(PART 529)


Far from sticking to the facts, 'Reclaiming History' is far and away the most factually inept, theory driven and speculative book ever written on the Kennedy assassination.


The above review-ending verbal salvo unleashed at Vincent Bugliosi by Martin Hay is far and away the most ridiculous and "factually inept" statement made (to date) by any reviewer at Amazon.com regarding Mr. Bugliosi's outstanding book "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy".

In actuality, Mr. Bugliosi's 2007 JFK tome is far and away the best (and most accurate) book that has ever been written about the death of America's 35th President (Mr. Hay's ludicrous statement quoted above notwithstanding, of course).

Re: The duplication of Lee Oswald's Dallas shooting performance......

Besides "Specialist Miller" for the Warren Commission in 1964, there are far better examples of gunmen who have not only duplicated Oswald's "2-for-3, 8.4-second" shooting "feat", but several gunmen have far SURPASSED Oswald's Dealey Plaza performance -- with the best (and most visible) examples of this being the multiple shooters who beat LHO's performance IN FRONT OF CAMERAS for the CBS-TV documentary "A CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report" in June of 1967 [see the video below].

One of the 11 volunteer gunmen participating in the CBS tests achieved 3 hits on the target in his 3 shots....in only 5.2 seconds!

And those 1967 tests were performed under nearly identical conditions to that of Oswald's, i.e., with a moving target (11 MPH) and the gunmen situated in a specially-constructed tower, 60 feet above the ground, the same height as Oswald's 6th-Floor sniper's perch in the Texas School Book Depository Building.

Naturally, nearly all conspiracy-happy individuals will forever ignore those very impressive CBS-TV tests done in 1967; and, as I said, the shooters were doing this ON CAMERA.

One of the CBS shooters, in fact, got off three shots from a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (just like Oswald's) in 4.1 seconds! That shooter managed only one hit on the silhouetted target, but that on-camera 4.1-second shooting performance was still very impressive, in that it easily debunks another false claim that the theorists love to trot out of their stale closets every now and then, that being the nonsensical claim (i.e., the lie) that it's simply impossible for Oswald (or anyone else in the world) to have fired three shots from a bolt-action Mannlicher-Carcano rifle in less than 5.6 seconds.

Mr. Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" is not without its share of errors, of course. Good heavens, a book of its size and scope is bound to have a few mistakes in it, both factual errors and the proverbial typos (although the overall number of typos in Bugliosi's book is, indeed, remarkably small for a publication of its enormous size).

I've documented some of the mistakes that pop up in Vince Bugliosi's book -- HERE and HERE.

Interestingly, though, when most of these errors that I found in the book are corrected, Mr. Bugliosi's bottom-line "Oswald Did It Alone" conclusion is actually enhanced and buttressed, instead of these corrections leading toward conspiracy.

In summary -- Conspiracists like Amazon book reviewer Martin Hay just flat-out don't like to see (or read about) their make-believe conspiracies regarding JFK's 1963 murder taken to the woodshed, which is what Vincent Bugliosi admirably and handily does within the 2,792 total pages of "Reclaiming History".

Therefore, people like Martin have no choice but to try and verbally tear to shreds the immense 21-year-long effort that Bugliosi put into his exemplary JFK book, a book that comes complete with more than 10,000 citations to back up Vincent's lone-assassin conclusions.

If only people like Martin Hay had just ONE non-Oswald bullet (or gun or bullet shell) to prop up on their conspiracy mantle. But, alas, the conspiracists of the world have ZERO bullets, or guns, or anything else of a physical evidence nature to back up their notions of conspiracy in the JFK case. And, of course, they never have. And never will.

It never ceases to amaze me at how these conspiracy-loving clowns continue to think, year after year, that their theories regarding the JFK assassination actually deserve to be treated with respect, despite a complete lack of ANY solid evidence to support them.

But a total lack of physical evidence to support the multi-gun conspiracy that nearly all conspiracists place their faith in never stops the staunch and eager theorists from putting forth their nonsense, with those theorists expecting their silliness to be lapped up with glee by everyone who is subjected to it.

David Von Pein
May 13, 2009