Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?  (Read 34895 times)

Online Tom Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3495
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2025, 11:26:21 PM »

Do you believe that JonBenet Ramsey just disappeared from the planet? How about something the size of MH 370 doing likewise? What about Area 51? And then there's Skinwalker Ranch. The U.S.Govt previously owned that land and we still have No Idea what was/is going on there. Crack reporters have been all over these cases for decades and Failed to solve all of them. Time + Reporters/Researchers does Not guarantee solving a mystery.   

The JFK assassination is no mystery.

A sharpshooting, psychologically disturbed, self-described Marxist by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK to advance the Marxist-Leninist Dialectic by firing three shots at him over 10.2 seconds in the echo chamber known a Dealey Plaza.

Online Tom Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3495
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2025, 12:20:21 AM »
Oliver Stone makes movies. Nobody regards him as a Historian. And just for the record, a house did Not fall onto a witch.

Very realistic-looking movies.

Offline Jim Hawthorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2025, 04:58:30 PM »

Oliver Stone to testify at John F Kennedy assassination hearing


The director, whose film JFK has been derided by historians for suggesting the CIA had a role in the killing, will speak to task force aiming ‘to get to the bottom of this mystery’

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/mar/31/oliver-stone-testify-john-f-kennedy-assassination-hearing-jfk
« Last Edit: March 31, 2025, 04:59:37 PM by Jim Hawthorn »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2025, 05:16:19 PM »
Oliver Stone to testify at John F Kennedy assassination hearing


The director, whose film JFK has been derided by historians for suggesting the CIA had a role in the killing, will speak to task force aiming ‘to get to the bottom of this mystery’

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/mar/31/oliver-stone-testify-john-f-kennedy-assassination-hearing-jfk


That makes sense to me, after all it will be April Fools Day….

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5010
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2025, 05:23:09 PM »
  You guys underestimate Oliver Stone. After all, Stone did get it Right when he publicly proclaimed that a body double was posing as President Bill Mitchell.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2025, 05:24:13 PM by Royell Storing »

Online Jarrett Smith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 175
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2025, 06:01:16 PM »
Stone is a total nutjob. The CIA had nothing to do with it, the Mafia did. Oswald fired 3 shots at JFK plus killed Officer Tippit. Only one shot came from the front.

Offline Lance Payette

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2025, 09:14:25 PM »
Stone is a total nutjob. The CIA had nothing to do with it, the Mafia did. Oswald fired 3 shots at JFK plus killed Officer Tippit. Only one shot came from the front.
Agree that Stone is a total nutjob. The fact that anyone thinks it is worth having him and his star-struck puppet Jim Di Eugenio weigh in at a hearing speaks volumes about the seriousness of the effort. Jesus. Agree that the CIA had nothing to do with it. The Mafia? Yes, it's possible, and your theory is at least at the rational end of the conspiracy spectrum.

In terms of motive and means, and even some actual evidence (Marcello, https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKmarcello.htm), the Mafia has to be at the top of the list. Several years ago, Pat Speer, surely one of the very top researchers, agreed with me on that the Mafia had the best (or worst, as the case may be) motives. It is also Larry Schnapf’s theory.

However, the issues I have are:

1. I don't believe there would have been a frontal gunman (and I don't believe there was). There would have been a Mafia-quality hitman with some sort of 6.5 rifle located somewhere that his trajectory would not be obviously inconsistent with the 6th floor of the TSBD – perhaps the roof of the Dal-Tex building (and perhaps there was!).

2. One of the Mafia’s key motives, in addition to eliminating JFK and neutralizing RFK, would have been the overthrow of Castro and the restoration of the Mafia’s lucrative resort/casino empire. While pro-Castro Oswald would have been a useful patsy for this purpose, I don’t think the Mafia would have trusted in this alone. There would have been other planted evidence pointing directly to Castro’s involvement.

3. It’s difficult to see how Oswald would have been on the Mafia’s radar screen at all, plus he seems like an awfully erratic and potentially unreliable patsy (although Marcello did speak of pinning the assassination on a "nut job"). It seems unlikely to me that the Mafia would have worked with (i.e., trusted) anyone outside the organization to recruit Oswald and convince him he was part of a pro-Castro plot. Once you start hypothesizing how the Mafia would have recruited Oswald, the plot starts to get complicated and un-Mafia-like.

4. I don't think Oswald would have lived to be arrested. If this were a Mafia hit, it would have been far cleaner in every way than the events in Dealey Plaza and the flight of Oswald. More than any of the other usual suspects, I have great confidence in the Mafia’s ability to plan and carry out a hit that would have left no clues at all.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on what the Mafia's hit actually looked like and why.