Jump to content
The Education Forum

Wikipedia


Recommended Posts

It says in Wikipedia that Morales instigated the assassination on the orders of Lyndon Johnson.

This makes sense to me, though I know that John Simkin has said that Lyndon did not know about the assassination until a few weeks before.

That must be why there has been such a cover-up.

Carl, do you always accept everything you read so readily? If so I have a couple of condos to sell, on a beautiful island in the North sea. Denis. :ice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, since both Oliver Stone and Wikipedia claim that LBJ did it, it simply MUST be true.

Carl, I suggest you search the Internet and read several articles re critical thinking.

You wrote:

It's still there. Look under David Morales. They mention Cord Meyer too. John Simkin is mentioned also.

Now surely John is not mentioned by Wikipedia as a potential SUSPECT! I am not aware of any evidence linking John to either Morales or Meyer although there was once some discussion on this Forum whether he was CIA in deep, deep cover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that there do seem to be a lot of red herrings posted on this site, and I don't think that was John's original intention. I wouldn't say Wikipedia is a red herring.
It's still there. Look under David Morales. They mention Cord Meyer too. John Simkin is mentioned also.

I thought people on this forum contribute to Wikipedia!

Carl.

Dennis, Tim.

I've thought about the JFK assassination for about fifteen years. I've read a bit about it. This article in Wikipedia isn't the first to say that LBJ instigated it all. The film JFK did.

It seems to me to make sense. That's why they've gone to all costs to cover it up. Either that or it's because Carl Jenkins has stayed alive for so long.

At the very least, a number of people were involved in it, and LBJ was 'their man'.

Wikipedia 'Carl Jenkins'. There's links to David Attlee Philipps, who it says did it on the orders of LBJ.

That is, if it's still there.

Carl.

It says in Wikipedia that Morales instigated the assassination on the orders of Lyndon Johnson.

This makes sense to me, though I know that John Simkin has said that Lyndon did not know about the assassination until a few weeks before.

That must be why there has been such a cover-up.

Carl, do you always accept everything you read so readily? If so I have a couple of condos to sell, on a beautiful island in the North sea. Denis. :tomatoes

Carl, your perfectly entitled to your own opinion, no one here would begrudge you that. All that Tim's saying is dont base that opinion on one article in Wikipedia and a FICTIONAL movie. Denis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Carl:

Sutherland's character was called "X" but he was based on Col. Fletcher Prouty, a rather strange character with strange ideas about a lot of things.

That someone may have benefitted from the death of JFK is of course no evidence that he, she or they participated in it. And of course, the person who benefitted the most was Fidel Castro, followed by members of the Mafia.

And it is clear that RFK personally participated in the cover-up, including writing a false statement to the WC. Clearly, all persons involved in the cover-up were not necessarily involved in the murder. In fact it is possible that no one who participated in the murder played ANY role in the cover-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I should throw in a few red herrings!

********************************************************

"I thought people on this forum contribute to Wikipedia!

Carl."

Hmmm...this name Carl Rylander strikes a bell here, for me. Aren't you one of the contributors to Wikipedia?

I could swear you came here in their defense, last year, when we had that discussion about the accuracy of a site passing itself off as an encyclopedia, except for the issue of the contributors, who were not required to have any formal training, nor hold any certification in research, writing, or education, scientific, technical, or otherwise, in order to contribute their services. Therefore, peer review was not an enforced nor a required mode of trouble-shooting held in effect over there, which would at least guarantee said accuracy of the documentation they were attempting to pass off as "fact."

The Education Forum is a site run by licensed professional educators and contributors. That alone, should speak for itself.

Edited by Terry Mauro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently corrected a few mistakes on Wiki's page on the single-bullet theory. Some single-bullet devotee had written that the bullet had struck Kennedy at the sixth cervical vertebra. This where Dr. Lattimer, the high-priest of the single-bullet religion, placed the wound, so that he could claim the bullet headed downwards in the neck. It had apparently gone uncorrected for years. I changed it to read that the HSCA medical panel placed the wound at the first thoracic vertebra, and created a few links to their report over on historymatters. It's been left alone for months.

While the "official" story is bunkum, places like Wiki have been over-run by single-assassin zealots, who've tried to turn the "research" of men like Lattimer, Posner, and Myers, into the "official" story, even though much of what they say is at odds with the government's investigations and conclusions. I believe we should identify the points of evidence where they differ, and make sure that Wiki--which is used by millions of people as an encyclopedia--at least tells the real "official" story, and not some bogus "official" story pushed by an eccentric penis collector like Lattimer. (Not a put-down--Lattimer's obituary revealed that he was the purchaser of Napoleon's penis when it come up at auction some years back).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently corrected a few mistakes on Wiki's page on the single-bullet theory. Some single-bullet devotee had written that the bullet had struck Kennedy at the sixth cervical vertebra. This where Dr. Lattimer, the high-priest of the single-bullet religion, placed the wound, so that he could claim the bullet headed downwards in the neck. It had apparently gone uncorrected for years. I changed it to read that the HSCA medical panel placed the wound at the first thoracic vertebra, and created a few links to their report over on historymatters. It's been left alone for months.

While the "official" story is bunkum, places like Wiki have been over-run by single-assassin zealots, who've tried to turn the "research" of men like Lattimer, Posner, and Myers, into the "official" story, even though much of what they say is at odds with the government's investigations and conclusions. I believe we should identify the points of evidence where they differ, and make sure that Wiki--which is used by millions of people as an encyclopedia--at least tells the real "official" story, and not some bogus "official" story pushed by an eccentric penis collector like Lattimer. (Not a put-down--Lattimer's obituary revealed that he was the purchaser of Napoleon's penis when it come up at auction some years back).

*******************************************************

"I believe we should identify the points of evidence where they differ, and make sure that Wiki--which is used by millions of people as an encyclopedia--at least tells the real "official" story, and not some bogus "official" story pushed by an eccentric..."

My sentiments exactly, Pat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting example:

Wiki

Chapin's follow-up album, Sniper and Other Love Songs (1972, #160), was less successful despite containing the Chapin anthem "Circle" (a big European hit for The New Seekers). His third album, Short Stories (1974, #61), was a major success. Verities & Balderdash (1974, #4), released soon after, was even more successful, bolstered by the chart-topping hit single "Cat's in the Cradle", based upon a poem by his wife. Sandy Chapin had written the song inspired by her first husband's relationship with his father, and a country song she heard on the radio[citation needed], though it is a common mistake that it was based on Harry's relations with his children.

So why would the man himself be seen singing the song before a live audience, with an intro stating that the song is about his boy Josh? Just cheap theatrics I guess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH46SmVv8SU...feature=related

On topic here, I found this extremely annoying:

On the knoll itself were nine witnesses: groundskeeper Emmett Hudson and two other men, standing on the stairs of a walk going from Elm Street to a parking lot; a young black couple eating lunch on a bench in an alcove along that same walk; Abraham Zapruder and his employee Marilyn Sitzman, standing on a pedestal on the west end of the pergola; and Zapruder employee Beatrice Hester and her husband Charles, sitting on a bench at the eastern end of the pergola. Emmett Hudson, Charles Hester, and Marilyn Sitzman, the only witnesses on the grassy knoll who gave testimony about the direction of shots, all reported that the shots came from the direction of the Texas School Book Depository.[6]

I thought that the black couple also gave testimony reporting that Lee Oswald did it.

It's a useful tool, but always take it with a shot of tequila.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...