26-06-2019, 11:55 PM
(This post was last modified: 27-06-2019, 01:47 AM by James Lateer.)
Just to put a point to it, I feel that the commercialized version of the JFK books such as the rehashing of the Peter Dale Scott material is much like the mainstream media treatment.
The discourse has to remain "tame" meaning that it doesn't go beyond the Warren Commission evidence, the Garrison evidence and the House Select Committee on Assassinations evidence.
Sadly, author after author seems to think that the goal is to prove that Oswald was not the lone gunman.
We know that Oswald was not the lone gunman or even the guilty murderer of JFK.
The books that are discussed on this site simply don't advance the ball further than I have mentioned above.
The real mystery is the following: how long will it take before the real details of the JFK assassination can be discussed by the commonly discussed authors (like Scott, Russell and others that are commonly quoted here).
We know that maybe 3000 documents are still being withheld. We know that Trump didn't have the balls to release even the documents that he promised to release. And the widely quoted authors still maintain that the Kennedy's didn't have knowledge of Operation Mongoose (much less knowledge of the weaponized cancer project).
The entire huge territory of the role of Skorzeny, West Germany, the James O Eastland plot revealed by Dr. Caufield involving the Supreme Court in Dombrowski vs Pfister, the likely use of Oswald as an informant by Eastland---all of this is still ignored and considered off-limits by the old school researchers.
The old school researchers are still back in the world of acceptable, mainstream media version of events.
Apparently Hank Albarelli was trying to cross this great divide--but he didn't live long enough to accomplish this monumental feat.
Does anybody have a guess as to when the real, raw meat of recent evidence will be acknowleged by the old school?
James Lateer
The discourse has to remain "tame" meaning that it doesn't go beyond the Warren Commission evidence, the Garrison evidence and the House Select Committee on Assassinations evidence.
Sadly, author after author seems to think that the goal is to prove that Oswald was not the lone gunman.
We know that Oswald was not the lone gunman or even the guilty murderer of JFK.
The books that are discussed on this site simply don't advance the ball further than I have mentioned above.
The real mystery is the following: how long will it take before the real details of the JFK assassination can be discussed by the commonly discussed authors (like Scott, Russell and others that are commonly quoted here).
We know that maybe 3000 documents are still being withheld. We know that Trump didn't have the balls to release even the documents that he promised to release. And the widely quoted authors still maintain that the Kennedy's didn't have knowledge of Operation Mongoose (much less knowledge of the weaponized cancer project).
The entire huge territory of the role of Skorzeny, West Germany, the James O Eastland plot revealed by Dr. Caufield involving the Supreme Court in Dombrowski vs Pfister, the likely use of Oswald as an informant by Eastland---all of this is still ignored and considered off-limits by the old school researchers.
The old school researchers are still back in the world of acceptable, mainstream media version of events.
Apparently Hank Albarelli was trying to cross this great divide--but he didn't live long enough to accomplish this monumental feat.
Does anybody have a guess as to when the real, raw meat of recent evidence will be acknowleged by the old school?
James Lateer