DeGaulle and Kennedy.

[Tim Gratz]

Well Mark the answer is that we both shut up and read both books before further pontificating.

But in closing did I ever imply that JFK was in favor of giving Israel nuclear weapons, pr permitting Israel to develop them, should I say?

Might be analagous to a crazy guy who was the beneficiary of a trust. First trustee, a money-pinching guy (my analogy to Ike) gives the beneficiary (Israel) NOTHING. Ike's replacement as Trustee refuses the guy's request for a Ferrari but agrees to buy the guy a Corvette. Not liking the fact that the new trustee won't give him the Ferrari he so badly wants, the guy shoots and kills the trustee, without any idea whether the new trustee (LBJ) would be more like Ike or more like JFK.

Only a crazy guy would do that.

If as I understand it JFK lifted a long-standing arms embargo on Israel, and created a new working relationship with Israel, the Israeli leaders would have had to be crazy to kill their benefactor merely because he opposed their acquisition of nuclear weapons.

Moreover, since your only evidence of Israeli involvement is motive, then Jackie is as strong a candidate as the Mossad, my friend. As well as a half dozen or more interest groups who had policy differences with JFK.

[Mark Stapleton]

Well Mark the answer is that we both shut up and read both books before further pontificating.

Not quite, Tim.

You are free to express your opinions, and the basis upon which they are founded, and so am I.

[Tim Gratz]

But Mark, without "sifting and winnowing" by reading the most significant scholarly book on the issue, the basis of your opinion is exactly ZIP. Opinions based on reading only one side are not worth much at all.

It'd be like trying to support the intelligent design premise without first reading Darwin, wouldn't it?

But of course you are free to express your opinion. I am just hoping you have enough intellectual curiosity if nothing else but to read the entire story of the JFK administration's relationship with Israel by the noted Mideast scholar.

Do you think you know as much about the issue as Mr. Bass, who I assume is old enough to be your father? If you think you know as much as he does about the matter, let's hear you express THAT opinion!

It can also be assumed that the Bass book was subject to very rigid editorial standards by its very reputable publisher, by the way.

[Mark Stapleton]

But Mark, without "sifting and winnowing" by reading the most significant scholarly book on the issue, the basis of your opinion is exactly ZIP. Opinions based on reading only one side are not worth much at all.

It'd be like trying to support the intelligent design premise without first reading Darwin, wouldn't it?

But of course you are free to express your opinion. I am just hoping you have enough intellectual curiosity if nothing else but to read the entire story of the JFK administration's relationship with Israel by the noted Mideast scholar.

Do you think you know as much about the issue as Mr. Bass, who I assume is old enough to be your father? If you think you know as much as he does about the matter, let's hear you express THAT opinion!

It can also be assumed that the Bass book was subject to very rigid editorial standards by its very reputable publisher, by the way.

Tim, whenever you want to emerge from the bubble and seriously discuss JFK's death, I will be glad to engage. You don't really want to solve the case because you didn't care too much for the man or his policies. It's painfully obvious.

People who want to find out what happened in DP share a level of respect for JFK which you clearly consider is too high.

You're wasting your time here.

[Tim Gratz]

Let me assure you, Mark, that I suspect I want the assassination solved as mucha s any member of the Forum.

For what it is worth, I am actively working on an effort to have a new official inquiry into the assassination.

But let me also assure you that the lunatic theories that are so often posted on this forum only play into VB's hands and could easily be used by VB (or others) in congressional testimony in the event he decided to try to thwart another investigation which would, if done correctly, demolish the premise of his book.

There are responsible assassination researchers who research the archives, read the history books, and spend hours trying to sort things out. Then there are those who only want to pontificate that "the Jews did it" without even reading Bass' seminal book.

You claim I am sure that the Jewish lobby is powerful and I have no doubt it is. Duh . . . Do you think the Congresspersons who are influenced by the Jewish lobby will want to work for another investigation if they are told that one of the leading assassination research forums have active "no-nothing" (anyone who refuses to read contrary opinions must be so considered) members who regularly argue that the "Jews killed Kennedy"? I mean they have enough work on their hands responding to "the Jews killed Jesus" people.

YOU could not be more harmful to a push for a new investigation if you were consciously trying to prevent one--or were being paid to do so.

How much do you want to bet that someone who opposed the investigation might send your postings to members of congress who would find your uneducated views reprehensible? I know if I wanted to STOP an investigation, that would be a tactic I would use.

I bet you have not read the VB book either, or you would know that you often uses ridiculous assassination theories to ridicule the entire assassination research community.

Edited August 20, 2007 by Tim Gratz