Deep Politics Forum

Today I discovered the JFK Facts website, located at http://www.jfkfacts.org

On the site's "About" page, we learn that:

The moderator is Jefferson Morley, former Washington Post reporter and author of Our Man in Mexico; Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA.

The webmaster is Rex Bradford, creator of MaryFerrell.org, the most comprehensive Web site of government records on the assassination of JFK, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King.


When we visit the site's "Worst JFK Websites" page, we see the following (make note of the third listing, which I've highlighted):

Misinformation and disinformation are too common in the JFK story, as these Web sites show.

Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation: In 2009, this ill-advised U.S. State Department Web page sought to discredit intelligent public discussion of JFK's assassination with a single blog post. It was so lame the State Department shut it down. (NOT CREDIBLE).

History.com: "This Day in History: Nov. 22, 1963:" Superficial treatment ignores much of the historical record, including eyewitness evidence, crime scene photography, and official investigations in service of a misleading view of the case. (ONE-SIDED)

Assassination Science: This misnamed site promotes the views of University of Minnesota professor James Fetzer who promotes conspiracy theories on a number of public events. (NOT CREDIBLE)

Bugliosi on JFK: The former prosecutor and author Vincent Bugliosi made the case for the official JFK story for the Discovery Channel while dismissing all evidence that complicates the case (ONE-SIDED)

JFK Murder Solved: James Files, an Illinois prison inmate has confessed to killing JFK. But an uncorroborated story from man serving a life sentence for attempting to kill two policemen is (NOT CREDIBLE).

Illuminati News: No, the Federal Reserve did not kill President Kennedy. (NOT CREDIBLE)


It is both tragic and reassuring to learn that Fetzer's junk science is recognized as such beyond the confines of DPF by other important, high-profile members of the JFK research community, including Messrs. Morley and Bradford.

They describe the sites above as sources of "disinformation" and "misinformation."

DISCLAIMER: I have not spoken to Morley or Bradford regarding this issue; the interpretation of their descriptions of Fetzer's site is mine alone.

Jeff includes also a best JFK site. I posted a message asking him to include DPF in that list
but he wouldn't. He has also included John McAdams site to his best list although he notes to handle with care.
Amistake in my opinion, but it is his site so he can do what he thinks is right.

Morley promotes McAdams' website as being one of the best (Not Credible).

Speaking of "not credible," I give you the agents provocateur "Albert Doyle."

Albert Doyle Wrote:Morley promotes McAdams' website as being one of the best (Not Credible).

I agree Albert. McAdam is not credible imho.

Magda Hassan Wrote:

Albert Doyle Wrote:Morley promotes McAdams' website as being one of the best (Not Credible).

I agree Albert. McAdam is not credible imho.

Paul McAdams Nolan (:loco
Marquette CIA Front? Now why would I have heard that?
That Paul Nolan liar, Oh yeah I forgot.

Thanks M

Jim

A major problem is starkly rendered here:

To my knowledge, Morley has yet to declare publicly that he acknowledges the fact of conspiracy in the death of JFK. Thus, Morley stands as a significant asset for those who would maintain and strengthen the cover-up.

For as we should know by now, the cover-up's primary goal is NOT to convince the world that LHO, acting alone, killed JFK. Rather, it is to maintain the doubt upon which the few base their control of the many.

If I'm wrong about Morley, please enlighten me ASAP with verifiable citationz of his statement(s) to the contrary.

Thank you.

I don't know why on earth Rex and Jeff included McAdams.

I mean, really. The guy is an out and out liar.

There are some documents on his page. But they are better presented at History Matters, MFF and AARC.

So who the heck needs him? And why?

It seems to me that Morley and Bradford are devoted to perpetuating the LN v. Truth false argument.

Neither appears to understand that we remain at war with the killers of JFK. Nor do they grasp the greater purpose of the cover-up (to prolong doubt) and how their silence on the ultimate question plays into the killers' hand.

Jim DiEugenio Wrote:I don't know why on earth Rex and Jeff included McAdams.

I mean, really. The guy is an out and out liar.

There are some documents on his page. But they are better presented at History Matters, MFF and AARC.

So who the heck needs him? And why?

I notice a bunch of (ONE-SIDED)...

Doesn't that describe his site better than "Not Credible"?

Whenever I want to know what the LNer thinks... I can visit DVP's blog/sites - one sided yet fully "LNer credible" (an oxymoron if I ever saw one)
or I can do McAdams who links me to more one-sided, and many (not credible)'s


Correct me... but where else do we find LNer personified as well as McAdams'?

DJ