Has Anyone Read "Contract on America" by David Scheim or

"Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi? Both deal with the assassination of JFK.

Scheim claims it was a mafia "hit" in coordination with many US agencies. Bugliosi claims it was Oswald and Oswald alone and says the 3 spent rifle cartridges are all the proof you need. He says none were found by the grassy knoll. VB says that Ruby was a "nobody" and the mob would never trust someone like that to make a hit on Oswald. However, Scheim has phone records to prove that Ruby made calls to known mobster hangouts before the murder that increased prior to the assassination and then just stopped days before.

Bugliosi dismisses the "mysterious" deaths of key witnesses as since they already told what they knew...why would they be killed? Scheim shows that these deaths are just too coincidental, and had a lot of bearing on the case.

I just wrote Scheim a note remarking on his quote of Gov. John Connally who stated that, "there wasn't one person in the world that didn't know where they were when JFK was killed." I stated that I remember a news report when I lived back east of Richard Nixon being asked where he was when JFK was killed. Nixon said he couldn't recall!! But I've seen reports saying that Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover was in Dallas the day of the assassination and were at Hunt's house during the assassination.

I'm trying to compare these books and get to the truth. I guess that will never happen. But I say that Scheim presents a better case for a conspiracy than Bugliosi saying there wasn't one.

Means, motive, and opportunity. These are not absolutes, any more than anything else. Take the entire population, and they all had the means, just to varying degrees. Etc.

But we all know that the facts are sufficient to conclude that Oswald killed Kennedy and then Ruby killed Oswald. The Zapruder film indicates with almost 100% certainty that Kennedy was killed by rifle fire that could easily have been directed by a single person (with some practice). And the mortal wounding of Oswald was also caught by cameras.

Had Oswald lived and been convicted, we would probably know the rest of the story with more certainty, but we would still have the ability to pose unique questions.

I'm a lot more curious about the alleged pubic hair in Clarence Thomas' Coke. Since most of the witnesses are still alive, why hasn't this been resolved, once and for all? Maybe TED Kennedy should have been doing something other than picking his nose, as shown here, at 1:18.

It's pretty easy to pick up a spent cartridge casing.

When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.

There's some who theorize those hairs belonged to Long Dong Silver himself....I'm betting on someone's grassy knoll.

The thing that bothers me is that Bugliosi just dismisses Ruby as someone the mob would pick to do a hit, when he was a known mobster since his early 20's. He also doesn't address the issue that Oswald and Ruby knew each other before the assassination. One of Ruby's dancers was introduced to Oswald in Ruby's Carousel Club, and others have put the two together in New Orleans.

People who get the glock usually get it from someone they know.

The best part of the Clarence Thomas story (the punchline, if there is one), is when Mrs. Thomas calls A. Hill at Brandeis. Her old man hired this fine young thing and spent his time in her office talking dirty. Then at his confirmation hearings, she tells it all. And then later the wife calls and asks her to recant. Just way too effin amusing.