Jump to content
The Education Forum

JFK Revisited: Through The Looking Glass

Denny Zartman

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Maybe Jack Ruby?  Seth Kantor said he was at Parkland.

And the Warren Commission dismissed respected long time career newspaper reporter Seth Kantor's 11/22/1963 early afternoon Jack Ruby meet up at Parkland recollection testimony as the mistaken take of an overly excited and mixed up news hound.

And perversely at the same time they illogically chose instead to accept the scattered, meandering testimony of an obviously mentally addled, stress broken murderer who lied his head off about his different location activities just after JFK was shot.

That one crazy, illogical finding alone ( among so many others ) in their report sealed the deal of their complicity in presenting a false truth report imo.

Jack Ruby was at Parkland Hospital when Seth Kantor was there.

To admit that reality would blow up the entire "Ruby not involved" aspect finding of the Warren Commission Report.

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 777
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, at least we know that CE 399 didn't cause James Teague's cheek to be bloodied.

And it certainly wasn't a well guided vengeful bird dropping that did so either.

How about an earlier morning shaving nick that re-erupted due to Teague's increased blood flow due to his shock and horror at what he was witnessing?

Could part of the exploding bullet that expelled from JFK's obliterated skull have kept going all the way to the cement curb next to Teague and caused his bloody nick injury?

Or, perhaps a soda pop bottle dropped and shattering by a shocked shooting witness on the Triple Overpass above Teague?

Or, was another target missing shot fired at JFK besides the three alleged ones?


Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

CE 399 is the best evidence of a cover up or at a minimum doctoring of evidence of what I have seen. The shirt, as Cliff harps about, is the other IMO.

I agree. But I would add to those that ~20 medical professionals at Parkland said the blowout wound was at the back of the head, in stark contradiction to what the autopsy photos show. Clearly photo alteration took place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Tell that to Tim Weiner who happens to be Morley's hero. He just posted a devistating critque of JFK Revisited:

The Origin Story of Oliver Stone’s Loony JFK Conspiracies – Rolling Stone


    It's a garbage review.  Pure disinformazia.  So much for Tim Weiner's limited hangout at the New York Times as a putative CIA critic...  It appears that his legacy is now in ashes...  🤥

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is so bad about this is that it simply and provably wrong.

The whole idea of the CIA cooperation with the OAS is in Andrew Tully's book.  Which is considered a pro CIA book.  Its also in Blum's book and its also from two other sources in The Devil's Chessboard.

In other words, this is what you have to do to attack the film, you have to resort to patent BS.

Or as with Long, you simply don't touch what we put forth in the film.

That's high cotton.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished watching "JFK Revisited" and I have to say it was superb. It's really a moving testimony, tightly packed with all sorts of great information. The editing is tight, the message clear and crisp, the speakers are engaging and insightful, and -- thanks to Jim DiEugenio -- it features a neatly interlocking script that smoothly flows from one theme to the next. The film also highlights, in a very subtle way, the warm human dimension of President Kennedy. I would imagine that a viewer without any prior knowledge of the case will be able to follow it without any problems; while those who have been studying the assassination for decades will admire the manner in which everything has been artfully condensed into two fast-paced hours. Looking forward to seeing the longer, unabridged version. Jim, all your years of labor have paid off and you should take great pride in this project which will be seen throughout the world for years to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks so much Rob.  I was well served with some elite collaborators.

You will love the four hour version.  It has more on JFK himself. 

That "more on JFK himself" is a moving thought on 11/22.

Thanks for all you've done Jim and all those who've helped you from Probe to JFK the film and before to today.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2021 at 2:28 PM, James DiEugenio said:

As per Litwin, the guy is today exposed as a neocon clown.

In my review of his book, I exposed what he did with Andrews and Weisberg, a stunt that would get him thrown out of any advanced academic program.

I also exposed how he actually rewrote a CIA memo to alter its meaning.  Which also would have gotten him expelled.

Fred Litwin lives in his own solipsistic world. Does not matter to Parnell.

You know Tracy, if you just don't give two hoots about what happened to President Kennedy, why don't you just say that?

Is your life really that empty that you need to indulge in this kind of nonsense?

Litwin has been killing this film on Facebook, he sounds like someone who defends Trump, he is just nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2021 at 4:37 PM, Jeff Carter said:

Obviously Mr Litwin is this go-round’s designated Posner / Bugliosi. It’s amusing that the effort stumbled out of the gate producing/sponsoring books on the assumption the new Stone film would be focussed largely on Garrison/Shaw/New Orleans… whoops.

Just to note, his claim the backyard photos were “conclusively” proven legitimate is completely incorrect. The HSCA, like the FBI before it, acknowledged that the technical possibility of a facial replacement at the chin line could not be proved or disproved.

I was arguing with Twitwin on FB about the backyard photos, look at the ring, the shadows, Oswald's words, it's all there.

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

  • Create New...