Posts: 2,665
Threads: 378
Likes Received: 3 in 2 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2010
This is a unique and unusual article by a new writer for us. I don't think very many people have looked at the subject.
What I think is so interesting is that the unstated text is that those people on the rar right who began to look at these things in that way have now resurfaced in the GOP in a large way, eg Steve Bannon.
https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kenne...y-rhetoric
Posts: 2,429
Threads: 124
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jan 2011
Quote:JFK assassination was a coup that toppled the government and proved that even the US president wasn't untouchable. I plan to examine these theories, and determine whether there's any truth behind them.[/FONT]
Let me guess, after his examination, and his own theory, just like everyone else, he has all the answers. I'm impressed!
Posts: 2,429
Threads: 124
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jan 2011
Okay, sorry about my own sarcasm, so let me try this a different way, he is so close, yet, so far away, close minded. Yes, although the communist were the first to be blamed, although they wanted to scream Russia did it (to invade Cuba), the United States wasn't about to invade Russia or Cuba, although, Russia played right into the hands of Fidel Castro, how long after they blamed the communists did it take to narrow it down to Fidel Castro? However, Fidel was not a stupid man, his public three hour lecture on the assassination the day after Jack got whacked is what saved Cuba from getting invaded. Why did Fidel decide to spend three hours delivering a speech regarding whacking Jack? Why didn't Fidel just get right to the point and say something like I'm sorry to hear about the assassination of president Kennedy, and leave it at that? Did Fidel want to make sure he was being heard? Did Fidel want to deliberately blame the United States for whacking their own president? Was this away for Fidel to save his country from getting invaded? Think about it for just a minute, how long did it take for them to blame Oswald as a Castro sympathizer before any real investigation was on the way? Didn't they also try and use Oswald as a means to invade Cuba after whacking Jack?
Hey, if I'm wrong, tell me please!
Sorry, but I feel like I'm just wasting my breath! Please do let me know when you find someone who has more stake in this than I do, it's just a waste of time.
Posts: 2,665
Threads: 378
Likes Received: 3 in 2 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2010
31-12-2018, 06:14 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-01-2019, 07:21 AM by Jim DiEugenio.)
Scott:
The point of the article was that the author wanted to show how the case could be looked at from a widely different political perspective. That is from the far right of the spectrum.
If you note, the first one he examines, Revilo Olive, does not say it was a coup. Its Oswald.
The other two, imply it was a coup but a very limited one. For instance, the Secret Service man shot Kennedy.
He is trying to show how the political orientation will taper the facts.
Posts: 2,429
Threads: 124
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jan 2011
Jim,
So, what you're saying is that the author is basically taking what evidence there is at hand and fact check what evidence there is against the far right wing groups, rather than blaming Oswald for the assassination, but the author is going to impede his own opinion while taking his time, more than 50 years later to disclose his theories based off his research on those individuals and groups. And! The groups he believes to exposed are those who have worked for, or, was involved with the 'Deep State' and or the John Birch Society, well, forgive me for chiming in. (Will he be dropping some names)? Don't mind me, I don't know what I'm talking about anyways.
