REOPENKENNEDYCASE
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
ROKC IS NOW CLOSED AND IS READ ONLY. WE THANK THOSE WHO HAVE SUPPORTED US OVER THE LAST 14 YEARS.


Search
Display results as :
Advanced Search
Latest topics
Brian says...Sat 30 Dec 2023, 4:33 pmEd.Ledoux
last drinks before the bar closesSat 30 Dec 2023, 2:46 pmTony Krome
The Mystery of Dirk Thomas KunertSat 30 Dec 2023, 1:23 pmTony Krome
Vickie AdamsSat 30 Dec 2023, 1:14 pmgreg_parker
Busted again: Tex ItaliaSat 30 Dec 2023, 9:22 amEd.Ledoux
The Raleigh CallSat 30 Dec 2023, 4:33 ambarto
Was Oswald ever confronted with the physical rifle?Sat 30 Dec 2023, 12:03 amCastroSimp
Who Dat? Fri 29 Dec 2023, 10:24 pmTony Krome
Log in
Social bookmarking
Social bookmarking reddit      

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

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

prayer  fritz  Darnell  +Lankford  Weigman  3  tsbd  zapruder  4  David  Humor  9  2  beckley  paine  Mason  Floor  3a  11  frazier  tippit  Lankford  hosty  Theory  Lifton  doyle  

Like/Tweet/+1

Go down
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 8325
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 65
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay Empty Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

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...

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


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
avatar
morleyj
Posts : 1
Join date : 2012-12-13

Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay Empty Re: Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

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.

greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 8325
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 65
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay Empty Re: Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

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:
https://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.


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


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
Sponsored content

Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay Empty Re: Comments from Blakey on the 49th anniversay

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