Douglas Horne versus Fred Kaplan

[Marc Ellis]

I don't know who Fred Kaplan is. Apparently, he's someone whose opinions are supposed to matter. SLATE published him.
But he has distinguished himself in one way. He's written the most condescending, patronizing, poorly-reasoned and poorly-sourced article on the assassination I have ever read. it's here:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...ingle.html

I'm just a novice. But I'm reasonably well-educated. I know the difference between facts and unsupported conclusions.
Unsupported conclusions are apparently what Mr. Kaplan's writing is all about.

544 Camp Street is a fact. Mr. Kaplan from what I can see, has never heard of it. JFK's missing brain is a fact.
That too, must have also escaped Mr.Kaplan's attention.

I read his piece shortly after watching Douglas Horne's devastating take-down of the JFK autopsy - here:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?p=PLAu2-ycDOa...ature=plpp

I have to admit, I was shaken up after listening to Horne's conclusions. I had no idea about this.
Then, I spotted Kaplan's piece and decided to see how persuasive his position was relative to Horne's.
What I found was pure dreck - unsupported conclusions and opinions.

So I concluded based on the fact of his article, that Fred Kaplan wasn't even worth a cursory GOOGLE search.
Then I searched Summers' book, NIYL, for any references to Horne. I found none.
i found one note in 'Destiny Betrayed' and over 30 references to Horne in 'Reclaiming Parkland'.

So I'm starting on 'Reclaiming Parkland' ahead of schedule. I look forward to it.
Horne's deconstruction of the autopsy was nothing less than astonishing.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Fred Kaplan is a clown. But he is not any clown. He is a Clown For Rent
Fred Kaplan is the author ofThe Insurgents and the Edward R. Murrow press fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

You can understand why his voice is heard and welcome while the people that matter are marginalized. If he was to debate face to face with any of
the esteemed JFK researchers, he would not last a second.

[Albert Doyle]

Somebody posted on EF that autopsy photographer Knudsen was shown a photograph of a brain sitting next to JFK's body prior to the brain autopsy. This photo then disappeared. It was obviously the swapped brain being prepared for substitution. DiEugenio said Specter sent two underlings to interview FBI agents Sibert and O'Neill when they protested that couldn't be the same brain. The purpose was to keep their complaint off the official record. The Warren Commission never interviewed O'Neill and Sibert.

I believe there's a photo of the Commission's brain in evidence that is even more undamaged than the Dox drawing. Wish I knew where to find it.

[David Josephs]

Agree completely Marc....

After reading Horne's Vol.4 I went straight back and reread the autopsy chapters in BEST EVIDENCE. Lifton's work in explaining the procedures that MUST have taken place and the very real contradiction of "life-saving" procedures such as blood and a trach given the condition of the head as first seen after 8pm. The explanations of the detailed autopsy descriptions into laymen's terms and the impossibility of the wounds resembling PARKLAND after 8pm is very well spelled out.

Many feel that a 30+ year old book cannot have the most up to date info.... Nothing since explains the goings on in Bethesda (of the KEY players) as well as sets the stage for the ARRB discoveries.

I expect most have read B.E. by now... yet if not recently I highly suggest the last third of the book's focus on the procedures and results of what transpired in the morgue at Bethesda.
And then O'Connor's statements...

Burns me up when CNN can have people stare blankly at the camera and ask where the other bullets went when we have the photos and testimonies of those who knew exactly where those bullets had "disappeared" .... The manhole cover bullet, the Connally bullet that drops out, this bullet found in the intercostal, a bullet that was discovered behind the right ear... that's four completely unaccounted for bullets that make up to 7 shots very realistic...

One of the great travesties here is the lack of attention on the ARRB/Horne results... where is THAT on CNN...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5469[/ATTACH]

I don't know who Fred Kaplan is. Apparently, he's someone whose opinions are supposed to matter. SLATE published him.
But he has distinguished himself in one way. He's written the most condescending, patronizing, poorly-reasoned and poorly-sourced article on the assassination I have ever read. it's here:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...ingle.html

I'm just a novice. But I'm reasonably well-educated. I know the difference between facts and unsupported conclusions.
Unsupported conclusions are apparently what Mr. Kaplan's writing is all about.

544 Camp Street is a fact. Mr. Kaplan from what I can see, has never heard of it. JFK's missing brain is a fact.
That too, must have also escaped Mr.Kaplan's attention.

I read his piece shortly after watching Douglas Horne's devastating take-down of the JFK autopsy - here:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?p=PLAu2-ycDOa...ature=plpp

I have to admit, I was shaken up after listening to Horne's conclusions. I had no idea about this.
Then, I spotted Kaplan's piece and decided to see how persuasive his position was relative to Horne's.
What I found was pure dreck - unsupported conclusions and opinions.

So I concluded based on the fact of his article, that Fred Kaplan wasn't even worth a cursory GOOGLE search.
Then I searched Summers' book, NIYL, for any references to Horne. I found none.
i found one note in 'Destiny Betrayed' and over 30 references to Horne in 'Reclaiming Parkland'.

So I'm starting on 'Reclaiming Parkland' ahead of schedule. I look forward to it.
Horne's deconstruction of the autopsy was nothing less than astonishing.

[Steve McChristian]

I have not followed the assassination very closely since I read Anthony Summers some ages ago, but the case for conspiracy seems even stronger than it did back then. Kaplan, with his "buffs" and his "case closed" and his implied "exploding nerve" and his I saw it on TV so there, hardly needs debunkiing as he pretty much does that to himself. Home's presentation cited above, on the other hand, seems devastating to the LN theory. Has any genuinely credible researcher been able to undermine the evidence Home presents? For example, has anyone shown Mantik's analysis of the x-rays is less compelling than it seems? Has anyone shown why so many seemingly credible witnesses are willing to testify to a disappeared blow out in the back of President Kennedy's head? Seriously, Kaplan's case is so weak and Home's so strong, it's hard to even imagine a debate between the two.

[Marc Ellis]

I have not followed the assassination very closely since I read Anthony Summers some ages ago, but the case for conspiracy seems even stronger than it did back then. Kaplan, with his "buffs" and his "case closed" and his implied "exploding nerve" and his I saw it on TV so there, hardly needs debunkiing as he pretty much does that to himself. Home's presentation cited above, on the other hand, seems devastating to the LN theory. Has any genuinely credible researcher been able to undermine the evidence Home presents? For example, has anyone shown Mantik's analysis of the x-rays is less compelling than it seems? Has anyone shown why so many seemingly credible witnesses are willing to testify to a disappeared blow out in the back of President Kennedy's head? Seriously, Kaplan's case is so weak and Home's so strong, it's hard to even imagine a debate between the two.

There was no debate. I just happened to read Kaplan's dreck the same day I saw Horne's devastating deconstruction of the autopsy. And Kaplan just happened to have written the laziest article on the topic I've ever read. BTW, I never was much interested in the assassination until this 50th anniversary year. I hadn't even seen JFK the movie until this year.

[Steve McChristian]

I have not followed the assassination very closely since I read Anthony Summers some ages ago, but the case for conspiracy seems even stronger than it did back then. Kaplan, with his "buffs" and his "case closed" and his implied "exploding nerve" and his I saw it on TV so there, hardly needs debunkiing as he pretty much does that to himself. Home's presentation cited above, on the other hand, seems devastating to the LN theory. Has any genuinely credible researcher been able to undermine the evidence Home presents? For example, has anyone shown Mantik's analysis of the x-rays is less compelling than it seems? Has anyone shown why so many seemingly credible witnesses are willing to testify to a disappeared blow out in the back of President Kennedy's head? Seriously, Kaplan's case is so weak and Home's so strong, it's hard to even imagine a debate between the two.

There was no debate. I just happened to read Kaplan's dreck the same day I saw Horne's devastating deconstruction of the autopsy. And Kaplan just happened to have written the laziest article on the topic I've ever read. BTW, I never was much interested in the assassination until this 50th anniversary year. I hadn't even seen JFK the movie until this year.

Had read your links and was aware there wasn't a real debate. Simply trying to express my surprise at how weak Kaplan's case was in comparison to Home's. Reading DiEugenio's and Mantik's review of parts of Home's book (from links at Mary Ferrell) makes me think one challenge facing those who support a conspiracy is the nearly overwhelming complexity of the case (five volumes in the case of Home) versus the seeming simplicy of that of the LN theorists: Oswald did it, so stop thinking.

[Albert Doyle]

Steve, you mean "Horne", right?

[Steve McChristian]

Steve, you mean "Horne", right?

Hey, I'm an idiot. I wear low powered classes when I'm on the computer and have for weeks seen the r and the n as an m. Thank you for the enlightenment.