Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Interview with Jack Duffy, author of 'The Man From 2063'


Jack DuffyJack Duffy is an attorney from Fort Worth, Texas.  The Man from 2063 is his first book.  On November 22, 1963 he was in school at Bruce Shulkey Elementary when he heard the news about President Kennedy’s assassination.  His parents were at the breakfast in Fort Worth, Texas, that morning when President Kennedy gave his last speech.  In 1970 he saw the Zapruder film for the first time.  He has been researching the JFK assassination since then.  He has interviewed many eyewitnesses including Marina Oswald and several Parkland physicians who treated JFK.  He has met many researchers who have written books on the assassination.  He came up with the idea for a time travel novel in 1998.  He has one of the largest private collections of materials on the JFK assassination.  He graduated from Texas Tech University with a B.A. in Political Science.  He then earned an M.B.A from Baylor University.  He then graduated from South Texas School of Law with a J.D.  He is an Eagle Scout.


The Man From 2063Who are some of the key people connected with the JFK assassination who died suspiciously?
William Pitzer is one of the most important strange deaths. Pitzer was a naval commander who took the photos and X-rays of JFK’s autopsy.  Pitzer told his family he was going to go public with the photos after he retired from the Navy.  He was threatened with court martial if he talked about the autopsy. He was visited by CIA agents and warned not to reveal what he had observed at the autopsy. Pitzer made a 16 mm film of the autopsy.  In the mid 1960′s a Green Beret was asked to kill Pitzer for the CIA. He refused to kill him.  Later Pitzer was found dead in his lab at Bethesda naval hospital. His death was ruled a suicide. His 16mm film disappeared.   Dorothy Kilgallen was a reporter for the NY times. She was the only person to ever have a private interview with Jack Ruby.  She later told people she was going to blow the JFK assassination story wide open.  She was found dead in her NY apartment. Her death was ruled a suicide from a drug overdose.  Albert Bogard was a used car salesman who met a man who claimed he was Oswald at his car lot.  He later said the man was not the real Oswald. Bogard passed a lie detector and recieved death threats. He was found dead in his garage. A hose had been connected to his cars exhaust pipe and put in the window. His death was ruled a suicide. George DeMohrenschildt was a close friend of Oswald’s. DeMorenschildt worked for the CIA.  In March 1977, he committed suicide with a shotgun at his home in Florida hours before he was to be interviewed by an investigator from the HSCA.  Several high ranking mobsters were murdered before they could be brought to Washington D.C. to testify before the HSCA.   
What is the single bullet theory?
The single bullet theory was developed by Arlen Specter who was a junior lawyer on the Warren Commission.  The theory is that one of the bullets fired by Oswald from the School Book Depository hit JFK in the back of the neck, exited his throat, hit Gov. Connally in the back, struck one of his ribs, exited his chest, entered his wrist shattering it and then ended up in his thigh.  The bullet was later recovered from a stretcher in Parkland hospital.  The bullet was Commission exhibit 399 and had very little damage to it. It has been called ‘The Magic Bullet” by critiics of the Warren Commission. 
What are some of the problems with the single bullet theory?
First, Gov. Connally never agreed with it. Connally was an experienced hunter and testified that one bullet did not hit him and JFK.  Connally said he was hit by a separate bullet.  The surgeons who operated on Connally disagreed with the theory.  They said the trajectory of the bullet that wounded Connally proved it could not have hit JFK first. JFK’s shirt and coat prove the bullet entered his back several inches below his neck and could not possibly have exited from his throat.  Autopsy photos show the location of the back wound on JFK.  One of the pathologists at the autopsy stuck his finger in JFK’s back wound and could not feel any point of exit.  An Admiral present at the autopsy ordered the pathologists not to track the back wound. Tests done at firearms labs with the same ammunition that Oswald allegedly used show bullets that are flattened out completely after being fired into cadavers wrists.  More bullet fragments are present in Connally’s wrist X-rays than are missing from CE 399.
Is there evidence that JFK’s head wound was caused by a different type of ammunition than Oswald allegedly used?
Yes. X-rays of JFK’s skull reveal a snowflake pattern of small bullet fragments scattered throughout JFK’s brain. This is indicative of a hollow point or dum dum bullet that explodes on impact and fragments into dozens of pieces. This is the type of bullet often used by the Mafia and CIA because it is almost impossible to trace and causes massive damage to the victim. Oswald was allegedly using military jacketed ammunition which does does not explode into dozens of fragments like a hollow point bullet.
Were gunmen observed on the Grassy Knoll several days before JFK was killed?
Yes. On Wednesday, November 20, 1963 two Dallas police officers were driving down Elm Street through Dealey Plaza when they saw two men dressed in suits and ties standing behind the picket fence with high powered rifles. The policemen ran up the knoll however the men drove away in a car before the officers could catch them.  The police officers made a report about the incident. The report was buried by the FBI until the HSCA discovered it during their investigation of the assassination in the 1970′s.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Interview with Kyle Scott, author of 'The Federalist Papers'

Kyle Scott, PhD, teaches American politics and constitutional law at Duke University. He has published three books and dozens of articles on issues ranging from political parties to Plato. His commentary on contemporary politics has appeared in Forbes, Reuters.com, Christian Science Monitor, Foxnews.com, and dozens of local outlets including the Philadelphia Inquirer and Baltimore Sun.

To find out more, please visit http://kyleascott.wordpress.com

Find him on Twitter at : ScottKyleA

Find him on Facebook at : http://www.facebook.com/kyleasc

Q: Thank you for this interview, Kyle. Can you tell us what your latest book, The Federalist Papers: A Reader’s Guide, is all about?

A:  The Federalist Papers: A Reader’s Guide is an attempt to make The Federalist Papers accessible to more people. With growing interest in the founding generation, and the continual question raised by our politicians of original intent, I think it is important for people to find out for themselves what this work is all about. Also, the debate over the constitution’s ratification demonstrates that political rhetoric need not be empty sound bites but can be elevated to philosophical discourse without losing its realism.

The-Federalist-PapersQ: How did you come up with the idea?

A: When I see a problem addressed irresponsibly or incorrectly I feel compelled to make a contribution. In The Federalist Papers: A Reader’s Guide I try to show how an open and reasoned dialogue between two opposing sides can be productive. In today’s political climate that seems so polarized and characterized by petty bickering I think we can learn a lot from the ratification debates and I try to help the reader see why the ratification debates have practical relevance for today. The goal was to break them out of their stale reputation and let readers see how alive and relevant the writings are.

Q: What kind of research did you do before and during the writing of your book?

A: I tried to read all of the secondary and primary literature on Hamilton, Madison and Jay in order to get a better grasp of what they were trying to say. But with so much information it was tough to distill it down to its essence. This book is my attempt to do the heavy lifting for the reader who has other things to do with their time but still finds the subject important.

Q: If a reader can come away from reading your book with one valuable message, what would that be?

A: That political rhetoric can be elevated beyond where it is now and needs to be if we are to move forward in a more productive fashion.

Q: In your own experience, is it hard to get a nonfiction book published today?  How did you do it?

A: I’ve written four books and I have had each published. But it did require a lot of submissions to various publishers that either rejected the book or did not bother to respond. I think an agent or editor might help the process along. Of course, with each passing year I think the process of getting a book placed with a traditional press will get more difficult as the competition from self-publishing and e-readers intensifies.

Q: What’s a typical day like for you?

A: Sometimes I wish those existed. In addition to my teaching and writing I run a family business. So depending on what needs tending to that day dictates what my day looks like.

Q: What’s next for you?

A: I’m working on a book about the value of humility. I think we could avoid a lot of conflict in our personal lives, in politics, business, and internationally if we were more open to discussing the ideas of others and not so conceited in thinking that we know it all. It’s easy to be defensive and arrogant, but it’s not necessarily the best course of action. The book is designed to help us see the value of humility and how it might be incorporated into various contexts.

Q: Thank you so much for this interview, Kyle.  We wish you much success!

A: Thank you for giving me the chance to discuss my book.