Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» ROKC Lampoon
Today at 4:14 pm by Stan Dane

» Shirley Temple is Prayer Man According to Duncan McRae
Today at 2:01 pm by steely dan

» Prayer Man Vs Sasquatch
Today at 1:23 pm by steely dan

» The Bold and the Italics
Yesterday at 9:06 am by greg parker

» The Eighth Naval District
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 11:33 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt2
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 8:08 pm by barto

» Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt1
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 11:58 am by barto

» JFK Assassination
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 7:15 am by jack ferguson

» Lifton on his "new evidence"
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 4:47 am by steely dan

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Furl  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

Post by greg parker on Sun 25 Nov 2012, 4:55 pm

And, there were romantic relationships between John Kennedy … well there were romantic relationships between Kennedy and everybody.

There were two John Kennedys. There was the public John Kennedy, which everybody admires, and then there is the guy who is sick when it comes to women. But he had a relationship with a woman who was … also associated with Sam Giancana.

What conclusions did you come to after it was all over?

I think the mob set Oswald up as a patsy. It’s not that I think (Oswald) didn’t shoot (Kennedy), but that I think he was set up so (investigators) would focus on the Cuban connections (and not the mob). Did the mob do it? I don’t know for sure, but it explains more of the evidence than anything el

So you've got the owner of the most influential JFK website, John Simkin, the former head of the HSCA, Robert Blakey, and crusading independent journalist Jefferson Morley, all happily crucifying Kennedy as a sex fiend while simultaneously claiming to represent the highest standards in historical research, knowledge and dissemination. Morley has even started a new website JFK Facts which has fine aims, but is undermined by Morley's lack of critical facilities when it comes Kennedy and all the allegations surrounding him.

I want to make it perfectly clear - I would have no problem accepting JFK as a molester of marsupials....if the evidence was enough to support the claim. The three I have named have accepted the word of the alleged other parties, and a mix of innuendo and gossip - without one single piece of corroborating evidence. Because the evidence is no more than a circle jerk between alleged "victims" and their enablers in the media, politics and research communities. It's that simple. Is this really good enough? Do we accept every statement without supporting evidence when it comes to the assassination? I surely hope not - otherwise Kennedy was killed by a shape-shifting Illuminati Jew working for the Queen of England who brainwashed the driver of the Lincoln into shooting Kennedy.

In short - I just don't get it. Three people all held in high regard - all who say they favor the most rigorous intellectual standards when assessing evidence - who toss those standards into the dustbin when it comes to sex allegations. Because that's all it takes. If you're a Kennedy, any allegation about sex or drugs will be accepted and folded into the ever-expanding Kennedy mythos by these three and others.

The irony is that Morley has listed the "best of" and the "worst of" JFK websites on his own. John Simkin's Spartacus Index makes both lists on the basis of having some "useful information" as well as "a fair amount of information that is false, misleading, or cannot be confirmed." He adds in caps "HANDLE WITH CARE". I happen to agree with him on that. John's failure to act on my recommendation to present a more balanced view of certain individuals, is one of the reasons I left that site. However, Morley also lists McAdams' "JFK Assassination Home Page" in his "Best Of" - without a hint of any warning that it also contains a mix of "useful information" and "a fair amount of information that is false, misleading, or cannot be confirmed." Moreover, McAdams once admitted to me he was a propagandist - and it's hard to disagree with him about that - his website is full of loaded language, misrepresentations, omissions and half-truths - all aimed at knocking down the easy conspiracy stuff... the stuff on the extreme that my 8 year old twins could poke holes in. He will not touch anything he cannot counter. He doesn't have to - not when he uses such a broad brush. All hallmarks of a propagandist.

Do I need to give examples from McAdams' site to demonstrate my point? I would be more than happy to...

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3453
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

Post by morleyj on Thu 13 Dec 2012, 2:19 am

Hey Greg, Where/when "did I crucify JFK as a sex fiend?" By reviewing Mimi Alford's book?

I was non-judgmental about his girlfriends. I said that Alford's account is most interesting about what it says about JFK's state of mind amidst the Cuban missile crisis: that he understood the sentiment behind "better red than dead." This is in keeping with my positive assessement of JFK's rejection the path of war in the missile crisis. The fact that JFK had many mistresses is a fact. It is not an important fact in judging his presidency or his death.


morleyj

Posts : 1
Join date : 2012-12-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

Post by greg parker on Fri 14 Dec 2012, 9:04 am

morleyj wrote:Hey Greg, Where/when "did I crucify JFK as a sex fiend?" By reviewing Mimi Alford's book?

I was non-judgmental about his girlfriends. I said that Alford's account is most interesting about what it says about JFK's state of mind amidst the Cuban missile crisis: that he understood the sentiment behind "better red than dead." This is in keeping with my positive assessement of JFK's rejection the path of war in the missile crisis. The fact that JFK had many mistresses is a fact. It is not an important fact in judging his presidency or his death.


Jeff, Blakey called him "sick" because of all these allegations.

John Simkin has said something akin to "he was morally corrupt in his personal life".

Like Robert Blakey and John Simkin, you believe Mimi - and apparently every other female who ever came out with similar stories. You can claim to be "non-judgemental" all you want. You are an influential journalist, and the very fact that you are on the same side as those who call him "sick", is of some concern to me personally. Let's face it, a lot of your countrymen are not so "non-judgemental" as you claim to be and the net effect of giving your seal of approval to such stories is to diminish concern over the assassination. I mean, to some Americans, adultery is only one step up from being a child molester, so he got what he deserved in their eyes.

None of that would matter one iota if there was any credible evidence for such stories because the truth is all that matters - yet despite this dearth of supporting evidence, you state baldly that his womanising is a "fact". I say it is a "fact" in the same way that Oswald was a lone Nut is a "fact".

You go on to say it is "not an important fact in judging his presidency or his death."

That's not what I get from these words "How President John F. Kennedy lived and died still has the power to set tabloid hearts aflutter, while providing a rich lode of material for those interested in the inner workings of the American national security state".
http://www.salon.com/2012/02/20/jfk_better_red_than_dead/singleton/

My response to your story, btw, is here:
http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t189-why-is-morley-supporting-alford

If you applied the same rigorous standards in assessing the stories of Mimi Alford and all her spiritual sisters down through the years, that you rightly insist should be applied to stories regarding the assassination, we wouldn't be having this conversation. We'd be on the same side of the issue.


_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3453
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

Post by Sponsored content Today at 9:43 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum