Is anything in JFK truthful or is it all conspiracy theory tin foil hat nonsense? Was LBJ involved? Were there multiple shooters? Was the Warren commission dishonest in their investigation?
Are there are any articles, books, videos, that go through all the points the JFK movie makes and break down the historical accuracy of it all?
TMC-4 asks: "Is anything in JFK truthful or is it all conspiracy theory tin foil hat nonsense? Was LBJ involved? Were there multiple shooters? Was the Warren commission dishonest in their investigation?
Are there are any articles, books, videos, that go through all the points the JFK movie makes and break down the historical accuracy of it all?"
What a stupid, lazy question.
Can't you even state outright what you believe or not about the story? Or even tell us what you have read or come to believe?
I think if anyone had proof of anymore shooters let alone LBJ involvement EVERYONE would know.
Instead you come on here and ask us to come up with a possible argument for you to latch onto.
Your pathetic attempt at sh!t stirring is more shameful than any movie Oliver Stone ever made.
How am I making a "pathetic attempt at shit stirring"!? If I'm stirring shit, then what exactly does that make Oliver Stone? Why the hell are you turning it around and personally attacking me instead of actually answering the question? I don't like your condescending "you should already know better" perspective that you're throwing at me.
shareI'm asking a fucking question not offering my own personal opinion or perspective, so why should whether or not I'm stating outright what I believe or don't believe shouldn't be relevant here?
shareI hear ya, its cool. Personally I dont believe the Garrison theory. Of course he points out the obvious flaws and shady characters dead and otherwise. Was it a conspiracy? Duh. This does not accurately portray the truth of that event. It is mostly based off the Garrison book. Its a recreation of the book. Im not sure how much if any O.S. narrative was inserted at all.
shareVery little. It's filled to the brim with bullshit and blatant inaccuracies. But it's well done and entertaining - a nice piece of fiction.
shareAll of it is total BS. Jim Garrison was the most wacked out CTer until idiot Stone rehabilitated him and made him a fake hero. I'd recommend two books: Case Closed by Posner and Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi. Or you can watch the Frontline doc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cjwKxuie2o
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HistoricalHeroUpgrade
Jim Garrison is depicted in Oliver Stone's JFK as a fearless crusader for the truth, driven by a deep sense of devotion to the slain president and a desire to bring justice to his assassins. The real life Garrison is considered by just about every objective historian to have been either a completely delusional paranoid or a shallow opportunist. He intimidated witnesses, suborned perjury and based his case against Clay Shaw on homophobia.share
You know what, our government after 60 years have ZERO reason to keep anything SECRET from the public about JFK's assassination. All the files should be released without being marked out for stupid & arbitrary reasons. They've had 60 years to get it right, and still to choose behave in a superior manner keeping "government secrets". It's bullshit.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jfk-assassination-files-release-delayed-white-house/
Read the book by L. Fletcher Prouty on the matter.
shareJust watch the movie with Oliver Stone's director's commentary audio and count how many times he says "Now, this never actually happened..." or "here we are taking dramatic license with what happened" and then decide for yourself.
shareNo, it’s an entertaining movie… that’s for sure. But that is all.
The truth lies in Dark Legacy (2009), the documentary.
George HW Bush and his CIA were the culprits, and the theories that popped up mainly around his and his son’s administrations were misdirection.
Clay “Shaw” Bertrand was another in a long line of patsy, same as Oswald.
Evil as fvck, the Bushes are. Kennedy coup. 9/11, too. Inside job. Maybe not controlled demolition, but they let their Saudi business friend terrorists through to do as they please. War profiteering… just like grandpappy Prescott working with the Nazis.
Oliver Stone and Michael Moore are not *real* liberal attack dogs. Barr McClellan, too. On Bush payroll. Examine their works… and their times of activity. They helped create a narrative of subterfuge that made us underestimate the Bush regime as puppets—part of the “Deep State.”
Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004) re-elected Bush, and provided his “My Pet Goat” alibi with the kids. Anti-Gun hysteria like Bowling for Columbine (2002) *helps* GOP, not Dems—who just want common sense incremental reforms.
It all created an anti-establishment backlash which resulted in Trump. Sucks. But we didn’t need Jeb, that’s for sure. Thank fvckin’ Christ!
The half-century national nightmare is over! Even Trump is gone, too. Rejoice.
BUMP
shareI don't think the movie is about truth as much as it is about the confusion that has engulfed the country since it happened.
shareThe FBI and the CIA were dicks about any info or contact they had indirectly with Oswald.
Other than that, there isn't a single theory or counter-revelation in JFK that stands up. Once you look just below the surface at things like Lee Bower, who did not claim to see a commotion behind the grassy knoll like the one depicted in the movie and did not die mysteriously before he was due to give damning testimony, you realise that the theories in JFK are little more than counter propaganda.
Having said that, the movie is a marvel. It is stunning in the way it conveys the story of Garrison's case. Even if Garrison's case was virtually non-existent.
The title card at the end of the movie that informs us that a Senate Assassinations committee was set up in the late 70s and further documents were declassified and published as a result of this movie, is the only truly accurate thing in it.