Ron Ecker Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 (edited) And of course CBS etc. like what Fuhrman has to say in the new book that they are helping him promote, “A Simple Act of Murder.” Oswald did it. "From the point of the first shot, they are simple shots. They are easy shots. They are easy shots for an average civilian marksman, let alone somebody that was trained by the Marine Corps.” Something tells me that LAPD is better off without this guy investigating homicides. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/12/...in1614016.shtml http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Books/story?id=1941755&page=1 Edited May 12, 2006 by Ron Ecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Crowe Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Exactly right Ron, The guy is a bafoon who probably worked about 30 minutes into looking into the case and then did a book, and believe me the PD is very happy he no longer is around..I was going to watch it, then decided not to, as its the same old crap, like lastnight on the discovery channel which was good until seeing Posner, made me cough up some dinner, starting to look like Michael Jackson... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francesca Akhtar Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 And of course CBS etc. like what Fuhrman has to say in the new book that they are helping him promote, “A Simple Act of Murder.” Oswald did it. "From the point of the first shot, they are simple shots. They are easy shots. They are easy shots for an average civilian marksman, let alone somebody that was trained by the Marine Corps.” Easy shots?! Oh please. I wonder if He has actually been to Dealey Plaza. I think they need to get someone like Craig Roberts, on a programme like that to respond to such an absurd statement. I'd quite like to read the book though, if only for the entertainment value and the fun in seeing how bad it is Will anyone on here be getting it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Lying thugs like Gordon Liddy, Oliver North and Mark Fuhrman become media darlings. Honest, accurate books like Somebody Would Have Talked and Breach of Trust struggle to find an audience outside of the JFK research community and are ignored by the major news organizations. Its business as usual in the United States of America. If the truth "shall set ye free" then we Americans are living in the shackles of whatever the opposite of freedom is. We live in a prison of falsehoods and dark secrets far beyond our ability to understand. We have been conditioned to accept the unacceptable, believe the unbelievable, and quickly forget the unforgettable. Is our mental incarceration outrageous, tragic, or just cynically laughable? Personally, I find it revolting and repugnant that Mark Fuhrman could offer his Posneresque bulls___ theories to the mix and get national publicity to help his crap sell. Aware of the publicity, the publisher Harper Collins will undoubtedly print a plethora of copies, many of which will ultimately be resigned to the remainder shelves at your local Borders or Barnes & Noble. But the damage will have been done. With a heavy, collective sigh, we can add another one to the Liebleresque pile of disinformation. Harper Collins has generously afforded us a look at this masterpiece. Fuhrman begins in the first person with the "everybody remembers exactly where they were when they learned President Kennedy had been killed" vehicle. He quickly goes on to relate that he grew up in Los Angeles, tells a few anecdotes that have the distinct flavor of an author's imagination, conjured up to make good reading. In the sixth grade in 1963, Fuhrman tells the reader that he didn't know anything about the Kennedy family and that he "didn't even understand what they meant when they called him rich." Those claims deserve no further comment. They speak for themselves. Fuhrman says that he spent the next couple of afternoons in front of his family's Zenith black and white television. He writes: One afternoon, sitting just a couple of feet from our television, I watched carefully as the assassin walked in front of the cameras. Looking back over my shoulder, I saw my mom ironing our uniforms for school the next day. Turning back toward the television, I saw Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed by Jack Ruby. One afternoon? Ruby shot Oswald at 11:21 CST. In Los Angeles, it would have been a couple of hours earlier. Where the hell are Fuhrman's editors and fact checkers? Fuhrman can't even get his own story straight. Granted, this has nothing to do with the facts surrounding President Kennedy's murder. But it does smack of the intellectual dishonesty that is almost certain to be inherent throughout Mark Fuhrman's book. If there is any doubt of that, just read the interview he gave to Harry Smith of CBS. (Thanks to Ron Ecker for the link). Mike Hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted May 12, 2006 Author Share Posted May 12, 2006 It's not over yet. This word from Gary Mack: "Fuhrman is on the Hannity & Colmes show on the Fox News Network tonight, 8pm CDT." Mark Fuhrman and Sean Hannity. I haven't watched Hannity & Colmes (or any other network "news" show) for months. If I watch it tonight, I'll have to have a puke can beside my chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 I had a look through the book the other day. Almost bought it. Although, Fuhrman's book is a bit shallow, and obviously incorrect about a lot of things, it does have some positive attributes, which have got the Posner and Myers worshippers over at alt.assassination.JFK in an uproar. Get this. Fuhrman believes the first shot miss at frame 160 accepted as gospel by the LN community, is bs. I didn't read it long enough to get a full take on his single-bullet theory, but my impression was that he doesn't buy it. He holds that the first shot went through Kennedy, was deflected upwards and out of the car after hitting the windshield trim, that the second shot hit Connally, and the third shot was the head shot. While his support for the Oswald did it camp is undoubtedly annoying, I can't help but think his book, and the mainstream attention it's receiving, represents a crack in the facade of the widely accepted Posner mythology. There was NO missed shot at frame 160. The Single-bullet theory IS bs. And now a semi-respected crime solver has thrown his weight into demonstrating this. Call me an optimist, if you like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 From Gary Mack: "The only reason I know about it is that he was here with a Fox crew yesterday and taped some scenes with me. I hadn't read his book yet, so couldn't comment about it at all. He believes the SBT didn't happen, that shot 1 went through JFK, shot 2 hit Connally, and a fragment of the head shot wounded Tague. But he's a no-conspiracy guy. Interesting that some ten years ago I was guest on his old radio show. At that time, he was pro-conspiracy. He said he turned around after reading and examining the ballistics evidence." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted May 13, 2006 Author Share Posted May 13, 2006 The Single-bullet theory IS bs. And now a semi-respected crime solver has thrown his weight into demonstrating this. But he apparently retains the BS sine qua non of the SBT, which is that the bullet entered JFK's back and came out his throat. That only works with the continuing Specter-Ford lie about JFK being shot in the "back of the neck," not where Burkley, Hill, Siebert, and other witnesses said he was shot and where the autopsy photo clearly shows he was shot, which was in the BACK, about 6 inches below the neck. Does Fuhrman try to argue that something in JFK's body deflected the bullet upward to make it go out the throat? If so, what does he think deflected it? If not, his Oswald-did-it argument self-destructs with this first shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Allen Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 (edited) "He holds that the first shot went through Kennedy, was deflected upwards and out of the car after hitting the windshield trim, that the second shot hit Connally, and the third shot was the head shot." The circularity of the indentation doesn't seem to suggest a glancing trajectory - "deflected upwards and out of the car". It looks to me like it hits pretty much straight-on through the chrome and strikes into the car's steel frame. From that hit, it seems like much of it's velocity would have been robbed away - the crushed slug maybe even falling INTO the car... It also seems from the picture that an upward deflection from JFK's tie-knot would almost have had to pass through the passenger-side's adjustable sun visor. I'm pretty sure that passing OVER the top edge of the visor is the wrong trajectory to be exiting the President's neck... PHOTO REMOVED TO RECAPTURE SPACE Edited May 21, 2006 by JL Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Having decided not to buy the book for 26 bucks at Borders, I am not in a position to defend Fuhrman's theory. But I do believe he shows the bullet deflecting upwards in the body and off the tie. In other words, he acknowledges that the back wound is lower than the throat wound. While he spends some time on the ballistics evidence, he basically ignores the medical evidence. I'm not sure if he even picks an entrance for the head wound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Having decided not to buy the book for 26 bucks at Borders, I am not in a position to defend Fuhrman's theory. But I do believe he shows the bullet deflecting upwards in the body and off the tie. In other words, he acknowledges that the back wound is lower than the throat wound. While he spends some time on the ballistics evidence, he basically ignores the medical evidence. I'm not sure if he even picks an entrance for the head wound. We are talking about the guy who said "N****R" so many times on tape that the jury ignored his evidence of murder in the OJ Simpson trial.........his "celebrity" is based on racist notoriety and his wisdom is less than nil.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Having decided not to buy the book for 26 bucks at Borders, I am not in a position to defend Fuhrman's theory. But I do believe he shows the bullet deflecting upwards in the body and off the tie. In other words, he acknowledges that the back wound is lower than the throat wound. While he spends some time on the ballistics evidence, he basically ignores the medical evidence. I'm not sure if he even picks an entrance for the head wound. We are talking about the guy who said "N****R" so many times on tape that the jury ignored his evidence of murder in the OJ Simpson trial.........his "celebrity" is based on racist notoriety and his wisdom is less than nil.......... Yeah, that's the same guy. But by some bizarre twist of fate he's written a couple of successful and respected "true crime" books, and now has "credibility" as a crime solver. It was Dominick Dunne and Fuhrman who solved the Martha Moxley murder... Who'da a thunk he'd be the one guy from the Circus of Simpson to get a second act? As I said, I think his public denouncement of the first shot miss and SBT scenarios will only help the CT community in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 The early reviews are in...... http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-...onDate&n=283155 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Allen Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 (edited) The ability for me to post pictures seems awfully restrictive. In this case, 56.69k... Edited May 16, 2006 by JL Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Allen Posted May 16, 2006 Share Posted May 16, 2006 (edited) PHOTO REMOVED TO RECAPTURE SPACE Made it... 56.3k!!! Using Dale Meyers 1st shot trajectory (looking down from above, showing seated JFK and Connally) - the location of the windshield chrome dent, and Zapruder frame of Kennedy and Connally both visible - appearing from behind sign - a line drawn from JFK's tie upwards to the Windshield frame dent seems to pass right through the middle of Connally's head. (After searching many, many old posts I have found 5 photos which I have posted in my time here. I have eliminated them all and recovered about 180 kilobytes. That is all I have - total. Compared to the size and quantity of others' offerings - it seems that something is very wrong...) Edited May 21, 2006 by JL Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now