Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
John Geraghty

What age did you take an interest

Recommended Posts

Dawn,

I dont think andy meant any harm by what he said, he simply hasnt had much interest in the case and was being light hearted with regards to his eyes glazing over when john speaks about it. thats the way i read it anyhow.

good to see so many people can keep an interest in the assassination for so long. it shows how in depth an investigation of this nature really is.

Ive always been fascinated by american history (modern), i study history in college and so far the only american topic i have covered is the american revolution but we did not go into details about battles etc but merely looked at causes of it.

john

________________________

Sorry Andy, it was the term "glaze over" that got to me as that is what always happens to me when I try to talk to people about this case. They just don't want to know. So it's terribly frustrating. Especially if they ask a question, then don't like the answer: ie the pat WC answer.

It is important to ME because as a child I saw old men on tv, the pols, the news, it was all so boring. Then suddenly while reading a Superman comic book I was "introduced" to JFK. I had seen him on tv and could tell he was different. I guess I was about 10. Living in Canada with one tv station I did not get to see JFK much on tv, but then I went to stay with relatives in Boston. IN October 1963, at age 13. Kennedy was coming to speak in Dec. I was soooo excited. I just loved the man. It was so clear that he was DIFFERENT. In every way, his intellect, his charm, his amazing wit, his grace, his love of life and the human race. All of this was evident to me.

Then came 11/22/63. (By now I was 14. 10/24/49)

What can I say? John will tell you that it was an inside job, that was also clear to me day one.

No JFK murder no Viet Nam, then no 500,000 dead and millions more lives forever ruined. (As a criminal defense atty for now almost 20 years I have seen the living victims of Viet Nam, in jail, on the streets begging for $, and dead at an early age from alcohol to drown out the horror they could not forget.)

So that is ONE reason it matters. There are many more, but it is dinner time and time to wrap my Christmas gifts.

I meant no rudeness, your post was just a riddle???

Happiest of holidays

Dawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What can I say?  John will tell you that it was an inside job [not that MI-6 doesn't spread their butcheeks for the CIA], that was also clear to me day one.

Dawn

Obviously, Al will not tolerate an anti-Castro, Mafia or corrupt police viewpoint. For that position to be condoned, even supported, renders this forum useless.

------------------------------

I think his Al's position may be accepted or rejected by anyone as he/she wishes. The trouble I see is that if you you do not agree with Al, you are "part of the problem" or an "idiot". In other words Al seems to think his position is gospel.  But there are enough ballistics experts who do not see eye to eye with him on everything. 

Wim

By "inside job" obviously Al Carrier doesn't allow tolerance for the views of anyone who believes there are dirty cops, as they are labeled "rediculous." He also doesn't follow the rule of logic, given his Catch-22 argument that no one who confesses, such as Tosh, could be genuine, and given the projection of his own performance in Latin America for which he certainly would never confess. He doesn't think anyone else should be allowed to comment, but when I posted new information about the massacre of dozens of police at Caro Quintero's ranch near Vera Cruz and asked for him to comment, he would not. So the Catch-22: as we search for the truth, he shuts down historians who didn't engage in murderous acts themselves in Latin America or have records of ongoing police abuse in America. Anyone who was there and admits it, must not have actually been there.

On Lancer, Al gave an ultimatum for certain people to be kicked off the forum, including the one he referred to on this forum as a "Nazi" (attacks don't get more personal than that; and he has made that statement on this forum). When not a single person spoke in support of him, he was silenced. That's history. Now, as Wim cited, people who don't kneel down before Al's murderous expertise are labeled "fantasy chasers," which is not considered personal attack here. He uses profanity and that's acceptable language here.

I don't sit back for police abuse and brutality, on the streets or on-line. That's not anti-establishment; that's pro-freedom.

Tim Carroll

Edited by Tim Carroll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On November 22 I had concluded LBJ was behind it. In following years I studied many theories... CIA, Mafia, Castro, Russia, right-wingers, etc....and after 40+ years I ended up where I began (LBJ+LBJ CRONIES did it).

Very similar experience. I was 18 and took longer to agree with Jack that it was organized by LBJ and his cronies.

I have taught about the Kennedy assassination for over 20 years. Hopefully there are a lot of people out there who can say they first became interested in the case when they were about 13 years old.

Close: I was fourteen when it happened and although not a Kennedy supporter his assassination deeply affected me, as it did most patriotic Americans. I want to add that although I disagreed with his politics, JFK was certainly a charismatic leader and I remember watching most of his press conferences and enjoying his wit and intellect. I read "Rush to Judgment" and "Six Seconds in Dallas" and "Inquest" shortly after they were published. And I read a lot of the other assassination books (e.g. "Crossfire"; "Reasonable Doubt", "Best Evidence" etc (as they were published.

My interest in the assassination case was resparked in the summer of 2003 when I read Fonzi's Washingtonian article on Gordon Winslow's web-site and started to work with Mark Howell re possible Keys' connections to the assassination.

It has been a pleasure discovering this Forum and being able to consider the opinions of others with far more knowledge of the assassination than I.

Happy holidays to all!

Edited by Tim Gratz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I don't doubt that the murder of an elected head of state is a significant event. However conspiracy theories regarding JFK do rather rest on the assumption that he would have done something rather interesting with his position had he lived... I can see no evidence that this was likely - instead he cuts the figure of a rather incompetent President in life and a hugely overblown media myth after his death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't doubt that the murder of an elected head of state is a significant event. However conspiracy theories regarding JFK do rather rest on the assumption that he would have done something rather interesting with his position had he lived... I can see no evidence that this was likely - instead he cuts the  figure of a rather incompetent President in life and a hugely overblown media myth after his death.

This is a very important point. A close inspection of his record does not suggest an outstanding president. In some cases, such as the Bay of Pigs and the plots to assassinate Fidel Castro, he was indeed a highly reckless president. He made some fine speeches that suggested that he was going to tackle the civil rights issue, however, we now know that deals had been done with the Southern Caucus in 1960 and that would not have happened.

The reason why JFK was assassinated is that he changed his mind about a wide variety of subjects. He was no longer the Cold War warrior that he had been in 1960. Recently released documents show that during the summer of 1963 JFK was attempting to bring an end to the Cold War. This would have meant a withdrawal from Vietnam. It is also clear that he really intended to bring an end to the oil depletion allowance and other tax fiddles enjoyed by wealthy industrialists in America.

JFK was preparing to betray powerful figures in the Democratic Party who had helped him to obtain the presidency. With his popularity boosted by the Cuban Missile Crisis (confirming him as a true Cold War warrior) JFK was heading for a victory in the 1964 election. Who can say what JFK would have done in his second period of office? JFK had to be removed before this could take place.

It is ironic that so many JFK researchers have helped to disguise the truth of the situation by promoting the myth of the JFK presidency. As Andy rightly points out: “he cuts the figure of a rather incompetent President in life and a hugely overblown media myth after his death.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't doubt that the murder of an elected head of state is a significant event. However conspiracy theories regarding JFK do rather rest on the assumption that he would have done something rather interesting with his position had he lived... I can see no evidence that this was likely - instead he cuts the  figure of a rather incompetent President in life and a hugely overblown media myth after his death.

Well, I see we have won an enormous victory by having this individual be our administrator, so thank you John and Andy!

JFK was shot when I was 18 months old.

It is hard to describe the degree that his death and the events of 1968 hangs over my life, a true backdrop to all my political questions.

The intelligence "theme" doesn't start at James Bond, it starts with

Bullwinkle the Moose and Rocket J. Squirrel (spies)

Major Matt Mason (a 1960's toy astronaut)

Wild Wild West (counter-intelligence western TV show)

The Day of the Jackal (popular novel and film)

Executive Action (popular film)

The discussions of my youth which I participated in, by observing---they just now make sense.

In best FBI memo fashion, I'll give you what stands out in my mind, circa 1973.

LYNDON JOHNSON, H.L. HUNT, CLINT MURCHISON, OIL DEPLETION ALLOWANCE, BELL HELLICOPTER, LADY BIRD'S RADIO STATION, HOWARD HUGHES, VIETNAM, HENRY CABOT LODGE, ALLEN DULLES, BAY OF PIGS, ARMY LSD EXPERIMENTS,

OPERATION PHOENIX, MILITARY COUP FOR WAR IN VIETNAM, EUGENE BRADING, HOWARD HUNT, DAVE PHILLIPS, DES FITZGERALD, 1963 SECRET SERVICE BRAKED TO A HALT, FAKED AUTOPSY PHOTOS AND X-RAYS, MARTIN LUTHER KING MURDERED, ROBERT F. KENNEDY MURDERED. RICHARD NIXON WINS.

WAR CONTINUES. GERALD FORD, of the the WARREN COMMISSION

named Vice President, NIXON RESIGNS

FORD PRESIDENT

etc etc etc

This is a capsule of cultural and political idioms and tropes I was exposed to growing up in the 1960s and 1970s...I hope it is helpful, I know the FORUM is very healthy for SHANET CLARK>

Edited by Shanet Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THank you again Shanet.

John, I am surprised at you.

Andy admits he has no interest in this case and he's clear he has no belief that JFk's life would have made a difference. Therefore his death does not either.

I find this odd, but a lot of people (sadly) feel this way.

The media's dsinformation agents have done an excellent job, test books don't even touch the subject...so , the agents who make money on this case are the likes of Posner ( just to name one)...

Andy, I "get", he is, by his own words, uninterested, unbelieving, sounds like the way Nic described her mom- (to me)- after seeing "JFK" . ("ya, but who cares??)

Happy New Year to All.

Dawn ("DD")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please excuse typos, did not proorf read.

I am PLAYING MUSIC today, Thank you Nic and several others!!!!

Dawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
JFK was shot when I was 18 months old.

It is hard to describe the degree that his death and the events of 1968 hangs over my life, a true backdrop to all my political questions.

Quite an advanced response at 18 months ;)

Andy, I "get", he is, by his own words, uninterested, unbelieving

This is a strange comment.

I am not sure what I am accused of lacking a belief in. Perhaps it is the "myth" of JFK?

I am not a JFK researcher and could thus be rightly accused of lacking interest in the case.

To suggest however that I lack "belief" suggests at something more troubling for the objective researcher.

I too am listening to music... I hope it does not colour my judgement.

I will continue to read posts in this area of the International Teachers Forum with some interest and a great deal of tolerance.

For this reason alone Shanet, you are indeed blessed to have me as an administrator :lol:;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...