HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cortez@milton.u.washington.edu (Tom Warner)
Subject: Re: Lattimer , X-Rays and Wecht
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 10:22:42 GMT

schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) writes:

>Recently there was a discussion of the comparative ability of
>Lattimer and Wechts ability to read X-Rays.

>Recently I picked up a copy of High Treason 2 and there was an
>interesting paragraph or two pertaining to X-Rays etc.

>From High Treason 2 by Livingstone:

>There has been a lot of speculation as to whether JFK had
>Addisions disease, which atrophys the adrenal glands.

>Livingstone quotes Lattimer's article in the May 1972 issue
>of Resident and Staff Physician Magazine, where he comments
>on the autopsy X-Rays of JFK:
>"The adrenal gland areas were well visualized on the X-Rays...."

>Livingstone goes on to quote a radiologist from Baltimore,
>Dr Donald Siple. "The adrenals are invisible to X-Rays, and
>do not show up on films unless specially treated with dye."

>What can we conclude?

>Either:

>1) Lattimer was lying, because he couldn't have seen the
>   adrenal glands without dye.

>or

>2) Lattimer is incompetent when viewing X-Rays, and sees things that
>   are not there.

>or

>3) The X-Rays of JFK's torso area are fakes, and are either of JFK
>   before his death, or of someone else entirely.

>Livingstone expressed view #3 in his book.

I vote for a combination of #1 or #2. My guess is Lattimer was aware of the
speculation and wanted to put an end to it, so he found some way to see
what he wanted to see even though it wasn't actually there.

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: jerry@cs.mcgill.ca (Gerald (Jerry) KUCH)
Subject: Re: CIA Agent confesses to buying rifles
Organization: McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 11:55:22 GMT

In article <schuck.718340182@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>Retired CIA agent Robert Morrow claimed on "A Current Affair"
>tonight that he bought the Mannlicher-Carcano rifles used
>to assassinate JFK.
>
>He says he bought four 7.35mm Mannlicher-Carcano rifles
>in July of 1963 from Sonny's Surplus under the impression they were to
>be used to assassinate a South American dictator.

Uhh... wasn't the famous Oswald rifle 6.5mm?

>Robert Blakey, head of the HSCA 'investigation' said that while the
>mob was connected to the Cubans, and the Cubans were connected to the
>CIA, the CIA were not connected to the assassination of the JFK. :)
>
>This from a man who was unperturbed to find a CIA agent burgalarizing
>an HSCA safe during the investigation. :)

And the third guy to fill the revolving door leadership of a committee that
was falling apart more and more by the day...


>        "We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin -- Split Second
>
>schuck@sfu.ca                                           Vote No on October 26th
>===============================================================================


-- 
 Jerry Kuch (jerry@cs.mcgill.ca) ----- SOMETHING NEAT SHOULD GO HERE.
 "I was wrong to play God.  Life is precious, not a thing to be toyed with.
  Now take out that brain and flush it down the toilet."
                  --- M. Burns  "Treehouse of Horror II"
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3422 alt.conspiracy:10999 alt.activism:17213 alt.society.civil-liberty:6155 alt.individualism:5670 alt.censorship:7886 talk.politics.misc:49704 misc.headlines:6509 soc.culture.usa:7644
From: paulj@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Congress votes to release the files
Date: 1 Oct 92 09:19:16 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

The Congress has just sen to President Vush a bill to open the records
of the Warren Commisssion and other agecies regarding th JFK
assasination.  I think all the inportant stuff has been destroyed by
now so the truth will never be known>
-- 

____________________________________________________________________
|                          PAUL JEFFERSON                          |
| PAULJ@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU       AE824@YFN.YSU.EDU                 |
| BR584@FREENET.CRWU.EDU          PAULJ@UKANVAX                    |
|__________________________________________________________________|
From: s666@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Who bloody cares?
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:59:56 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada


    I really don't get the large amount of material regarding JFKs
assassanation. I mean Oswald was fingered for it and he's dead. It happened
many years ago and it is starting to get stale.

Sean Dzafovic
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Re: alt.conspiracy.jfk Under Attack
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 20:58:59 GMT
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Keywords: alt.conspiracy.jfk under attack


In article <52.X6661@ramona.com> of alt.conspiracy.jfk, 
   doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:

>I've been tipped off that someone at one of the main news distribution
>sites has installed a program that randomly deletes a percentage of
>postings to alt.conspiracy.jfk. This program has been running for months.
>Why would some sick hacker do this? Supposedly to make a.c.j posters
>feel more paranoid than they really are when their postings don't get
>answered.

    I think that all concerned readers should e-mail this article
    to their systems administrators. It's their job to protect 
    our systems of communication. Despite the lack of evidence in
    Doug's bulletin, the systems administrators need only investigate
    the situation and take corrective action if the charges are true.

        John DiNardo

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR)
Subject: Missing the point(Re: Who bloody cares?
Summary: Relative  
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 30 Sep 92 22:47:03 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.115956.7868@ac.dal.ca>, s666@ac.dal.ca                    writes...
>    I really don't get the large amount of material regarding JFKs
>assassanation. I mean Oswald was fingered for it and he's dead. It happened
>many years ago and it is starting to get stale.
> 
If Oswald acted alone, then you are 100% correct. But there is a 
very good chance that he didn't. Also, there is a very good chance
that some of the people who conspired to kill him are still alive.
I'm sure you don't agree with letting murderers go free. Finally,
there is the question of implications. What did the conspirators do
to the country? As you'll notice, the second word in the newsgroup is
"conspiracy", not assasination. BIG difference. Does this clear up 
your confusion?

>Sean Dzafovic
> 
-Garrett
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: harvie@maxine.wpi.edu (Larry Harvie)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic,talk.rumors
Subject: Re: alt.conspiracy.jfk under attack!
Date: 2 Oct 1992 18:34:52 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: maxine.wpi.edu

In article <52.X6661@ramona.com> doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:
>I've been tipped off that someone at one of the main news distribution
>sites has installed a program that randomly deletes a percentage of
>postings to alt.conspiracy.jfk. This program has been running for months.
>Why would some sick hacker do this? Supposedly to make a.c.j posters
>feel more paranoid than they really are when their postings don't get
>answered.
>

Are you 100% sure? We don't want to seem paranoid aas a group.

LARRY
PS; Where can I get the tapes by Jim Garrison? 
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3394 alt.conspiracy:10911 sci.skeptic:17355 talk.rumors:1060
From: doug@ramona.com (Double Agent)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic,talk.rumors
Subject: alt.conspiracy.jfk under attack!
Date: 2 Oct 92 06:10:05 GMT
Organization: Ramona Engineering

[Hope this one gets through.]

I've been tipped off that someone at one of the main news distribution
sites has installed a program that randomly deletes a percentage of
postings to alt.conspiracy.jfk. This program has been running for months.
Why would some sick hacker do this? Supposedly to make a.c.j posters
feel more paranoid than they really are when their postings don't get
answered.
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3378 alt.conspiracy:10868 alt.society.civil-liberty:6092 alt.individualism:5617 alt.censorship:7727 talk.politics.misc:48687 misc.headlines:6440 soc.culture.usa:7570 alt.activism:16958
From: ajs9462@zeus.tamu.edu (SIMON, ANTHONY JOE)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: mortal error
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:50:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <schuck.717790996@sfu.ca>, Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes...
> 
>Thats your interpretation, but not mine. At 255 he is about 200-220
>feet from the TSBD. I would think his field of view included the 6th
>floor.
> 

And where is the tree between the TSBD and Hickey. . . in his line of sight?

>>>>Couldn't you at least put a reference once in
>>>>awhile? It makes it easier to look things up.
>>> 
>>>Very funny.
> 
>>The problem is that I do not have all the source material that you have at
>>your fingertips. I have to go to the library and find a book that is actually
>>in the library that has the picture. I suspect that there others with the
>>same problem. I have other work to do, so I can't afford to spend my whole
>>life tracking down something that you make comments about without some kind
>>of reference.
> 
>I'm not the alt.conspiracy.jfk reference librarian either. 
>It's not my job to source everything I write. If I'm quoting from a
>source book I usually do. Do you source everything you post?
> 

Agreed you aren't the librarian, but when you talk about a picture showing
someone doing something, you should at least say which picture.

I do try to make references to what I am discussing. I can't say that 100%
of the time I follow this rule, but I try to do so most of the time (espcially
when the topic is first mentioned).

>>> 
>>>>>If there was an assassin to see in the TSBD, and I'm sure from less
>>>>>than 200 feet a rifle would have had a good chance of being seen,
>>>>>then Hickey would have had a target.
>>>>>
> 
>>Provided he was looking in the proper direction.
>
>>> 
>>>>By the time he would have had his rifle up, couldn't the target on the 6th
>>>>floor have been gone?
>>> 
>>>If there was a shooter on the 6th floor of the TSBD, he should have
>>>seen the rifle.
> 
>>If he was looking at the sixth floor.
> 
>Well....if you were an SS agent and heard rifle shots behind you,
>would you:
> 
>a) look at the crowd 
> or 
>b) look at the windows of the tall buildings behind you? 
> 
>I think b) would be the best choice, and the one SS agents should have
>been trained to do.

I still see Hickey looking at the crowd in the Altgens photo. I would have
looked around (especially the buildings), but that doesn't mean that Hickey
did that. For instance, did Hickey realize that gunfire was occuring by the
time of that picture? The Secret Service agents always seem to be looking at
the crowd. So, he hears a shot and maybe thinks that it is backfire. He looks
around at ground level (unaware that the president is hit).

What is Hickey's testimony regarding when he heard shots and what he did when
he heard them? Can you give me a source for that?

Tony Simon
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3425 alt.conspiracy:11001 sci.skeptic:17535 talk.rumors:1075
From: dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic,talk.rumors
Subject: Re: alt.conspiracy.jfk under attack!
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:44:08 GMT
Organization: Electrical and Electronic Eng., University of Adelaide

In article <52.X6661@ramona.com> doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:
>I've been tipped off that someone at one of the main news distribution
>sites has installed a program that randomly deletes a percentage of
>postings to alt.conspiracy.jfk. This program has been running for months.
>Why would some sick hacker do this? Supposedly to make a.c.j posters
>feel more paranoid than they really are when their postings don't get
>answered.


I always suspected something like this :-)
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Tuesday, 29 Sep 1992 20:04:13 CDT
From: <U54778@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Lattimer, Questions six and seven
 <cortez.717576873@milton> <schuck.717618043@sfu.ca> <cortez.717735475@milton>

>Geez, they think someone shot Kennedy at frame 210 from the sixth floor
>of the TSBD and yet the bullet entered his back travelling *upward*?
>Just goes to show how hard the HSCA stretched things when it was the only
>way to make the facts fit the dogma. So what else is new.)
>
>Tom Warner

Tom, the real comedic show is to watch Dr. Baden explain how this was possible
in his bit on that Nova science special which should be called the JFK
Magical Mystery Tour.  Baden, using a pointer, shows us how JFK is hunched
forward just so far and Connally is twisted 45 deg. to his right.  I get
visions of instructions on how to do the Lambada.  Cronkite jumps in with
Nova's graphic magic showing in 2d how these contortions will make the
bullet path line up with, viola, the 6th floor sniper's nest.
My favorite home routine with friends is to put the video into frame stop
just at the side graphic and tell them to put themselves in the position
that the graphic requires of JFK.  Then I rewind to the Zfilm, just before
the limo disappears behind the sign.  The position of Connally can be argued
depending on where one feels the first shot was fired, though I don't
have much belief in the justifications given by the pro-WC posters but JFK's
position is clear for anyone with decent eye sight.  If he is hunched forward
it cannot be anymore than a couple of inches, not the amount needed to
conform to Baden's buffonary. He goes further to state that this JFK
body position could have happened as the car is behind the sign. HAH!!!
For all those who hate Wecht, it is particularly this dissenting item that
makes me like him.  He points out that the limo is only behind the sign
.9 seconds.  For JFK to hunch forward, get shot, then return back to an
upright position is just not believable.  But this is just what Baden and
his crew give as justification for the rehabilitation of the SBT.  They
say that anything could have happened behind that sign in that .9 seconds.
Yes, pigs could have flown, the earth reversed its rotation and 2 + 2
became 6 BUT NOT F***ING LIKELY.
Everyone I have demostrated this to has come away from it convinced to some
extent that the HSCA was Son of WC.
ALAN ROGERS
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: ajs9462@zeus.tamu.edu (SIMON, ANTHONY JOE)
Subject: Re: mortal error
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 16:18:00 GMT

In article <schuck.717350114@sfu.ca>, Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes...
> 
>Why didn't Hickey turn and spray the TSBD with the AR-15?
>He had enough time if he had reacted immediately. If Oswald had
>really fired the head shot, Hickey had 5-8 seconds to react. That
>shouldn't be impossible for a well trained SS agent.
> 

     But was Hickey certain as to which window the shots came from? If not,
then spraying the building would not be a wise move. Many innocent people
would be hurt or killed. Could he really take that risk?

Tony Simon
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: canderso@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chuck Anderson)
Subject: The Great American Experience: LBJ and "The Wise Men"
Organization: Center for Life Fulfillment
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 02:16:25 GMT

I posted this last week, but I don't think it made it out to the net.  We
were temporarily off line at the time.  So, I'm reposting.  If I'm just being
ignored I'll have to kill someone (and set up a patsy so I don't get caught).

   -----

PBS just ran a great series called "The American Experience." It focused on 
three presidents: The Kennedys (actually about Joe Sr. and his children), LBJ, 
and Nixon.  All three were very interesting and had information relevant to 
the discussions here.

The night that LBJ was on I was watching something else for a while and so 
missed some details.  As I was watching the later portions of it they spoke
of a group of LBJ "advisors" called "The Wise Men." I think it was the "five" 
wise men even.

They were mentioned when LBJ finally decides that he has blundered by
escalating the vietnam war.  LBJ meets with "The Wise Men" who have all
changed their minds and decided, since the Tet offensive, that the war cannot 
be won and that it is now a bad idea.  This so disheartens LBJ that he makes
his decision not to seek the 1968 candidacy.

Who were "The Wise Men."  They sounded reminiscent of "The Secret Team."

--
  *************************************************************************
     Chuck Anderson                uucp    :         uunet!nyx!canderso
     Boulder, Co. (303) 494-6278   internet:         canderso@nyx.cs.du.edu
  *************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: CIA Agent confesses to buying rifles
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 02:56:22 GMT

Retired CIA agent Robert Morrow claimed on "A Current Affair"
tonight that he bought the Mannlicher-Carcano rifles used
to assassinate JFK.

He says he bought four 7.35mm Mannlicher-Carcano rifles
in July of 1963 from Sonny's Surplus under the impression they were to
be used to assassinate a South American dictator.

Later, when he delivered three of the rifles to David Ferrie,
he was informed they were to be used to kill JFK in Dallas.

He kept one of the rifles because it was slightly defective and
displayed it from a large wall safe.


The CIA denied involvement.   Surprise.


Robert Blakey, head of the HSCA 'investigation' said that while the
mob was connected to the Cubans, and the Cubans were connected to the
CIA, the CIA were not connected to the assassination of the JFK. :)

This from a man who was unperturbed to find a CIA agent burgalarizing
an HSCA safe during the investigation. :)



-- 
===============================================================================
        "We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin -- Split Second

schuck@sfu.ca                                           Vote No on October 26th
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: mortal error
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 17:51:20 GMT

ajs9462@zeus.tamu.edu (SIMON, ANTHONY JOE) writes:

>In article <schuck.717350114@sfu.ca>, Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes...
>> 
>>Why didn't Hickey turn and spray the TSBD with the AR-15?
>>He had enough time if he had reacted immediately. If Oswald had
>>really fired the head shot, Hickey had 5-8 seconds to react. That
>>shouldn't be impossible for a well trained SS agent.
>> 

>     But was Hickey certain as to which window the shots came from? If not,
>then spraying the building would not be a wise move. Many innocent people
>would be hurt or killed. Could he really take that risk?

There is photographic evidence that Hickey was already turned
around and facing rearwards by the time of the 2nd shot.

If there was an assassin to see in the TSBD, and I'm sure from less
than 200 feet a rifle would have had a good chance of being seen,
then Hickey would have had a target.

Donahues thesis is that Hickey was getting ready to do that by
standing up with the AR-15 when he accidently shot JFK.

The alternative explanation is that there was no TSBD shooter to
see after the 2nd shot. The head shot came from the grassy knoll,
and the TSBD assassin, if there was one, had already left the window.

-- 
===============================================================================
        "We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin -- Split Second

schuck@sfu.ca                                           Vote No on October 26th
===============================================================================
From: indiana@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Disappearance of JFK newsgroup items
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:18:55 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

       Does anyone know how to slow down the rate of disappearance of items
       from this newsgroup ? ? ? ? ?
From: saltzman@ISOVAX (Bob Saltzman)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: New L. Fletcher Prouty Book
Date: 29 Sep 92 13:00:32 GMT
Reply-To: saltzman@ISOVAX
Organization: GE Corporate Research & Development, Schenectady, NY

In article <1992Sep24.182712.285@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com>, m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson) writes:
>--
>Since I have no life I listen to a lot of AM talk radio.  ;^)
>
>Last night on the "Gill Gross Show" the guest was non other than L. Fletcher
>Prouty. He is promoting his new book: "Vietnam, CIA, and the plot to kill
>JFK"   (That title might not be exact)
>
>I'm looking forward to reading this. Has anyone out there seen it yet?
>
>Marty
>
Book is out at Waldenbook.  Hardcover.  $22?

Bob, CTIA
==============================================================================
Robert B. Saltzman (Bob)            Internet: saltzman@crd.ge.com
Information System Operation        Snailnet: Bldg KW, Room C120, PO Box 8
General Electric Company            AT&Tnet:  518-387-5828(B), 387-6560(FAX),
Corporate Research and Development            370-2222(H)
Schenectady, New York 12301 USA     ICBMnet:  42 50 04 N, 73 54 14 W, Alt 246
AEMT-4 Paramedic/Firefighter        HAMnet:   WB2ARK
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: mortal error
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 06:29:24 GMT

karn@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) writes:

>In article <schuck.717908982@sfu.ca>, schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) writes:
>|> Hickey is describing a 'double' shot . Such a double shot, .8
>|> seconds apart is heard on the HSCA acoustical evidence tape.

>How come nobody ever considers the fact that Dealy Plaza is surrounded
>by tall buildings and various other structures that are excellent
>acoustic reflectors? Work out the various distances, divide by the
>speed of sound, and I think you'll find it easy to explain
>observations like these.

With selective editting you chose to leave out Hickeys observation of
the effects of these shots on JFK's head. He described two separate
physical impacts. One was the wound on the back of JFK's head , the
other was JFK's hair on the side of his head flying forward, each
occurring at a slightly different time.

Echoes do not cause the hair on someones head to fly forward.

Neither do echoes cause a piece of skull to fly backwards or blood and
brain tissue to fly backwards. These effects have been described by
the motorcycle policeman to the rear and left of JFK.

The Harper fragment, a piece of occipital bone from the rear of JFK's
head was found 25 feet to the rear of JFK at the time of the fatal
head shot. This was not caused by an echo either.

JFK was flung backwards and to his left. This was not caused by an
echo either.


The gunshots on the HSCA have never been proven to be anything but
gunshots. There are *two* gunshots approximately .8 seconds apart on
the tape. On the enhanced tape there are also echoes that can be
heard. The echoes are *separate* from the gunshots.






-- 
===============================================================================
        "We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin -- Split Second

schuck@sfu.ca                                           Vote No on October 26th
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk