BOOK REVIEW -- "RECLAIMING HISTORY: THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY" (2 Viewers)

[bobbyg2]

Are you assuming that I think something other than the official JFK story?

I was only presenting forth that the term conspiracy theorist isn't a negative term, as pretty much everyone with the mental capacity to theorize is a conspiracy theorist.

 

[Ed Moroughan]

I'll tell you what the real conspiracy is: having to constantly hear how everything is a conspiracy! Sometimes it's just as simple as the Earth is round and the Moon is not made of cheese.

 

[bobbyg2]

I agree, some theories are pretty ridiculous, and although I haven't looked much into either side of the debate over JFK's assassination, I don't think it's really much of a question of whether Oswald shot JFK, I think it's more of a question of whether he worked alone or not.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

The only people who say he didn't work alone are delusional conspiracy theorists. Read the thread, will ya?

 

[David Von Pein]

This is just simply not true at all.

The ballistics experts for the Warren Commission said that a FMJ bullet like Oswald's (CE399) could very well do what the bullet did do in Dallas on Nov. 22.

And the HSCA panel fully concurred with the WC's assessment regarding the doability of the SBT and of the capabilities of CE399 doing just what it was said to have done on Nov. 22nd.

Do some people really want to buy into the notion that not only did the Warren Commission people lie through their collective teeth re. Bullet CE399...but that the HSCA (15 years later!) also was part of the never-ending "cover-up" associated with JFK's demise (with respect to the SBT in particular; the silly "Acoustics/4th Shot" malarkey notwithstanding)?!

In two words -- That's nuts.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, the 2004 Discovery Channel program "Beyond The Magic Bullet" is a must-see program for any SBT nay-sayer. While not duplicating Bullet CE399 to the Nth degree, the SBT test that was performed in that documentary mimicked the SBT in so many different ways that I'd wager to say it "virtually proved" the workability and viability of the Single-Bullet Theory.

Any anti-SBT conspiracy theorist who watches that Discovery Channel program should be able to ask themselves the following question after viewing it:

"Gee, I wonder how in the world these guys in Australia in 2004 were able to meet so many of the SBT requirements and yet still have the SBT be totally impossible, as so many conspiracy theorists have claimed since 1963?"

And then, after asking themselves the above logical question, the same person (if they are a reasonable individual) should be able to easily answer their own question with this answer:

"I don't think they could have. I'm convinced -- the SBT is not the utterly-impossible feat that so many people have claimed it to be over the last 45 years."

REVIEW -- "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet" (From "The Discovery Channel") - alt.conspiracy.jfk | Google Groups

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/...0-post271.html

THE ASSASSINATION OF JOHN F. KENNEDY: A LONE-GUNMAN VIEWPOINT

 

[bobbyg2]

Well, it doesn't seem too out-of whack, I mean I'm sure there were people that wanted him dead. Wasn't this the same guy that wanted to rid the country of the Federal Reserve Private Bank and the Internal Revenue Service? Or am I thinking of someone else?

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Take a history class. ASAP. For your own good. Either that or continue to embarrass yourself. But here's a hint - After high school, 999 times out of 1000, the more ignorant you are of the world, the less succesful you are.

 

[buttmunker]

The popular reasons for a conspiracy is due to JFK's internal goodness. He wanted to rid the world of Castro; he turned his back on Sinatra and the mob; he put a monkey-wrench in the Joint Chiefs plan to have an invasion/war in Cuba during the Cubian Missile Crisis by ending it in a peaceful manner; he wanted to end segregation and talked "positive" about blacks on national television! That stuff alone can get you killed in the 1960's.

As it turned out, Oswald beat them all to it. So the story goes...

I don't know - killing a man because you disagree with his politics or whatever...how about you don't reelect him in 1964? It was only a couple of months left before reelection-time...the man had a family depending on him, he mattered to people who loved him, so you kill him because you disagree with him on a matter?? What kind of sickness is this? What kind of world do we live in, for Christ's sake!

(Oh yeah, that kind of world. Guess I'll come back to reality now.)

 

[Jeff Gatie]

As Jackie said "He didn’t even have the satisfaction of being killed for civil rights... it had to be some silly little Communist."

Although I submit most of those glomming onto the conspiracy crap are doing it for reasons that are more like Oswald than they care to admit. Aside from the obvious delusional characteristcs, there are other similarities. It makes them a "somebody" if they seem to know or do "something" everyone else does not. And if that "something" has something to do with one of the defining moments of the 20th century; they are going to seize the opportunity for self-aggrandizement . . . and to hell with the consequences.

 

[Lew Crippen]

You might want to get a decent bio of Kennedy—and send the bill to your local school board.

 

[buttmunker]

Now, if Jack's older brother Joe had lived and become President, I wonder if Joe would have garnered as many enemies as Jack did. I doubt it, as Joe was more like his father than Jack - Jack was an idealist, while Joe was a pragmatist. Joe was the "go along with the popular idea" kind of guy, most likely causing nuclear war in 1962, while Jack prevented it.

Jack may have had to die by becoming President, but he saved millions of lives by doing so.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

God you really do need to read some history. Jack Kennedy an idealist? It is to laugh. Kennedy was a tough-as-nails Boston pol, cynical to the tips of his manicured fingertips. Joe jr. was something of an amiable dunce, far less like his father than either brother Jack or brother Bobby was. It is extremely unlikely that even Joe, Sr. could have pushed his eldest son into the White House. All the accounts I've read of the eldest son suggest he lacked the political "fire in the belly" that drove his father and brothers.

And it was JFK's own weakness and vacillation that created the Cuban Missle Crisis in the first place. He failed to get the obsolete missles out of Turkey (the secret trade he finally made with Nikita K) and he was so addled at the Vienna summit (mostly thanks to the drug cocktail that "Dr. Feelgood" had him taking) that the Soviets were convinced that he'd have to accept a fait accompli - especially after his loss of nerve at the Bay of Pigs. You really don't deserve credit for stopping a bomb from going off when you're the one who lit the fuse in the first place.

There have been a number of recent books - some based on declassified U.S. documents and on Soviet-era files that were briefly made available to scholars during the brief thaw between the fall of the U.S.S.R. and the rise of Putin that correct the romanticized view of the events of October 1962 first put forth by Robert Kennedy and later picked up by other JFK haigiographers.

I'd say something about your characterization of Joe Kennedy, Sr. as an amiable "go along to get along" type, but I'm laughing too hard to type straight. Let me put it this way: if Viagra had been around in the Ambassador's day and he'd taken any - he would have gotten taller.

Regards,

Joe

 

[bobbyg2]

A quick Google search ran up this:


Source.

EDIT:

Read the rest of the article.

 

[buttmunker]

I said Joe, Jr. was the "go along type." He did whatever his father said, and believed what his father believed. This is not to say that the other children didn't go along with whatever Joe Sr wanted, but they all had their own points of view, and that differenciated them from Joe, Jr. Joe Sr was antisemitic, then so was Joe Jr.

Joe Jr may have lacked that certain credential for politics - intelligence and "fire in the belly," as you so put it, but with his father pulling the strings, it would not have been impossible for Joe Jr to achieve the highest office in the country. Heck, he was slated to fill a big political office right after the war... I forget if it was for Governor or for Mayor, but it was for one of those positions. After that, the White House.

Jack, himself, said he was going to be some kind of teacher. Guess again.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

That's a stylized interpretation of that Executive order. Similar to the interpretations of tax law that put Wesley Snipes in jail. The fact that it's also listed on a page discussing (cue scary music) - The Illuminati - is all the Google searching I need to see.

Here's some good advice - Believe half of what you see, 1/4 of what you hear, 1/8 of what you read, and zero of what you read on an internet conspiracy page.

 

[bobbyg2]

Yeah, but that's not my point. According to that quote, JFK signed an executive order to get the country's money produced from the National Treasury, rather than the Federal Reserve, am I correct?

If I am correct, than my previous post:


Was also correct, right?

Without the Federal Reserve, we wouldn't need the IRS, so that executive order would kill two birds with one stone. It's a shame, really, that this man died before he could actually reverse the damage caused by switching to paper "money" that's currently the reason why our dollar is worth so little. Our country is pretty much the Federal Reserve's puppet. All they have to do is cut off printing, and our country will go back into another great depression.

"You idiots! What ever made you think paper was worth so much?"

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Holy Jesus, please don't procreate. I've heard a lot of things in my life but "Without the Federal Reserve, we wouldn't need the IRS" takes the cake. Bobby - Go to school. Stay off the internet. Learn something, for the love of God, learn something.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Bring back William Jennings Bryan I say!

 

[bobbyg2]

You're right.

There's never been a conspiracy, about anything. Even when people are arrested, the police didn't take them away because they had probable cause that they were conspiring to break the law.

The pharmaceutical companies are not trying to kill us! Every last one of those calories/fats are needed! The news isn't lying to us, they never lie to us! The Government has never lied to us! I mean, come on, why would they lie? They love us! I can't believe I believed all of that "conspiracy" crap!

The love of money is the root of all good! - Bad Opinions 12:3.

 

[David Von Pein]

A request by me to those who want to take this
thread off-topic (or at least mostly off-topic):

Please shut up.

Or: start up your own separate forum thread to continue your quarrel (which is a battle that seems to be getting a little too "personal" in nature).

I request this due to the fact that I am the person who started this thread in July 2007, and I desperately do not want it closed by the moderators (due to continual bickering and sniping over "politics" or some other matters that HTF deems over-the-top and/or "off limits" in these forums).

Because if it gets closed, then the "EDIT" buttons disappear for all time too, and I don't want that to happen, since I still like to edit and fine-tune my Bugliosi book review every now and then).

Thank you,
David Von Pein