Remington Shell Casings Issue

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

This is for Bruce. What do you think of this posting regarding the Remington shell casings and "the likes of" people like Eaglesham? LOL

[Dealey Joe]

This is a topic that I have given a lot of thought.I also see Bruce has not responded to the post Pasquale made.Have there been any developments on this subject.I just want to add my opinion as believing that Remington Peters did in fact make these casings with these markings before 1963.Just another example of accepting unprovable information to disprovewhat Files has said.The only thing that is confusing is that he found two .222 casings in different locations.Finding two casings negates the possibility of a hoax, otherwise only one casing would be found.But where did the second casing come from?Any ideas?

[Bruce Patrick Brychek]

Gentlemen:03.31.2009 - Pasquale DiFabrizio Posted this Headline. Pasquale, in My Opinion, did an outstanding piece of work here, as he so often does. Pasquale is a determined, excellent, focused, passionate, valued member of the JFK Forum, and has rendered tremendous research and study on many subject matters overall. I actually admire Pasquale's zeal, and probably agree with him 90 % of the time. Pasquale and Joe, I read this material the day that Pasquale Posted it. HOWEVER, I did not respond to it Purposely in an effort to allow it to gain traction, and a life of its own, without the Negative Heat that I felt that I would draw to Pasquale, and his efforts. I also seemingly ignored it to "protect" Pasquale's position. Follow my thinking, please.Few of you ever read, and only a handful may remember how much I was attacked by Bob Vernon and Alan Eaglesham years ago in many venues. Next to Wim, I was second in their tirades, which I likened to a Badge of Honor by the way. Not that I cared either, because it was clear several years ago that they were all about totally discrediting Wim, Jimmy, and me. I felt that if I supported Pasquale's position immediately, I would draw my negative image to Pasquale's excellent work. Hence, protect Pasquale's Excellent Work and allow it center stage.It was clear to me that Vernon and Eaglesham were out to destroy Wim, Jimmy, and me several years.ago. And I was convinced that Vernon and Eaglesham were totally wrong. When Vernon and Eaglesham used low level, foul language to attack me in print in several venues, I knew that they were emotionally bent on a dis-information course. My Opinion.Pasquale's original Post and subsequent work hereunder deserved their own life, and recognition. Pasquale wrote basically what I wrote years earlier, but Eaglesham attacked me 100 times more. My belief was that it was to simultaneously attack me more so because I am Jimmy's friend. Do I make sense ? Have I written this well enough to explain my convolutions of thought that have evolved over 10 years or more ?Pasquale hits a Grand Slam in My Opinion, with his original Post herein, and subsequent comments.NOW - let me go further with something that I wrote almost 10 years ago.Besides all original information on the Remington XP - 100 weapon, and shell casings not being available, and only a cut and paste accumulation of knowledge being forwarded by Eaglesham, think along with me.REVERSE ENGINEERING:In the late 1950'S the CIA, or some alphabet division of the Military Industrial Complex set about secretly with Remington to create the Remington XP - 100 Fireball. But for what purpose, and what reasons ?!?No records of the original notes, project, work orders, design specifications, or designed purpose are available anywhere. Big surprise.Let us JFK Forum Members "pretend" that we are the Designing Committee for the Remington XP - 100 Fireball.1. Create a long pistol that has no law enforcement value, no home defense value, and no self defense value. 2. This long pistol will only fire one shot. No clip, magazine, or cylinder like a revolver.3. This long pistol will not fit into a holster.4. This long pistol will fit into a briefcase.5. This long pistol will be able to have a scope mounted to it, for precision shots at 100 yards.6. This short rifle will have no hunting value.7. This short rifle will be highly effective for 50 - 100 yard kill shots maximum. One shot, one kill.8. This long pistol/short rifle, with a scope will be excellent for Urban Assassinations of Human Beings, and easy concealment.9. This long pistol/short rifle will be for Covert Operations, and the first 500 will be released without Serial Numbers to the CIA, and related agencies.10. We will cover-up everything about the weapon, and the ammunition.James Earl Sutton/Files disclosed his possession and use of this weapon years ago, and was labeled a "nut-job" because for all practical purposes THIS WEAPON DIDN'T EXIST for the first 5 - 10 years of its inception.Now, Pasquale DiFabrizio and other JFK Forum Members go out and find information available in print in the late 1950'S to support your position today in 2010 ?That is why I think that Pasquale's work on this Subject Matter was brilliant. My Opinion.Comments ?Respectfully,Bruce Patrick Brychek.

[Phil Dragoo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCAkkncfJ9YEaglesham is a fount of wisdom. Pitzer's death not homicide, but suicide.JFK probably died of natural causes.Whew, we can all relax now, knowing that.

[Jsnow915]

a couple of years ago,Eaglesham emailed me about 3 times to try and convince me of the shell markings and put down Wims work....I told him I needed to look at this myself and decide and he needed to back off...sounded like Bob Vernon sour grapes..I researched as much as I could at the time and like evrything else in this story people make up alot of their historical facts and it seems the only thing Vernon could come up with was the shell casing to be wrong(as far as he was concerned it was wrong)...I wasnt convinced then or now...my point is...you,as an individual,research it yourself, come up with your own conclusions and make your decisions on that...otherwise...Dancing with the stars is on...check your TV guide

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Bruce Patrick Brychek wrote:Gentlemen:03.31.2009 - Pasquale DiFabrizio Posted this Headline. Pasquale, in My Opinion, did an outstanding piece of work here, as he so often does. Pasquale is a determined, excellent, focused, passionate, valued member of the JFK Forum, and has rendered tremendous research and study on many subject matters overall. I actually admire Pasquale's zeal, and probably agree with him 90 % of the time. Pasquale and Joe, I read this material the day that Pasquale Posted it. HOWEVER, I did not respond to it Purposely in an effort to allow it to gain traction, and a life of its own, without the Negative Heat that I felt that I would draw to Pasquale, and his efforts. I also seemingly ignored it to "protect" Pasquale's position. Follow my thinking, please.Few of you ever read, and only a handful may remember how much I was attacked by Bob Vernon and Alan Eaglesham years ago in many venues. Next to Wim, I was second in their tirades, which I likened to a Badge of Honor by the way. Not that I cared either, because it was clear several years ago that they were all about totally discrediting Wim, Jimmy, and me. I felt that if I supported Pasquale's position immediately, I would draw my negative image to Pasquale's excellent work. Hence, protect Pasquale's Excellent Work and allow it center stage.It was clear to me that Vernon and Eaglesham were out to destroy Wim, Jimmy, and me several years.ago. And I was convinced that Vernon and Eaglesham were totally wrong. When Vernon and Eaglesham used low level, foul language to attack me in print in several venues, I knew that they were emotionally bent on a dis-information course. My Opinion.Pasquale's original Post and subsequent work hereunder deserved their own life, and recognition. Pasquale wrote basically what I wrote years earlier, but Eaglesham attacked me 100 times more. My belief was that it was to simultaneously attack me more so because I am Jimmy's friend. Do I make sense ? Have I written this well enough to explain my convolutions of thought that have evolved over 10 years or more ?Pasquale hits a Grand Slam in My Opinion, with his original Post herein, and subsequent comments.NOW - let me go further with something that I wrote almost 10 years ago.Besides all original information on the Remington XP - 100 weapon, and shell casings not being available, and only a cut and paste accumulation of knowledge being forwarded by Eaglesham, think along with me.REVERSE ENGINEERING:In the late 1950'S the CIA, or some alphabet division of the Military Industrial Complex set about secretly with Remington to create the Remington XP - 100 Fireball. But for what purpose, and what reasons ?!?No records of the original notes, project, work orders, design specifications, or designed purpose are available anywhere. Big surprise.Let us JFK Forum Members "pretend" that we are the Designing Committee for the Remington XP - 100 Fireball.1. Create a long pistol that has no law enforcement value, no home defense value, and no self defense value. 2. This long pistol will only fire one shot. No clip, magazine, or cylinder like a revolver.3. This long pistol will not fit into a holster.4. This long pistol will fit into a briefcase.5. This long pistol will be able to have a scope mounted to it, for precision shots at 100 yards.6. This short rifle will have no hunting value.7. This short rifle will be highly effective for 50 - 100 yard kill shots maximum. One shot, one kill.8. This long pistol/short rifle, with a scope will be excellent for Urban Assassinations of Human Beings, and easy concealment.9. This long pistol/short rifle will be for Covert Operations, and the first 500 will be released without Serial Numbers to the CIA, and related agencies.10. We will cover-up everything about the weapon, and the ammunition.James Earl Sutton/Files disclosed his possession and use of this weapon years ago, and was labeled a "nut-job" because for all practical purposes THIS WEAPON DIDN'T EXIST for the first 5 - 10 years of its inception.Now, Pasquale DiFabrizio and other JFK Forum Members go out and find information available in print in the late 1950'S to support your position today in 2010 ?That is why I think that Pasquale's work on this Subject Matter was brilliant. My Opinion.Comments ?Respectfully,Bruce Patrick Brychek.Bruce,That is a real compliment.Thank you.I remember going toe-to-toe with Eaglesham at another forum over this. He would refer to me as "the likes of DiFabrizio." LOLThe bottom line, in my opinion, is that Eaglesham was not about finding the truth. He was out to disprove the Files information. For the rest of you who are not familiar with this material, just scroll up and read my original post about Eaglesham's material. I really appreciate your support, Bruce, and the rest of you too.Thank you.

[Dealey Joe]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:I was recently confronted with "information" or disinformation that the shell casings found by Rademacher could not have been made prior to 1970. (It has to do with the marking on the back of the shell casing and the type of "dash" between the letters R and P.) They posted a link to this website below..My conclusion, after reading all that stuff, is that they cannot confirm their notion that the shell casings were NOT made prior to 1970.The website (see below) says it. The author said that he contacted Remington (the maker of the shell casings) and asked them to verify the information. The reply from Remington, according to the website, was that they only provide such information to law enforcement agencies. So, Remington didn't confirm their notion about the shell casings. The author then relies on information from people who collect shell casings and a "drawing" that was "...salvaged from trash by a former Remington employee..." of Remington. WTF???? The author then seems to take us on a round about journey about how he contacted experts, etc. All of the people he contacted had apparently been collecting shell casings for YEARS. Anyway, the bottom line that I could see is that there is NO conclusive proof to the notion that the shell casings found by Rademacher were NOT made before 1970. http://www.manuscriptservice.com/Headstamp/What do you guys think?PasqualeAs we know most ammunition and fabricating companies are all contracted to the government, do experimental work and to stand by for wartime production.The Remington experimental model 100 was just that and The ammunition would have been specifically made for it.Such as changing the load a little or whatever and possibly marking the casings differently.I remember being excited about pre advertising on this gun from Remington as it was going to be available in a caliber that would fire a .410 shot shell. I waited a while then had my dealer contact Remington to find that the XP100 was not going to be manufactured as .410 because in most states the barrel length was too short to be legal.I am sure all these new experimental models are looked at for their use to the military.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Joe,Exactly! I'm beginning to suspect that "the likes of" people like Eaglesham might be spooks, if you know what I mean. This is how they work, the spooks I mean. They get into a truth movement saying all the right things, and then, at critical times, they participate in leading people down the wrong path.

[Bob Jonas]

This topic has reignited once again on the Spacebook side of things (led by EagleSham) so I was wondering if there have been any new developments in the last 5 years that I should be aware of? I don't necessarily seek "ammo" to combat any disinformation, but rather the truth so that I can have a better understanding of this touchy subject. Especially if I'm defending the position that it was possible for it to have been manufactured prior to 1971. Thanx in advance.

[Ed Teach]

Look in the 1970 Gun Digest Yearbook...you will find a nice article about the Fireball... Remington first created the cartridge in...1963.Experimental gun and experimental cartridge made from a necked down .222.Special cartridges and special bullets were used. No telling what stock they were made from or by whom.