Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Read Reinventing History by Bugliosi. Itís game over for the conspiracy theorists.
    That should be "Reclaiming History", and yes anyone who has an interest in the case should read it.
    My opinion is all I have to offer here,

    Dave.

    Smilies are canned laughter.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DirectorDave View Post
      That should be "Reclaiming History", and yes anyone who has an interest in the case should read it.
      Thanks for pointing that one out Dave. I canít even blame auto-correct for that one! Just my brain
      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes.

      “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
        Thanks for pointing that one out Dave. I canít even blame auto-correct for that one! Just my brain

        I had one of those last week, I genuinely could not remember if it was 2016 or 2017.

        I'm hoping it was just spending too much time in the past and not the early onset of something!
        My opinion is all I have to offer here,

        Dave.

        Smilies are canned laughter.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by DirectorDave View Post
          I had one of those last week, I genuinely could not remember if it was 2016 or 2017.

          I'm hoping it was just spending too much time in the past and not the early onset of something!
          It must be something thatís Ďstuckí,in my brain because itís not the first time Iíve made the same error
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes.

          “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

          Comment


          • #20
            From what I understand the "extra" 25 years was as a result of the Oliver Stone film, and his subsequent interviews and the like ( by the way, I love the film... think it is an amazing piece of cinema...but it is almost total B.S....Stone made up some facts for "dramatic license" others he just believed were true that were not (and proven to be not true.. even before he made the film), he completely misrepresented SEVERAL "characters" and then marketed the film by claiming he was in hiding because the government was going to kill him for exposing the truth (I always remember those via satellite interviews and thinking....really...if the government is really looking for you, you don't think they could track you with this??)..so at the time of all this JFK hysteria they set a date to release the files....and here we are approaching that date.....let me mention again.. I really do like the film, and think it is worth watching...not as a fact finding endeavor, but entertainment with some of the biggest stars and best cameo's ever!!!
            I am not sure that Stone was trying to "alter facts", I believe he was very passionate about the topic and truly believed what he put on screen... it shows in the finish product, excellent piece of film making!!


            Steadmund Brand
            Last edited by Steadmund Brand; 10-23-2017, 05:22 AM.
            "The truth is what is, and what should be is a fantasy. A terrible, terrible lie that someone gave to the people long ago."- Lenny Bruce

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Steadmund Brand View Post
              From what I understand the "extra" 25 years was as a result of the Oliver Stone film, and his subsequent interviews and the like ( by the way, I love the film... think it is an amazing piece of cinema...but it is almost total B.S....Stone made up some facts for "dramatic license" others he just believed were true that were not (and proven to be not true.. even before he made the film), he completely misrepresented SEVERAL "characters" and then marketed the film by claiming he was in hiding because the government was going to kill him for exposing the truth (I always remember those via satellite interviews and thinking....really...if the government is really looking for you, you don't think they could track you with this??)..so at the time of all this JFK hysteria they set a date to release the files....and here we are approaching that date.....let me mention again.. I really do like the film, and think it is worth watching...not as a fact finding endeavor, but entertainment with some of the biggest stars and best cameo's ever!!!
              I am not sure that Stone was trying to "alter facts", I believe he was very passionate about the topic and truly believed what he put on screen... it shows in the finish product, excellent piece of film making!!


              Steadmund Brand
              we met the actual Keven Bacon character Willie Okeefe(danny ferries gay boy toy) celebrating mardi Gra in New Orleans about 20 years ago. He was a cab driver who gave us a ride home one night.
              told us the whole story. according to him it was all basically true-there was a conspiracy and second shooter atop the railway bridge/grassy knoll.

              It was a long ride and he got into the specifics, but when we woke up the next morning we couldn't remember half of what he said.

              we knew it was really him because one thing he told us was that he was given a cameo in the movie as a drinker during a bar scene-and sure enough he was.

              Comment


              • #22
                Willie Okeefe was a character invented by Oliver Stone, he didn't exist.
                My opinion is all I have to offer here,

                Dave.

                Smilies are canned laughter.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by DirectorDave View Post
                  Willie Okeefe was a character invented by Oliver Stone, he didn't exist.
                  My understanding is that the O'Keefe character was a composite of 4 actual people.
                  David Logan, William Morris, Perry Russo and Raymond Broshears.

                  It was Perry Russo who had the cameo at the bar.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by barnflatwyngarde View Post
                    My understanding is that the O'Keefe character was a composite of 4 actual people.
                    David Logan, William Morris, Perry Russo and Raymond Broshears.

                    It was Perry Russo who had the cameo at the bar.
                    thanks Director and Barn
                    the cab driver said he was the kevin Bacon character, I don't remember his actual name.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Graham View Post
                      I have actually stood (and nearly got killed by the traffic) just in front of the famous 'Grassy Knoll', with the TBD to my left and slightly behind me. If it was LHO up there in the TBD building, then it was a bloody good shot, but not an impossible shot. However, anyone who looks at the Zapruder Film can see quite clearly that a shot hit JFK from more or less in front of him and to his right, and threw his head right back with the impact. That shot, I contend, could have come from only the area of the 'Grassy Knoll', yet it seems to me that this possibility had been glossed over for years. Why? Because to accept it pre-supposes that there really was more than one gunman that day? Or what? I have also never quite come to terms with the accepted facts regarding LHO's arrest following the shooting of Officer Tippet. It seems to me that he was pinched very, very quickly after that event.

                      Something is going on here, and has been for more than 54 years......hasn't it?

                      G

                      Well I can run with this version. Thankfully, it isn't just my lone view.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Steadmund Brand View Post
                        From what I understand the "extra" 25 years was as a result of the Oliver Stone film, and his subsequent interviews and the like ( by the way, I love the film... think it is an amazing piece of cinema...but it is almost total B.S....Stone made up some facts for "dramatic license" others he just believed were true that were not (and proven to be not true.. even before he made the film), he completely misrepresented SEVERAL "characters" and then marketed the film by claiming he was in hiding because the government was going to kill him for exposing the truth (I always remember those via satellite interviews and thinking....really...if the government is really looking for you, you don't think they could track you with this??)..so at the time of all this JFK hysteria they set a date to release the files....and here we are approaching that date.....let me mention again.. I really do like the film, and think it is worth watching...not as a fact finding endeavor, but entertainment with some of the biggest stars and best cameo's ever!!!
                        I am not sure that Stone was trying to "alter facts", I believe he was very passionate about the topic and truly believed what he put on screen... it shows in the finish product, excellent piece of film making!!


                        Steadmund Brand
                        Hi Steadmund,

                        I agree that it was an enjoyable movie and as a piece of conspiracy theorist propaganda it couldn’t have been much better, or more effective for that matter. Many people either based there opinions on it or had their existing notions confirmed. As you probably know Bugliosi called it a ‘three hour lie,’ and he was just about right. They got the correct President at least. I don’t think that Stone himself really believes in the truth of it.
                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                        “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by MysterySinger View Post
                          Well I can run with this version. Thankfully, it isn't just my lone view.
                          Hi MS

                          The first movement of Kennedyís head, after impact, is forward. Only slightly, but forward nonetheless. This isnít debatable as itís visible evidence. Scientist state that the snapping of Kennedyís head backward is exactly what they would expect to occur. It just looks wrong to us laymen. Also, as I mentioned before, the arterial spray is clearly shown to go forward indicating a shot from behind.

                          When you add this to the fact that it was Oswald gun, with Oswalds prints (one of which was in an area where only a person who had assembled the gun could have accessed.) Found on the floor of the Depository where only Oswald was working. And when they did a roll call after the assassination Oswald was the only employee who had left the building. And on the way to work that morning he was carrying a long package which he told his friend were Ďcurtain rods,í despite him living in a boarding house! Oswald couldnít have been more guilty if heíd have jumped onto Kennedyís car and stabbed him repeatedly with a Samurai sword!
                          Regards

                          Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                          “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Sure, Herlock, but this article has stats proving that "most Americans believe in JFK conspiracy theories."

                            Perhaps no major event in modern U.S. history has spawned more widespread doubt than the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas in November 1963. …


                            I read a fascinating article about why people became so obsessed with the idea, fairly quickly after the assassination. It has to do, apparently, with the human need to find explanations for something that seems awful and inexplicable.

                            Maybe.
                            Pat D. https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...rt/reading.gif
                            ---------------
                            Von Konigswald: Jack the Ripper plays shuffleboard. -- Happy Birthday, Wanda June by Kurt Vonnegut, c.1970.
                            ---------------

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by MysterySinger View Post
                              Hmm, but I'll never be convinced that THAT shot wasn't fired from the front and side - not at all. There's nothing anyone can say that will change my view, and the magic bullet theory is ridiculous fantasy for me.

                              That guy taking the side shot was a poor marksman then. He missed everything.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by MysterySinger View Post
                                Well I can run with this version. Thankfully, it isn't just my lone view.
                                I lived in the USA for a number of years and always had an interest in both the JFK Assassination and the general political climate in the late 1950's/early 1960's. They were very uncertain times. It happens that I cannot recall discussing the JFK case with any American who felt that there wasn't a conspiracy to remove JFK. Some people seem to think that anyone who believes in a conspiracy automatically believes that Oswald was not involved - that is, a 'patsy'. Well, I for one believe that there indeed was a conspiracy to remove JFK and that Oswald most certainly was part of it. I have little doubt that he was up there in TSBD with his cheap Mannlicher-Carcano, and that at least one bullet from this rifle struck Kennedy. I also cannot be convinced that on that day he was the only gunman who fired at JFK. I also cannot be convinced that Oswald was not himself killed to ensure his silence. Anyone who thinks that Ruby did it because he 'felt sorry' for Mrs Kennedy is IMHO naive. I haven't read Bugliosi but have to say that I would take a hell of a lot of convincing to accept that Oswald acted totally alone.

                                Graham
                                We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X