Jonathan Cohen

Do you really believe there are people who would vote for him simply because he says he "will open up the JFK records" ? Setting that aside for a moment, what qualifies him to be the President of the United States? And please don't say his lineage ...

And Oliver Stone is a Putin supporter. Does that make him untrustworthy to you as well?

Jim, it's not a contest, and I don't know why you insist that the two films have to be compared to one another. They should rise or fall on their own merits. It's all well and good to parse precisely when a JFK character is meant to be "speculating," but how does that work in the case of, say, the "Mr. X" / Prouty character? "His" pronouncements are conveyed in a way that is surely intended to be definitive, not speculative, and in reality the actual Prouty's claims on the subject are certainly up for dispute. Considering Mamet's movie was just announced and won't be released for some time, why not withhold judgement until you see the final product?

Did I ever say I was an authority on New Orleans? Did I even mention the subject in my posts? Rather, I said that there are inaccuracies and misrepresentations in both JFK and JFK Revisited, many of which have been discussed at length on this forum.

Unfortunately, they did! And unfortunately, it isn't!

You mean the same guy who used to dig through Bob Dylan's trash looking for proof of his loony theories?

https://deadline.com/2023/05/al-pacino-viggo-mortensen-john-travolta-shia-labeouf-courtney-love-david-mamets-jfk-assassination-cannes-1235366496/

This is the kind of post that passes for "research" on this forum. Pathetic.

Under what definition of journalism is Armstrong is "a very good writer" ? 900 pages with no editing? Boy, that'a a new one! I trust you will recognize there is a major difference between Oswald having been impersonated and him being a part of a decades-long secret government doppelganger scheme that also involved two distinct, human versions of his own mother. There is evidence for the former. The latter is laughable.

So the Dallas Police just made up fake identities for the three tramps 29 years after the assassination and conspired with their very real families to lie about what happened in Dealey Plaza, then allowed those families, and the tramps themselves, to give television interviews? Great conspiracy, Paul!

So, you're accepting the unsolicited opinion of one forensic artist over the actual documents and testimony refuting any ongoing mystery about the Three Tramps incident?

You have zero evidence that these photos aren’t of the men arrested in Dealey Plaza. Their family members, and some of the tramps themselves, confirmed that it was them.

What about the DPD arrest reports of the tramps is bogus? Please, educate us.

Tom, nobody is suggesting we accept the arrest records at face value on their own. Journalists and researchers such as the La Fontaines went deeper into the story and determined that the tramps were exactly who they said they were. Shouldn’t that be the end of it?

Really? Chauncey Holt, in 2023? Can’t we EVER move on from decades-old claptrap?

Of course they can judge for themselves, as they already have. Numerous member polls right here on this forum show that the vast majority of researchers reject this silly, ridiculous theory.

What may have seemed suspicious at the time can clearly be shown to be innocuous with the benefit of history. Numerous people were mistakenly arrested in Dallas that day, were considered suspects, and were written up in FBI reports, only to be cleared as having nothing to do with the assassination. The Three Tramps are among them.

So? Millions upon millions of people born between 1900 and the mid 1940s served in the military. Does that make them suspects in the assassination?

Tom, what do you mean, they didn't really prove anything? Were the arrest records faked, in that case?

W: they did no such thing. The Harvey and Lee theory has been destroyed by Mark Stevens, Robert Charles Dunne, and Jeremy B. in numerous threads right here on this forum - not just at ROKC.

What's illogical is rejecting the arrest reports of the actual three tramps, which show them to be nothing more than... tramps. This was thoroughly confirmed in 1992 reporting by Mary and Ray La Fontaine.

Kevyan, I'll be interested to read your full article, but I am preemptively hoping we're in agreement that the Tramps were most definitely not CIA operatives and were in fact actual hobos...

In fact, the opposite is true. We owe the members of the ROKC a debt of gratitude for authoritatively shredding the looniest and most embarrassing fringe theories in this case ("Harvey" and/or "Lee," I'm aiming a Minox camera in your direction...) -- theories that impugn the integrity and credibility of the JFK research community at large.

Because that would have forced him to confront the fact that something was fishy as it pertained to the way Oswald's internal files were being handled.

Amen, Jeremy. But maybe everyone at ROKC will finally take us here at the Education Forum more seriously now that we have unearthed the earth-shattering fact that Bob Dylan was involved in all the political assassinations of the 1960s? Or that every film and photo from Dealey Plaza has been altered?