(PART 11)

JFK conspiracy theorist James DiEugenio made a return appearance on
Len Osanic's "Black Op Radio" show on October 30, 2008 (above), with
DiEugenio spouting more of the usual anti-LN and pro-conspiracy junk
that we've heard a million times before.

DiEugenio's 10/30/08 BlackOp appearance features a portion of his
lengthy review of Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 book "Reclaiming History",
with James verbally assaulting as much of VB's excellent book as he
can within the 105-minute radio show.

DiEugenio also gets in a few more jabs at me near the beginning of the
broadcast, mainly with respect to the topic of Lee Harvey Oswald's
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (although Jim thinks I might very well be
Dave Reitzes, which always makes me smile when I hear that).

James D. continues to insist, incorrectly, that "PROOF" exists that
additional Mannlicher-Carcano Model 91/38 rifles (besides just LHO's
rifle; CE139) were stamped with serial number "C2766".

Jim actually thinks that since a conspiracy kook named Thomas H. Purvis
said that he owned a Carcano rifle with a HIGHER serial number than
C2766 (C5-something), this therefore somehow, in effect, "proves"
that a second Carcano Model 91/38 existed with the same number on
it as CE139 ("C2766").

But, of course, Purvis' nonsense regarding the higher serial number
"proves" no such thing. Purvis never saw a second Carcano 91/38 with
"C2766" stamped on it. He just assumes that since his rifle had a
"C5XXX" number, it must mean that a second 91/38 rifle (other than
CE139, that is) must have been produced with the number "C2766"
on it at that particular Carcano manufacturing plant (wherever it might
have been).


DiEugenio then goes on to repeat the incorrect information about how
Dr. John K. Lattimer once owned a rifle with the number C2766 on it.

But if DiEugenio had bothered to read a few of my recent Internet
posts regarding this matter (and I'm pretty sure that James has looked
at some of my recent posts, based on his comments about me on BlackOp
on both October 9 and October 30), he would have found this 10/6/08 post, wherein I repeat the information about Lattimer, which is information
that was posted in 2004 by John Canal. The Purvis/Carcano matter is
tackled in that same post, btw:

"The book ["Kennedy And Lincoln"] was printed before we noticed
the error [re. the C2766 serial number] and it was too late to correct
it." -- Dr. John K. Lattimer; April 2004

But even if James D. never saw the above post, I wonder if Jim ever
asked himself the following question---

What are the odds of Dr. Lattimer being able to actually get ahold of
a rifle exactly like Oswald's that was stamped with the EXACT SAME

Apparently, Jim must think that such an incredible occurrence is
routine and not remarkable in the least.


Footnote -- Of course, even if a second Carcano 91/38 rifle were to
suddenly drop from the heavens into a conspiracy theorist's waiting
lap, it wouldn't go very far toward debunking any of the lone-assassin-
favoring evidence that exists in the JFK murder case.

Such a heaven-sent C2766 Carcano would only go to show that at least
one other gun like Oswald's was stamped with the same serial number
that CE139 possesses.

In other words -- So what?

The likelihood of Klein's shipping OSWALD a rifle with that serial
number on it in March of 1963 (which we know that Klein's did, without
question; Waldman Exhibit No. 7 proves that fact beyond every speck of
a doubt)....and then having a DIFFERENT rifle with that exact same
serial number on it being found in the Depository after the
assassination with OSWALD'S palmprint on it (and proven by ballistics
tests to have been the rifle that fired the bullets that killed
President Kennedy)....is so remote, that even the hardline CTers of
the world should be too embarrassed to even consider it.

But, of course, they're not embarrassed at all. I guess they think
that such an incredible "Double C2766" occurrence could have easily
happened in November 1963 (or whenever). Just ask people like Thomas
H. Purvis and James DiEugenio.


Now, I know that some people reading this are probably going to think
that I just made up the following hilarious remarks made by Jim
DiEugenio on 10/30/08 -- but, hand over my heart, I'm not fabricating
this stuff from whole cloth. Honest. ....

DiEugenio actually thinks that Vincent T. Bugliosi, Esq. (or any
lawyer who would have prosecuted Lee Oswald in a court of law, had
JFK's murderer [Oswald, of course] lived to stand trial) would have
had a very difficult time getting Oswald's rifle (CE139) introduced
into evidence at a real trial.

Of course, as we know, the rifle (CE139) and the Stretcher Bullet
(CE399) WERE, in fact, introduced into evidence at a court proceeding
in 1986 in London, during the TV mock trial that Bugliosi was involved
in ["On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald"].

Now, yes, it's true that the '86 mock trial wasn't a "real" trial.
There's no denying that fact. But, as far as I am aware, REAL RULES OF
LAW were adhered to during the course of that simulated trial, and
that would certainly include (or it should!) the court rules that
pertain to the "admissibility of evidence".

Which, if true, means that both the rifle (CE139) and the Stretcher
Bullet (CE399) would not have had any trouble getting introduced into
evidence during a real trial. Because those two items (CE139 & CE399)
were mentioned countless times by numerous witnesses during the TV
trial in London in '86.

But even apart from the above reference re. that evidence being
accepted at a "mock" trial, DiEugenio's comments about Oswald's rifle
being inadmissible as evidence at a REAL trial is really, really
kooky. In fact, this type of crazy shit borders on sheer insanity.

DiEugenio thinks that due to the fact that Parkland Hospital's O.P.
Wright was not able to positively identify the Stretcher Bullet as the
bullet he was later shown (CE399), this fact ALONE(!) means that
Oswald's rifle could never be introduced into evidence at LHO's trial.

I'm not kidding....Jimmy D. actually said that.

Of course, Jim decides to STOP right there with the Wright/CE399
thing, instead of telling the radio audience (i.e., the 2 people
listening who weren't already asleep by that time; and, believe me,
the October 30 BlackOp program is a real snooze-fest, to be sure)
about all of the OTHER stuff besides CE399 that connects Rifle CE139
to John Kennedy's murder.

Things like:

1.) The two large bullet fragments found IN THE PRESIDENT'S LIMOUSINE,
which are fragments that positively came FROM THE VERY SAME RIFLE that
Mr. DiEugenio thinks could never be introduced into evidence at a real

2.) The three empty bullet shells found in the Book Depository's
Sniper's Nest, which are shells that positively came from Rifle CE139
as well.

3.) The mere fact that Oswald's rifle (CE139) was found inside the
building from where gunshots were fired at the President (regardless
of any bullets or shells being linked to it or not)! And not just
found in the same building from where shots were fired at JFK...but
the rifle was found on the very same FLOOR of that building from where
a gunman (identified by one witness as Lee H. Oswald) fired shots at
Kennedy's car!

4.) Oswald's palmprint [CE637] being found on Rifle CE139. This isn't
ballistics evidence, but it certainly ties the man who would have been
on trial (the same man IDed as the TSBD gunman by one witness) to
the rifle that was also found on that very same floor of the building
(again, regardless of ballistics/bullet evidence being introduced

In summary:

For Jim DiEugenio (or anyone) to suggest that Lee Harvey Oswald's
rifle was essentially worthless as evidence, in light of all the stuff
I just outlined above, is just flat-out idiotic.

And the list above doesn't even include Stretcher Bullet CE399, which
(of course) was definitely a bullet fired from Oswald's Carcano "to
the exclusion", and it was certainly the very same bullet that was
inside the bodies of both John Kennedy and John Connally on 11/22/63,
before it was found on Connally's stretcher at a time (prior to 2:00
PM CST) when it would have been simply stupid beyond all belief for
any plotters to even WANT to start "planting" bullets on stretchers at
Parkland, due to the lack of knowledge re. the whereabouts of ALL the
other bullets and fragments connected to the shooting at the time of
the alleged planting.

James DiEugenio, like many other CTers, believes that a "pointy-
tipped" bullet was really found on the Parkland stretcher by Darrell

Which, of course, creates a bit of a problem for most conspiracy
theorists. Because by claiming that a "pointy"-tipped bullet was
recovered at Parkland (instead of the bullet from Oswald's rifle that
was really found there, CE399), those CTers are admitting one of three
things (none of which is very appetizing to a conspiracy theorist's
palate, I'm quite sure):

1.) Either this alleged "pointy" bullet really did cause all the
damage to John Connally's body on November 22nd (and there's no
evidence of a SECOND bullet striking Governor Connally at all; so the
CTers who want to pretend he was hit by more than one bullet are only
speculating, as usual).


2.) This "pointy" bullet that CTers think existed was planted on the
stretcher by somebody prior to 2:00 PM, Dallas time, on 11/22/63.


3.) The bullet found by Tomlinson on a stretcher wasn't connected in
ANY way to the shooting of JFK & JBC on November 22nd. And is this
option a likely or reasonable alternative, especially when considering
the fact that the only other stretcher in the Parkland corridor that
the bullet could have come off of was last occupied by a young boy
(Ronnie Fuller) who was not the victim of any gunshot wounds that day?

As I said, all of the above alternative options are quite weak and
unsatisfying for almost all conspiracists.

Because, if the CT-Kooks choose #1, they are forced to admit that one
bullet COULD, indeed, have caused all of John Connally's bony injuries
and still have emerged in one piece -- and with the nose of the bullet
still "pointy", no less!! And this is something that most CTers have
always said couldn't happen in the real world in a thousand lifetimes.
(I guess the CTers who go with this option will have no choice but to
resurrect the unprovable and unsupportable "Connally Was Hit By At
Least Two Bullets" scenario.)

And if the CTers choose #2, they are forced to admit, in essence, that
the people who were "framing" Lee Harvey Oswald were so incredibly
stupid that they planted a bullet that could never be connected to the
"patsy's" rifle. And if the unknown "they" weren't really trying to
"frame" LHO, then what's the purpose of planting ANY bullet at all
inside Parkland? Just for the sport of it?

And #3 is pretty unbelievable on the face of it. Although, this highly-
unlikely option could possibly be a CTer's best bet, considering their
only other two options on the table here.

So, CTers really don't have a leg to stand on regarding their silly
theories and unprovable plots surrounding Bullet CE399. And, as I just
explained, they really already should know why that is the case. (But
they'll never admit it to anybody.)

Thanks, Mr. DiEugenio, for today's BlackOpRadio laughs. The part about
Oswald's rifle being a hunk of metal that can be thrown right into the
trash can from any kind of "evidentiary" standpoint was certainly the
highlight of tonight's hilarity.

David Von Pein
(not Dave Reitzes; sorry to disappoint you, Jim and Len)
October 2008