Mark Stapleton Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 (edited) For those interested, last Sunday (Feb 19), the ABC quiz show "Einstein Factor" featured a contestant whose special subject was the JFK assassination. David Gilbert, from Sydney won the contest and answered 14 of 15 questions correctly. Some were easy, some a bit harder. I was surprised about the one he missed because the compere gave him the first two names of the answer--James Jesus--and he couldn't give the last name. But he was impressive, all the same. He will go through to the next round on Sunday March 5 at 6.30pm on ABC. Here's the site. You can try the quiz. http://www.abc.net.au/einsteinfactor/ Edited February 25, 2006 by Mark Stapleton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Thanks for the heads up, Mark. It does amaze me how many Aussies seem to be into the assassination of John Kennedy. I was at a dinner party recently where one of the guests, a local Motorola sales Rep, was a very keen student of the case. He passed the comment that a lifetime of research into the assassination is barely enough. I had to agree with him. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Wilkinson Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Thanks for that Mark, I'll try and watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Carroll Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 David Gilbert, from Sydney won the contest and answered 14 of 15 questions correctly. Some were easy, some a bit harder. The question I found a bit tricky was: "From the time Kennedy was shot, America was effectively without a president for around how many hours?" The programs answer was two hours, obviously in consideration of the time of LBJ taking the oath of office. But a constitutional scholar, considering the word "effectively," would have answered that there is no interregnum. In the abstract, LBJ was president from the moment of JFK's death. Bobby Kennedy made this point himself when he informed Johnson that there was no need to hold up Air Force One in Dallas waiting for Judge Sarah Hughes. T.C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stapleton Posted February 25, 2006 Author Share Posted February 25, 2006 (edited) David Gilbert, from Sydney won the contest and answered 14 of 15 questions correctly. Some were easy, some a bit harder. The question I found a bit tricky was: "From the time Kennedy was shot, America was effectively without a president for around how many hours?" The programs answer was two hours, obviously in consideration of the time of LBJ taking the oath of office. But a constitutional scholar, considering the word "effectively," would have answered that there is no interregnum. In the abstract, LBJ was president from the moment of JFK's death. Bobby Kennedy made this point himself when he informed Johnson that there was no need to hold up Air Force One in Dallas waiting for Judge Sarah Hughes. T.C. Good point, Tim. Technically the question is wrong. They should have asked "how much time elapsed before LBJ took the oath?", to remove any ambiguity about the question. A lot of the subject matter is still under dispute so they have to tread warily when writing the questions. Some of the questions asked of David Gilbert were ridiculously easy (who established the WC, who got arrested for handing out pro-Cuba leaflets in NO etc.). In the second round they will get harder. Hopefully, the ABC will get their facts straight. Thanks for the heads up, Mark.It does amaze me how many Aussies seem to be into the assassination of John Kennedy. I was at a dinner party recently where one of the guests, a local Motorola sales Rep, was a very keen student of the case. He passed the comment that a lifetime of research into the assassination is barely enough. I had to agree with him. James And the burning question is........what was his theory? Edited February 25, 2006 by Mark Stapleton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 Reminds me of the joke: An assassin "buff", after spending years researching the case, died and went to Heaven. After being there thirty days or so he finally had the opportunity to meet God Himself. Naturally the first thing he asked the Deity was: "Who really killed Kennedy?" To which God replied: "Well, I have a theory about that . . ." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 To which God replied: "Well, I have a theory about that . . ." That's not really a joke. Even in the Bible, God is far from omniscient. In Genesis 11:5, he has to come down to Earth to see what's happening at the Tower of Babel. And later in the book God sends some angels to the city of Sodom to see if things there are as bad as he's heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 (edited) I actually had an interesting theological discussion with my atheistic (or agnostic) friend re whether all secrets will be in heaven. I certainly would not want all my sins to be publicly revealed in heaven so hopefully God will not show everyone all He knows and has seen. Which led to the question: if whoever killed Kennedy confessed and was forgiven, perhaps God would keep the secret (like the privilege attending a confession given to a priest or other clergy member). So there may be no hope of EVER knowing the truth for sure! Edited February 25, 2006 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 There's no hope of finding out in hell either, since there'll be thousands of guys there claiming they did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 Usual Ron humour! Spontaneous and funny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 And the burning question is........what was his theory? (Mark Stapleton) He was having an each way bet on the CIA or Mafia. BTW, the dinner party assassination discussion came to a screeching halt when the hostess asked who Lee Harvey Oswald was. After a moment of stunned silence, she directed the conversation back to Brad and Angelina. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 For those interested, last Sunday (Feb 19), the ABC quiz shoe "Einstein Factor" featured a contestant whose special subject was the JFK assassination. David Gilbert, from Sydney won the contest and answered 14 of 15 questions correctly. Some were easy, some a bit harder. I was surprised about the one he missed because the compere gave him the first two names of the answer--James Jesus--and he couldn't give the last name. But he was impressive, all the same. He will go through to the next round on Sunday March 5 at 6.30pm on ABC. Here's the site. You can try the quiz. http://www.abc.net.au/einsteinfactor/ Mark, I applied to go on the show soon after it started. Guess what my nominated subject was? Guess who never got an invite? I put it down to the subject being so contentious. But looks like it was just me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 (edited) Of course we all know if Einstein had lived he'd have solved the case! His solution may have depended, however, upon where one was standing! Edited February 25, 2006 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 I think that Einstein would have fingered Bobby indirectly, by saying that relatives were involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stapleton Posted February 25, 2006 Author Share Posted February 25, 2006 (edited) I think that Einstein would have fingered Bobby indirectly, by saying that relatives were involved. Ron, I needed a double take, but it hit. You never disappoint. Absolutely never. Edited February 25, 2006 by Mark Stapleton 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