Kaleidoscope: A Review of Douglas Horne's Inside the
Assassination Records Review Board [Paperback]
Harrison
Edwards Livingstone (Author)
Book Description
Publication Date: November 13, 2012
This is the new line. The JFK case is solved, and has been
for a long time. The JFK case is really very simple. I know that may sound
ridiculous to many who have studied the mystery, but most of us began that
study on the wrong footing and did not understand that underlying the alleged
evidence was a massive sham and shell game designed to get us off the track.
Once derailed, it has seemed impossible to "solve: the case." In
order to think clearly about it, we must sweep away and throw out a great deal
of trash, often deliberately put there to screw us up. Conspiracies do things
like that to cover the truth. There are three shell games-the original one; a
second that soon followed the assassination soon run by a group who provided
leadership for the so-called "research community" that proclaimed the
murder was a conspiracy, and, often keeping their true agendas and provenance
secret, played a game with true facts in the evidence while either sabotaging
it, or actually tying everyone up in knots with puzzles and games. The horrid
truth is that far too much of the conflict and disputes about evidence were
staged to make us appear to retain a semblance of democracy after Kennedy was
gone through a violent overthrown of his administration. The third shell game
followed the murder by 18 years, and was inserted by novelist David s. Lifton.
This was the most destructive of all, and it still plays a rôle in the
controversy, creating vastly more controversy, and now threatens to close down
any further inquiry whatsoever due to the age of the case, the death of key
witnesses, and ennui in the new generation.
Paperback: 478 pages
Publisher: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform
(November 13, 2012 )
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1481012274
ISBN-13: 978-1481012270
Product Dimensions: 0.9 x 5.9 x 8.9 inches
Shipping Weight: 1.8 pounds (View
shipping rates and policies)
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #966,775 in Books (See
Top 100 in Books)
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
18 of 18 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars An
unbelievable waste of time (mine, and yours !) December 30, 2012
Peter Janney Responds
A review by Peter Janney, author of "Mary's Mosaic: The
CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy,
Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace."
It's very difficult to decide how to best express my outrage over Harry Livingstone's feeble, sorry attempt to trash Doug Horne's five-volume 2009 masterwork documenting theU.S.
First, a word about the true methodology of the Review Board and how it made its decisions about which depositions to take, for example. Doug Horne began his work as a Senior Analyst on the Military Records Team, and about halfway through his three-year stint at the ARRB, he was promoted to the position of Team Leader (i.e., "Chief Analyst for Military Records," a Supervisory Analyst position). The only times that Doug Horne addressed the Review Board as a body was in relation to recommendations about the release of DOD records on Cuba and Vietnam policy. Doug never addressed the Board Members, as a body, about any medical issues. The only person allowed to do that, or to recommend taking any depositions, was the Executive Director of the Staff: David Marwell, for the first three years; and Jeremy Gunn, after his departure, for the better part of the fourth and final year of the ARRB's existence. All ten ARRB depositions of autopsy witnesses and participants were first proposed to the Board by Executive Director Marwell, who was himself (like the Board Members) a Warren Commission true believer. The Board voted unanimously to conduct all ten of these depositions, primarily because the former Chair of the HSCA, Congressman Louis Stokes, encouraged them in 1994 to do all they could to "clarify the record" in the medical arena, after admitting that all the HSCA managed to do was to sow confusion and dissention in this crucial area of the evidence. While it is true that Horne championed taking the depositions of the two FBI agents at JFK's autopsy, as well as the two Navy x-ray techs, his recommendations to do so had to first pass muster with his boss, T. Jeremy Gunn, who was not only Head of Research and Analysis on the staff, but also General Counsel. Gunn possessed two Master's degrees, a PhD, and a Law Degree; furthermore, he was an experienced deposition attorney in the private sector before coming to the ARRB. Gunn found these suggestions worthy of serious consideration, and so did David Marwell, who recommended them to the Board.
While Horne did pass a memo recommending deposing some of the 1963 Dallas treating physicians to the Board's Chairman, Jack Tunheim, in July of 1998 just prior to the ARRB's shutdown (after Tunheim had invited direct staff recommendations on any issues), we don't know today whether Tunheim or the other Board members ever read this document. While the Board ultimately did decide to conduct a joint deposition of five of the Parkland physicians who treated President Kennedy the day of his assassination, it is obvious that they made this decision reluctantly, and almost certainly in response only to an intense call-in and fax campaign waged by the JFK research community. Their decision to depose someDallas Dallas Washington
In conclusion, then, any claim that Horne, acting as a "loose cannon," improperly influenced the JFK Review Board to stray outside its proper mandate, is both specious, and false. The Board voted to take all of its medical depositions in an attempt to clarify an incomplete medical record, and their attitude was "let the chips fall where they may." In writing his magnum opus, Horne, as a former staff member who served as the principal assistant to the General Counsel during the 10 depositions of JFK autopsy witnesses, was simply (and properly) providing his opinions about the importance of key sections of that new testimony to our understanding of JFK's assassination and the ensuing cover-up. After all, he was there as the 10 depositions were taken, and was steeped in the medical evidence for three full years, and so had many valuable observations to make, and perceptions to report about the mindset and varying veracity of those who were deposed.
Second, the attempts by Livingstone to cast doubt upon the authenticity and importance of the "Boyajian report" appear to me to be a deliberate attempt by Livingstone to invalidate a key new piece of evidence which tended to destroy one of his own theories. [Livingstone does not believe that JFK's wounds were surgically altered prior to autopsy, and is unforgiving of David Lifton for raising the possibility in 1981.] For those who may not be fully familiar with the "Boyajian report," it is an after-action memo written by Sergeant Roger Boyajian, USMC, who headed the security detail sent toBethesda
Naval Hospital Washington , D.C. November
26, 1963 , just four days after JFK's assassination (and one day
after his funeral). The key statement in this report (which was about the
security actions taken to safeguard President Kennedy's body and his autopsy)
which so offends Harry Livingstone is wherein it states that JFK's body arrived
at the Bethesda morgue at 1835 hours (6:35 PM civilian time), a full 20 minutes
before the Andrews AFB motorcade carrying the bronze ceremonial Dallas casket
arrived out in front of Bethesda Naval Hospital. Livingstone's objections are
without foundation, to wit:
- His claim that the document was not signed, and is therefore `suspect' or possibly even a forgery, is nonsense. Former Sergeant Boyajian possessed an onionskin carbon copy of his 1963 report, and mailed a validated photocopy of that onionskin copy to the ARRB staff after being interviewed by Doug Horne on the phone in 1997. Anyone who knows anything about military correspondence in the early 1960s, in the age of manual typewriters, knows that onionskin copies were never signed. Only original documents were signed. The point here is that Boyajian himself was the source of the document, and validated it himself, both orally in a telephonic interview, and later in the cover letter by which he sent a copy of it to the ARRB.
- One reviewer's claim that Horne disingenuously attempted to hide the fact that Boyajian had no memory of the details of that night, when interviewed in 1997, is false. Doug Horne himself wrote the ARRB staff call report following the telephonic interview of Boyajian in which he (Doug) stated up-front that Boyajian could no longer remember specifics of the events of Nov 22nd, 1963, except that he did supervise the detail from Marine Barracks, and the fact that he did prepare and submit to higher authority the after action report dated Nov 26th, 1963. Doug also personally placed in the Archives, in 1998, Boyajian's letter to the ARRB, claiming a bad memory, but also authenticating the copy of his report he provided to the ARRB. To suggest that Horne was attempting to hide the fact the Boyajian could no longer remember details of the events surrounding the autopsy is a scurrilous and unfounded accusation.
- Even worse, it ignores the real point: Boyajian provided the document to the ARRB, and he authenticated it as what he prepared in November of 1963. That is all that really matters. The Boyajian report is a contemporaneous document of profound importance, that was both provided to the ARRB, and authenticated, by its author in 1997. It is of similar importance to the reports written by the treating physicians inDallas Parkland
Hospital Nov 22nd, 1963 .
-The Boyajian document describes the same event witnessed by Navy men Dennis David and Donald Rebentisch - the unaccountably early arrival of JFK's body atBethesda Dallas Bethesda
Naval Hospital 8:15
PM , in order to remove all evidence of shots from the front. The
expanded cranial defect was then photographed and x-rayed, and the damage thus
recorded was misrepresented as having been caused by "the assassin's
bullet." Harrison Livingstone, because of his longstanding and well-known
personal animus against David Lifton, is adamantly opposed to Doug Horne's
reinterpretation of Lifton's original thesis in Best Evidence (1981). Read
more ›
It's very difficult to decide how to best express my outrage over Harry Livingstone's feeble, sorry attempt to trash Doug Horne's five-volume 2009 masterwork documenting the
First, a word about the true methodology of the Review Board and how it made its decisions about which depositions to take, for example. Doug Horne began his work as a Senior Analyst on the Military Records Team, and about halfway through his three-year stint at the ARRB, he was promoted to the position of Team Leader (i.e., "Chief Analyst for Military Records," a Supervisory Analyst position). The only times that Doug Horne addressed the Review Board as a body was in relation to recommendations about the release of DOD records on Cuba and Vietnam policy. Doug never addressed the Board Members, as a body, about any medical issues. The only person allowed to do that, or to recommend taking any depositions, was the Executive Director of the Staff: David Marwell, for the first three years; and Jeremy Gunn, after his departure, for the better part of the fourth and final year of the ARRB's existence. All ten ARRB depositions of autopsy witnesses and participants were first proposed to the Board by Executive Director Marwell, who was himself (like the Board Members) a Warren Commission true believer. The Board voted unanimously to conduct all ten of these depositions, primarily because the former Chair of the HSCA, Congressman Louis Stokes, encouraged them in 1994 to do all they could to "clarify the record" in the medical arena, after admitting that all the HSCA managed to do was to sow confusion and dissention in this crucial area of the evidence. While it is true that Horne championed taking the depositions of the two FBI agents at JFK's autopsy, as well as the two Navy x-ray techs, his recommendations to do so had to first pass muster with his boss, T. Jeremy Gunn, who was not only Head of Research and Analysis on the staff, but also General Counsel. Gunn possessed two Master's degrees, a PhD, and a Law Degree; furthermore, he was an experienced deposition attorney in the private sector before coming to the ARRB. Gunn found these suggestions worthy of serious consideration, and so did David Marwell, who recommended them to the Board.
While Horne did pass a memo recommending deposing some of the 1963 Dallas treating physicians to the Board's Chairman, Jack Tunheim, in July of 1998 just prior to the ARRB's shutdown (after Tunheim had invited direct staff recommendations on any issues), we don't know today whether Tunheim or the other Board members ever read this document. While the Board ultimately did decide to conduct a joint deposition of five of the Parkland physicians who treated President Kennedy the day of his assassination, it is obvious that they made this decision reluctantly, and almost certainly in response only to an intense call-in and fax campaign waged by the JFK research community. Their decision to depose some
In conclusion, then, any claim that Horne, acting as a "loose cannon," improperly influenced the JFK Review Board to stray outside its proper mandate, is both specious, and false. The Board voted to take all of its medical depositions in an attempt to clarify an incomplete medical record, and their attitude was "let the chips fall where they may." In writing his magnum opus, Horne, as a former staff member who served as the principal assistant to the General Counsel during the 10 depositions of JFK autopsy witnesses, was simply (and properly) providing his opinions about the importance of key sections of that new testimony to our understanding of JFK's assassination and the ensuing cover-up. After all, he was there as the 10 depositions were taken, and was steeped in the medical evidence for three full years, and so had many valuable observations to make, and perceptions to report about the mindset and varying veracity of those who were deposed.
Second, the attempts by Livingstone to cast doubt upon the authenticity and importance of the "Boyajian report" appear to me to be a deliberate attempt by Livingstone to invalidate a key new piece of evidence which tended to destroy one of his own theories. [Livingstone does not believe that JFK's wounds were surgically altered prior to autopsy, and is unforgiving of David Lifton for raising the possibility in 1981.] For those who may not be fully familiar with the "Boyajian report," it is an after-action memo written by Sergeant Roger Boyajian, USMC, who headed the security detail sent to
- His claim that the document was not signed, and is therefore `suspect' or possibly even a forgery, is nonsense. Former Sergeant Boyajian possessed an onionskin carbon copy of his 1963 report, and mailed a validated photocopy of that onionskin copy to the ARRB staff after being interviewed by Doug Horne on the phone in 1997. Anyone who knows anything about military correspondence in the early 1960s, in the age of manual typewriters, knows that onionskin copies were never signed. Only original documents were signed. The point here is that Boyajian himself was the source of the document, and validated it himself, both orally in a telephonic interview, and later in the cover letter by which he sent a copy of it to the ARRB.
- One reviewer's claim that Horne disingenuously attempted to hide the fact that Boyajian had no memory of the details of that night, when interviewed in 1997, is false. Doug Horne himself wrote the ARRB staff call report following the telephonic interview of Boyajian in which he (Doug) stated up-front that Boyajian could no longer remember specifics of the events of Nov 22nd, 1963, except that he did supervise the detail from Marine Barracks, and the fact that he did prepare and submit to higher authority the after action report dated Nov 26th, 1963. Doug also personally placed in the Archives, in 1998, Boyajian's letter to the ARRB, claiming a bad memory, but also authenticating the copy of his report he provided to the ARRB. To suggest that Horne was attempting to hide the fact the Boyajian could no longer remember details of the events surrounding the autopsy is a scurrilous and unfounded accusation.
- Even worse, it ignores the real point: Boyajian provided the document to the ARRB, and he authenticated it as what he prepared in November of 1963. That is all that really matters. The Boyajian report is a contemporaneous document of profound importance, that was both provided to the ARRB, and authenticated, by its author in 1997. It is of similar importance to the reports written by the treating physicians in
-The Boyajian document describes the same event witnessed by Navy men Dennis David and Donald Rebentisch - the unaccountably early arrival of JFK's body at
Was this review helpful to you?
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
I heard about this booklet from the pen of Livingstone some
time ago, but only just got to look it over.
I must say I enjoyed Livingstone's early output. He had interesting thoughts, and his first couple of books are worthwhile.
This latest is incongruous blabbering, in my opinion, and not worthy of anyone's bookshelf.
I have no idea what Mr. Livingstone has against Doug Horne. Horne's massive quintuple treatise on working for the ARRB is the very best collection of information on the medical aspects of the JFK case. The book, I feel, is among the most valuable works in my collection.
I can't make heads or tails out of Livingstone's apparently vendetta against Horne titled Kaleidoscope. His points don't stand up when you compare them to Horne's work with the ARRB. It's like Mr. Livingstone is on another, rather angry planet where up is down and he is blasting out his own version of crazy events.
Books like this hurt the author, more than the target.
Do yourself a favor, if you are interested at an in depth look at the complexities of the medical side of the JFK case, the newer released witness testimony, and the case for alteration of evidence, and buy Mr. Hornes first rate work.
I must say I enjoyed Livingstone's early output. He had interesting thoughts, and his first couple of books are worthwhile.
This latest is incongruous blabbering, in my opinion, and not worthy of anyone's bookshelf.
I have no idea what Mr. Livingstone has against Doug Horne. Horne's massive quintuple treatise on working for the ARRB is the very best collection of information on the medical aspects of the JFK case. The book, I feel, is among the most valuable works in my collection.
I can't make heads or tails out of Livingstone's apparently vendetta against Horne titled Kaleidoscope. His points don't stand up when you compare them to Horne's work with the ARRB. It's like Mr. Livingstone is on another, rather angry planet where up is down and he is blasting out his own version of crazy events.
Books like this hurt the author, more than the target.
Do yourself a favor, if you are interested at an in depth look at the complexities of the medical side of the JFK case, the newer released witness testimony, and the case for alteration of evidence, and buy Mr. Hornes first rate work.
Comment |
Was this review helpful to you?
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful
By Bridger
We have six eyewitnesses who provide proof that the
president's body entered the morgue at 6:35 /6;45pm,
well before the motorcade with Mrs.K arrived at the entrance of the Bethesda
Hospital
The Boyjian report says a casket entered the morgue at6:35pm . He did not describe the casket. Dennis David said
he and his detail of men brought a shipping casket into the anteroom of the
morgue at 6:45pm . The closeness of
the times strongly suggest Boyajian and David are describing the same event.
Inside the morgue were photographer Riebe, x-ray technicians Reed and Custer, plus medical technician O'Connor who were in the morgue before the shipping casket was taken in or shortly thereafter, observed the shipping casket as well as the president being taken out of a body bag.
I can only speculate as to why Boyajian did not include in his report
the fact that he observed the arrival of the bronze casket twice. Perhaps he was ordered not to by a higher up, like Galloway, who was part of the cover-up. But why does this matter?
I think the six eyewitnesses prove the early arrival.And we should accept the purpose was to alter the wounds and extract evidence indicative of shots from the front. The surgery that Dr.Humes uttered as annotated in the Sibert and O'Neill report was surgery that he himself had just done. The utterance was to convince the FBI Agents that he (Humes) was seeing the surgery for the first time and that it had been done by someone else.
Lifton foreshadowed multiple enties of the casket and his has been found to be correct. Horne has expanded on it and he is correct. The undersigned has written on the subect and has corroborated both men. See the web site "Dark Corners"
Jim Rinnovatore
The Boyjian report says a casket entered the morgue at
Inside the morgue were photographer Riebe, x-ray technicians Reed and Custer, plus medical technician O'Connor who were in the morgue before the shipping casket was taken in or shortly thereafter, observed the shipping casket as well as the president being taken out of a body bag.
I can only speculate as to why Boyajian did not include in his report
the fact that he observed the arrival of the bronze casket twice. Perhaps he was ordered not to by a higher up, like Galloway, who was part of the cover-up. But why does this matter?
I think the six eyewitnesses prove the early arrival.And we should accept the purpose was to alter the wounds and extract evidence indicative of shots from the front. The surgery that Dr.Humes uttered as annotated in the Sibert and O'Neill report was surgery that he himself had just done. The utterance was to convince the FBI Agents that he (Humes) was seeing the surgery for the first time and that it had been done by someone else.
Lifton foreshadowed multiple enties of the casket and his has been found to be correct. Horne has expanded on it and he is correct. The undersigned has written on the subect and has corroborated both men. See the web site "Dark Corners"
Jim Rinnovatore
No comments:
Post a Comment