The media onslaught

[Martin White]

I should add that the BBC has recently been subject to thinly-veiled threats from David Cameron's government that unless it's more pro-government it'll end the BBC's funding. This maybe doesn't impact on the JFK case as such, but shows what pressure the BBC are under.

I realise it's a controversial subject in the US, but our National Health Service is a respected and treasured institution here. Cameron's mob are selling it piece by piece to private health companies, that most of the Conservative politicians own shares in. Conflict of interest, much?

And not a word of this can be found anywhere on the BBC.

[Peter Lemkin]

I should add that the BBC has recently been subject to thinly-veiled threats from David Cameron's government that unless it's more pro-government it'll end the BBC's funding. This maybe doesn't impact on the JFK case as such, but shows what pressure the BBC are under.

I realise it's a controversial subject in the US, but our National Health Service is a respected and treasured institution here. Cameron's mob are selling it piece by piece to private health companies, that most of the Conservative politicians own shares in. Conflict of interest, much?

And not a word of this can be found anywhere on the BBC.

Aside from their oh-so-correct pronunciation, and a fairly global view of the news [compared to US standards], the BBC is a and has always been a lapdog of the British elites and their intelligence agencies, IMHO. They totally blew 9-11 coverage...if not being somewhat complicit; ditto the London Bombings, the man in the bag, anything that involved deep politics or military moves...they wave the flag and keep their thumb on the script given to them from Whitehall! Independent they are not....they MAY well be getting less so, however. The incredible shrinking truth.....::director::

[Tracy Riddle]

I should add that the BBC has recently been subject to thinly-veiled threats from David Cameron's government that unless it's more pro-government it'll end the BBC's funding. This maybe doesn't impact on the JFK case as such, but shows what pressure the BBC are under.

I realise it's a controversial subject in the US, but our National Health Service is a respected and treasured institution here. Cameron's mob are selling it piece by piece to private health companies, that most of the Conservative politicians own shares in. Conflict of interest, much?

And not a word of this can be found anywhere on the BBC.

Aside from their oh-so-correct pronunciation, and a fairly global view of the news [compared to US standards], the BBC is a and has always been a lapdog of the British elites and their intelligence agencies, IMHO. They totally blew 9-11 coverage...if not being somewhat complicit; ditto the London Bombings, the man in the bag, anything that involved deep politics or military moves...they wave the flag and keep their thumb on the script given to them from Whitehall! Independent they are not....they MAY well be getting less so, however. The incredible shrinking truth.....::director::

It's like the situation with the American media. There was a time when both BBC and US media weren't always terrible; sometimes they even did a good job. But those days are gone now.

[Peter Lemkin]

I should add that the BBC has recently been subject to thinly-veiled threats from David Cameron's government that unless it's more pro-government it'll end the BBC's funding. This maybe doesn't impact on the JFK case as such, but shows what pressure the BBC are under.

I realise it's a controversial subject in the US, but our National Health Service is a respected and treasured institution here. Cameron's mob are selling it piece by piece to private health companies, that most of the Conservative politicians own shares in. Conflict of interest, much?

And not a word of this can be found anywhere on the BBC.

Aside from their oh-so-correct pronunciation, and a fairly global view of the news [compared to US standards], the BBC is a and has always been a lapdog of the British elites and their intelligence agencies, IMHO. They totally blew 9-11 coverage...if not being somewhat complicit; ditto the London Bombings, the man in the bag, anything that involved deep politics or military moves...they wave the flag and keep their thumb on the script given to them from Whitehall! Independent they are not....they MAY well be getting less so, however. The incredible shrinking truth.....::director::

It's like the situation with the American media. There was a time when both BBC and US media weren't always terrible; sometimes they even did a good job. But those days are gone now.

Well, its a time of vast EVIL consolidating its power and control....at the expense of truth, humans, all living things, and the Planet......and nothing is about to get any better without massive resistance to all this!....but the Sheeple in the UK and USA [for the most part] bleat on beat with the propaganda and 'circus'.....and eat the poisoned McFood, drink the McWater and breathe the McAir while watching the McMedia and getting electronic lobotomies, while having their pocket's picked by the uber-Rich and their rights taken away while being 100% electronically spied upon.::dictator::

Cheerful times, No?....NO!

[Donald Manning]

Anthony Summers while at the BBC around 1978 was asked to produce something concerning the HSCA and the rumour is that his effort was actually shown on the Beeb's Panarama programme despite it consisting almost exclusively of conspiracy angles.

If that rumour is correct and it was actually broadcast, then Summers achieved what no other man could, either before or since, he got an honest look at the case from a healthy sceptic put out by the BBC.
His result is on YT and you've all no doubt seen it but the source of that is actually from the US.
It's never been repeated over here and certainly never will be, not by the channel in question.

You look at the BBC for a fair shout, in this case?
Do you do the same with ABC?
Did they ever do anything else but "this happened only one one" BS?
If not, then that's similar to what we deal with over here with the Beeb.

Mark Lane learnt early on what to expect from this crowd.
http://www.big-lies.org/bertrand-russell...-lane.html

I know I'm probably new to the case compared to Martin and the rest of you but in my experience I have seen nothing from them to suggest anything has changed since then.
Yes "we" gave you TMWKK but that was an independent channel's work, nothing to do with old Auntie.

Funnily enough whilst looking for info on exactly what happened with Summers documentary, I found this;

I have as little patience with the bogus experts who have wasted time and distracted attention from the real issues or the Hollywood distortions. Really early on, when I was working as a young journalist at the BBC in London, I had the unpleasant experience of seeing Mark Lane, heady no doubt with the hoohhah about his book Rush to Judgement, cause an unjustifable public furore and flounce out of a television studio. It was grandstanding, made no point, achieved nothing except to make doubt look disreputable.

http://anthonysummersandrobbynswan.wordp...-11222013/

That just doesn't fit the recorded facts or indeed Lane's own recollection.
Lane had every right to get steamed that night and was perfectly correct in his attitude since, he too expected something different from the BBC not the frustratingly high wall of WC defenders he came up against.
They cut RTJ up into four segments and let Bel/Spect have at it whilst the proWC moderators barely let ML speak.
How does AS appear to not know that?

So if Summers has something against Lane then I would suspect it has most likely developed since that alleged meeting, because as anyone who watched the show would know, including the hundreds that phoned in to complain of the unfair treatment of Lane, it was completely and without shame biased in favour of the WC.
That indeed was the only way in which Spector and Belin took part, if Lane was allowed to debate them they would simply walk out...

Out.

[Albert Doyle]

^ Typo: "This happened only one way"

[Donald Manning]

Thanks Albert but that was a hard out.
Doh! You got me.

[Tracy Riddle]

Anthony Summers while at the BBC around 1978 was asked to produce something concerning the HSCA and the rumour is that his effort was actually shown on the Beeb's Panarama programme despite it consisting almost exclusively of conspiracy angles.

If that rumour is correct and it was actually broadcast, then Summers achieved what no other man could, either before or since, he got an honest look at the case from a healthy sceptic put out by the BBC.
His result is on YT and you've all no doubt seen it but the source of that is actually from the US.
It's never been repeated over here and certainly never will be, not by the channel in question.

I have a copy of this documentary; I rented it from a video store 20 years ago. It has a lot of great rare interviews. There isn't even a used copy advertised on Amazon.

[Donald Manning]

Have to agree Tracy, Sprague is even in there talking about the photographic evidence and you might ask why wouldn't he be?
Well again, if this was broadcast by the BBC it is beyond rare and I would suggest totally unique.
You'll notice that it's not produced by them, they're not credited either and the narrator is American but I suppose those last two are changeable without too much effort.
Anyway just a friendly heads up, if you are ever approached by a charming, wellspoken person with a mic and/or camera and a big official looking BBC namebadge just be careful and keep that gameface on.
Travelchannel?
Why sure!

[Tracy Riddle]

Summers is listed as the producer, while the Executive producers are M.G. Hollo, David Osterlund for Syndicast Services. It apparently was made in 1978 as The JFK Conspiracy and released on video in 1983 as The Killing of President Kennedy: New Revelations 20 Years Later.

Back in the day, I rented from an independently owned video store and the owner had all the JFK documentaries on his shelves. He even had Ted Charach's doc on RFK, The Second Gun, and the three-part On Company Business series on the CIA.