25-11-2013, 09:50 PM
I put a post about the young Paul McCartney's skepticism of the Oswald-did-it narrative on Kinja (Gawker's user-blog tool). It pulls quotes/anecdotes from Mark Lane's somewhat recent autobiography, Citizen Lane. If you haven't heard Lane's story about his interactions with McCartney in 65/66, I think you'll find it interesting.
My esteem for McCartney, already quite high, was further boosted by reading about his insistence to Lane that he be allowed to compose the score for "Rush to Judgment". And when warned by Lane of how incredibly controversial the topic was, and how it might be damaging to McCartney's standing (particularly with American fans), it just put a huge smile on face to see his alleged reply:
To my complete surprise and total delight, Gawker put my story right on their front page on Friday. I'd secretly hoped that might happen, as their influence with young, affluent, politically-opinionated readers is pretty consequential. And most such readers are not naturally interested in revisiting a topic they've heard argued about their entire lives, unless there's an unexpected or new hook.
I don't think anyone here would find their knowledge of the conspiracy deepened by the post. In fact, you'll probably find errors here and there! But I was encouraged by the large percentage of commenters who seemed open to, rather than skeptical of, conspiratorial narratives for the JFK assassination.
best to you all,
Justin
My esteem for McCartney, already quite high, was further boosted by reading about his insistence to Lane that he be allowed to compose the score for "Rush to Judgment". And when warned by Lane of how incredibly controversial the topic was, and how it might be damaging to McCartney's standing (particularly with American fans), it just put a huge smile on face to see his alleged reply:
Quote:"One day my children are going to ask me what I did with my life, and I can't just answer that I was a Beatle."
To my complete surprise and total delight, Gawker put my story right on their front page on Friday. I'd secretly hoped that might happen, as their influence with young, affluent, politically-opinionated readers is pretty consequential. And most such readers are not naturally interested in revisiting a topic they've heard argued about their entire lives, unless there's an unexpected or new hook.
I don't think anyone here would find their knowledge of the conspiracy deepened by the post. In fact, you'll probably find errors here and there! But I was encouraged by the large percentage of commenters who seemed open to, rather than skeptical of, conspiratorial narratives for the JFK assassination.
best to you all,
Justin