Reclaiming History- The Assassination Of JFK by Vincent Bugliosi

In its review of this book, Publisher’s Weekly made the excellent point that “Gerald Posner's 1993 Case Closed made most of the same points in a much more concise way”, and further notes that Bugliosi seems to be trying to set a record for footnotes. All true, but in making this complaint, PW is missing the forest for the trees in my opinion. The sheer number (over 1,000 at last count) of books trying through illogic, misdirection, omissions and flat-out LIES to prove a conspiracy existed, coupled with the fact that more than ¾ of all Americans STILL believe there was a conspiracy absolutely DEMANDS that America’s foremost prosecuting attorney make the case for Oswald acting alone by overwhelming the skeptic with evidence. I am a history teacher myself, and I loathe conspiracy theories. Badly thought out miasmas of idiocy that always depend on the evil collusion of the powerful and their supposed incredible ability to keep secrets. Such thinking is how we get ideas like spacemen building Stonehenge or the Jews being responsible for 9-11. However, there were a few things pointed out in the reams of B.S. that the JFK conspiracy theorists proffer that had always made me pause: 1 – Could the shooting be done with a “poor-quality” rifle in the time allowed, especially since Oswald was supposed to be a bad shot? 2 – If he was hit in the BACK of the head, why did Kennedy’s head fly backwards? 3 – How could one bullet have caused all those wounds and flown at such crazy angles? Well, between the animation using modern computer techniques, this book, and the Penn & Teller show, I found perfectly simple answers to all the questions. Firstly, if you bother to do the research, Oswald qualified expert marksman in the USMC, and hundreds of people HAVE duplicated the shooting, using the same rifle and in less time. Secondly, it seems the jet effect of soft brains flying out a hole can naturally push a head backwards – see the P&T show to see it done with watermelons, and finally, thanks to the computer animation, it turns out that if you place the bodies in the car as they were actually placed (Kennedy’s seat was raised and offset, Connolly was turned half way around to the right), then the wounds form a perfectly straight line. And guess where that line goes back to? You got it, the schoolbook depository sniper’s nest. So what about the Cubans and the Mafia and LBJ and the FBI and Hoover and…? It’s all crap. The sad reality for JFK and America is that a pitiful little man killed a great one, which doesn’t satisfy our need for dramatic equality. A great crime (the Holocaust, for example) requires great criminals (like the Nazis), and when something horrible is caused by a miserable little nothing for no good reason, we seem compelled to want it to be more than that. The sad reality for the conspiracy theorists is that, having devoted so much time and energy to trying to prove there was a conspiracy where none existed, they cannot abandon their beliefs in the face of reality without having to admit that have foolishly wasted their time. It is the inability to do exactly this that causes the retention of most stupid ideas. Has anyone else noticed that the people who can’t get past these theories on JFK are also always the same people who think we never landed on the moon, that there was no holocaust, and that 9-11 was the biggest conspiracy of all time? Almost nobody trusts the Warren Report, but it turns out damned near nobody has bothered to READ it! So theorists claim ‘X’ never happened, or that ‘Y’ was never asked. Along comes Bugliosi and his thousands of footnotes, who shows you in black and white that ‘X’ DID happen, or that ‘Y’ WAS asked in Volume 3, page 349, etc. The Warren report, instead of being thought of as a huge lie, ought to be treated as a case study in how to conduct an investigation. It is fair to say Bugliosi goes to pedantic extremes to document and prove the idiots wrong, but what else can be done to convince the inconvincible? If anyone reading this still has trouble accepting the fact that Oswald acted alone, then grab some popular conspiracy books AND a copy of the Warren report, and start checking footnotes. You will notice that when Bugliosi points out lies, he can cite chapter and verse where he finds data in the Warren report that the theorists claim isn’t there. The theorists are COUNTING on the idea that you will never bother to do it, but will continue to ignorantly assume that it must be lies because the government said so. If you actually think that way, it doesn’t make ME naïve, it makes YOU a lazy idiot. Speaking for all historians and history teachers everywhere, don’t bother me with your bullshit if you haven’t done your homework. http://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-History-Assassination-President-Kennedy/dp/0393045250/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-5313856-1558468?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176872876&sr=8-1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reclaiming_History

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80
udp://open.demonii.com:1337
udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969
udp://exodus.desync.com:6969

robsnobb (2008-12-30)

What a lot of crap by Vincent Bugliosi. Many people have researched for 30years and no one have believed the Oswald lone gunmen theory. Don't believe this writers story. He desnt understand a simple thing that JFK was hated by many in the goverment. He fired some high ranked politicians and was against the Wietnam war. Weapon dealers waiting to sell for billions got angry. And the fact that JFK got "soft" negotiating with Kruschev was not liked. And so on.

sonofdog (2009-05-03)

close examination of handheld footage and witness statements prove that there were more than one gunman and that the authorities changed the autopsy results for the purpose of deliberately falsifying the lone gunman theory. To counter this the assassins claim that LBJ didn't want to end up at war with the USSR, but it still proves there was a cover up to hide the fact that there were multiple gunmen involved. Oswald may have been one, if so he was supposed to take the blame. Just because he and Ruby were unstable characters does not mean they were not manipulated, in fact it makes the likelihood of that greater. Similar high level conspiracy in the murder of JFK's brother Robert. Most likely culprits a group of international bankers controlling the military industrial complex, who have owned every president since JFK including Obama. I think he has managed to prove already that he is on the side of the bankers and not the American people. Gordon Brown and Obama have just carried off one of the greatest frauds and acts of treason in history. No longer content with crashing economies and making wars these bankers have got the PM and the President to pay them back directly trillions of the money they themselves print without accountability, consequently enslaving the people of our two great nations with debt for years to come. This vanished money will fund more global corruption in their attempt at World fascist dictatorship, of the "New World Order" as they phrase it. These people have been around for a long time - see the Money Masters and you will understand that they have ruthlessly assassinated those in their way for centuries.

Hegelian.Dialectic (2009-07-26)

"In 1979, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) found both the original FBI investigation and the Warren Commission Report to be seriously flawed. The HSCA also concluded that there were at least four shots fired and that it was probable that a conspiracy existed."

shutterbun (2009-09-25)

Raise your hand if you've actually READ the book. Nobody? That's what I thought.

Ace777 (2010-01-30)

Alright rambam1776, shutterbun. Read this and tell me if you still "loathe" conspiracy theories. Hell, I bet your blind conformism will prevent you from opening the page.
http://www.reclaiminghistory.org/
I dare you to read the whole essay!

nerv666999 (2010-02-23)

I am no fan of Vincent as I still reel at how he was instrumental in convicting a man for murders that he neither directed nor attended, but if you are able, or need to wade through 1612 pages of fact and are of sound mind there is no other conclusion to draw other than it really was a ne'er do well loser that took down the US president. I think it is only that the public has such a hard time conceptualizing, not to mention just not wanting to believe that such a precise act of violence and its aftermath could happen by dumb luck. Oswald's, not Kennedy's. And if you will believe none of it ask yourself. What group of 10, 12, 20, or more conspirators could keep such a monumental secret for over 50 years?? It's just not believable, but we do because we need to believe. I've been there. I stood behind the fence, and I can tell you that anyone shooting from there is so close to the road and the many spectators Zapruder's film documents that they would have never made it out alive much less escape unnoticed. Go there, see for yourself. There is a big white X painted in the road at the point Kennedy was struck. Standing there it becomes very real, very personal, and all to plausible.

cinamnit (2013-09-04)

Hegelian.Dialectic writes: "The HSCA also concluded that there were at least four shots fired and that it was probable that a conspiracy existed."
And they based this conclusion solely on acoustical (i.e. audio) evidence that has since proven to be incorrect. In his book, Bugliosi clearly and extensively sets forth all the reasons the acoustical evidence was incorrect, as proved by several people over the years. Since that evidence was flawed, there's no evidence of a fourth bullet, ergo, no evidence of a conspiracy. Note that the the HSCA did not give any other reason for finding a conspiracy - no evidence of any specific person or people who conspired. It was just the microphone sounds of an alleged fourth bullet. Without the acoustical evidence, the HSCA conclusion falls apart.

Swamppony (2014-09-27)

Thanks for this Rambam1776! Much appreciated.