=UTF8&pageNumber=3&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

4.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, but with a few observations, February 4, 2013 By

Tim - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)

This review is from: Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK (Hardcover)

I highly recommend Lane's Last Word, not because it's the Rosetta Stone of Kennedy assassination research, but because Lane uses CIA directive memoranda to document the CIA's effort to discredit critics of the Warren Commission, as well as providing documented testimony of numerous witnesses, testimony conveniently omitted from Warren's Report. Lane also provides documented evidence for most claims. Taken together, Last Word's indictment of the CIA is very convincing, as far as its attempts to stifle Warren Report criticism.

Lane does seem overly critical of G. Robert Blakey's investigation for the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations because it lacked, as Lane claims, a thorough investigation of the CIA and FBI. Lane claims Blakey relied upon CIA and FBI information, thus exonerating both. He further claims Blakey had a preconceived notion that organized crime had committed the assassination and did not objectively investigate the murder. It should be noted, however, that Blakey eventually discovered the CIA had lied, which would likely have led Blakey to a different conclusion had this been uncovered at the outset of his investigation.

But Lane commits the same error by assuming exclusive CIA responsibility. While perjured testimony from David Atlee Phillips does suggest CIA involvement with Lee Harvey Oswald two months prior to the assassination, Lane refuses to consider the obvious and well documented collaboration between the CIA and organized crime, namely Sam Giancana and Johnny Roselli, in Fidel Castro assassination attempts. He also fails to consider the statements of various members of organized crime claiming credit. It is very likely that a full investigation into Kennedy's assassination would have disclosed this relationship, and that may have been one factor in the CIA's efforts to discredit Warren critics. But Lane never considered organized crime, he focused solely on the CIA.

Lane does make a rather peculiar statement claiming that Jack Ruby was a CIA asset, and later describing him an `FBI confederate', but he provides no evidence. Of course, since Lane does not associate Ruby with organized crime, the CIA asset reference is meant to suggest that Ruby shot Oswald at the direction of the CIA. That any rational person can be manipulated by the CIA into committing murder in a police station in front of cameras and an entire TV audience defies logic, especially given the reason of sparing Jackie Kennedy the trial. But Ruby's association with organized crime does explain his actions - he had no choice. This inconvenient fact would have led Lane to a somewhat different conclusion.

Lane further states that on his death bed, E. Howard Hunt, of Watergate fame, admitted involvement in the assassination. Resulting from Watergate and several books on the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Hunt's employment by the CIA is well known. But in son Saint John Hunt's recently published book, Bond of Secrecy, Howard claims to have only been approached by several CIA people, and declined to participate because of those involved, naming Lyndon Johnson, Cord Meyer, and David Atlee Phillips among others. He further claims "that Phillips met Oswald not just in Dallas but also in Mexico City". Because Hunt's claims are not believable and are inconsistent with Phillips' statements about Oswald, using anything he said as a basis for conclusions is a little dangerous.

Similarly, Lane concludes that CIA Director Helms' response to Haldeman's attempt at blackmail is simply because of Hunt's conjectured involvement in the assassination. Helms' reaction is more likely because Haldeman's attempts to involve the CIA in the Watergate cover-up by forcing the CIA to thwart the FBI investigation. This would clearly obstruct of justice, an offense that Lane does not consider an impeachable offense, as mentioned earlier in Last Word.

While my critique may sound as though I disagree with Lane, I am only pointing out a few suspicious issues that led to his conclusion. Had Lane and Blakey jointly and objectively investigated the assassination, they would likely have solved the crime.

Ralph Yates says:
I disagree with your criticisms because they fail to understand the full scope of the CIA's relationship to the mafia. A broader understanding of that relationship would realize how ridiculous it is to speculate the CIA interfered with investigations into the assassination in order to cover-up their relationship with the mob. A better understanding of the assassination would show, as seen in Douglass' 'JFK And The Unspeakable', that CIA murdered Kennedy for CIA-related reasons.

Blakey knew he was being brought-in to cover-up. If he protested later it was only to cover-up his true role.

As far as Ruby you have to know his gun-running background and relationship to the FBI-connected underground associated with the assassination. The mob might have been Ruby's contacts but the people pulling their strings were intel. You've got it backwards and the fact Ruby was willing to commit a suicide attack in the police station tells you who he was and what was motivating him.

Hunt is probably telling a half-truth in order to scapegoat Johnson.

Your last sentence only proves you don't understand Blakey's conscious role in the House Select Committee On Assassinations. What it should say is if Blakey didn't cooperate in his replacing Sprague, Sprague and Lane would have solved the

[June 29, 2007] JFK Files Italian experts test JFK assassination gun

June 29, 2007

Italian weapons experts say tests on the type of rifle used to kill U.S. President John F. Kennedy show assassin Lee Harvey Oswald could not have acted alone. The Warren Commission report concluded that Oswald fired three shots with a Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifle in 7 seconds to kill Kennedy in Dallas in 1963. However, tests supervised by the Italian Army showed it would take 19 seconds to get off three shots with that type of gun, the Italian news agency ANSA reported.

The tests were done in a former Carcano factory in Terni.

In one test, a bullet was fired through two large pieces of meat to simulate the assumed path of a shot that the Warren Commission concluded struck Texas Gov. John Connally after passing through Kennedy's body. In the test, the bullet ended deformed, while the bullet in the Kennedy assassination remained intact.

Conspiracy theories about the assassination have been circulating for more than four decades.

* * * *
My Two Cents: Holy cow! Is it any wonder that conspiracy theories continue to swirl after more than 44 years with fodder like this spreading around the globe?

First, the Warren Commission deemed that Kennedy and Connally were struck by two bullets fired between Z210 (at the earliest) and Z313 - that's a period of 5.6 seconds for those keeping track. [WR105-110]

The Commission also concluded that the "preponderance of evidence, in particular the three spent cartridges" indicated that a total of three shots were fired - two hits and one miss.

Of the shot that missed, the Commission wrote that "The evidence is inconclusive as to whether it was the first, second, or third shot which missed".[WR111]

Depending on which shot missed, Oswald would have had a minimum time of 7.1 to 7.9 seconds to get off three rounds. If Oswald took more than the calculated 2.3 seconds to load each round between shots, the time span for the entire shooting scenario would increase accordingly. [WR117]

So, in fact, the Warren Commission's 7.1 second estimate for the entire shooting sequence was a minimum estimate.

More important, FBI firearm experts concluded that the minimum firing time between shots using Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano was 2.3 seconds - that's a total minimum firing time for three shots of 4.6 seconds (don't forget, the clock starts running with the firing of the first shot)! The HSCA later determined that the minimum firing time between shots might have been closer to 1.6 seconds had Oswald used the iron sights instead of the scope (no one knows for sure whether he used the scope).

So why did it take the Italian weapon experts nineteen seconds to get off three shots with a Mannlicher-Carcano? The difference between 4.6 seconds and 19 seconds is considerable, no? What in the world took so long? Did they forget to eat their Wheaties? See for yourself. CLICK HERE to view the Italian shooting tests. [Windows Media Player Required]

No one remotely familiar with the operation of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle or who had seen the 1967 CBS-TV shooting reconstruction could possibly take this Italian "reconstruction" seriously. But many who haven't done either will.

And how about that Italian single-bullet reconstruction? How does firing a bullet into two "large pieces of meat" constitute an accurate representation of what happened in Dallas? It doesn't, period. And finally, I hate to be the one to break it to United Press International but the single-bullet (CE399) in the Kennedy assassination did not remain "intact" (i.e., pristine). This is a common myth born from hundreds of conspiracy books and articles.

Is it any wonder that so many people embrace Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories when mis-information like this is spread across the globe by a reputable news organization like UPI? Let me guess - conspiracy buffs will embrace this story as they do anything that remotely supports their position. After all, if it's on TV or in print it must be true, right? DKM

END

Recommended Links

Google matched content

Softpanorama Recommended

Top articles

Sites

JFK Files Italian experts test JFK assassination gun

http://video.google.fr/videosearch?q=jfk+2&hl=fr&emb=0#

Lyndon Johnson Admits To Walter Cronkite That He Killed Kennedy

4-47 Bush confessed to killing JFK.by Paul Kangas151,065 views

3-53 J Edgar Hoover- "Bush CIA killed JFK" by Paul Kangas20,308 views

0-45 President Lyndon Johnson using the "N" word. by 63kj108,986 views

1-33-36 JFK was killed by the CIA-Whitehouse Phone 202-456-1414by TruthTVMinnesota70,367 views

10-52 LBJ Benefited the most from JFK assassination by SCGATOR200133,522 views

Howard Stern Show Jesse Ventura Full Interview 09-17-12 - YouTube



Etc

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotesSomerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose BierceBernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOSProgramming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC developmentScripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-MonthHow to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D


Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

Disclaimer:

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Last modified: July 28, 2019