Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / How Did Bart Kamp Create The Lovelady Image?
« Last post by Brian Doyle on Today at 07:16:41 PM »


No, that makes sense because you know how honest The Education Forum and Mainstream Media have been on the subject up to now...

James Hosty told Nigel Turner that "Oswald told us he was alone in the Lunch Room during the assassination"...

I have yet to get an answer from Bart Kamp why Hosty left such an important statement out of his notes?...

And I have yet to get an answer how that relates to Buell Frazier saying a Depository employee told him a partly-eaten cheese sandwich and apple were seen on the 2nd Floor Lunch Room table after the assassination...

And why couldn't Frazier name that employee?...
2
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Ultra-Liberal CTers Are Outraged Over New Book on JFK and Vietnam
« Last post by Tom Scully on Today at 07:10:28 PM »
Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Today at 05:47:11 PM
Huh? No, I didn't say McMaster is an ultra-liberal. I'm not sure how you got that from my OP. McMaster has praised the book, as I mention in the OP.

The claim that Kennedy ordered a full withdrawal, not to mention the claim that he planned to unconditionally withdraw after the election, has been debunked every which way and is rejected by the vast majority of scholars all across the spectrum. Even most liberal historians reject the claim.

This is a prime example of the refusal of ultra-liberal JFKA researchers to listen to fact and reason.

I devote an entire chapter in A Comforting Lie to debunking the JFK-full-withdrawl myth. The far-left assertion that JFK planned on unconditionally withdrawing from Vietnam, i.e., even if it meant losing the war and allowing North Vietnam to conquer South Vietnam, is even more inexcusable and erroneous.

Dr. Marc Selverstone's 2022 book The Kennedy Withdrawal proves, among other things, that the JFK White House tapes do not contain one syllable from JFK or RFK to the effect that JFK had any intention of pulling out of Vietnam after the election. In fact, RFK specifically rejected this claim in his April 1964 oral history interview.

Your opinions fly in the face of the actual historical record.

Withdrawal was the policy on the day JFK died.

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v04/d167

....And,

Quote
https://www.amazon.com/Virtual-JFK-Vietnam-Kennedy-Lived/dp/0742557006
Virtual JFK: Vietnam If Kennedy Had Lived

Tackling head-on the most controversial and debated "what if" in U.S. foreign policy, this provocative work explores what President John F. Kennedy would have done in Vietnam had he not been assassinated in 1963. Drawing on a wealth of recently declassified documents, frank oral testimony of White House officials from both the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, and the analysis of top historians, this book presents compelling evidence that JFK was ready to end U.S. involvement well before the conflict escalated. With vivid immediacy, readers will feel they are in the president's war room as the debates raged that forever changed the course of American history—and continue to affect us profoundly as the shadows of Vietnam stretch into Iraq.
3
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Did Bart Kamp Create The Lovelady Image?
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 06:34:15 PM »
Quote from: Brian Doyle on Today at 03:30:18 PM
Clique-favored Bart Kamp has been allowed readmission to The Education Forum...

Like DiEugenio, Kamp shows ability in deep research and extensive digging in to assassination information...Since I am honest I have to admit I use Kamp as a source on some assassination matters and his research is helpful at times...My pique with Kamp is that he tends to use that extensive research to reach quack conclusions and misses what his research is really leading to and insists on gang-like conduct in forcing through wrong claims...So the correct explanation of Kamp and his research is it is useful in learning about certain assassination subjects but then needs final correction away from the false conclusions he almost always draws...Kamp is a practice-er of Greg Parker crank research...The average JFK internet member gets impressed by extensive research but then fails to fact-check (See 'Ciphered Past')...

The reason Kamp has been allowed back on The Education Forum is because the Prayer Man people have hijacked the JFK internet and they have taken final control of the JFK internet through DiEugenio proxy Andrew Iler...The "reformation" of The Education Forum is carefully allowing all those who support the Prayer Man theory back on the board and it is corruptedly not allowing the best and brightest who are capable of refuting it..."The Moderation Team" is bullying those people and censoring them with false moderation...

If you are smart you will realize that the reason Kamp opened his re-admission to The Education Forum with a paper on Oswald in Finland and not his eponymous Prayer Man theory is because he knows I have refuted that notorious theory and he doesn't believe in it himself...It stands true that the Prayer Man theory only exists in places where corruption censors those who can refute it...I owe gratitude to Kamp because if he hadn't provoked me to refute that bogus theory then I would not have discovered the conspiracy break-through of our generation...

If you ever had a real breakthrough, it would quickly become national news. In reality it is just another one of hundreds, if not thousands of kook theories that have been proposed over he tlast six decades that combined don't amount ot a hill of beans.

Sorry. Just being honest.
4
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Why didn't Clint Hill hear the first shot?
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 06:21:04 PM »
Quote from: Jack Nessan on Today at 06:03:36 PM
Exactly is it you know? Where is the proof? How is this early missed shot nonsense any different than Andrew's bizarre theory?

It is supported by evidence, both forensic and witness accounts.
5
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Why didn't Clint Hill hear the first shot?
« Last post by Jack Nessan on Today at 06:03:36 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on Today at 05:36:52 PM
This is why I directed the question at those who know there was an early missed shot.

Exactly is it you know? Where is the proof? How is this early missed shot nonsense any different than Andrew's bizarre theory?
6
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Ultra-Liberal CTers Are Outraged Over New Book on JFK and Vietnam
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Today at 05:47:11 PM »
Quote from: Tom Scully on August 01, 2026, 02:30:26 PM
McMasters..... Ultra-Liberal?

Huh? No, I didn't say McMaster is an ultra-liberal. I'm not sure how you got that from my OP. McMaster has praised the book, as I mention in the OP.

The claim that Kennedy ordered a full withdrawal, not to mention the claim that he planned to unconditionally withdraw after the election, has been debunked every which way and is rejected by the vast majority of scholars all across the spectrum. Even most liberal historians reject the claim.

This is a prime example of the refusal of ultra-liberal JFKA researchers to listen to fact and reason.

I devote an entire chapter in A Comforting Lie to debunking the JFK-full-withdrawl myth. The far-left assertion that JFK planned on unconditionally withdrawing from Vietnam, i.e., even if it meant losing the war and allowing North Vietnam to conquer South Vietnam, is even more inexcusable and erroneous.

Dr. Marc Selverstone's 2022 book The Kennedy Withdrawal proves, among other things, that the JFK White House tapes do not contain one syllable from JFK or RFK to the effect that JFK had any intention of pulling out of Vietnam after the election. In fact, RFK specifically rejected this claim in his April 1964 oral history interview.
 



7
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Mary Woodward said there were 3 shots and the 1st shot missed everything
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 05:41:25 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on Today at 04:22:40 PM
You are fooling yourself if you think you can see him waving after z198. He begins to drop his hand and turn forward after z193 if not a bit sooner. That we can see.  What we cannot tell is whether his hand is still up because he is still waving or because hasn’t yet moved it fully down yet. z198 is 275 milliseconds after z193. How much movement would you expect in the first quarter second after being shot through the neck? 
Not only do you have no evidence that he is not already reacting well before z226, you would have to be suffering from dementia or acute tunnel-vision to be confident that JFK is not reacting well before:
You need to read more.  That motion is perfectly consistent with how JBC said he reacted to the first shot.

As usual, you have it bassackwards, Clouseau. We don't need evidence that JFK is not reacting at that point. If you are going to hypothesize JFK was reacting to a gunshot at that point in time, the burden is on you to provide the evidence to support it. Nobody has any burden to prove a negative. I wouldn't expect someone with the goofy beliefs you hold to understand that.
8
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Why didn't Clint Hill hear the first shot?
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 05:36:52 PM »
Quote from: Jack Nessan on Today at 04:17:19 PM
Does anyone else have a different theory as to why some of the occupants of either limo did not seem to hear or react to Oswald's early missed shot.

Because there wasn't one.

This is why I directed the question at those who know there was an early missed shot.
9
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Clint Hill describes the assassination
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 05:36:00 PM »
Quote from: Jarrett Smith on Today at 05:16:09 PM

He never stepped off the car until Kennedy was already dead at Z313. If he heard a shot before reaching the car then that backs up the acoustic and eyewitness accounts of two rapid shots. He also said that last shot sounded different than the others.

Now we have the dumbass version of the event.

Where to the nutcases get these ideas from?
10
General Discussion And Debate (Any Topic) / Re: U.S. And International Politics
« Last post by Richard Smith on Today at 05:17:53 PM »
Quote from: Michael Capasse on August 01, 2026, 01:09:19 PM
:D what specifically did he do to deserve that title?

Complicit in the deaths of 15 million people either through gross negligence or outright complicity in the origination of the pandemic.  He made Dr. Mengele seem like an amateur and got rich off it.  The Dems never cared where the virus originated or how many people died.   They used the pandemic for their own political purposes to damage Trump including changing the voting laws in almost every state.  That resulted in Biden getting a statistical outlier in votes from ballet harvesting.  The most of any candidate in American history by many million.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10