Bill OReilly's NewBook

[Barry Krusch]

Very good idea. GIve Barry a lot of positive feedback to keep his review up on page one.

Great idea.

[Barry Krusch]

here is the photo, i believe is part of the subject in this thread, fwiw..b

This photo was taken at a UT football game in 1973, a few months before LBJ died.

D. Harold Byrd is seen on the left (in cowboy hat) and LBJ is on the right. Byrd was a

longtime friend and financial/political supporter of Johnson. He was also the OWNER

of the Texas School Book Depository Building, from which Oswald was alleged to have fired

the fatal shots.

http://home.earthlink.net/~sixthfloor/byrd2.htm

I have another photo of LBJ and Byrd, from Byrd's book "I'm An Endangered Species" (1978).

It seems reasonable to infer that Byrd knew LBJ; the question is: "how well?" etc.

And is there evidence which might establish a link between a Byrd-LBJ relationship, and Bryd's leasing of the building at 411 Elm (what we today call the "Texas School Book Depository") to the TSBD back in late 1961 or early 1962?

That would be (potentially) significant. But, imho, anybody that did anything in this plot made sure that whatever was done was handled in such a way that it was an "arm's length transaction".

DSL

Lots of info on this in my archive:

https://www.box.com/s/8849089d6437c9cf4d93

Go to "Conspirators_Dallas" folder and also "DallasMorningNews_Articles".

Specific Links:

https://www.box.com/s/lztk3vl9jbb1q6ugc6dx

https://www.box.com/s/19c152p8z3ucnmms4dbg

Also, photograph with the caption:

https://www.box.com/s/efi0l7li7e7xi1pup6wt

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I would urge everyone to go to the Amazon page for O'Reilly's McHistory book and click on "yes" to the question of whether the negative reviews there were helpful. Obviously, there are a lot of LNers at Amazon, clicking "no" on these reviews, much as they did with Gerald Blaine's ridiculous book.

Good idea. and also write a lot more Amazon reviews with lots of Best book references and PRODUCT LINKS (see product links button when you are writing your review.) Also mix in links to good internet sites and a variety of specific titles of articles from those sites, thus giving readers a sense of the POLICY CONNECTIONS TO THE ASSASSINATION and not merely the who dunnit stuff that O'Reilly readers are going to be served detached from the policies.

[Barry Krusch]

My point is this: after 49 years of this stuff, its time to lean away from it.

What I mean is this: "Hmm, look X is sitting near Y, maybe they knew each other?"

OK, what does that mean?

Even standing alone, I do think it means something. After all, the person who became president after Pres. Kennedy was assassinated turns out to be friends with the man who owned the Texas school book depository building.

Now, take it to the next level. In how many assassinations in history is the target DRIVEN to the assassin? And, that location just happens to be by a hairpin curve: how many of those are in Dallas?. And, curiously enough, that very week a plywood floor is being laid, which necessitates the moving of boxes, some of which are used to create a "sniper's nest". a "nest" NOT constructed by Oswald. Who would have the authority to order that floor being laid? The owner of the building? and, curiously enough, the successor to Pres. Johnson, happened to have hired Jack Ruby as an investigator many years earlier. And the President after him served on the Warren commission!!

This is just the very beginning. Put a large number of these facts together, and a picture begins to emerge. You create a neural network, a probability matrix. This is very useful, particularly when most of the significant evidence has been destroyed.

[Mike Rago]

My challenge to O'Reilly on YouTube:

In the quoted post you mention a "virtual" jury. Can you please give some details of this "virtual" jury? Who will they be? Will they be people who have read most of the JFK books or will they be people who , for the most part, have very minimal knowledge of the case?

Edited October 7, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Barry Krusch]

Details here:

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,6230.0.html

Virtual jury members will be co-selected by myself and the challenger. The document set will be co-written by myself and the challenger, Mike.

[Dawn Meredith]

And by the way, there is no other way to say this in order to get across how bad this book is.

Its one thing to exaggerate. Its one thing to distort. Its one thing to leave stuff out. Its one thing to write a half truth.

O'Reilly and his co author actually tell a number of outright lies. There is no other way to state it. And you can bet I will underline this in my review.

So far, I cannot find one good thing in the book to make it worth reading.

Bill O make Chris Matthews look respectable as an author.

Wow. Chris Matthews can claim ignorance. Billo is simply a xxxx.

And many will buy his trash while the great books on this subject are read by few.

I think Marty Schotz got it right: mass denial.

Dawn

[Mike Rago]

Details here:

http://www.jfkassass...pic,6230.0.html

Virtual jury members will be co-selected by myself and the challenger. The document set will be co-written by myself and the challenger, Mike.

I think that you will want people who have not formed any opinion on the case. You want jurors who will base their decision only on the evidence.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Barry Krusch]

Details here:

http://www.jfkassass...pic,6230.0.html

Virtual jury members will be co-selected by myself and the challenger. The document set will be co-written by myself and the challenger, Mike.

I think that you will want people who have not formed any opinion on the case. You want jurors who will base their decision only on the evidence.

That is right.

[Mike Rago]

Details here:

http://www.jfkassass...pic,6230.0.html

Virtual jury members will be co-selected by myself and the challenger. The document set will be co-written by myself and the challenger, Mike.

I think that you will want people who have not formed any opinion on the case. You want jurors who will base their decision only on the evidence.

That is right.

I dare say that very few members of this forum(if any), or any other forum, would make a good juror.

So we are not the jurors.

Some of us present evidence.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Barry Krusch]

Arbitrators are the jurors.

[Michael Hogan]

David Talbot reviews Killing Kennedy for Salon.

Excerpt:

Once upon a time, Bill O’Reilly had balls when it came to investigating the Kennedy assassination. Back in 1991 — as a reporter for the tabloid TV news show, “Inside Edition” – O’Reilly

to track the epic crime all the way into the dark labyrinth of the CIA. Following up on the important work done by investigators for the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the late ‘70s, O’Reilly boldly told his “Inside Edition” audience that there were “crucial” links between alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald and the CIA. O’Reilly also reported that the CIA had infiltrated the office of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, who brought the only criminal case in the JFK assassination to trial, in an effort to sabotage Garrison’s investigation.

That was then – when O’Reilly was a scrappy reporter for low-budget syndicated TV. But now, of course, he’s BILL O’REILLY – Fox News icon, a lavishly paid centerpiece of the Murdoch empire. Everything he says – every windy pontification and dyspeptic remark – is writ LARGE. He can no longer afford to have the courage of his suspicions. In O’Reilly’s new ideological mold, the CIA is not the incubator of an unspeakable crime against American democracy – it’s the defender of the greatest nation in the world.

And so we have the Fox News star’s latest instant bestseller, “Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot,” co-written by Martin Dugard, who collaborated with O’Reilly on his earlier runaway success, “Killing Lincoln.” There is almost nothing in this Kennedy for Beginners book that indicates O’Reilly once did some original research on this murky and still deeply haunting subject. Most of this surprisingly dumbed-down book is a biographical rehash of the Kennedy story that will contain nothing new for even casual readers of People magazine and viewers of Kennedy soap opera biopics over the years. Once again, we get the story of JFK’s PT-109 heroics in the South Pacific; the lurid tales of Jack’s womanizing and Jackie’s anguish; the requisite cameos of Sinatra, Marilyn and the Mob; the familiar snapshots of a deeply disgruntled Lyndon Johnson, continually humiliated by the Kennedy brothers and their elite Harvard crowd. None of this is worth the book’s $28 price of admission.

When it comes to the assassination of President Kennedy, these days Bill O’Reilly embraces the lone nut theory, pinning sole blame on Lee Harvey Oswald. But his case against Oswald is feeble, and he’s obviously still haunted by the suspicions of the younger, freer Bill O’Reilly. In “Killing Kennedy,” he can’t help returning to those earlier suspicions, in fleeting moments of the book, as if darting a tongue at a nagging tooth.

Complete story: http://www.salon.com...illy_wimps_out/

[Dawn Meredith]

You know I am glad Salon reviews JFK books, but I feel about this review the way I did about their reviews of Waldron's Ultimate Sacrifice, and Caro's Passage of Power.

Both too mild and too short. It does not get across just bow godawful this book really is.

Because its not actually about the murder of JFK at all. Its really about the post humous character assassination of three innocent men: Oswald, JFK and King. Yep, Bill O takes every opportunity to go after King's character in a book about JFK's death.

To say Bill got the Ailes' memo is really understating it. The guy must really like being in the limelight and raking in the cash. There is no other reason for writing a smelly little piece of garbage like this and putting your name on it.

I am looking very forward to your review Jim. I agree that David's did not go far enough, but thank you Mike for posting it. I copied and made it my status on facebook today.

Are you on fb?

Dawn

[Michael Hogan]

The New York Times Review

by Janet Maslin

http://www.nytimes.c...ugard.html?_r=0

Really disgusting.

It's going to be quite an uphill battle for O'Reilly's critics.

[Bernice Moore]

• Killing Kennedy Bill Oreilly Wimps Out,,
  

http://www.salon.com/2012/10/08/killing_kennedy_bill_oreilly_wimps_out/