what we are witnessing...

First topic message reminder :

I know the claims have been made for a very long time that witness testimony has been changed/suborned. But I honestly don't believe the case for that has ever been all that strong. Suspicion isn't evidence.

I think what we have witnessed 

here
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354&page=1

here
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t34-was-eddie-piper-on-the-6th-floor

here
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17269

& here
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t453-the-rearranged-boxes

to give just some examples, changes all that and is the bones and meat of a prima facie case that Oswald's alibi would not be permitted to stand, and wherever possible, the real story would be turned into a variation on the truth, but leaning towards his guilt.

There is, imo, no longer any justification for defending the WC findings or its methodology.

These threads, among others, contain the real story, or very close to it, about what happened just prior, during and just after the assassination.

The pity is that this story will remain buried in forums. They have no real impact on how the history is written.

It is a large part of my frustration.

I just wanted to add here something I witnessed this week. Alec Baldwin, last week was accused of saying the word 'faggot'. Probably one of the two or three real swear words left that can get you into trouble.
He says he didn't say it, although that part of the story is not getting media attention.
As a punishment all the shows that he was going to play that week have been deep sixed.
Why I find that interesting is because one of the shows taped for this week was with Mark Lane, I assume it was going to play on the 22nd.
I'm friends with Sue Herndon, ( lovely woman, very funny) Mark Lane's PA on Facebook. She told me about the taping and the refusal to play the tapes.

Seems strange to me, that the punishment for this is not playing the tapes Baldwin did a week before, that it happened to happen just as Mark Lane was going on the show, and that Baldwin said he didn't say it. He might very well have said it, I'm not sure. But there you have it.
Was it a complicated plot so the network didn't have to play the Mark Lane interview?
Also, David Talbot was going to make 'Brothers' into a documentary for this anniversary, but met a hell of a lot of road blocks. (It's been a while since I read what exactly so forgive me if I'm wrong) I believe he even had someone trying to buy the rights who had no intention of making it.

In order for 'us' to get any media time we will have to fight through things like this. But I still think it can be done. I think the best way to do it will be to build a strong social media campaign. The media will find it very hard to ignore if everyone is already talking about it. In order to make it viral it will have to be bright, catchy and in a soundbite.
Well, that's what I reckon.

Frankie Vegas wrote:I just wanted to add here something I witnessed this week. Alec Baldwin, last week was accused of saying the word 'faggot'. Probably one of the two or three real swear words left that can get you into trouble.
He says he didn't say it, although that part of the story is not getting media attention.
As a punishment all the shows that he was going to play that week have been deep sixed.
Why I find that interesting is because one of the shows taped for this week was with Mark Lane, I assume it was going to play on the 22nd.
I'm friends with Sue Herndon, ( lovely woman, very funny) Mark Lane's PA on Facebook. She told me about the taping and the refusal to play the tapes.

Seems strange to me, that the punishment for this is not playing the tapes Baldwin did a week before, that it happened to happen just as Mark Lane was going on the show, and that Baldwin said he didn't say it. He might very well have said it, I'm not sure. But there you have it.
Was it a complicated plot so the network didn't have to play the Mark Lane interview?
Also, David Talbot was going to make 'Brothers' into a documentary for this anniversary, but met a hell of a lot of road blocks. (It's been a while since I read what exactly so forgive me if I'm wrong) I believe he even had someone trying to buy the rights who had no intention of making it.

In order for 'us' to get any media time we will have to fight through things like this. But I still think it can be done. I think the best way to do it will be to build a strong social media campaign. The media will find it very hard to ignore if everyone is already talking about it. In order to make it viral it will have to be bright, catchy and in a soundbite.
Well, that's what I reckon.

And I reckon you're right, Frankie.

At least once a week, there seems to be a MSM story about something that's "gone viral" on social media. Usually it's a clip of a cat tap-dancing in a vat of custard while juggling chain-saws and meowing to the tune of the Star Spangled Banner, and okay so once in a while... just for a change... it's something not quite as important as that... but I do live in hope, and if anyone can get a viral social media campaign going, it's gotta be you.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Greg. I might have to talk to Santa about getting more than coal.

For a social media campaign to go viral it will have to be one (or two or three) of a few things.

. Clever
. Helpful
. Funny
. Cute
. Sexy
. Super interesting.

It also has to be understood in 5 seconds and under. Like the Kennedy/Lincoln similarities thing we all see flying around, it's super interesting, even though a lot of it is untrue. People other than the ones in our community share it heaps because it's uncanny. I get sent it at least 4-5 times a year by well meaning friends. Cats are big online because they are funny and adorable, everyone likes sexy (I think this is how they get away with the Kennedy and all his women myth). Helpful hints around the home and recipes get lots of shares (51 everyday uses for baking soda!!) And everyone likes a good joke.

Anyway. I'm sure that if you guys talk it over and pick a topic I could get a social media campaign going. Whether or not it goes viral will be a little up to fate and how clever I am on the day.
I imagine that if I cover Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and Youtube then we could get something going. Maybe talk a few celebs into joining in...
You never know.

Frankie Vegas wrote:Thanks for the vote of confidence, Greg. I might have to talk to Santa about getting more than coal.

For a social media campaign to go viral it will have to be one (or two or three) of a few things.

. Clever
. Helpful
. Funny
. Cute
. Sexy
. Super interesting.

It also has to be understood in 5 seconds and under. Like the Kennedy/Lincoln similarities thing we all see flying around, it's super interesting, even though a lot of it is untrue. People other than the ones in our community share it heaps because it's uncanny. I get sent it at least 4-5 times a year by well meaning friends. Cats are big online because they are funny and adorable, everyone likes sexy (I think this is how they get away with the Kennedy and all his women myth). Helpful hints around the home and recipes get lots of shares (51 everyday uses for baking soda!!) And everyone likes a good joke.

Anyway. I'm sure that if you guys talk it over and pick a topic I could get a social media campaign going. Whether or not it goes viral will be a little up to fate and how clever I am on the day.
I imagine that if I cover Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and Youtube then we could get something going. Maybe talk a few celebs into joining in...
You never know.

Okay. So the challenge is out there and the rules of engagement are laid out. Let's make this happen. Let's see some ideas...

I know I said this is up to Sean to take to the press. I still think that's the case. Trying to get it passed around on social media is a different thing altogether - no different than discussing it here...

I only hope it fills the "super interesting" slot...
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Reopen-Kennedy-Case/176063269087200

I like it!!
And I'm so glad you are taking prayer man to social media. It's really important information I think, and could be a turning point for us. Good on you Greg for putting it out there.

I think maybe it should be on a black background so it's a bit bolder. And maybe if the words were a bit bigger. I also wonder if there could be a link at the bottom that leads to a quick blog post outlining the facts of prayer man. Maybe like bullet points cos they are fantastic for getting little bits of information out quickly.
And if it had a grabby title on top in bigger letters like "Photo of Oswald found!" "Proves he is not Guilty!" or something like that which sounds super exciting and attention grabbing.
My two Kiwi dollars on the matter, not sure what the exchange rate is at the mo.

Frankie Vegas wrote:I like it!!
And I'm so glad you are taking prayer man to social media. It's really important information I think, and could be a turning point for us. Good on you Greg for putting it out there.

I think maybe it should be on a black background so it's a bit bolder. And maybe if the words were a bit bigger. I also wonder if there could be a link at the bottom that leads to a quick blog post outlining the facts of prayer man. Maybe like bullet points cos they are fantastic for getting little bits of information out quickly.
And if it had a grabby title on top in bigger letters like "Photo of Oswald found!" "Proves he is not Guilty!" or something like that which sounds super exciting and attention grabbing.
My two Kiwi dollars on the matter, not sure what the exchange rate is at the mo.

Got it!

Posted to Tumblr if anyone has a Tumblr and wants to share from there.
http://franklymydearest.tumblr.com/

Okay - redone - hopefully to instructions!
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Reopen-Kennedy-Case/176063269087200

Code:

<div id="fb-root"></div> <script>(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));</script>
<div class="fb-post" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=764328086927379&set=a.759964400697081.1073741825.176063269087200&type=1" data-width="550"><div class="fb-xfbml-parse-ignore"><a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=764328086927379&set=a.759964400697081.1073741825.176063269087200&type=1">Post</a> by <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Reopen-Kennedy-Case/176063269087200">Reopen Kennedy Case</a>.</div></div>


The embed code for embedding into websites.

Thanks :)And sorry about the instructions lol. It was supposed to be constructive criticism or you know, lovely but helpful.

Frankie Vegas wrote:Thanks :)And sorry about the instructions lol. It was supposed to be constructive criticism or you know, lovely but helpful.

No no. Needed that guidance. Just wish I had more time and better skills...

http://www.reopenkennedycase.net/1/post/2013/11/he-never-had-a-prayer-man.html

Can someone on twitter get it going there as well?

greg parker wrote:http://www.reopenkennedycase.net/1/post/2013/11/he-never-had-a-prayer-man.html

Can someone on twitter get it going there as well?

I'm not a social media savvy guy, but I'm sharing links with folks who are on Facebook.
 
Awaiting further instructions…

Stan Dane wrote:

greg parker wrote:http://www.reopenkennedycase.net/1/post/2013/11/he-never-had-a-prayer-man.html

Can someone on twitter get it going there as well?

I'm not a social media savvy guy, but I'm sharing links with folks who are on Facebook.
 
Awaiting further instructions…

Thanks, Stan. That's probably as much as you can do without taking a crash course and it all helps get the information out...

I have a twitter account but only one follower as far as I know... and I still can't figure out how to use it.
I will ask around for someone who has a twitter account.

Here's some early feedback (scrubbed) from Operation Prayer Man Goes Social! (my wife posted the reopenkennedycase.net link on her Facebook and I told her how to respond in general to questions):

Friend 1: One of the world's biggest questions.
 
Wifey: True Friend 1. My husband has been following this research extensively about the prayerman and he is convinced along with a growing number of people that Oswald couldn't have done it.
 
Friend 1: But then there is the evidence that he ran, hid, and shot a policeman. How is that explained?
 
Friend 2: His fingerprints were all over the gun and shells. Not circumstantial evidence but fact. Saw a life story on him last night. It was pretty weird, his life.
 
Wifey: I didn't make this post to address every issue, just to show a piece of evidence that has been recently discovered. One thing to consider, if all of the evidence proves that Oswald did it, then why won't the government release all of the documents that are still locked up? Is it because they want to hide evidence? Sure looks that way. If you look at what the eye witnesses say on the day of the shooting and how their stories were either changed or suppressed, it makes me suspicious.
 
Friend 1: I agree Wifey. We aren't going to solve anything here. I heard all docs are to be released in 2017 - "if they are not a threat to national security" - which I'm sure they will decide some are, possibly the most important docs. I am not a proponent either way. I haven't really given who shot Kennedy real thought except for this 50th Anniversary. It will always be a mystery I think.

My wife has never mentioned or discussed JFK with her circle of friends before. I would be curious to see if these few responses might be indicative of the questions and thinking the larger public will have when faced with new information on JFK. Might help us to anticipate the most likely questions/objections we'll face so as to be prepared to tackle them head on. I can see a few already.

Anyway, just a little update from the trenches I thought you might find interesting.

It would be great if someone could write a short summary of Prayer Man to link to. I have been giving people the links to the discussion here and at Ed Forum but I don't think Joe Citizen is going to read all of that.

Frankie Vegas wrote:It would be great if someone could write a short summary of Prayer Man to link to. I have been giving people the links to the discussion here and at Ed Forum but I don't think Joe Citizen is going to read all of that.

What Greg's got here is pretty good for starters:

http://www.reopenkennedycase.net/1/post/2013/11/he-never-had-a-prayer-man.html

Ah, thanks. I missed that.
*Facepalm.

Frankie Vegas wrote:Ah, thanks. I missed that.
*Facepalm.

But Frankie... I told you I was HOPEFUL I had followed your instructions 

Stan Dane wrote:Here's some early feedback (scrubbed) from Operation Prayer Man Goes Social! (my wife posted the reopenkennedycase.net link on her Facebook and I told her how to respond in general to questions):

Friend 1: One of the world's biggest questions.
 
Wifey: True Friend 1. My husband has been following this research extensively about the prayerman and he is convinced along with a growing number of people that Oswald couldn't have done it.
 
Friend 1: But then there is the evidence that he ran, hid, and shot a policeman. How is that explained?
 
Friend 2: His fingerprints were all over the gun and shells. Not circumstantial evidence but fact. Saw a life story on him last night. It was pretty weird, his life.
 
Wifey: I didn't make this post to address every issue, just to show a piece of evidence that has been recently discovered. One thing to consider, if all of the evidence proves that Oswald did it, then why won't the government release all of the documents that are still locked up? Is it because they want to hide evidence? Sure looks that way. If you look at what the eye witnesses say on the day of the shooting and how their stories were either changed or suppressed, it makes me suspicious.
 
Friend 1: I agree Wifey. We aren't going to solve anything here. I heard all docs are to be released in 2017 - "if they are not a threat to national security" - which I'm sure they will decide some are, possibly the most important docs. I am not a proponent either way. I haven't really given who shot Kennedy real thought except for this 50th Anniversary. It will always be a mystery I think.

My wife has never mentioned or discussed JFK with her circle of friends before. I would be curious to see if these few responses might be indicative of the questions and thinking the larger public will have when faced with new information on JFK. Might help us to anticipate the most likely questions/objections we'll face so as to be prepared to tackle them head on. I can see a few already.

Anyway, just a little update from the trenches I thought you might find interesting.

Thanks, Stan. It was indeed interesting.

He ran - he hid - he shot a policeman.... proof that type of propaganda works! We HAVE to make it work FOR us to have any chance of turning the tables...

greg parker wrote:Thanks, Stan. It was indeed interesting.

He ran - he hid - he shot a policeman.... proof that type of propaganda works! We HAVE to make it work FOR us to have any chance of turning the tables...

I like what you had to say about propaganda earlier. It's a neutral concept, neither good nor bad of itself. It's how it's used.
 
There's the well-known quote often attributed to propagandist Joseph Goebbels: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
 
For our purposes, we need to revise it to say: "If you tell a truth big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
 
I see Sean doing this over at the JFK Clusterfuck Forum with patience and confidence. He just keeps repeating his "big truth" and his detractors have been reduced to repeating the same old worn out childish words in response. They have no answer.

The reason the Prayer Man threads in these forums have so many views is not the lies and disinformation of the numbskull detractors, but the truth being told. Over and over and over again. It works.
 
You're right Greg. That's our model.

Stan Dane wrote:

greg parker wrote:Thanks, Stan. It was indeed interesting.

He ran - he hid - he shot a policeman.... proof that type of propaganda works! We HAVE to make it work FOR us to have any chance of turning the tables...

I like what you had to say about propaganda earlier. It's a neutral concept, neither good nor bad of itself. It's how it's used.
 
There's the well-known quote often attributed to propagandist Joseph Goebbels: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
 
For our purposes, we need to revise it to say: "If you tell a truth big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
 
I see Sean doing this over at the JFK Clusterfuck Forum with patience and confidence. He just keeps repeating his "big truth" and his detractors have been reduced to repeating the same old worn out childish words in response. They have no answer.

The reason the Prayer Man threads in these forums have so many views is not the lies and disinformation of the numbskull detractors, but the truth being told. Over and over and over again. It works.
 
You're right Greg. That's our model.

Thanks Stan.

All I hear from people at the moment is how Hickey did.

For 50 years we have been complicit in our own side-lining. It's long overdue that we actually joined the game (and by any means we can think of).

I cannot watch the coverage any more.

Some of these people who are giving sound bites are talking utter bullshit.  These are supposed to be reporters.

"We know that people in the windows below the sixth floor heard shells hitting the floor and the bolt being operated."

"Oswald's actions after the assassination were not that of an innocent man."

"We know he shot Officer Tippit in cold blood."

"He came closest to an admission of guilt in the theater when he said 'it's all over now'"

"He tried to shoot police officers when they were arresting him."

Fuck me, have we gone back in time here?  For the sake of my blood pressure I'm having to turn it off.

But nuttiest comment so far has been this; One complete arsehole was asked what Kennedy's legacy was.  Their answer was this:

"One Kennedy achievement was putting things in place to allow Ronald Reagan to help destroy the communist way of life in the Soviet Union. It took a long time but we did it."  

WTF?  I can't even dignify this with a response other than WHAT THE FUCK?