HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
Subject: Re: The Fourth Force -- initial CIA "expansion" via 40s Pentagon War Plans
Date: 10 Apr 92 16:52:37 GMT
Reply-To: m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson)
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. (VMS Software Support - Colorado)

>>>
>>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
>	by the way. I'll save the insults for later.

This is the typical method of Warren defenders. If it's published in a 
less than reputable publication then the content MUST be incorrect. This
is a ploy which works on many people who tend NOT to think for themselves.

If you go public as a Warren opponent they anything CAN and WILL be used
against your character in an attempt to discredit the content of what you
are proclaiming. There is a long/unbroken line of precedence for this.

Besides - in the '70's it was extremely difficult to get published with
anything having to do with conspiracy. Do you think Prouty went directly
to the publishers of a porn mag as his 1st choice? I think not.

I think we are now seeing a turnaround in the media regarding this. It appears
to me that Stone's "JFK" has had much to do with this. 20/20 (ABC?) just ran
their interview with Dr. Crenshaw etc...

Marty Moose
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:889 alt.conspiracy:6323 alt.activism:7681
From: andru@concerto.lcs.mit.edu (Andrew Myers)
Subject: How about Z-gifs?
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 20:44:08 GMT




Why haven't frame-by-frame GIFs of the Zapruder film (or the location

of same) been posted to this newsgroup? I bet a lot of people would
like to see them...

Andrew
From: rlent@weird.miami.fl.us (Rob Lent)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: What REALLY happened
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:38:41 EST
Organization: Weird BBS [Amiga] (305)553-3207 S. Miami, FL USA

Actually, if the FBI or CIA was involved in the JFK assasination, this issue
is one of the most important issues of our time, perhaps even the single most
important issue in the history of this country. The US has a great deal of
secret and "quasi-legal" government. We are forced to trust that government,
and can do little about it. The CIA has already expanded to far, far beyond
the authority which was given to it in 1947. If they were involved in the
assasination, what more clear evidence would one need that they are a threat
to al of our freedoms? It matters little that the individuals would have been
long since retired. We need to see if this secret government we have built is
not going to be our undoing.
From: noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring)
Subject: Re: the umbrella man question solved by the HSCA?
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 17:39:19 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon) writes:
>
>Being in Europe, you are in a good position to ask some people who were
>around in 1963 or better yet in 1938 if they would have perceived the
>simple display of an umbrella as a comment on any given leader's treason/
>capitulation/appeasement of enemy forces. If it would not have "read" as
>a symbol, i.e. communicated the intended meaning, in a European context,
>it would have been even less likely to do so in the U.S. (I agree it
>sounds farfetched)

From what I've read so far, the HSCA committee found and questioned the
umbrella man.  Have researchers found any information about this person that
indicates that he *may* have been involved, or is he essentially clean?

Jon Noring

-- 
=============================================================================
| Jon Noring          | noring@netcom.netcom.com | "The dogs bark, but the  |
| JKN International   | IP    : 192.100.81.100   |  caravan moves on."      |
| 1312 Carlton Place  | Phone : (510) 294-8153   | "Pack your lunch, sit in |
| Livermore, CA 94550 | V-Mail: (510) 862-1101   |  the bushes, and watch." |
=============================================================================
"If your annual income today is $50,000, you have the same buying power as
the average coal miner did in 1949, adjusted for taxes and inflation," John
Sestina, nationally recognized Certified Financial Planner;  quoted in 1987.
From: david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Head Shot - Lead or Copper Jacketed Bullet?
Date: 17 Apr 92 03:10:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.33124
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


In article <16APR199220162299@sigma.tamu.edu> mst4298@sigma.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
|(David Wright) writes...
|>mst4298@summa.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
|>|david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright) writes...
|>|>mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
|
|
|>|>||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 systems 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. 
|
|	And the x-rays and test bullets show the kind of fragmentation that
|	seem to be common with certain FMJ designs ;->. Now, where have
|	you leared sooooo much about the cranial fragmentation patterns
|	of dum-dum bullets?


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. 

|	Finally, I return to the fundamental. Skull tests conducted
|	by Lattimer and	Olivier independently of each other show
|	that 6.5mm FMJ bullets fragment in the fashion seen in 
|	the JFK assassination.

Finally, you have nothing to do but repeat your baseless allegations.
-- 
   |^^^^^^|      _______________________________________________________
   |      |      |                                                     | 
   |      |      | "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: mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: The Doctor Speaks
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:49:00 GMT
Organization: Incontinental Blather, Inc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes...
>mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
>>jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes...
>>>Crenshaw states in his book that when the head doctor persisted in insisting
>>>that the body remain, several men in suits displayed their guns. He believes
>>>they would have killed any doctor who stood in their way.

>>	The 'head doctor' was Earl Rose, the Chief Medical Examiner of
>>	Dallas. There are many accounts of this encounter, yet this is
>>	the first one that mentioned guns drawn.

>Sorry if I was misleading... Crenshaw referred to the men drawing their
>suits back so the guns could be seen. Still, not too cool for a hospital
>emergency room. I would say, however, and I think even Crenshaw points
>out in another context, these men were stressed out. Nevertheless, I find
>the account interesting and chilling. How much more information can these
>"silent" doctors tell us?

	Actually, one of Kennedy's staff members remembers wanting to 
	start a bit o' fisticuffs with Rose when the doctor refused		
	to allow the Presidential party to leave Parkland with the
	body.

	As for the "silent doctors", two of them seem to have already
	spoken, but they certainly don't tow Crenshaw's line. Then there
	are the four Parkland doctors who saw the full set of autopsy
	photos, etc, etc.


>>>For what its worth, Dr. Crenshaw feels that Oswald would have survived if...

>>	I don't know. Ruby's bullet holed Oswald's descending Aorta and
>>	the inferior Vena Cava. I'm not sure how far I believe
>>	Crenshaw's claim that the Parkland team has staunched the
>>	massive bleeding within Oswald's body. Dr Rose's autopsy
>>	records finding something like eight liters of blood in
>>	Oswald's abdomen (the average adult body contains about half
>>	as much). Something was *really* bleeding.

>Well, I can't really say. He seems credible to me -- I'd suggest reading
>his account and deciding. He did mention the aorta and that sounded 
>hopeless to me, too, but he gives quite a few details. Oswald had not gone
>into fatal shock yet, and Crenshaw claims that later "major bleeding had been
>brought under control."

	That's what bothers me. Then again, I haven't read Crenshaw's
	account.



                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(0)---   ______________________________________
\__                      \___/~/|\~\___/                              _______/
  \__ mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu / / | \ \\ 	      Ambiguity is the      ______////
    \__ Mitchell S Todd    /    |    \\   Devil's tetherball     ______////
      \___________________/           \\____________________________////
         \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/_____________\\\///////////////////////////
                           /////\\\\\\\\\\\
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 17 Apr 1992 00:23:35 CDT
From: <U54778@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Post Office Box
 <8APR199213204593@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> <8APR199220554543@rigel.tamu.edu>
 <1992Apr13.180252.17574@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu>

They were holding LHO on the Oswald name because they already associated him
with the TSBD.  His boss Truly identified him as one of the people who was
missing from the work floor after the rucus on Elm St.  The Dallas police were
looking for him within an hour of shooting.  It is still a source of suspician
as to why the Hidell card was not listed.
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Questions
Keywords: New info on JFK assassination
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 22:48:55 GMT

judy@ethel.mitre.org (Judith S. Sider) writes:

>In article <schuck.701901719@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>>mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
>>
>>Who else was shooting that day in Dallas? The answer is that
>>the tape is a genuine recording of what went on in Dallas.
>>As the NOVA program pointed out, transcribing errors, or 
>>crosstalk on the dictabelt may have also recorded conversations
>>a minute later. A dictabelt is a drum recording device. As the
>>drum rotates, previous tracks are directly beside the current
>>recording track. It is possible that track that recorded the
>>shots in Dealy Plaza also recorded information from
>>a minute later.

>>The dictabelt recording is genuine! No other shooting was
>>recorded. It was the JFK assassination that was recorded.
>>The microphone was in Dealy Plaza!

>First of all, it was my understanding that the NAS did not confirm
>with 100% certainty that the recording contained gunfire, as opposed
>to some other type of noise (a backfire, for example).  But even if
>the recording did contain gunfire, how do you make the leap from the
>dictabelt *possibly* recording sound from a minute after the
>assassination to the dictabelt *definitely* containing the assassination
>shots?  

After hearing the tape, there is no doubt in my mind it was gunfire.
You could even hear the echoes of the shots.

The *only* problem with the tape is that there was some information
on it that came from about one minute after the assassination.

If you've seen the dictabelt drum, it would be easy to explain
this away with a double recorded track. The assassination could have
been recorded, and then the needle tracked over the information a 
second time. Since no one was shooting a minute after the
assassination it is easy to assume the rifle shots recorded *were*
the genuine article. 






Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy,alt.activism
From: cook@vcsesu.enet.dec.com (The Cookster!)
Subject: Re: The Fourth Force -- initial CIA "expansion" via 40s Pentagon War Plans
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 10 APR 92 12:49:19    


In article <167C5A80C.MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu>, MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman) writes...

>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".

	Oh excuse me for making a mistake. Remind me to beat myself
	later.

>Oh, no need. I think you've handled yourself quite well already.

	So have you. I'd suggest cutting down on the coffee. 

>You know the old saying- don't f*** with eagles if you don't know hom
>to fly.

	I'd cut you apart for the spelling error but I refuse to
	include such pathetic whining.

	I've been eating people for breakfast like you in notes
	conferencing for 8 years. One more hash mark on my office
	wall won't bother me.

	Now that we are done bickering, why not refute the facts
	and/or opinions stated in the articles?


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

 Peter R. Cook			Mystic Powers new EP - Life in the Fast Lane 
 Digital Equipment Corp.	now available. Inquire within.
 Littleton, MA.

 G.A.F. Productions		"1984 has past, forget about Big Brother,
 Clinton, MA.			 Welcome to the 90's where the government's
				 your mother!" - Scatterbrain

 Flames not welcome. Serious inquires only. Opinions are mine, all mine!
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:861 alt.conspiracy:6261 alt.activism:7538
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Friday, 10 Apr 1992 22:15:11 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>

geez, who is this neanderthal Edleman?  Wasn't there just lately a note
praising the lack of insults in the repartee in this news group?  this may be
coming to an end.
The articles in the skin mags were there primarily because they were the only
publishers not scared off by government pressure to let the subject die
quietly.
And as long as we are all in such a frisky mood, I want to offer some great
deals on real estate around Rocky Flats to those who have such great faith
and hold deep comfort from Gov. hired expert testimony and official
pronouncements from our Gov. institutions.  You know Rocky Flats, the place
where gov. agencies spent years and great effort in comforting those they
encouraged to live there that there just wasn't a iota of anything to worry
about.
From: mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Neuro-Muscular Reaction
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:39:00 GMT
Organization: Incontinental Blather, Inc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

(Neal C. Wickham) writes...

>So do you have reference or any first hand experience with "sudden 
>downfulx of neural impulses" or did you just pull this out of your ass?

	Read my last reply to David Wright's post. Further, refer to
	the HSCA hearings, v1, page 400 or so (Sturdivan's testimony),
	it's the probabyl the most accessible source for this; it's
	something of a staple of conspiracy debate, so you'll likely 
	find discussions of either it or a strawman version of it
	in various conspiracy tracts and tomes.


                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(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: The Doctor Speaks
Date: 10 Apr 92 15:03:46 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

In article <1992Apr7.204055.5332@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>
>Crenshaw states in his book that when the head doctor persisted in insisting
>that the body remain, several men in suits displayed their guns. He believes
>they would have killed any doctor who stood in their way.
>
Not the head doctor, even, the County Medical Examiner, who was a very
well qualified forensic pathologist, one of the best in the country
at the time.  He rushed to Parkland when he heard of the assassination.
He was directly threatened.  This was clearly a violation
of Texas Law, which required autopsies by the medical examiner in
all murder cases in the state of Texas.  



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hicks@pulsar.rtp.dg.com (Linus Hicks)
Subject: Won't change history (was Re: What REALLY happened)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 00:54:44 GMT
Reply-To: hicks@dg-rtp.dg.com
Organization: Data General Corp., Research Triangle Park, NC

In article <61560001@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com>, hypes@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Gary Hypes) writes:

      [Stuff deleted]
 
|> - The Evil Government conspiracists would get to stand up and say,
|> "THERE! SEE!?!" - And then what? Personally, I will finish my dinner and
|> go work on the lawn; my dogs will go back to sleep; the mail and
|> newspaper will still be delivered more or less on time. It may affect
|> our understanding of history, but it will not CHANGE history, past or
|> present. The greatest impact would be on the Kennedy family, who would
|> be more tortured, I think, than relieved to discover that the government
|> had murdered JFK.
|> 
|> I don't mean to imply that it's pointless to pursue; there is always
|> some intrinsic merit in uncovering "truth", and I feel that if
|> governmental elements were involved, it's worth knowing.
|> 
|> But I have to wonder if "truth" is what really motivates most conspiracy
|> buffs. I think that, by and large, it is hatred and distrust of Big
|> Government - and the power that accompanies an opportunity to prove Big
|> wrong or guilty in some demeaning fashion.

If it didn't change history, then I would be very sad. Perhaps "truth"
doesn't motivate some conspiracy buffs. But there seems to be a certain
lack of integrety among those in government, in the CIA, and the FBI.
You seem to assume (as I'm sure most Americans do) you have the right
to certain freedoms without having to make sure those freedoms are
still intact. I'm not sure we have that luxury. If the government (or
certain elements within the government) is willing to go to the
trouble to (assuming the worst) kill a standing president, or (assuming
the best) protect the public from traumatic information, what assurance
do we have that the government is truly acting in our best interests?
At the very best we are considered incompetent. At the worst we are
considered manageable. That doesn't flatter me.

Information is our (we the people) only tool.
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: 16 Apr 92 19:51:38 GMT
Organization: Decision Systems Laboratory, Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA.

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?
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Head Shot - Lead or Copper Jacketed Bullet?
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 02:19:00 GMT

tjfs@tadtec.uucp (Tim Steele) writes:

>In article <schuck.703059944@sfu.ca> schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck) writes:

>   On the X-Rays, a circular ring is visible.

>Where is the ring - on the back of the skull, presumably, implying he
>was shot from the rear?

I don't have *exact* location of the ring. All I know is that
is clear evidence of a lead bullet hitting JFK, not the
copper jacketed bullets supposedly used by Oswald -- and
matching the shell cases found in the TSBD.

>I'm not sure if there is confusion as to
>which is the entrance wound on the skull...  

Actually, there is a *lot* of confusion which is the 
entrance wound. The Parkland Doctors and Nurses saw an exit
wound in the back of the skull. Some saw an entrance wound
in the right temple area, at least one saw a wound in the left
temple area.

Humes, one of the Doctors at the autopsy, put a wound 
"2.5 cm to the right and slightly above the external occipital
protuberance".

An autopsy drawing by Ida Dox put the entrance wound about 4 inches
above the one Humes saw. *However*, an actual picture of the
back of JFK's skull shows no entrance wound in either location.
The picture also fails to show the exit wound described by
Humes. It also fails to show the wound described by most of the
Parkland staff -- a 2 1/2 inch wide hole in the right occipital
area of the skull.

>later on you seem to
>imply the entrance wound was on the right side towards the front and
>the bullet fragmented inside before "blowing out the rear of his skull".

Thats the wound described by most of the Parkland Staff.

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk