The second and concluding installment of a long and detailed critique of Myer's arguments for Oswald's culpability in the Tippit murder.
The first installment of a long and detailed critique of Myer's arguments for Oswald's culpability in the Tippit murder.
Writing of an episode of Unsolved History, Ryan Siebenthaler states: "The show's producers and Mr. Mack are not working from empirical evidence in their deductions. They had an agenda ... to make the audience believe that there was no frontal shot. If the reader recalls, Mr. Mack did the same thing for Discovery Channel's Inside the Target Car, even altering the position of Jackie Kennedy's stand in inside the limousine".
Self-promotion by adopting the right talking points characterizes the work of people like Sabato, eager to become televised mouthpieces of establishment propaganda in an age of dying empire, writes Mike Swanson.
In reply to Michael Shermer and the LA Times, David Mantik asks why the media refuse to accept the overwhelmingly obvious conclusion that Oswald was framed.
A critical review of the NOVA production (November 14, 2013) – "Cold Case JFK."
Ron says "that all is uncertainty, that we'll never know who killed Kennedy or why to any degree of certainty." Well, with Ron leading the way that is probably true. ... To people who know something about the JFK case, and the ARRB declassified files, it is Ron who is the wingnut theorist. The idea that JFK was killed as a result of a high level plot is not a theory. It is a provable fact. End of story, writes Jim DiEugenio.
Jim DiEugenio exposes the disingenuousness and silliness of the anti-conspiracy arguments of David Reitzes and John McAdams, comparing them to those of the media shill Michael Shermer.
Examines McAdams' relationship with Wikipedia, his ground rules for debates, his rightwing politics and activism, his upcoming (2013) PBS special, and his recruitment help for the CIA.
McAdams has selectively culled the information he puts [on his site]. He then trumpets that site loudly as undermining the "buffs". As with Bugliosi, his argument is gaseous, since he has rigged the site beforehand, write Jim DiEugenio and Brian Hunt.