David Boylan Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Well worth the time! https://jfkjmn.com/media/?fbclid=IwAR36IwenPIgSI0DoZzzK-1bmT8-7ORv1mR70JxmUrgMbVK5-yHRp-ibpICw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Schwartz Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Thank you for posting, David. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 8 hours ago, David Boylan said: Well worth the time! https://jfkjmn.com/media/?fbclid=IwAR36IwenPIgSI0DoZzzK-1bmT8-7ORv1mR70JxmUrgMbVK5-yHRp-ibpICw Thanks David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cummings Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Still digesting his comments about Phillips, LHO and Veciana together in bank vault in Dallas. Have to admit I'm a little confused as didn't Newman make a presentation that LHO and Phillips couldn't have met? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Wexler Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Paul: I skimmed segments that seemed to rehash the excellent work he did on Jane Roman, Mexico City, etc. Are you saying he actually supported the Veciana meeting? Can you refer us to the time clip. Because that would, indeed, be quite a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cummings Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Stu Wexler said: Paul: I skimmed segments that seemed to rehash the excellent work he did on Jane Roman, Mexico City, etc. Are you saying he actually supported the Veciana meeting? Can you refer us to the time clip. Because that would, indeed, be quite a surprise. It's right in the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Boylan Posted February 14 Author Share Posted February 14 Paul, I think John said it was pretty much BS. Veciana was working for Army Intel at the time. 17 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said: It's right in the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Newman completely ignores the fact that the guy in the Cuban Consulate was a short, blond, Oswald impersonator. He, like the WC, is fooled by the CIA's fabricated MC story. Disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Cummings Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 2 hours ago, David Boylan said: Paul, I think John said it was pretty much BS. Veciana was working for Army Intel at the time. Thanks David. Watched it again but he did rush through the beginning of it. Newman is an intense interviewee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Boylan Posted February 14 Author Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, Paul Cummings said: Thanks David. Watched it again but he did rush through the beginning of it. Newman is an intense interviewee. Paul, he has a lot of ground to cover! 🙂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Marshall Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 I agree with most of his findings, but he hasn't achieved perfection yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted February 16 Share Posted February 16 20 hours ago, Evan Marshall said: I agree with most of his findings, but he hasn't achieved perfection yet! When he publishes book number 5 and if that book actually contains specifics about the assassination-i.e. who did it, how and why, he will be dead in the water. It is the easiest thing in the world to poke holes in something specific as the conspiracy people have done with the official version for years. That is why most conspiracy books are vague. Nice guy and I am sure there are many who appreciate the work he has done. but the theory (as I understand it currently) is nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Marshall Posted February 17 Share Posted February 17 I don't and have been interested in this since 11/22/63 when I was a history major at BYU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Rose Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 On 2/16/2024 at 9:38 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said: When he publishes book number 5 and if that book actually contains specifics about the assassination-i.e. who did it, how and why, he will be dead in the water. It is the easiest thing in the world to poke holes in something specific as the conspiracy people have done with the official version for years. That is why most conspiracy books are vague. Nice guy and I am sure there are many who appreciate the work he has done. but the theory (as I understand it currently) is nonsense. What makes Newman's theory of the assassination nonsense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Tracy Parnell Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 1 hour ago, Tony Rose said: What makes Newman's theory of the assassination nonsense? Let me say this-I'll wait until the publication of book 5 before I make a definitive statement. But in my opinion the theory is nonsense as I currently understand 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