James DiEugenio Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 (edited) William, Parnell is quoting the Neocon nut Fred Litwin. Litwin's views on foreign policy are about at the level of insight as his views on the JFK case. In reading Litwin's Conservative Confidential, this is a guy who in 2015 praised W 's reaction to 9-11, without saying that his fraudulently based war killed 650,000 innocent civilians in Iraq and destabilized the Middle East by giving birth to ISIS and expanding Al Qaeda. Litwin also does not admit that W knew the war was a fraud--he leaves out the Manning memo and the Downing Street memo. Litwin then praised Rudy G's reaction to 9-11 without saying that the mayor placed the city's emergency response HQ in Building 7! LOL! This is the same Fred Litwin who says Kennedy was not really withdrawing from Vietnam and LBJ continued Kennedy's policy there. Somehow Parnell missed all of that. Heck, I would not read Fred's Conservative Confidential piece of rubbish either. Edited March 8, 2022 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 2 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: William, Parnell is quoting the Neocon nut Fred Litwin. Litwin's views on foreign policy are about at the level of insight as his views on the JFK case. In reading Litwin's Conservative Confidential, this is a guy who in 2015 praised W 's reaction to 9-11, without saying that his fraudulently based war killed 650,000 innocent civilians in Iraq and destabilized the Middle East by giving birth to ISIS and expanding Al Qaeda. Litwin also does not admit that W knew the war was a fraud--he leaves out the Manning memo and the Downing Street memo. Litwin then praised Rudy G's reaction to 9-11 without saying that the mayor placed the city's emergency response HQ in Building 7! LOL! This is the same Fred Litwin who says Kennedy was not really withdrawing from Vietnam and LBJ continued Kennedy's policy there. Somehow Parnell missed all of that. Heck, I would not read Fred's Conservative Confidential piece of rubbish either. Understood. I was simply pointing out that Litwin's lame attempt to smear Oliver Stone's JFKA work on the basis of what is happening with Putin right now is based on a fallacy. Two separate subjects. Isaac Newton had some erroneous 17th century theories about alchemy, but they don't invalidate his groundbreaking Laws of Motion and Thermodynamics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 (edited) Let me add a point here on this whole issue of denial about LBJ and Vietnam that Joe McBride writes about at length in his book on the media. And which neocon nut Litwin supports. In the film, we play the tape where LBJ himself says to McNamara that he did not agree with McNamara's statements about Kennedy's withdrawal policy but he shut up since he was just the VP. How could it be more clear than that? Johnson admits he knew Kennedy was withdrawing and says he disagreed with it. On tape played in the film. And Newman then talks about how he read McNamara's debriefs where he stated that Kennedy and him had agreed they would go no further than training and advisement. At that point they were getting out and it did not matter if Saigon was winning or losing. We go into this even more in the long version. Anyone who says such was not the case, as Joe M writes, is simply following Johnson's BS public statements and is not leveling with the public. This tells you a lot about Litwin, as does what he wrote about W, Rudy and the Middle East. Edited March 8, 2022 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 So are we getting to the point that Fred and Tracy are trying to defy the laws of logic? Like Newton's apple, the single bullet does not change direction in mid air. Back and to the left, explosively, from behind, is BS, not a "jet effect". Melons and scotch tape indeed are a bit questionable, eh? The Joker in the Jet Effect (kennedysandking.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 If you recall what Oliver said on Rogan: We drove a stake though the heart of CE 399. And we did. CE 399 was never fired in Dealey Plaza that day. And we proved it about four different ways. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 This tweet of mine had over 35,000 impressions in less than one day. Exposing the MSM clown for what he is. About three weeks ago I asked James Kirchick to debate me. I even said he could appear with Posner and 3 WC lawyers. I asked to have one other person. 5-2 their advantage. I even said they could have any money from the rights to a historical debate. Kirchick blocked me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: I even said they could have any money from the rights to a historical debate. Kirchick blocked me. Ha Ha Ha! Too funny... talk about a blowhard coward! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted March 8, 2022 Author Share Posted March 8, 2022 I'm not seeing that Destiny Betrayed is available on Amazon yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 Exclusive: Perry Russo Talks in Baton Rouge, Part Two (onthetrailofdelusion.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Lowe Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 38 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said: Exclusive: Perry Russo Talks in Baton Rouge, Part Two (onthetrailofdelusion.com) please try and keep up. It has been conclusively proven that Russo made his statements implicating Shaw and Ferry BEFORE he was given the sodium pentothal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 (edited) 14 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: If you recall what Oliver said on Rogan: We drove a stake though the heart of CE 399. And we did. CE 399 was never fired in Dealey Plaza that day. And we proved it about four different ways. End of story. Some might think of CE 567 as the "good brother", but CE 567 is the label given to not just the nose fragment but FOUR particles of (human?) tissue that are in the same container fragment. I could not find any evidence that the tissue was originally attached to the nose fragment. I am aware of nothing from the 1960's FBI investigation that acknowledged the tissue - no photograph, no written report. Robert Frazier told the Warren Commission that he wiped BLOOD off of the nose fragment, he mentioned nothing about tissue, and I am not aware of any blood sample that was catalogued onto evidence. The 1990's FBI re-examination of CE 567 only found non-tissue fibers embedded on the nose fragment. The tissue could have been a totally separate artifact that was added later. Edited March 8, 2022 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted March 8, 2022 Share Posted March 8, 2022 3 hours ago, Micah Mileto said: Some might think of CE 567 as the "good brother", but CE 567 is the label given to not just the nose fragment but FOUR particles of (human?) tissue that are in the same container fragment. I could not find any evidence that the tissue was originally attached to the nose fragment. I am aware of nothing from the 1960's FBI investigation that acknowledged the tissue - no photograph, no written report. Robert Frazier told the Warren Commission that he wiped BLOOD off of the nose fragment, he mentioned nothing about tissue, and I am not aware of any blood sample that was catalogued onto evidence. The 1990's FBI re-examination of CE 567 only found non-tissue fibers embedded on the nose fragment. The tissue could have been a totally separate artifact that was added later. My understanding is that someone left a memo in the HSCA's files saying there was material on CE 567 and that it should be examined. In the 1990's John Orr, hoping the material would track back to Connally, successfully pushed for it to be examined. It turned out to be human tissue, with insufficient DNA to point to Kennedy or Connally. This wasn't what Orr had hoped for, so it was largely ignored. The problem, however, is that the skin on the bullet nose is the smoking gun that will re-open this case IF people will finally accept it for what it is. This skin could only have come from Kennedy's large head wound. It proves the bullet impacted at the supposed exit. This means two head wounds. When you read forensic books and journals this is clear as can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 Oliver at work again: https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/03/08/oliver-stone-adds-up-the-clues-in-jfk-destiny-betrayed-doc/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 (edited) And again: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/oliver-stone-interview He did about four in one day. The Abby Martin interview is now being platformed on about four other venues. We will be on Coast to Coast tomorrow night, i think its going to be on Zoom. Edited March 9, 2022 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted March 9, 2022 Share Posted March 9, 2022 Pat: Can I make a suggestion? If yo can really prove this, why don't you set up another thread entitled: How CE 567 proves a second head shot. Or if you have this on your site please link to it. 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