HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman)
Subject: Re: The Fourth Force -- initial CIA "expansion" via 40s Pentagon War Plans
Organization: Wayne State University
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 15:56:58 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.130308.2869@e2big.mko.dec.com>
cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (The Cookster!) writes:
 
>
>
>In article <167C4B756.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu>, MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes...
>>>
>>In other words, this work is so well researched, so scholarly, and so
>>above critcism that no ordinary journal could publish it; only a glossy
>>mastrubation manual had the necessary wherewithall. Uh-huh. That's it;
>>I'm dropping my subsciption to the NYT, who never get these good stories,
>>and subscribing to "Gallery". Say, maybe "Jugs" has some good data on
>>the Rockefeller commission, too...
>
>	The information in those articles is nothing new to anyone who
>	has taken the time to actually go read a book on the subject.
>	I see your very well versed in the names of these magazines
 
Uh-huh. Not only am I supposed to take as gospel information from magazines
whose main raison d'etre is titillating adolescent minds, I'm to be
lectured by one who is so unschooled as to not know the difference
between "your", the posessive article, and "you're", the conjuction of
"you are".
 
>	by the way. I'll save the insults for later.
 
Oh, no need. I think you've handled yourself quite well already.
 
> Peter R. Cook			Mystic Powers new EP - Life in the Fast Lane
> Digital Equipment Corp.	now available. Inquire within.
>
> Flames not welcome. Serious inquires only. Opinions are mine, all mine!
 
You know the old saying- don't f*** with eagles if you don't know hom
to fly.
 
            --mike
From: david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Head Shot - Lead or Copper Jacketed Bullet?
Date: 16 Apr 92 00:39:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.33031
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


In article <15APR199213091858@summa.tamu.edu> mst4298@summa.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
|david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes...
|>mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
|>|david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes...
|>||mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
|
|>||Lattimer did not shoot the skulls at the same lenght, but at a shorter distence
|>||that Oswald. Presumably, that is what gives them the unusual results. Or, it
|>||could possibly be due to the difference of their experiments to reality.

|	Dr Olivier...
|	He was involved not only in the Warren investigation, but also
|	with the Rockefeller Commission's investigation into allegations
|	of CIA involvement with the assassination.

I see. And what did he find? Is he the source that found that only 1 in ten
mellons corrosponds to Kennedy's wounds?

|>||Also, Lattimer's skulls shot off the top of the head, and made 5-6 pieces. 
|>||Kennedy's head had long, fractures running all about the bottom of the skull, 
|>||and only a few large pieces. The fragmentation *within* the skull is not
|>||characteristic of a non-FMJ. 
|
|>|	That's odd, since Lattimer's book includes x-rays of several of
|>|	his test skulls that show the extensive fracture suystems seen
|>|	in JFK's skull.
|
|>Not at all. The pictures there show pieces of skulls, they don't show the type
|>of fragmentation within the skull that is common with dum dum type bullets. 
|
|	The pictures I saw showed very large areas of the crania that
|	were extensively fractured in the manner that we see JFK's
|	skull fractured.

Not at all. The pictures there show pieces of skull crania, they don't show 
the type of fragmentation within the skull that is common with dum dum type 
bullets. 
	
-- 
   |^^^^^^|      _______________________________________________________
   |      |      |                                                     | 
   |      |      | "Be Prepared for Enormous Fustrations"              |
   | (o)(o)      O         --Kreps, A course in Micro theory, p. 352   | 
   @      _)    o|_____________________________________________________|  
    |  ____\ o o
    |     /   
   /     \                              All comments  are mine---(David Wright)
From: m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: guest posting
Date: 9 Apr 92 23:14:28 GMT
Reply-To: m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. (VMS Software Support - Colorado)

>>I shall attempt to post a file by Mr. David Condon, who
>>inadvertently sent it to me rather than to the Usenet.
>>Being a WC defender, and being therefore committed to
>>truth, justice, and the American Way, I have resisted the
>>temptation to edit his article to a form resembling:

> (Some text deleted)

>>Joel Grant

>Mr. Grant,

>I too am committed to "truth, justice, and the American Way". This is why I
>am active posting anti-Warren Commission articles to this database.

>A good American Citizen is one who believes what his/her government tells them,
>pays their taxes, stays quiet, oh yea, and votes once every 4 years or so...


>				...NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>A good American Citizen is one who DEMANDS that the American Way indeed be
>that of TRUTH AND JUSTICE!! The American people have NOT recieved either in
>the assissination of JFK.

>Marty

>P.S. - Are there others out there who agree?

Hmmmm, I just realized that my comments could be taken as a jab at Joel. They
are not. It was only an attempt to communicate that I - a conspiracy supporter -
love this country also. And that this is THE very reason for my vocal stance.

That's allm

Marty (aka. Marty Moose)     ;^)
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:860 alt.conspiracy:6260 alt.activism:7537
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 10 Apr 1992 22:27:53 CDT
From: <U54778@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
Subject: Re: The Fourth Force -- initial CIA "expansion" via 40s Pentagon War P
 <167C4B756.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> <1992Apr10.130308.2869@e2big.mko.dec.com>
 <167C5A80C.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu> <1992Apr10.162927.799@e2big.mko.dec.com>

Exceptionally well articulated reply.  Hats off to Peter Cook.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: rseguine@buckeye.mitre.org (Roy SeGuine)
Subject: Re: Dr. Charles Crenshaw - JFK was shot from front
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:48:16 GMT

In article <schuck.702324090@sfu.ca> schuck@selkirk.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan  
Schuck) writes:
> Dr Charles Crenshaw was interviewed on "Now It Can Be Told"
> Thursday night.
> 
> He was one of the physicians in attendance at Parkland when
> JFK was wheeled in.
> 
[stuff deleted]

> He said:
> 
> 
> The throat wound was an entrance wound.
> The head wound was caused by a bullet entering from the
> front and blew the back of JFK's head off.
> 
> 
Suppose all this is true....could someone please explain how the  
Governor's wounds fit into this hypothesis?

--

Roy SeGuine	NeXT SA
*many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased* Dan12:4

USMail:		MITRE Corp 7525 Colshire Drive McLean Va. 22102
Voice:		(703) 883 - 7 double oh 7
From: mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Retrograde Recoil and the JFK Assassination
Keywords: Some more calculations
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:16:00 GMT
Organization: Incontinental Blather, Inc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr6.094303.16875@fys.ruu.nl>, sdevries@fys.ruu.nl (Sjoerd de Vries) writes...
>In <32128@darkstar.ucsc.edu> david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes:

>>	The fact that we did not see anything like this on the Zapruder film
>>shows that such an explanation is highly unlikely to account for the
>>President's head snap. Joseph Baugher presents us with the *theory* of what the
>>backward head snap would look like. On the other hand, Lattimer presents us
>>with some *experimental* evidence--but because he does not measure or document
>>or give us any real information, and the fact he left out any theory shows that
>>his efforts are fairly useless to the serious student of the Assassination. 

>This looks like some kind of medieval reasoning. Isn't really necessary.
>I think Joseph Baugher's article is quite convincing. What has our
>traditionally sceptic Mitchell Todd to say about it?


	I think that the value of the jet flow theory has been overstated,
	even if I've argued with David Wright over it. I'm a reflex-action
	man meself.

	However, the most important thing about the jet flow theory,
	is that it demostrates that the effects of bullet impacts are
	not necessarrily 'intuitive', as several of the conspiracy
	writers would have us believe.

	
	
                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(0)---   ______________________________________
\__                      \___/~/|\~\___/                              _______/
  \__ mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu / / | \ \\ 	      Ambiguity is the      ______////
    \__ Mitchell S Todd    /    |    \\   Devil's tetherball     ______////
      \___________________/           \\____________________________////
         \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/_____________\\\///////////////////////////
                           /////\\\\\\\\\\\
From: david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: LHO's Job at the Texas School Book Depository
Keywords: conspiracy, jfk, TSBD, hiring, Ruth Paine
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:00:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.33120
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


In article <14398@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
|In article <1992Apr12.203808.26827@samba.oit.unc.edu> Robert.Daniels@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Robert Daniels) writes:
|>
|>Well, yes, a Nash Rambler does show up in one photo I've seen.  But is
|>there any evidence (aside from LHO's cryptic remark) that it was Ruth
|>Paine's?
|
|It was seen several times in the vicinity.  It just happened to appear
|in a photo.  It was described as the same color as Paine's.  Oswald
|seemed to know about it, or why would he say anything about it
|being Paine's?  So what was it doing there?  Don't you think that
|is sort of suspicious?

Actually, I think this is the smoking gun everyone has been looking for. There
are about 5 witnesses who independently say they saw an Oswald like figure
getting into a light colored (some say green, note plural) Rambler. Craig said
so, before he had any likely information about Oswald's friend Paine's car.
It is nearly impossible for everyone to be making this up. 

As to Oswald mentioning Paine, there is absolutely no reason for Craig to lie
about this at this time. He simply stated what he saw, as presumably he always
did, and was very well respected around the force--untill later.

-- 
   |^^^^^^|      _______________________________________________________
   |      |      |                                                     | 
   |      |      | "Be Prepared for Enormous Fustrations"              |
   | (o)(o)      O         --Kreps, A course in Micro theory, p. 352   | 
   @      _)    o|_____________________________________________________|  
    |  ____\ o o
    |     /   
   /     \                              All comments  are mine---(David Wright)
From: sdevries@fys.ruu.nl (Sjoerd de Vries)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: the umbrella man question solved by the HSCA?
Keywords: umbrella man
Date: 14 Apr 92 15:48:24 GMT
Organization: Physics Department, University of Utrecht,  The Netherlands

Last week, I read some postings about the suspicious 'umbrella man',
the fellow who opened and closed his umbrella at the moment JFK passed him
and got shot. He appears in two of Prouty's articles (posted by Dave
Ratcliffe), giving signals to the assassins and/or shooting poisoned
darts. 
In 1978, after distribution of photographs of this man by the HSCA, he
got identified quickly: Louie Witt, insurance agent.
His story: A black umbrella is de symbol of Muenchen 1938, where
Chamberlain (apparently always carrying an umbrella) sold Cechoslovakia
to the germans. So showing the umbrella was some kind of protest against
the 'pro communist' politics of JFK.
Case solved, isn't it?

Come to think of it: imagine you being the president, sitting in
a limousine traveling through Dallas, where you see this guy opening
and closing his umbrella. What thoughts will immediately cross
your mind?
1. umbrella
2. -> Chamberlain
3. -> Muenchen
4. -> treason
5. -> I'm a traitor
6. I'll never do it again! Oh lord have mercy!

Sounds unlikely to you? Same to me. More suggestions?

refs: New York Times, 26 sept. 1978 p 9. 
      Washington post,              p. A2

                     ---------------
                        Sjoerd

-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Sjoerd C. de Vries				| If all else fails |
| Utrecht Biophysics Research Institute		| we can whip the   |
| Dept. of Medical and Physiological Physics	| horses' eyes      |
From: mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Head Shot - Lead or Copper Jacketed Bullet?
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:44:00 GMT
Organization: Incontinental Blather, Inc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes...
>mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:

>|	Skull test bullets fired by Drs Olivier and Lattimer show the
>|	same type of deformation as found in the bullet fragments 
>|	found in the Presidential limosine.

>Lattimer did not shoot the skulls at the same lenght, but at a shorter distence
>that Oswald. Presumably, that is what gives them the unusual results. Or, it
>could possibly be due to the difference of their experiments to reality.

	Olivier's tests and Lattimer's tests were entirely separate and
	unrelated.
	
	What is the difference between Lattimer's tests and reality?
	How much of a range difference is there, and, more importantly,
	what is the corresponding velocity difference?



>Also, Lattimer's skulls shot off the top of the head, and made 5-6 pieces. 
>Kennedy's head had long, fractures running all about the bottom of the skull, 
>and only a few large pieces. The fragmentation *within* the skull is not
>characteristic of a non-FMJ. 

	That's odd, since Lattimer's book includes x-rays of several of
	his test skulls that show the extensive fracture suystems seen
	in JFK's skull.



                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(0)---   ______________________________________
\__                      \___/~/|\~\___/                              _______/
  \__ mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu / / | \ \\ 	      Ambiguity is the      ______////
    \__ Mitchell S Todd    /    |    \\   Devil's tetherball     ______////
      \___________________/           \\____________________________////
         \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/_____________\\\///////////////////////////
                           /////\\\\\\\\\\\
From: mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Magic Bullet Theory Impossible - Warren Commission
Date: 11 Apr 92 20:36:00 GMT
Organization: Incontinental Blather, Inc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <14303@pitt.UUCP>, geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes...
>In article <5APR199221491038@rigel.tamu.edu> mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:

>>	The HSCA forensics panel seems to have reviewed the attending
>>	doctor's reports, yet they did not beleive that there was a 
>>	sucking chest wound.

>Who said anything about a sucking chest wound?  Most wounds to the chest
>are not sucking. Any wound that causes bleeding into the thoracic
>cavity is indication for a chest tube.  But blood going into the
>lung from the trachea isn't, and the chest tube wouldn't work in
>this case.  You'd need to suction the blood out of the lung from
>the trachea, not from outside the lung.  I'm just telling you
>medical facts, not making any statements about what kind of wounds
>JFK had or why they put the chest tube in.


	Ok, I beg forgiveness for using the term 'sucking chest wound'.
	
	However, I still say that the Parkland reports do not seem to
	indicate any suspicions of a chest wound by the doctors there.
	Further, none of the other physicians/pathologists/forensics
	experts that I've read, from the pro WC (Baden, Lattimer) to
	the WC critics (Wecht, Wilber) haev mentioned the possibility
	of a wound in the pleural cavity other than the bruising at
	the apex of the right lugn and the associated pleura. Since
	all of theses men seem to have read the Parkland descriptions
	of the wound...

	Getting back to the point: 

	My claim that the Parkland doctors inserted the chest tubes
	into JFK because of the throat wound was based on the comments
	of one of the Parkland staff physicians (Perry, I believe),
	who said that they put the tubes in after noticing
	the hole in the trachea.

 	

                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(0)---   ______________________________________
\__                      \___/~/|\~\___/                              _______/
  \__ mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu / / | \ \\ 	      Ambiguity is the      ______////
    \__ Mitchell S Todd    /    |    \\   Devil's tetherball     ______////
      \___________________/           \\____________________________////
         \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/_____________\\\///////////////////////////
                           /////\\\\\\\\\\\
From: geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: LHO's Job at the Texas School Book Depository
Keywords: conspiracy, jfk, TSBD, hiring, Ruth Paine
Date: 10 Apr 92 14:28:12 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <hzmj=2n@lynx.unm.edu> nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham) writes:

>>There  doesn't  seem  to  be   anything   all   that   mysterious   or
>>conspiratorial about LHO's initial hiring at the TSBD.
>
> 
>Anyone know why Mrs. Paine's income tax return is being kept "clasified"
>by the FBI?
>
And why her Nash Rambler appears in photographs taken at Dealey Plaza?

Oswald said "that station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine.  Leave her
out of this!"  What did he mean by that?

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: black@jazz.concert.net (Rob Black)
Subject: Lifton's Body Altering Thesis
Organization: Center for Communications, MCNC; RTP, NC
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 17:24:06 GMT

To: utacfd!mdaeng!jrc@PL118c.CC.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: Re:  "Best Evidence"

I read Best Evidence a couple of years ago and came away with mixed feelings
on it. I think that Lifton raises some good questions in it but his answers
are not quite all there.

Some weird things did go on that need explaining. It's been a little while
since I read the book but I remember something about a lab technician saying
that the body arrived was before the family did at Bethesda. I also remember
something about there being a decoy hearse or something.

However, I think that Lifton goes to great lengths to justify his hypothesis.
Please correct me if I am wrong but didn't he finally end up, at the end of
the book, saying that the body was altered while en route from Dallas? I
consider myself an amateur assasination buff. Everything I have read notes
that the body was never left unattended. Even when Johnson was being sworn
in and Mrs. Kennedy was up front with that, Godfrey McHugh, JFK's military
advisor maintained a watch on the body.

It is entirely plausible that someone is lying but I think that the main reason
I don't buy Lifton's alteration argument is this: Body altering is hard surgery
to do. It would require surgical equipment as well as specialists. There is 
also a time factor involved. The whereabouts of the body can be fairly well
documented and I just don't see a gap of time long enough for body altering to
take place.

What I DO find plausible is that someone altered the photos of the autopsy. This
would be much easier to do. So what needs to happen now is exhume the body.


Has anyone read the new book that says that the fatal head shot was a Secret
Service agent firing accidently from the car behind JFK? Whaat did you think
of this book?


Rob Black                           Raleigh, NC
From: nwickham@triton.unm.edu (Neal C. Wickham)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Neuro-Muscular Reaction
Date: 11 Apr 92 03:41:14 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <32514@darkstar.ucsc.edu> david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes:
>
>
>Mitchell Todd claims that Kennedy's head snap was caused by a neuromuscular
>spasm.
> 
>I (David Wright) claim that the Kennedy's movement does not corrospond to the
>definition of a muscular spasm as defined by the HSCA, Lattimer, and the Clark
>Panel report. Such a definition requries:
>
>1) An arching of the back
>
>2) A violent stiffening of the limbs

 
Yes... I have shot dozzens of deer and elk in the head and have watched
dozzens of deer and elk shot in the head.  A head shot is the way to 
quickly complete a kill or even to make a kill when the deer or elk is
close.

First off, usually if you hit the brain, the animal goes limp and is simply
dead to never move again.  That is what I see with the Kennedy head shot.
It hit the brain and he is limp.

From watching many head shots, what is being called a neuromuscular reaction
here is really a simple reaction to intense pain.  If the shot does not
damage the brain sufficiently, the man or aminmal experiences intense pain. 
The inner ears and inner nose are extremely sensitive to even being touched.
Immagine what it is like having them shot.  The pain is so intense that
all the muscles tense... probably not unlike the tension one feels after
being slapped on the ear with a cupped hand.  All the muscles tense.  It 
is not just some of the muscles.  One obvious thing about the Kennedy head 
shot is that the head swings limply and the neck is obviously never tense.
Further, if there is a reactive muscle tensioning, it usually lasts for
a few seconds.  Again, what is happening is that the man or animal has not
had its nervouse system sufficiently damaged and it is reacting to pain.
They brain was either sufficiently damaged or it was not and if not the man
or animal will react for a few seconds with extreme muscle tensioning.  
The last time I went hunting, I was with this idiot to tried to head shoot
a downed elk but missed and hit it in the nose.  The elk reared its head
back, arched its back like were talking about here, and gave some very
stiff kicks with its legs.  Its head then swung back down on the ground
with a bang and it still very stiffly kicked.  It then froze, with all
of its muscles still extremely tensioned and back arched until it began 
to shake.  The shaking increased but finally slowed in both intensity and
frequency until the animal some 60 seconds later went limp.  In contrast,
Kennedy was limp before he was ever hit in the head and he was certainly 
limp not long after and I see no evidence that there was any muscle 
tensioning.  He looks like a ragdoll being shot in the head to me in the
Z-film.  Get real.




                                     NCW
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk