A.J. Weberman Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 There have been several new developments in the JFK thing - Sturgis's nephew who provided his alibi has told me that his aunt told him to say Frank was watching TV all day and Hunt's son provided some interesing information about November 22. He believes his father was one of the tramps. But no matter what happens the truth will continue to be supressed as studying the Kennedy assassination has become a game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Geraghty Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 Alan, Can you elaborate on Hunt's son please. Was it in a conversation with you? All the best, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 Alan,Can you elaborate on Hunt's son please. Was it in a conversation with you? All the best, John John, there were a number of articles--the one in Rolling Stone comes to mind-- in which Hunt's son said he thought his dad might be one of the tramps. Still, if Hunt's son has been talking to Mr. Weberman, his father's long-time nemesis, you can count me among the curious as to what was said. I am also intrigued by Weberman's comment that it has all become a game. A.J., if you'd care to elaborate, you have my attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 imo, the Hunt offspring have no reason to keep any of this percolating unless they're looking for cash or fame. And given the state of affairs in the US culture, my guess is that they're truly hoping to achieve a famegasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 According to Hunt's son, Hunt claimed to know which CIA operatives were involved in the plot (plus LBJ), even though he wasn't involved himself. It has been my impression, perhaps mistaken, that the CIA doesn't work that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 imo, the Hunt offspring have no reason to keep any of this percolating unless they're looking for cash or fame. And given the state of affairs in the US culture, my guess is that they're truly hoping to achieve a famegasm. Did you coin that Mark - or have I been missing out on the word that makes sense out of Reality TV? Anyhow, a great word! Not copyrighted, I trust? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 imo, the Hunt offspring have no reason to keep any of this percolating unless they're looking for cash or fame. And given the state of affairs in the US culture, my guess is that they're truly hoping to achieve a famegasm. Did you coin that Mark - or have I been missing out on the word that makes sense out of Reality TV? Anyhow, a great word! Not copyrighted, I trust? Thanks - there are actual steps one can take to secure rights to such a word. Weird, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 imo, the Hunt offspring have no reason to keep any of this percolating unless they're looking for cash or fame. And given the state of affairs in the US culture, my guess is that they're truly hoping to achieve a famegasm. Did you coin that Mark - or have I been missing out on the word that makes sense out of Reality TV? Anyhow, a great word! Not copyrighted, I trust? Thanks - there are actual steps one can take to secure rights to such a word. Weird, eh? Apparently famegasm.com is "coming soon!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted April 12, 2007 Share Posted April 12, 2007 Apparently famegasm.com is "coming soon!" It's like any meme -- some are informational, others are geared toward making a buck. In this case, it's safe to say that filthy lucre rules the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 Apparently famegasm.com is "coming soon!" It's like any meme -- some are informational, others are geared toward making a buck. In this case, it's safe to say that filthy lucre rules the day. ________________________________ How enlightening. --Thomas ________________________________ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 ________________________________How enlightening. --Thomas ________________________________ How typical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Kent Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I found the Rolling Stone article more interesting as a sad story of the estrangement of a man and his son than as a plausible account of the JFK assassination. While I personally suspect that LBJ (or, as likely, men who were close to him) and some intelligence operatives were involved, I doubt they were all together from the beginning in the fairly neat scenario Hunt lays out. We may be looking at a last act of contrition from Howard to his son: The opportunity to make a buck or two. Just a thought... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 (edited) A word cannot be copyrighted. It may be trademarked under certain conditions. You could file for a trademark of "famegasm" as the name of a movie title, so nobody could make another movie of that name. But any one could use the word itself in writing or other mediums freely. Jack Edited April 18, 2007 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Brown Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 There have been several new developments in the JFK thing - Sturgis's nephew who provided his alibi has told me that his aunt told him to say Frank was watching TV all day and Hunt's son provided some interesing information about November 22. He believes his father was one of the tramps. But no matter what happens the truth will continue to be supressed as studying the Kennedy assassination has become a game How could he be one of the tramps! Hunt testified he was at home all of the day of the assassination with his children. Have any of his children denied that he was with them on the day of the assassination? If so Hunt committed perjury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 (edited) [...] Hunt testified he was at home all of the day of the assassination with his children.Have any of his children denied that he was with them on the day of the assassination? If so Hunt committed perjury. [...] __________________ Chris, I don't know if any of Hunt's children have (very recently; i.e. since his death) "denied that he was with them on the day of the assassination," but regardless-- many years ago Attorney Mark Lane was able to trip him up under oath on the question of why he (Hunt) had testified that he had had to remind his children that he had been at home watching TV with them that day, and as a result the jury overturned the very large monetary judgment which Hunt had won in his earlier libel suit against Liberty Lobby, the publisher of "The Spotlight." Hunt was lucky that he didn't screw up in court more than he did, otherwise he probably would have been brought up on the charges of perjury, and yes, convicted... If you haven't already read it, I highly suggest that you read Lane's book "Plausible Denial." --Thomas Edited April 18, 2007 by Thomas Graves 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