I'm not going to shout anyone down about their view. All I can say is that I always believed the conspiracy idea. Docu after docu tapped into the conspiracy idea and I really believed it. But this one simple BBC docu simply showed truths - Good evidence and explanation. For instance, the fatal blow where Kennedy pulls back and to the left - It is explained that a body being shot does not have to act in any specific way i.e. shot from the back or the front doesn't matter. A myth explained.
The JFK film was referred to because it managed to get 4million documents released. The film caused a stir and in 1999, those documents were forced into being released early because of the film's impact. The docu showed that there are many myths in the film that are given as truths. The Garrett guy Costner played was actually a bit of a dick. :)
Anyway...there will never be rest on this because too many will stick to their long-term views. For once in 12 years, I now tred a different path on this one.
All I can say is please don't discard this docu before seeing it. Seek it out and watch it - then decide.
Peace,
Adam.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Adam, that is the best advice i've read on the subject.
Watch it first then comment, if you aint seen it don't slag it.
Watch it first then comment, if you aint seen it don't slag it.
I admire Oliver Stone for making a film about the JFK assassination, although I wish he had a better story for the film than the Garrison investigation. Garrison's case against Clay Shaw was shaky to begin with. Also, by hanging his film on Garrison's far fetched case, Stone opened the film up to attacks from everyone who either fervently believes the Warren Commission or is afraid to contradict it. We did need a forum to bring out the inconsistencies such as the "magic bullet" and the wounds the President suffered in relation to a "lone gunman" in a building behind him. There may not be hard evidence of a conspiracy, but that does not mean there was not one. After all, there is no hard evidence that God exists, yet millions believe in His existence.
I didn't see the BBC documentary, much as I'd like to have, but I'm sure it can all be explained, one way or another.
I do think the film JFK is excellent though, and even if it is all bollocks, you've got to admit, they do put forward a pretty good case for the conspiracy. I always like a good consipracy theory, and that film, despite being 16 hours long, does do a great job!
I do think the film JFK is excellent though, and even if it is all bollocks, you've got to admit, they do put forward a pretty good case for the conspiracy. I always like a good consipracy theory, and that film, despite being 16 hours long, does do a great job!
Guess what I found folks... - http://66.90.75.92/suprnova//torrents/2427/Beyond%20Conspiracy.torrent
The documentay is on Supernova.org! I'm gonna download it immediately. Love to keep this.
Watch it. That's all I'll say.
Peace,
Adam.
The documentay is on Supernova.org! I'm gonna download it immediately. Love to keep this.
Watch it. That's all I'll say.
Peace,
Adam.
Thanks for the link Adam!
"For instance, the fatal blow where Kennedy pulls back and to the left - It is explained that a body being shot does not have to act in any specific way i.e. shot from the back or the front doesn't matter. A myth explained."
My old Uni professor (an expert in US history - what he didn't know about US history, wasn't worth knowing!) said the same thing.
The BBC documentary did make me think about what I considered to be facts in the whole JFK case.
- I'll enjoy watching it again.
My old Uni professor (an expert in US history - what he didn't know about US history, wasn't worth knowing!) said the same thing.
The BBC documentary did make me think about what I considered to be facts in the whole JFK case.
- I'll enjoy watching it again.
I believe there were at least 2 shooters - based on my own, in depth, pure guesswork ;-)
"Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap.
Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap.
Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap.
Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap."
Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap.
Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap.
Overrated, Clap, clap, clap, clap, clap."
I suppose you also think that the Moon landings were faked by the 'evil' US government then, Lucy?
I wish I could say I wasn't considering the possibility. But think about it... just about everything else in space was done by Russia first, so the US had every motivation in the world to fake it out. One theory says it was all done in Sudbury, ON. I wouldn't doubt ANYTHING in regards to the power of the US.
sorry, double post
Anyone who seriously thinks that the Moon landings were faked is either a conspiracy theorist or simply misinformed.
The Russians were only ahead of the Americans until the Gemini missions of the mid 1960's proved that NASA had mastered many of the techniques needed for a successful Moon landing, i.e., Rendezvous and Docking, EVA, etc.
At this time, the Russians had many problems with their version of the Saturn V rocket (the N1), which had an unfortunate tendancy to explode on take-off. This, essentially, was why America got to the Moon and the Russians didn't.
The Russians were only ahead of the Americans until the Gemini missions of the mid 1960's proved that NASA had mastered many of the techniques needed for a successful Moon landing, i.e., Rendezvous and Docking, EVA, etc.
At this time, the Russians had many problems with their version of the Saturn V rocket (the N1), which had an unfortunate tendancy to explode on take-off. This, essentially, was why America got to the Moon and the Russians didn't.
Here is a more in-depth response to the suggestion that the Russians did just about everything in space first before the Americans:
http://www.clavius.org/techsoviet.html
Read also:
http://www.clavius.org/bibsibrel.html
http://www.clavius.org/techsoviet.html
Read also:
http://www.clavius.org/bibsibrel.html
Adam - I have the BBC JFK doc you refer to on DVD. (I own a DVD recorder). It shed no new light on the subject at all. In fact, all the BBC "Uncovered" was broadcast over 10 years ago on a NOVA special broadcast in the USA - and available as an official NOVA NTSC video release.
The problem for Nova is that it used a very primitive BBC computer at the time so the effects look very "Space Invaders"!
Regurgetated using new high powered digitally generated graphics - it was indeed very convincing - but those graphics are "programmed" into a PC - not physical evidence. Also graphics can be manipulated.
Rather, I suggest you search out a book called "The Death Of A President" - it should be available from on-line book sellers like Amazon.
It is not a "read", but a collection of all known photographs of the assassination - and it is a revelation, as the President's car is vrtually riddled with bullets and bullet holes.
One through the windscreen. Another in the dashboard (Under the windscreen and can not be the same bullet). One in the back seat. One bullet hit James Tague standing in the underpass.
One hit a manhole cover. One hit the kerb. One hit the grassy verge opposite Zeprudder. Another was supposed to have lodged in Conelly's thigh.
This is all documented, physical evidence the BBC ignored. I make that at least six bullet holes - from six different bullets - which kind of buggers the three shot magic bullet theory!
Do some research of your own. The BBC is a powerful persuader, but it is British propaganda as much as Pravda is Russian propaganda.
If the above is correct, it can not be explained away so "magically".
The problem for Nova is that it used a very primitive BBC computer at the time so the effects look very "Space Invaders"!
Regurgetated using new high powered digitally generated graphics - it was indeed very convincing - but those graphics are "programmed" into a PC - not physical evidence. Also graphics can be manipulated.
Rather, I suggest you search out a book called "The Death Of A President" - it should be available from on-line book sellers like Amazon.
It is not a "read", but a collection of all known photographs of the assassination - and it is a revelation, as the President's car is vrtually riddled with bullets and bullet holes.
One through the windscreen. Another in the dashboard (Under the windscreen and can not be the same bullet). One in the back seat. One bullet hit James Tague standing in the underpass.
One hit a manhole cover. One hit the kerb. One hit the grassy verge opposite Zeprudder. Another was supposed to have lodged in Conelly's thigh.
This is all documented, physical evidence the BBC ignored. I make that at least six bullet holes - from six different bullets - which kind of buggers the three shot magic bullet theory!
Do some research of your own. The BBC is a powerful persuader, but it is British propaganda as much as Pravda is Russian propaganda.
If the above is correct, it can not be explained away so "magically".
I watched the Capricorn One film yesterday. Now that was cool! I remember a crazy story that Kubrick did the filming of the moon landings. Heeheee. Yeah, I've begun questioning whether they did go to the moon. Nice conspiracy progs on tv about it in the last few years. Interesting evidence.
Getting past all the evidence in pictures etc. - The one thing that always confuses me is how they didn't get poisoned by the radiation above Earth. Could someone explain that?
Peace,
Adam.
Getting past all the evidence in pictures etc. - The one thing that always confuses me is how they didn't get poisoned by the radiation above Earth. Could someone explain that?
Peace,
Adam.