Jump to content
The Education Forum

Kishan Dandiker

Members
  • Posts

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Kishan Dandiker's Achievements

  1. Watched JFK as a teen but only became interested after reading On the Trail of the Assassins by Jim Garrison when I was 18. I remember reading it at lunchtime at school engrossed. As Stone has said, it read like a thriller, only the case and its characters were all real. While studying in Ireland I found a copy of Gaeton Fonzi's Last Investigation I the university library and I thought it was as impressive (if not more) than Garrison's book. Surprisingly, I laughed quite a lot - mainly at the absurdity of some of the situations Fonzi, Tanenbaum and others went through.
  2. I wouldn’t want to promote something a friend wrote that had a blatant disregard for the truth, but each their own.
  3. Up there with On the Trail of the Assassins as, in my opinion, the best book on the subject. I remember watching a speech Tanenbaum gave where he said that one of the people he was reporting to was so nonplussed about the whole thing that he asked how the investigation into RFK’s murder was going. I would’ve walked as well if I was working hard like Sprague and Tanenbaum only for the investigation to be controlled by incompetents.
  4. https://www.inquirer.com/news/richard-sprague-obit-death-philly-20210405.html Things may have been very different had he not left the HSCA. RIP
  5. After a little look online apparently it was RFK. He was talking to an old family friend. It was quoted in Talbot’s ‘Brothers’ on pg 268.
  6. Thanks for the link, been meaning to listen to this for some time now. Two greats of the research community.
  7. I should have made clearer why I brought up the grassy knoll gunman point. One of the major critiques of the Garrison trial was that he was just a paranoid DA who was looking to indict every Tom, Dick and Harry with conspiracy to murder the president. Hence, I just wanted to make clear I think this is a bogus claim, although you yourself weren’t arguing this. To answer your final question, yes I do believe Clay Shaw was involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK, due to the evidence today as well as what was available at the Shaw trial. His consistent lying throughout the build up in the trial for me doesn’t help prove his innocence. As a Brit I’m not fully aware of how your conspiracy laws work, so Dr Wager’s comment was especially useful. I certainly don’t think he’s as complicit as members of the CIA, FBI, Secret Service etc., but with these type of cases you have to start small and peel back the layers. It reminds of The Untouchables, where they start off small, then get the bookmaker, before finally getting Capone. As has been pointed out Garrison had good reason to go after Shaw, based on the certain initial instances. Had the Dean Andrews debacle not happened, as well as David Ferrie’s weird story about his trip to Texas, I doubt Garrison would have even attempted to start investigating. As DA, he was well aware of Ferrie and Bannisters right wing leanings, which should make anyone question why so many people saw them hanging around ‘communist’ LHO. Even though he wasn’t privy to what we have available now, I believe he was right to charge Clay Shaw with conspiracy.
  8. Given the numerous links Shaw had to the CIA, as well as to men like David Ferrie and LHO, is it so unreasonable to think that he was guilty of what Garrison was trying to prove? The Clinton witnesses are enough for me to think there was a lot more going on with Shaw. Did Garrison do things I would have done differently? Definitely. But I don't think that he realised until too late what he had uncovered. I think the support he received from news stations like NBC, newspapers and magazines, politicians, CIA etc. show Garrison was on the right track. As Micah has highlighted, was Garrison trying to prove that Shaw was the shooter on the grassy knoll? If that had been the case then I would agree with your sentiment 100%. I doubt Shaw would have known the full extent of what was going to happen, but he certainly helped Oswald out as well as setting up the Oswald 'story' in Louisiana.
  9. His youth, as well as his failing marriage with Uma Thurman whilst filming JFK, definitely contributed to his anger. It also in my opinion made his portrayal of LHO brilliant. The deleted scene of him talking 'beyond the grave' [39:21-42:00] shows how invested he was in the role. A proper old school character actor.
  10. Partisans and ideologues will be the fall of your great country unfortunately. Maybe it’s just Caronavirus blues but I’m just not bothered by politics anymore. Spending my time reading books on this topic and others. Much more enjoyable.
  11. I first learnt about his work in On The Trail of the Assassin’s, where he pointed out false leads to Garrison that were being fed by disinformation agents. He also came up in The Last Investigation. While Fonzi called him a nut initially, it was Vince who spurred on Fonzi’s later work by pointing him in the right direction. RIP Mr. Salandria, a true American hero.
  12. Sorry but I have to disagree on your 20-30 years line. Oliver Stone is still getting grief today in major publications for a film he made in 1991, that alone proves that much of the establishment media does not want this to get out. I find it fascinating that despite a majority of the country believing in there being a conspiracy, mainstream media does not reflect this. News anchors, late night hosts, print journalists, film producers etc all still promote the official story, and mock those who don’t believe in it. The only section of American entertainment who openly share the public’s view are comedians (Bill Hicks, Bill Burr, Joe Rogan, Tim Dillon and Dave Chappelle have all openly said they believe in a cover up). That says it all. To say the mainstream media don’t fear this topic is simply not true. Did I get taught this in school? Of course not, because if I tried to write about this topic at my university I’d either be marked down or failed. That’s why I think it’s so important to keep up the discussion, because in 30 years most people won’t think there was anything dodgy about the assassination. There very much is a secrecy within those in power now, Trump was blocked from releasing all the files he wanted to. I don’t believe the government as a whole is inherently sinister, and I certainly don’t think there should ever be another government run investigation. The ship has long sailed but it should have been a privately funded investigation. I’m in the Tanenbaum/Fonzi/Sprague camp: there was a major opportunity in the 1970s to conduct an actual investigation with some talented researchers and detectives, but governmental bureaucracy and CIA interference ruined it.
  13. I watched the Favourite with Hugh Jackman before I read The Last Investigation, so was surprised to see his name pop up in the book. I’ve read he was quite open about his concerns surrounding the Warren Commission. In the film some of the reporters speculate that the photos they received may have been sent by the CIA. This was obviously after the congressional hearings of the 1970s, so when I found out he was involved it did seem likely someone higher up made sure his infidelities were broadcast publicly.
  14. As an Brit, I'm pretty surprised the members of this forum are so invested in this election. Don't most people on here believe JFK's death allowed for coup to take place in the US? Why would you have any faith in the system at all, whether it be Republicans or Democrats? Apart from a few good politicians such as Thomas Downing, Richard Schweiker, Gary Hart etc., most in the major parties have not looked to conduct a proper investigation or have actively blocked efforts to do so.
×
×
  • Create New...