What are your top 5 JFK assassination books?

[Thomas Graves]

I didn't mean to derail this thread into a thread on the SBT. But, to answer your question, I have two single-assassin theorist books in my possession which devote a considerable amount of space to de-bunking the SBT. One is A Simple Act of Murder, by Mark Fuhrman, and the other is The Assassination of JFK by Robert Wagner. These writers found the SBT unbelievable, but concluded there was enough evidence to support Oswald's sole guilt without the SBT.

Pat,

Did they say anything about the penetrating ability (e.g., three feet of pine wood) of that kind of bullet when fired from that kind of rifle?

Did they say anything about that bullet's tendency to yaw downwards when exiting a body?

--  MWT 

[Pat Speer]

The single bullet theory really is fact though. When you examine all of the available evidence, there really is no other plausible scenario. For you to say that the SBT is absolute rubbish makes me doubt that you are the real Pat Speer. Pat Speer is not a stupid guy and he has examined all of the available evidence. He doesn't embrace the SBT but he doesn't dismiss it outright either. Unless he's had some sort of head injury recently.

To be clear on my position... It is not impossible for a bullet to go through one individual and wound another. It is unlikely, however, that a high-velocity bullet piercing Kennedy's neck on the proposed trajectory would create such little damage. It is unlikely as well that a bullet creating the damage in Connally would end up so undamaged. I have chapter after chapter on this stuff on my website, and performed a presentation on this stuff at the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report Conference in Bethesda.

My problem, then, is not with those who think the SBT has gotta be true, and probably happened in one way or another. It is with those who have fibbed and fibbed and fibbed to support its probability. Specter, Lattimer, Sturdivan, Canning, Myers, Haag, etc... It's just awful.

The wounds don't align...move the wounds.
Connally's back wound is not suggestive of a tumbling bullet...use the wrong measurement.
The amount of bullet velocity lost during the tests performed for the WC don't add up...misrepresent them in the Warren Report, and then, if you're Sturdivan, change them for your book.
And that's not even to get into Canning, who was so desperate to claim the wounds aligned he claimed Kennedy was leaning forward when struck in the back and then sat up in his seat before getting hit in the back of the head--precisely the opposite of what is shown in the Z-film.

It's been a con job since the beginning.

As far as the NOVA program and the cartoon posted by Graves...I saw that on the day it was first broadcast on a morning news show and immediately posted it on the internet to warn people another con job was in the works. You see, that animation shows the bullet enter the back of the collar, when the bullet indisputably entered 5 inches below that location. As I recall, Haag then defended this deception by saying that the controversy about the SBT was all about what happened after the bullet exited the neck--which was as big a whopper as one can tell.

[Thomas Graves]

To be clear on my position... It is not impossible for a bullet to go through one individual and wound another. It is unlikely, however, that a high-velocity bullet piercing Kennedy's neck on the proposed trajectory would create such little damage. It is unlikely as well that a bullet creating the damage in Connally would end up so undamaged. I have chapter after chapter on this stuff on my website, and performed a presentation on this stuff at the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report Conference in Bethesda.

My problem, then, is not with those who think the SBT has gotta be true, and probably happened in one way or another. It is with those who have fibbed and fibbed and fibbed to support its probability. Specter, Lattimer, Sturdivan, Canning, Myers, Haag, etc... It's just awful.

The wounds don't align...move the wounds.
Connally's back wound is not suggestive of a tumbling bullet...use the wrong measurement.
The amount of bullet velocity lost during the tests performed for the WC don't add up...misrepresent them in the Warren Report, and then, if you're Sturdivan, change them for your book.
And that's not even to get into Canning, who was so desperate to claim the wounds aligned he claimed Kennedy was leaning forward when struck in the back and then sat up in his seat before getting hit in the back of the head--precisely the opposite of what is shown in the Z-film.

It's been a con job since the beginning.

As far as the NOVA program and the cartoon posted by Graves...I saw that on the day it was first broadcast on a morning news show and immediately posted it on the internet to warn people another con job was in the works. You see, that animation shows the bullet enter the back of the collar, when the bullet indisputably entered 5 inches below that location. As I recall, Haag then defended this deception by saying that the controversy about the SBT was all about what happened after the bullet exited the neck--which was as big a whopper as one can tell.

How did Haag lie, Pat?

--  MWT 

[John Tonkovich]

How did Haag lie, Pat?

--  MWT 

Obviously, it is Pat Speer who is lying, because, of course, he is a dupe of the Russian secret services, and has been a paid agent since the Soviet era, when he was also part of a "doubling project", codenamed " 2 Speers are better than 1". Mark Lane, of course, has also been involved since the late '50s, briefing the two Pat's. We won't even get into CIA photo fakery, Warren Report errors and omissions, etc. which was, yes, performed by Russian  "moles", rather (deliberately) poorly, to implicate U.S. government agencies- falsely, of course.

It will all be in my book - definitely top 5 material - which clears up everything, including the SBT chapter, in which guest contributor Gerald Posner will reveal his exclusive interviews with CE399 and the 6th floor window, thereby putting to  rest all conspiracy theories - including those that, sadly, exist regarding his alleged plagiarism and, uh, historical inventions.

In stores this fall! Save your pennies!

[Thomas Graves]

Obviously, it is Pat Speer who is lying, because, of course, he is a dupe of the Russian secret services, and has been a paid agent since the Soviet era, when he was also part of a "doubling project", codenamed " 2 Speers are better than 1". Mark Lane, of course, has also been involved since the late '50s, briefing the two Pat's. We won't even get into CIA photo fakery, Warren Report errors and omissions, etc. which was, yes, performed by Russian  "moles", rather (deliberately) poorly, to implicate U.S. government agencies- falsely, of course.

It will all be in my book - definitely top 5 material - which clears up everything, including the SBT chapter, in which guest contributor Gerald Posner will reveal his exclusive interviews with CE399 and the 6th floor window, thereby putting to  rest all conspiracy theories - including those that, sadly, exist regarding his alleged plagiarism and, uh, historical inventions.

In stores this fall! Save your pennies!

Well put, Bratan!

(By the way, how much does Putin pay you?)

--  MWT 

[John Tonkovich]

Well put, Bratan!

(By the way, how much does Putin pay you?)

--  MWT 

Is the satire lost on the above individual...or is he doubling back?

Putin pays me millions. : )

Two Pat Speers...how could I not have seen that?  And both Soviet moles. Or ,.triple agents? Can twins be only double agents?
Inquiring minds must know!!

[Thomas Graves]

Is the satire lost on the above individual...or is he doubling back?

Putin pays me millions. : )

Two Pat Speers...how could I not have seen that?  And both Soviet moles. Or ,.triple agents? Can twins be only double agents?
Inquiring minds must know!!

He's getting his money's worth, that's for sure!

Where did you learn to speak English so well?

--  MWT 

[Tim Nickerson]

To be clear on my position... It is not impossible for a bullet to go through one individual and wound another. It is unlikely, however, that a high-velocity bullet piercing Kennedy's neck on the proposed trajectory would create such little damage. It is unlikely as well that a bullet creating the damage in Connally would end up so undamaged. I have chapter after chapter on this stuff on my website, and performed a presentation on this stuff at the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report Conference in Bethesda.

My problem, then, is not with those who think the SBT has gotta be true, and probably happened in one way or another. It is with those who have fibbed and fibbed and fibbed to support its probability. Specter, Lattimer, Sturdivan, Canning, Myers, Haag, etc... It's just awful.

The wounds don't align...move the wounds.
Connally's back wound is not suggestive of a tumbling bullet...use the wrong measurement.
The amount of bullet velocity lost during the tests performed for the WC don't add up...misrepresent them in the Warren Report, and then, if you're Sturdivan, change them for your book.
And that's not even to get into Canning, who was so desperate to claim the wounds aligned he claimed Kennedy was leaning forward when struck in the back and then sat up in his seat before getting hit in the back of the head--precisely the opposite of what is shown in the Z-film.

It's been a con job since the beginning.

As far as the NOVA program and the cartoon posted by Graves...I saw that on the day it was first broadcast on a morning news show and immediately posted it on the internet to warn people another con job was in the works. You see, that animation shows the bullet enter the back of the collar, when the bullet indisputably entered 5 inches below that location. As I recall, Haag then defended this deception by saying that the controversy about the SBT was all about what happened after the bullet exited the neck--which was as big a whopper as one can tell.

Pat , you should stick to the things that you know. The SBT isn't one of them.