Robert Burrows Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 By Jefferson Morley. https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/06/19/dylan-does-have-a-lot-on-his-mind-but-the-nyt-didnt-want-to-talk-about-it/#gsc.tab=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 (edited) Why does Morley question why "presidential historian" Doug Brinkley doesn't dare utter the word "conspiracy" in interviewing conspiracy theorist Dylan about "Murder Most Foul"? Every "presidential historian" that I'm aware of avoids the word like the plague, unless it's just to dismiss the notion. Morley should be perfectly aware of the fact (though he doesn't mention it) that the reputations and careers of "presidential historians" depend on their adherence to the official story, which is they adhere to it. It's not because they're stupid, though Morley pretends to wonder why Brinkley asks Dylan stupid questions not related to any conspiracy. "Presidential historians" might even change the known facts about the assassination. As I recall, "presidential historian" Robert Dallek wrote, in his book "An Unfinished Life," that JFK was shot "in the lower neck." Well, I guess you could say that, if you consider the upper back to be the lower neck. I have to assume that Dallek used to the word "neck" so as not to deviate from the single bullet theory. Who knows? All we know is that Dallek, like Brinkley in his interview of Dylan, was protecting his reputation and career. Edited June 26, 2020 by Ron Ecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now