what we are witnessing...

Stan Dane wrote:Are we wasting our time?

greg parker wrote:I take your point, Paul - and it's not without some truth. 

Let's put it another way... it is the very definition of madness to keep throwing the same evidence and theories at "the champ" and expect a different result at some stage. He's immune to it - inoculated by a compliant press over 50 years. 

But it's a different world now with the internet. And we have lots of "new" facts at our disposal.

Dan Wenceslas Dunn wrote:Maybe it's more like trying to knock down a wall -- you just keep on hammering. I've gotten to the point where I like it that way. (But then I'm probably too dreamy about going up against really long odds, sounds kinda heroic, y'know.)

So no, Stan, I don't think we're wasting our time. The fuckin wall's gotta come down some day.

greg parker wrote:I take your point, Paul - and it's not without some truth. 

Let's put it another way... it is the very definition of madness to keep throwing the same evidence and theories at "the champ" and expect a different result at some stage. He's immune to it - inoculated by a compliant press over 50 years. 

But it's a different world now with the internet. And we have lots of "new" facts at our disposal.

greg parker wrote:

Frankie Vegas wrote:Me too! We need one of these coming out every year. Like an encyclopedia of sorts...
An overview of the years findings.

Excellent idea, and one that should be acted upon.

steely dan wrote:It would be fascinating to see the reaction a filmed version of the main PM thread points would make on Youtube. As for the WCR 50th, it will be the same old faces on Nat Geo.

Stan Dane wrote:As good as Jim DiEugenio's Plaque series is, I think it would be more effective if done on video.

Stan Dane wrote:

steely dan wrote:It would be fascinating to see the reaction a filmed version of the main PM thread points would make on Youtube. As for the WCR 50th, it will be the same old faces on Nat Geo.

I like how you think, steely. I think we need to embrace video much more. A Prayer Man video would be awesome (are you reading this, Mr. Sean Murphy?). As good as Jim DiEugenio's Plaque series is, I think it would be more effective if done on video. Videos are so "today." The "50 Reasons for 50 Years" series on BOR wouldn't have cut it as a series of articles.
 
If we're going to reach a new generation of people we need to use the media they prefer, or more of it anyway.
 
:: kicking the soapbox back under the bed ::

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder....

Dan Wenceslas Dunn wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder....

Why don't you write her and tell her all that, Goban. And be sure to refer to her father as "JFK" as opposed to "President John F. Kennedy." I'm sure she'll appreciate your take on the whole matter of her own implication in her father's death.

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
...... 
 
We can slug it out in the forums till the cows come home – and it’s important that that fight continues – but I doubt that anything that comes of all of that could pack a punch to match that of the Kennedy clan matriarch demanding justice.

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder.
 
Of course there are extenuating circumstances, the chief of which is the supreme sacrifices already made by Caroline Kennedy’s family – the apparent political martyrdom of her father, uncle and brother – not to mention the possible further martyrdom of herself, her children or other members of her extended family, should she call for the investigation that’s needed.
 
We can slug it out in the forums till the cows come home – and it’s important that that fight continues – but I doubt that anything that comes of all of that could pack a punch to match that of the Kennedy clan matriarch demanding justice.

Paul Klein2 wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder.
 
Of course there are extenuating circumstances, the chief of which is the supreme sacrifices already made by Caroline Kennedy’s family – the apparent political martyrdom of her father, uncle and brother – not to mention the possible further martyrdom of herself, her children or other members of her extended family, should she call for the investigation that’s needed.
 
We can slug it out in the forums till the cows come home – and it’s important that that fight continues – but I doubt that anything that comes of all of that could pack a punch to match that of the Kennedy clan matriarch demanding justice.

Caroline Kennedy is ensconced in the establishment. Even more so today. It is, after all, the Kennedy family business. They are considered royalty and royalty has its duties and obligations to "public service".
To her, IMHO, her family's sacrifices will always remain a private matter and should be understood in those terms. Especially by those blowhard researchers who want to call on her to supply them with weapons of truth. Who the fuck do they think they are?
I've said before that engaging the Oswald sisters makes more pertinent sense. We know they have questions. Caroline Kennedy hasn't even revealed that much. June and Rachel can effectively make a concerted effort to demand another inquiry. They have more of a stake in this case than all of the researchers combined. If we are going to approach spokespeople to this thing then we must appeal to them both and offer all the supporting evidence that can be mustered.

Goban Saor wrote:

Paul Klein2 wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder.
 
Of course there are extenuating circumstances, the chief of which is the supreme sacrifices already made by Caroline Kennedy’s family – the apparent political martyrdom of her father, uncle and brother – not to mention the possible further martyrdom of herself, her children or other members of her extended family, should she call for the investigation that’s needed.
 
We can slug it out in the forums till the cows come home – and it’s important that that fight continues – but I doubt that anything that comes of all of that could pack a punch to match that of the Kennedy clan matriarch demanding justice.

Caroline Kennedy is ensconced in the establishment. Even more so today. It is, after all, the Kennedy family business. They are considered royalty and royalty has its duties and obligations to "public service".
To her, IMHO, her family's sacrifices will always remain a private matter and should be understood in those terms. Especially by those blowhard researchers who want to call on her to supply them with weapons of truth. Who the fuck do they think they are?
I've said before that engaging the Oswald sisters makes more pertinent sense. We know they have questions. Caroline Kennedy hasn't even revealed that much. June and Rachel can effectively make a concerted effort to demand another inquiry. They have more of a stake in this case than all of the researchers combined. If we are going to approach spokespeople to this thing then we must appeal to them both and offer all the supporting evidence that can be mustered.

I'm still awaiting the flaw(s) in my reasoning to be identified. Shooting the messenger is not good enough.

Paul Klein2 wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:

Paul Klein2 wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder.
 
Of course there are extenuating circumstances, the chief of which is the supreme sacrifices already made by Caroline Kennedy’s family – the apparent political martyrdom of her father, uncle and brother – not to mention the possible further martyrdom of herself, her children or other members of her extended family, should she call for the investigation that’s needed.
 
We can slug it out in the forums till the cows come home – and it’s important that that fight continues – but I doubt that anything that comes of all of that could pack a punch to match that of the Kennedy clan matriarch demanding justice.

Caroline Kennedy is ensconced in the establishment. Even more so today. It is, after all, the Kennedy family business. They are considered royalty and royalty has its duties and obligations to "public service".
To her, IMHO, her family's sacrifices will always remain a private matter and should be understood in those terms. Especially by those blowhard researchers who want to call on her to supply them with weapons of truth. Who the fuck do they think they are?
I've said before that engaging the Oswald sisters makes more pertinent sense. We know they have questions. Caroline Kennedy hasn't even revealed that much. June and Rachel can effectively make a concerted effort to demand another inquiry. They have more of a stake in this case than all of the researchers combined. If we are going to approach spokespeople to this thing then we must appeal to them both and offer all the supporting evidence that can be mustered.

I'm still awaiting the flaw(s) in my reasoning to be identified. Shooting the messenger is not good enough.

I wasn't aiming to shoot you, Goban. I don't consider you a "blowhard researcher" so I am sorry if you got caught up in that crossfire. I simply underlined my reasoning to yours because I wanted to address the same topic you respectfully brought up as a contrast.
Perhaps I should be more careful in future so please accept my apology for this time.

Goban Saor wrote:
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.

Goban Saor wrote:

Paul Klein2 wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:

Paul Klein2 wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:To continue with the boxing analogy, maybe it’s time for the women to step into the ring. The women I refer to are Caroline Kennedy and the Oswald sisters.
 
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.
 
Caroline Kennedy is now a senior US Government representative as Ambassador to Japan. She is thus implicated, albeit perhaps at some remove, in her father’s murder.
 
Of course there are extenuating circumstances, the chief of which is the supreme sacrifices already made by Caroline Kennedy’s family – the apparent political martyrdom of her father, uncle and brother – not to mention the possible further martyrdom of herself, her children or other members of her extended family, should she call for the investigation that’s needed.
 
We can slug it out in the forums till the cows come home – and it’s important that that fight continues – but I doubt that anything that comes of all of that could pack a punch to match that of the Kennedy clan matriarch demanding justice.

Caroline Kennedy is ensconced in the establishment. Even more so today. It is, after all, the Kennedy family business. They are considered royalty and royalty has its duties and obligations to "public service".
To her, IMHO, her family's sacrifices will always remain a private matter and should be understood in those terms. Especially by those blowhard researchers who want to call on her to supply them with weapons of truth. Who the fuck do they think they are?
I've said before that engaging the Oswald sisters makes more pertinent sense. We know they have questions. Caroline Kennedy hasn't even revealed that much. June and Rachel can effectively make a concerted effort to demand another inquiry. They have more of a stake in this case than all of the researchers combined. If we are going to approach spokespeople to this thing then we must appeal to them both and offer all the supporting evidence that can be mustered.

I'm still awaiting the flaw(s) in my reasoning to be identified. Shooting the messenger is not good enough.

I wasn't aiming to shoot you, Goban. I don't consider you a "blowhard researcher" so I am sorry if you got caught up in that crossfire. I simply underlined my reasoning to yours because I wanted to address the same topic you respectfully brought up as a contrast.
Perhaps I should be more careful in future so please accept my apology for this time.

It’s OK, Paul. It’s very gracious of you to apologise even though though the fault was probably mine in wrongly assuming you were referring to me as a researcher. Though I can’t resist throwing in the odd hapworth into the mix, I consider myself a student rather than a researcher in these matters.

Also I may be a tad tetchy today because of minor terrestrial irritants.
 
Having thought a bit more about this, I think I need to clarify what I meant by my initial post. I was trying to define a state of affairs rather than judge or criticize Caroline Kennedy. To criticize her would be harsh and unfair given the circumstances I mentioned. If I were in her position I am not at all sure I would behave any differently to her.
 
I didn’t say she should come out and demand the investigation I referred to. What I was more or less saying is that if she did do so it would be a gamechanger.

Paul Klein2 wrote:I still think the Oswald sisters are the best bet. They have a lot to gain from another inquiry.

Stan Dane wrote:

Goban Saor wrote:
Caroline Kennedy is in a particularly difficult position. Ever since the HSCA found in 1979 that  JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy, the US Government has had a solemn duty to conduct a follow up investigation to find out who was involved in the conspiracy. Its failure to do so makes it an accessory after the fact.

Excellent point.

Goban, I must remind you that you are one of the Dirty Dozen (which is not limited to 12 because this is ROKC, not a stupid standalone forum), so feel free to chime in anytime. I like hearing your perspective.