JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Patrick Jackson on August 16, 2019, 09:37:58 AM
-
Hello Forum members and visitors,
For quite some time I am developing the idea of writing a book but I am aware that cannot do it alone so decided to ask here if there would be interested co-writers?
The book would be a novel with around 80% known facts about events in Dallas and 20% fiction and the main topic would be that there was no assassination (blood cannons, remember).
Co-writer should be openminded for new ideas and ready to develop not so new theory and have reasonable experience in book publishing.
Relations between co-writers would be regulated by a collaboration agreement.
If you would be interested in this co-writing project, please feel free to write me a PM.
Thank you.
PJ
-
Hello Forum members and visitors,
For quite some time I am developing the idea of writing a book but I am aware that cannot do it alone so decided to ask here if there would be interested co-writers?
The book would be a novel with around 80% known facts about events in Dallas and 20% fiction and the main topic would be that there was no assassination (blood cannons, remember).
Co-writer should be openminded for new ideas and ready to develop not so new theory and have reasonable experience in book publishing.
Relations between co-writers would be regulated by a collaboration agreement.
If you would be interested in this co-writing project, please feel free to write me a PM.
Thank you.
PJ
*For quite some time I have been developing ...
-- Mudd Wrassler Tommy ;)
PS Sorry. I couldn't resist.
-
My first thought is: would anyone be interested in reading such a book? But then again, I spent good money on the purchase of Stephen King’s “11/22/63” fictional book.
-
Sorry, that train has already left the station. As Mark O' would certainly agree, nobody could do it better (or more thoughtfully, thoroughly, or informatively) than......:
A 75 page thread, rebutting everyone from the WC to Ray Crump defense attorney, Dovey Roundtree !
http://letsrollforums.com//jfk-murder-staged-event-t23127.html
The "JFK-MURDER" was a STAGED EVENT / JFK wasn't "KILLED" on 11/22/63!
The events in Dealey Plaza were a Psy-Op
The 'shots' and JFK's 'headwound' were simulated, the purpose was to create an immense MYTH in plain sight.
- Culto
-
My first thought is: would anyone be interested in reading such a book? But then again, I spent good money on the purchase of Stephen King’s “11/22/63” fictional book.
The idea is to offer new theory with a lot of facts which would lead the readers to the new researching fields. What I am afraid of is being right in the conclusions and that the book would shake America good.
-
Sorry, that train has already left the station. As Mark O' would certainly agree, nobody could do it better (or more thoughtfully, thoroughly, or informatively) than......:
A 75 page thread, rebutting everyone from the WC to Ray Crump defense attorney, Dovey Roundtree !
That thread was my starting point back in 2013. It has a lot of good conclusions and many wrong in my opinion.
-
The idea is to offer new theory with a lot of facts which would lead the readers to the new researching fields. What I am afraid of is being right in the conclusions and that the book would shake America good.
If you are afraid of being right in the conclusion: “there was no assassination.” I don’t think that you have anything to worry about. I consider myself to be open minded. However, I haven’t seen any evidence that would support that conclusion.
-
If you are afraid of being right in the conclusion: “there was no assassination.” I don’t think that you have anything to worry about. I consider myself to be open minded. However, I haven’t seen any evidence that would support that conclusion.
The fact there are no evidences seen to support the conclusion does not mean evidences don't exist, right?
Still, this is not a topic about evidences but about searching for an open-minded co-author who will recognize the potential of publishing such a book.
-
My first thought is: would anyone be interested in reading such a book? But then again, I spent good money on the purchase of Stephen King’s “11/22/63” fictional book.
Stephen King is in the CIA you know.
-
The fact there are no evidences seen to support the conclusion does not mean evidences don't exist, right?
Still, this is not a topic about evidences but about searching for an open-minded co-author who will recognize the potential of publishing such a book.
If your goal is to write a fictional story, then you can make up whatever suits your fantasy. If you want to “be right and shake up America,” then evidence might help.
-
If your goal is to write a fictional story, then you can make up whatever suits your fantasy. If you want to “be right and shake up America,” then evidence might help.
The goal is to use as much as possible known facts and fill up the gaps with fiction. But not fiction like aliens, demons, vampires but plausible fiction.
Also, the goal is not to offer documented, solid evidence since I do not have access to them but to open a new direction of research which would lead to new evidence.
-
The goal is to use as much as possible known facts and fill up the gaps with fiction. But not fiction like aliens, demons, vampires but plausible fiction.
Also, the goal is not to offer documented, solid evidence since I do not have access to them but to open a new direction of research which would lead to new evidence.
The American Trap
Review: https://decadentdallas.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-american-trap.html
Interesting fiction
(https://i.postimg.cc/L5xs0QRb/Trap-TSBD.jpg)
-
The goal is to use as much as possible known facts and fill up the gaps with fiction. But not fiction like aliens, demons, vampires but plausible fiction.
Also, the goal is not to offer documented, solid evidence since I do not have access to them but to open a new direction of research which would lead to new evidence.
Here is one paragraph from Reclaiming History, page 976, that you might find interesting:
In his book The Paranoid Style in American Politics and Other Essays, Richard Hofstadter writes that "the typical procedure of the higher paranoid scholarship is to start with defensible assumptions." He goes on to say, in an observation tailor-made for the conspiracy theorists in the Kennedy case, that "the paranoid mentality is far more coherent than the real world, since it leaves no room for mistakes, failures or ambiguities... It believes it is up against an enemy who is as infallibly rational as he is totally evil, and it seeks to match his imputed total competence with its own, leaving nothing unexplained and comprehending all of reality in one overreaching , consistent theory." Hofstadter says the "qualities" of the paranoid style are "heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy," and a "heroic striving for 'evidence' to prove that the unbelievable is the only thing that can be believed."