REMEMBER: so much of our information is RECENT!!

[Vince Palamara]

In keeping with my discussion below (elsewhere) with regard to interest in the case still remaining relatively strong (under the circumstances of time, etc.), we must keep in mind that so much of our information is RECENT.

MID-LATE 1990's: the ARRB and the millions of file releases.

2017: more file releases.

2011 onward: the vast majority of Kennedy images (still and motion) have only been digitized and available since around 2011 on! If you go back to the previous decade, so much of the visual images of Kennedy were not yet available, as Cecil Stoughton (the White House photographer) was still living and his images were not yet released and public domain. I can personally attest to having discovered thousands of photos since around 2011 (from many sources, not just the JFK library) that were not available before then! 2011 is pretty darn recent: iPhones were around and our last president (Obama) was in office! In fact, the vast majority of my visual materials re: motorcades, etc. I did not have 10 years ago.

Before the ARRB, we had theories and type-written print journals like The Continuing Inquiry and The Third/Fourth Decade. Book releases were few and far between and there was no kindle and NO AMAZON!

ALSO,  there was no internet!

Pre-1994 or so, we lugged around our used copies of Weisberg, Lane, Marrs, etc. and speculated; wrote theory-driven articles; and sources and references were optional (or just secondary sources galore-quoting Meagher, Penn Jones, etc.)

PRIMARY research and all these tools above changed the game...and they are all very recent.

 

[James DiEugenio]

Yes, I agree with this Vince.

And the MSM has gotten progressively worse on the JFK case.  Example, Rachel Maddow and MSNBC as led by cover up artist Chris Matthews.

I mean this is what passes for liberalism in this country today.

[Vince Palamara]

Matthews was so nauseating how he fawned over Hill and Blaine. I remember him laughing at the phony "Ivy League charlatans" claim as if it was genuine; so lame.