````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` So your hero leaves work in the middle of the day to walk into the middle of a movie? I know you'll never do it but I would just love to hear your story about the assassination from start to finish and see what you think happened.
So, if it's in the book, you believe it? Sorry, I mis-stated that. I apologize. If it is in the book "Ultimate Sacrifice", you endorse the findings in the book, the conclusions in the book, the scenarios in the book, etc....?
That was a strange post. I've read many books and some made sense and some didn't. The book I mentioned Ultimate Sacrifice is well resourced and documented and is extremely logical. It also doesn't delve into the ridiculous "secret serviceman in the car shot JFK" nonsense. In fact while it does talk about Oswald to some degree, it doesn't try to identify the actual shooter or shooters but rather describe show and why the assassination was planed and covered up
Neither one of you intends to read that book and yet you think you can evaluate it. THAT is dissappointing
So you agree no evidence is presented in the book that the Mob killed Kennedy with the help of some rogue CIA agents using Oswald as a patsy. It does not even count as theory it is supposition
I "agree" that you have no idea what you are talking about since you have never read that book. Nothing new there
No you agree they present no evidence to support the theory tha the mob killed Kennedy or you could cite some of that evidence
As you stated...it's a book about an Assassination...that doesn't discuss the assassins. As you say "it doesn't try to identify the actual shooter or shooters".
Again...you have no idea what is in the book and you're condemning it. Ultimate Sacrifice describes who planned and orchestrated the assassination and how those perpetrators used the Federal government to trigger a cover up. It's factual and documented all to hell. An you have no interest in having your preconceived notions challenged...obviously
I quoted you. So that means you have no idea. Actually, I have a huge interest...in getting you to list in reasonable detail what you think happened that day. I've noticed one thing about conspiracy theorists; they resists tooth and nail EVER taking a firm stand on anything. Which is why you couldn't answer the question about Roger Craig. Obviously, you have no interest in stating what you think happened on that day because you cannot defend it without sounding silly (like the other conspiracy loon did with body doubles). Why do you think @Your Best Friend is the way he is and has to lace every post with snide commentary??? It's because there is zero chance at vindication of his indefensible position!!! As the old saying about jury trials go; if the evidence is against you, you pound the witness (as I did with Roger Craig showing that he has told some real whoppers in his time). if the witness is against you, pound the evidence (as I did when @Your Best Friend brought up the two gals who proved anyone could transverse 4 flights of stairs in plenty of time) if both are against you, pound the table and throw a tantrum (as he does daily). So I asked you if you agree 100% with the findings of that book; that at least gives us a glimpse. The problem is that the book itself, as you describe, doesn't even go into who killed the President....pathetic. I'll be happy to look at the book but it's disappointing; we still don't know what you think happened on that day.
The book is 800 pages and reads like a text book. I've told you the basics of it but I'm not about to try to detail all of 800 pages here, That's a stupid request. Again...it details various CIA programs dealing with Cuba that the mob used to set up a government cover up of their actions. If you're interested...read it. If not, continue on your merry way. As far as what I think happened that day? I've indicated numerous times that I think Carlos Marcello used his connections to the CIA to have Kennedy killed and to trigger a government cover up. Who Marcello used to actually pull the trigger isn't nearly as important as the fact that he did that. Now you can play bully with your friend all you want but it has no effect on anything except your own self image. Get back to me when you read Ultimate Sacrifice so you can have an actual basis for discussing it.
I searched your mentions of Marcello. There are 4; 3 from 2015 and this one just here. I read your passage from 2015 (well before I showed up). I apologize. Seriously. I apologize for the accusation that you didn't lay out your theory. You did what I requested. And then some. Again, I'm sorry.
I must admit I'm impressed and shocked at the same time. There is a genuine side to you after all. If only you could keep that up you and I might even be able to have a serious discussion about 9/11 one day.
Considering the fact that you haven't read the book that has as much value as all your other nonsense
Yes ultimate Sacrifice makes a convincing case about the actions of the CIA and the Kennedy administration's effort to overthrow Castro. Where they go off the rails and into la la land however is that they present no evidence of any kind that the CIA had anything to do with Kennedy's murder.
Not entirely only parts of it which does not alter the fact that while they actually do document much of what they say about the Kennedy's and cuba they offer no evidence of any sort whatsoever concerning Kennedy's assassination and their claims
