JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Gerry Down on November 23, 2020, 04:52:12 PM
-
This claim is made in the amazon.com description of the book I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak by Fred Litwin. I presume Fred Litwin wrote the amazon description for his own book so, if i'm correct, this allegation is coming from him. The book description goes as follows:
I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak demonstrates how the left and right have used the JFK assassination to drive home myths about power in America. There is also the persecution of a gay man prosecuted for conspiring to kill Kennedy, the ugly story of Oliver Stone’s homophobic film JFK, an exposé of conspiracy nonsense on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a look at how the Soviets tried to influence American public opinion that CIA was behind the murder, and the incredible secret why some JFK assassination documents must remain locked up. And a whole lot more.
-
This claim is made in the amazon.com description of the book I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak by Fred Litwin. I presume Fred Litwin wrote the amazon description for his own book so, if i'm correct, this allegation is coming from him. The book description goes as follows:
I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak demonstrates how the left and right have used the JFK assassination to drive home myths about power in America. There is also the persecution of a gay man prosecuted for conspiring to kill Kennedy, the ugly story of Oliver Stone’s homophobic film JFK, an exposé of conspiracy nonsense on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a look at how the Soviets tried to influence American public opinion that CIA was behind the murder, and the incredible secret why some JFK assassination documents must remain locked up. And a whole lot more.
I have seen opinions that say that Jim Garrison was (among other things). The movie is mostly concerning him and his fiasco. So that aspect might not could have been avoided. I only wish that someone would produce a movie that is an antidote to Stone’s movie. I wrote Ken Burns requesting that he consider it. He wrote back saying he is already covered up making other documentaries. But that there are many others who have requested this of him.
-
I have seen opinions that say that Jim Garrison was (among other things). The movie is mostly concerning him and his fiasco. So that aspect might not could have been avoided. I only wish that someone would produce a movie that is an antidote to Stone’s movie. I wrote Ken Burns requesting that he consider it. He wrote back saying he is already covered up making other documentaries. But that there are many others who have requested this of him.
You didn't like "Killing Kennedy" or "Parkland"?
I think Oliver Stone's "JFK" is great in the context of entertainment and being a political thriller. One of the best Hollywood political thrillers in my honest opinion.
It shouldn't be treated as a documentary.
"Killing Kennedy" and "11-22-63", also took major liberties with the facts about Kennedy's assassination ("Parkland" did okay on accuracy) but I don't see those productions getting as much criticism about playing loose with historical facts...
-
You didn't like "Killing Kennedy" or "Parkland"?
I think Oliver Stone's "JFK" is great in the context of entertainment and being a political thriller. One of the best Hollywood political thrillers in my honest opinion.
It shouldn't be treated as a documentary.
"Killing Kennedy" and "11-22-63", also took major liberties with the facts about Kennedy's assassination ("Parkland" did okay on accuracy) but I don't see those productions getting as much criticism about playing loose with historical facts...
Neither of those movies got near the amount of attention that Stone’s movie did. Parkland was mostly about Parkland. And the JFK assassination happened so long ago that most people alive now weren’t around back then. And their interest in it is less than most people who were around and remember the emotional part. Ken Burns has a knack for bringing the viewers into the story. Even if it happened before their time. And Ken already has a huge fan base. So it would be a very popular documentary. That’s what is sorely needed in my opinion.
-
Neither of those movies got near the amount of attention that Stone’s movie did. Parkland was mostly about Parkland. And the JFK assassination happened so long ago that most people alive now weren’t around back then. And their interest in it is less than most people who were around and remember the emotional part. Ken Burns has a knack for bringing the viewers into the story. Even if it happened before their time. And Ken already has a huge fan base. So it would be a very popular documentary. That’s what is sorely needed in my opinion.
I like most of Burns' work but I don't blame him for not wanting to get involved with the JFK controversy. It's too polarizing.
-
You didn't like "Killing Kennedy" or "Parkland"?
I think Oliver Stone's "JFK" is great in the context of entertainment and being a political thriller. One of the best Hollywood political thrillers in my honest opinion.
It shouldn't be treated as a documentary.
"Killing Kennedy" and "11-22-63", also took major liberties with the facts about Kennedy's assassination ("Parkland" did okay on accuracy) but I don't see those productions getting as much criticism about playing loose with historical facts...
Stephen King's 11.22.63 wasn't meant as a documentary
-
Yes, I think it was: but perhaps not enough.
-
How many Fred Litwin threads do we need?
-
How many Fred Litwin threads do we need?
There are others? I'd never heard his name until i came across his book. And to be honest, its probably not a book i'd read because the title sounds so childish. Maybe it is a good book, but its hard to get past that awful title.
Does the book contain any useful information? Any new interviews or insights etc?
-
This claim is made in the amazon.com description of the book I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak by Fred Litwin. I presume Fred Litwin wrote the amazon description for his own book so, if i'm correct, this allegation is coming from him. The book description goes as follows:
How many Fred Litwin threads do we need?
Apparently one for each jab that could be made about the Garrison Inquiry. However thousands have been made about the official story huh?
In the Stone movie...Was it Tommy Lee Jones who portrayed a gay Clay Shaw? So what? He was. That was all I noticed.
-
Yes, I think it was: but perhaps not enough.
Re King's 11.22.63, how can a story about a time-travel portal that sends a person back in time to stop Oswald from shooting JFK be a documentary exactly? King himself said the assassination details weren't meant to be challenged or argued against. It was from his novel of the same name.
For example, we all know that Oswald did not walk out in the open in front of cops:
(https://i.postimg.cc/xThtZxsY/11-22-63-buell-oawald-walking.png)
Scene from 11.22.63
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/xThtZxsY/11-22-63-buell-oawald-walking.png)
Scene from 11.22.63
That picture certainly fits the lone nut theory that has him carrying a big long rifle shaped package in front of the entire city :D
-
That picture certainly fits the lone nut theory that has him carrying a big long rifle shaped package in front of the entire city :D
That's interesting. Perhaps you can show me where exactly this "lone nut theory that has him carrying a big long rifle shaped package in front of the entire city" is? I for one have never seen such a claim..but I'm sure a 'smart guy' like you knows better. :D
-
This claim is made in the amazon.com description of the book I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak by Fred Litwin. I presume Fred Litwin wrote the amazon description for his own book so, if i'm correct, this allegation is coming from him. The book description goes as follows:
I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak demonstrates how the left and right have used the JFK assassination to drive home myths about power in America. There is also the persecution of a gay man prosecuted for conspiring to kill Kennedy, the ugly story of Oliver Stone’s homophobic film JFK, an exposé of conspiracy nonsense on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a look at how the Soviets tried to influence American public opinion that CIA was behind the murder, and the incredible secret why some JFK assassination documents must remain locked up. And a whole lot more.
Stone had an entirely gratuitous scene in the movie where Shaw is seen at some sort of gay orgy (with David Ferrie and Perry Russo) where leather "tools" and other "devices" are shown. It's entirely fictional - there is no evidence whatsoever that it occurred - and really just a smear of a dead man, Clay Shaw.
Mark Lane condemned Stone for the scene saying, "Stone was not bound by the laws of defamation which apply, in the United States, only to the living. Apparently, the less-codified rules of common decency were not an impediment either....Where Stone labors to demean Clay Shaw and to condemn him by introducing a bizarre gay orgy scene he is indulging his own fantasies and misleading the audience."
Dave Reitzes details the scene here: https://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100party.html
-
That's interesting. Perhaps you can show me where exactly this "lone nut theory that has him carrying a big long rifle shaped package in front of the entire city" is? I for one have never seen such a claim..but I'm sure a 'smart guy' like you knows better.
Yeah I certainly do.