Jump to content
The Education Forum

Rodney Rivers

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rodney Rivers

  1. One movie that is a 'FUN' JFK movie is called 'TIME QUEST'. Sure it's a B-Movie and Science fiction, but the basic premise is that JFK survives Dallas and it goes on from there. I rented this on netflix and thought it was like I said a fun movie. I don't think it is available anywhere on the net, but here's a good preview and snippet from JFK fans from youtube. Preview : Snippet : I love the part where he stands up to the military and LBJ about Vietnam. I just think this is what the REAL JFK would have done too if he lived. Check out the comments too, great one posted below. One youtube comment I particularly like : "If you do this, you'll be damned as a Communist Appeaser...... I really don't give a xxxx." That's what I'm talking about Jack!!! I miss u Man... I miss your Brother.... I hope you all are at peace, we know what u fought for and we'll take it from here... billionaireby16 3 years ago 13
  2. I need some help from you experts about something I've never figured out about the Z film. For the headshot, while JFK's head goes back from a shot from the front, how come the head explosion looks awkward. Whenever I see this, I expect something from the back of his head being blown out. Now I've read the witness testimony's and of course some of your work showing that 'blob' in the Z film as his back of the head. But what is actually being blown away in the Z film? When I see it, I see what it seems like his side of the head/right ear gets blown away and the head flaps over it. Almost makes it look like the shot came from his left to right. Still can't really figure it out.
  3. I think that would be fine. As long as it serves an educational purpose or can be used as reference media, I think it's ok.
  4. I've also found the Greg Kinnear Kennedy's Mini Series up on youtube, but not sure if I should post it here due to any distribution issues. For those who saw that movie, what were your comments? It was very tabloid but the way they got Kinnear to look like JFK was the best I've ever seen. They even had the wrinkles down right. As for how he was portrayed by the writers, it was very disappointing. They basically showed JFK as an aloof uncaring President who really did not want to be involved in any policy matters.
  5. Mr.Griffin - excellent contribution. I think this movie probably portrays how it really went down. I've read how many people marvel at Daley Plaza in this movie since it had not changed since the time of the event. I'll give you an assist - here's the full movie in one link, no segmentation : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL7_Iar2a0o
  6. Thank you Mr. Simkin. I wanted to add a movie that aired on ABC in the mid 70s - The Missiles of October. William Devane does a really good JFK. IMDB Link : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071847/ Stats : Director:Anthony Page Writers:Stanley R. Greenberg, Robert F. Kennedy (book) Stars:William Devane, Ralph Bellamy and Howard Da Silva Part 1 : Part 2 :
  7. I've always wondered if JFK survived if these affairs would have ever come to light. I doubt it, since the press would have still protected the President. We may have never known about it even years later. When Clinton's scandal occurred, I wondered if JFK got caught, would it have ended up the same way, he would be tarnished but not ousted as President? But during those years, they probably would have made him resign. If the powers wanted JFK out so badly in 63, why didnt they just produce a sexual scandal with the ammo they had instead of killing the man. An affair scandal would have killed JFK just as much as the bullet did. At one point I recall JFK Jr. saying something to the effect that if his Dad were alive today he would be wise not to run for Pres. But with all due respect, while I am certainly not one for shoveling dirt under a rug, it does seem that since JFK is unable to speak for himself, this is not a fair game. In particular, if a 'new' book simply parrots what similar 'old' books have said, why even bother to read them? I went through a phase, I think it was after reading the Exner book, where I was angry enough at JFK to have wished Jackie had stood up for herself and demanded a divorce (I know that wasn't likely), but that was a long time ago. JFK was a flawed person; he was a good President. I like the comment you made about being angry at JFK. I too went thru the same phase/feeling after the new revelations from the MiMi book were out. I think it's just human nature to feel that way about someone when you read these type of things. I was so angered I even went so far to think to myself 'bastard got what he deserved'. Well, that anger has lifted with me now and I'm back to rational thinking when it comes to JFK. Have to view the man as a whole, not just the flawed aspects.
  8. Perhaps you need to read a bit more about that era. Phil Graham of the Washington Post stood up at a conference of newsmen and told them all about JFK's affairs. If that plus Hoover's dirt couldn't get even a page-10 story about JFK then your theory is untenable. The simple fact of the matter is that practically everyone of that era had dirt on each other. Hoover followed the CIA and the Mafia. The CIA and the Mafia watched each other. The politicians weaved in between all of these groups with their own peculiar information and so on. The people who needed to silence Kennedy could not rely on a simple scandal. JFK, already viewed as young and virile, may have survived it on charisma alone. A bullet to the head was infinitely more effective, combined with a 50-year propaganda campaign designed to discredit or hide all of his actual accomplishments. In all of my history classes, I think the only positive item cited next to JFK was the Peace Corps. I never heard of him. What did he say to out JFK? Is there a transcript? And what were his reasons? I googled his name and it says that he was a friend of JFK's and convinced him in taking LBJ as VP. His actions don't sound too friendly.
  9. I've always wondered if JFK survived if these affairs would have ever come to light. I doubt it, since the press would have still protected the President. We may have never known about it even years later. When Clinton's scandal occurred, I wondered if JFK got caught, would it have ended up the same way, he would be tarnished but not ousted as President? But during those years, they probably would have made him resign. If the powers wanted JFK out so badly in 63, why didnt they just produce a sexual scandal with the ammo they had instead of killing the man. An affair scandal would have killed JFK just as much as the bullet did.
  10. I do recall he believed in a conspiracy back in the late 80s when he was doing Inside Edition, but that was years ago before he made it big. In case you've missed it, here's Bill with some JFK Conspiracy reporting back in the late 80s:
  11. C2C had a good show a few weeks ago about Nixon. The guest mentioned some of the same old JFK buddies (Smathers) who were buddies with people like BB Rebozo of Watergate Fame. Take it for what it's worth, because the first two minutes of this theory are sort of questionable, but stick with it., The Author talks about White House Politics from the 50s - 70s. Gets into JFK ASSASSINATION start of part 2. Author : Don Fulsom Book : Nixon's Darkest Secrets Part 1 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtcpd5M6pKA Part 2 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9K3Ffc8lI8
  12. Positives : he does present alternative viewpoints plus other subjects the MSM won't even dare touch. Negative : he's not a very good interviewer. I really get tired of him always interrupting and cutting off his guests when I get a chance to listen to his show. I think he needs to tone down the ego and let his guests provide their information.
  13. Whenever we get quotes from Presidents or their Aides in black and white in reference to this conspiracy or any historical event, it's always intriguing. I've never bought the reason LBJ didn't run for re-election was just solely Vietnam. My own theory is that RFK did his own investigation, got some of his contact in the government to press LBJ on it, and if they did find that LBJ was involved in any way, they threatened him with Impeachment. Of course, especially back then, they were not going to embarrass the President or the Office of POTUS. So maybe LBJ was told by the Kennedy people or AG/Justice Dept. that declining to run would save him a public trial. And that he would be under secret house arrest for the rest of his life as long as he stepped away quietly. And that his legacy would not be tarnished if he accepted this deal. I know it all sounds like an episode out of '24', but maybe that's the way it happened. But they in power will still not tell us the truth. The only reason I can ponder is that the truth is so disturbing that they will just not tell us. Say if it was LBJ behind it, I can see why. Why tarnish the office, it would be embarrassing for the nation. We would just be another Banana republic. Or there is something even greater that they think we can't handle.
  14. Lot of fireworks here, but also some good information. I too was always interested on how the motorcade worked in Dallas. But also was intrigued that other motorcades like like Mr. Von Pein has provided were similar in secret service protection. Since the Secret Service had done so many different motorcades for JFK before Dallas, does anyone have information why this motorcade protection was used in this motorcade vs that motorcade? Now here's my take on what happened in Dallas. Mind you this is all speculation, I have no real evidence to back it up, but thought I'd throw it out there for the members to debate about. So from the evidence we have, we know that JFK was being hunted down for assassination by Somebody/Something in Chicago and Tampa, 2 visits before Dallas. In Chicago, he had to cancel the trip when someone named Lee (got this off Tablot's book) informed the secret service of an assassination plot similar to Dallas (sniper from building behind motorcade - again from Talbot's book). So Chicago trip was cancelled. Now in Tampa, same situation. Someone tipped off the FBI and the Secret Service was informed and packed the motorcade with many agents. Agents on the car, Agents all around the President, and some accounts (Tablot's book), the Secret Service went crazy when JFK brazenly met the crowd. So we have that background from the evidence/reports the Secret Service has released thru the last 10-15 years. Now Dallas. I need someone to confirm this, but I had thought I read information maybe 5-10 years back that the secret service got a notification of a bomb at Love field when the President landed. I know I've heard this before, but i'm not sure if it was from a official source or some independent research. So let's paint the picture if this is true. JFK land at Love Field, the Secret Service is on guard for this threat, and after the president is safely in the car, the threat passes, or they assume. Maybe even JFK swiping his hair when you see him get inside the car almost has a 'whew....' feel to it. Now the secret service, thinking that the threat has passed without incident at Love field, go ahead and naturally have their guard down for the rest of the motorcade. And why not? They've been on so many motorcades with JFK, it's just routine. Then you get to Daley Plaza. The Secret Service, again, just another routine motorcade, easy as pie, maybe not as ready and on guard as they should be, stroll into the kill zone. Then a shot rings out, and the sense of complacency, the 1 or 2 seconds lost of reacting , cost the President his life. Now do I think the Secret Service was in on it? I don't know. But you don't need many people to participate in your conspiracy. One conspirator is enough to act as the weakest link in the chain that breaks the cohesiveness of a efficient working unit. Was the bomb story, if true, planted by the conspirators to actually achieve what occurred? Some of you brilliant researches maybe will find that out in the years to come.
  15. My gut feeling tells me this woman is not lying. Considering we know JFK was a womanizer, I don't find this shocking at all. I believe most of you have good intentions, but let's not forget that we need to analyze JFK the Man, not the Myth or Martyr status he's achieved almost 50 years later. This man, just like other great accomplished men throughout history, had his deep flaws. As someone else mentioned in this thread, running for POTUS tells us that someone isn't really like the rest of us when it comes to living/pursuing a normal life. Recall the reporter Helen Thomas stating that every President she's had the privileged to cover had something 'off' about them. Well other than Jerry Ford who she claimed was the closest thing to 'normal'. The Kennedy's were just sexual deviants and that's a sad fact. I hate even typing this but it's the hard truth. I like probably most of you idolize JFK, but also can see from afar the man had serious sexual issues. In today's world, he would be diagnosed a sex addict. Although I know of these flaws, I judge the man as a whole. But I must honestly admit, when I read this account in detail,it slapped me in the face once again. I know the history, but I guess reading yet another account, and this one more graphic and disturbing, just takes some of the shine off the man and his legacy.
  16. My name is Rodney Rivers, people just call me Rod for short. I live in San Francisco, CA and work in the 'entertainment business'. I'm not an author or professional in the JFK field, but have always had interest in the man and his life. I also have a JFK Youtube channel you can refer to : http://www.youtube.com/user/rodni7777/videos I have a few JFK videos on there and am always commenting on JFK related material. Age: 34 Nationality: 2nd generation American Ethnicity : Caribbean Islander -ancestors come from Trinidad/Tobago.
  • Create New...