Made LHO lone shooter which is total BS. a mountain of evidence proves he was killed by "them".
also made it seem JFK death was a necessity for the wellbeing of america, basically a fox news dream.
I understand the underlining theme of not being able to change your destiny but I still didn't like it.
https://youtu.be/93sGUFpVxFI
Boohoo, the story didn't fit the narrative I wanted, so it's propaganda.
-Howard Gordon unbuttons his pants: "On your knees."
-Fanboy: "Yes, sir!"
it kinda is. the whole show made CIA/illuminati references to LHO his handler everything and then all of a sudden he's a loneshooter...
https://youtu.be/93sGUFpVxFI
it kinda is. the whole show made CIA/illuminati references to LHO his handler everything and then all of a sudden he's a loneshooter...Just because LHO was teh lone shooter did not mean he did not act on CIA/KGB orders. He was, after all, a Marine who did qualify as a Sharp Shooter once.
"He was, after all, a Marine who did qualify as a Sharp Shooter once."
No, he didn't. He qualified as "marksman", which is the lowest level of qualification, and that was only after failing to qualify at all.
Here's a quote from Carlos Hathcock:
“Let me tell you what we did at Quantico,” Hathcock recalls. “We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don’t know how many times we tried it, but we couldn’t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. Now if I can’t do it, how in the world could a guy who was a non-qual on the rifle range and later only qualified 'marksman' do it?”
Also, Marine sniper Craig Roberts said:
“The reason I knew that Oswald could not have done it, was because I could not have done it.”
“First, I analyzed the scene as a sniper . . . I looked at the engagement angles. It was entirely wrong…Here, from what I could see, three problems arose that would influence my shots. First, the target was moving away at a drastic angle to the right from the window, meaning that I would have to position my body to compete with the wall and a set of vertical water pipes . . . This would be extremely difficult for a right-handed shooter. Second, I would have to be ready to fire exactly when the target emerged past some tree branches that obscured the kill zone. Finally, I would have to deal with two factors at the same time; the curve of the street, and the high-to-low angle formula—a law of physics Oswald would not have known.”
And in case you're wondering who Carlos Hathcock is:
Carlos Norman Hathcock II (May 20, 1942 – February 22, 1999) was a United States Marine Corps (USMC) sniper with a service record of 93 confirmed kills. Hathcock's record and the extraordinary details of the missions he undertook made him a legend in the U.S. Marine Corps. He was honored by having a rifle named after him: a variant of the M21 dubbed the Springfield Armory M25 White Feather, for the nickname "White Feather" given to Hathcock by the North Vietnamese Army (NVA).share
SK went with the "canon" version of history. If you believe otherwise, it's fine, but you must respect his decision to not open the can of worms that are conspiracy theories.
In the book, the world goes to hell because of too many timelines. This is explained in full by the man with the yellow card. Maybe they thought it would be too convoluted for a TV show? In any case, it's really not relevant, since SK himself is pretty liberal, and he wouldn't validate "fox news dreams", and since every change to the book was approved by him...
-I'm done trying to win over their hearts.
-Let's attack their hearts.
I was hoping this thing would be multiple seasons so they could use more things from the book. I was disappointed that it was just the 1 season. Granted, I didn't do the research on the show. I just (incorrectly) assumed the whole point of making a show was to keep making a show (if people were watching it and it was making money).
shareThe tv show, as written, is not compelling enough to go more than 1 season. I was actually expecting at least a 2nd, but then...it suddenly ended.
shareI disagree - people like Stephen King don't need the money, perhaps like many, they do it for the art. Should Van Gogh have pumped out more paintings so we could have one?
I like/have liked many shows that were only one season - told a story, finished the story, didn't constantly contrive cliff hangers, and didn't go on until we were all tired. How many people enjoyed How I met your Mother but were disappointed in the ending? How many good shows were cancelled because they didn't get ratings but would have been enjoyable if we just got to find out what was going on - Alcatraz, Pushing Daisies and many more may have made good, short series.
We want tv to produce quality shows, not pump out quantity with poor stories.
For me - more Fargo, True Detective and many British crime dramas.
I am happy for a sequel or prequel - perhaps even to explain the man with the yellow card, but in many respects I would expect it to finish similarly - that the past shouldn't be changed.
"No, he didn't. He qualified as "marksman", which is the lowest level of qualification, and that was only after failing to qualify at all."
No, he qualified as a sharpshooter, later on he was downgraded to marksman.
The standard for marksman in the marines is much higher than the army,
Boohoo, the story didn't fit the narrative I wanted, so it's propaganda.
How is this a "fox news dream" when liberal claim the democrat and republican platforms changed positions after JFK?
shareOccam's razor applies to the whole JFK conspiracy. With all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the truth. Oswald was the lone shooter. I jumped on the conspiracy bandwagon for years but eventually I went with the Occam's razor hypothesis. It was what happened. It's a shame a loser like Oswald could have done it but it is what it is. People like to make it bigger than it was (the assassins that is): the assassination itself was one of, if not the most, tragic day of the 20th century. With an event as big and tragic as it was, naturally one would want to make it a big assassin conspiracy: But in my opinion, it was not. A loser did it and as Gump says, that is all I have to say about that.
shareand jack rubin just randomly killed him....because he was upset
https://youtu.be/93sGUFpVxFI
also made it seem JFK death was a necessity for the wellbeing of america, basically a fox news dream.
I take it Stephen King is a firm believer that Oswald acted alone. But the OP is right, anyone who's done any studying on this knows that the bullet came from the front of JFK, not the back.
shareBut the OP is right, anyone who's done any studying on this knows that the bullet came from the front of JFK, not the back.
Sorry, but the shot didn't come from Oswald. Your government lies to you, face it.
shareMy government?? I don't care what government is lying about. I know what a gun shot does to a human head. I've also seen the video frame by frame. The shots came from behind. It may have been Oswald or someone else, but it came from behind. There are people saying it came from the trunk if that fits your narrative better...but that shot came from behind.
shareYep, and the evil Muslims crashed the world trade center.
shareBorat said Jews did that!
shareReality Check, Joe: Actually yes evil Muslims DID crash into the WTC.
Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar, and / or doesn't.
Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy and evil Muslims brought down the twin towers and crashed into the Pentagon. I'm sorry the official version isn't as exciting as a shadowy conspiracy hiding behind bushes in the grassy knoll and using hologram technology to make it appear planes crashed into the WTC and Pentagon, when in fact it was a controlled demolition that brought down the Twin Towers and a missile was fired into the Pentagon, meanwhile the planes were flown to an undisclosed location and the passengers were executed. Even I have to admit that the wacky conspiracy theories are far more entertaining than the truth.
shareI respect those who believe that JFK's death was the result of a conspiracy. I do not, but Unopoly is quite correct here. The fatal bullet came from behind, as the exit wound is much larger than the entry wound. Further, we see the contents of the head are going to the front and the head going backwards. I am familiar with guns and have shot at water-filled jugs with a high-powered weapon and they were knocked towards me. This is called the jet-recoil effect, and while I know that the jugs are not the same as the human head, it is still the same principle involved. The head's contents are composed largely of fluids and a high-velocity projectile hitting it causes a shockwave as these fluids are displaced and they expand, causing the head to come apart. The displaced material goes forward and the head 'recoils' backward. This is what we see in the Zapruder film.But the OP is right, anyone who's done any studying on this knows that the bullet came from the front of JFK, not the back.
Actually no this is not known to "anyone" that has done studying. There are people that have countered this argument. Being shot in the front wouldn't cause the entire frontal lobe to explode, it would cause the back of his head to explode out from the exit wound. Exit wounds are always bigger than entry wounds. Frame 313 shows the front of JFK exploding. This could only happen from an exit wound, or shot from behind as "anyone who's done any studying on this knows".
This exit wound would also cause the head to come forward, then jerk backwards when it exploded. Frame 312 shows a jerk forward, to jerk backwards as the exit wounds explode in Frame 313.
There are many video of this online. All you have to do is type in Frame 313 to see them.
Actually no this is not known to "anyone" that has done studying.
the assassination itself was one of, if not the most, tragic day of the 20th century
There are "mountains of evidence" to prove that everyone from the Maffia to the KKK had Kennedy killed. It all depends on which mountain you choose to believe.
I disagree that this show was propaganda. I have been thinking about this all week, yes I am pretty boring. It defiantly stands to reason that Wallace could have won after Kennedy. Hear me out, Kennedy picked LBJ as his running mate to appeal to southern Democrats who were by-and-large racists and very anti Catholic (exceptions being the large Catholic population of Louisiana) Had Kennedy lived do you think he could have gotten the Civil Rights passed? I don't think he could have. It took Johnson, a southern paranoiac, who literally had dirt on everyone to do it and even still it split the party.
Had Kennedy lived, we might have seen a longer civil rights movement that may or may not have been successful. It the middle of a civil rights struggle isn't it possible that a bigot like George Wallace could garner support of southern Dixiecrats and taken either the election of 64 or 68? (I know the show said JFK won the reelection, I honestly doubt that would have been the case though)
Its all a silly story and I think to much into things.
I enjoyed this show not so much for substance but for the costumes and period props.
It was clearly more a thought experiment than a close-up of the JFK assassination. "What would it be like for a modern man to go back in time to the optimistic late fifties/early sixties, before JFK died and the world went dark"
Since King is a guy who really really likes to write and evidently's got exemplary self-discipline (I am a wannabe writer myself, without said traits), that base idea became a book. It is necessary for a novel to have a plot-driving conflict, so he chose the JFK assassination for that purpose.
It's not like I have spoken to King myself, but this is my take on it anyways.
A similar thought-experiment-come-book-because-the-writer-has-got-plenty-determination is The Man in the High Castle. Good series too!
The Ending I wanted: Oswald is stopped just in time, but Kennedy still gets shot. There really was a second shooter. When faced with indomitable task of discovering who that is, and trying to stop two shooters at once, Jake resets time and just lives happily ever after with Sadie.
"I said no camels, that's five camels, can't you count?"
I have thought about that also, from a JFK perspective and for having multiple series that could have been interesting. However from the romance perspective it would have made the romance very difficult as the joy of discovering someone wouldn't be mutual and equal and could have been weird.
It may only have been a good construct to manipulate it into another series, but if he had reset too often the romance would have been lost.
I think we have to appreciate that while we think the show is about JFK it is really more about the small people, particularly Sadie - who influenced many lives - it may not have been saving JFK that screwed up the future, but Sadie's death meant she couldn't influence so many young people who in turn may have been responsible for the messed up world we saw.
I think you miss the point and place too much relevance on JFK.
JFK's death may not have been a "necessity", but sometimes we learn from grief and from bad experiences. His death touched the hearts of millions - worldwide, and I turn may have made many people nicer people, and the world a better place.
Sadie's life influenced many people also, her death may have meant many school kids didn't get the positive influence they needed.
The story wasn't really about JFK, who shot him, why or "not being able to change your destiny" (as he did) - it was about appreciating that the bad things in the past have got us to where we are today, and to appreciate them, and that even the small people matter. It was much more a romance, akin to "The time traveler's wife", than any sort of political propaganda.
Would have been cool to have Jake framed for trying to kill JFK and shot by Jack Ruby in place of LHO.
share"Propaganda"...Jeez!
Almost every film, documentary and book on the assassination of JFK peddles a conspiracy theory. It's great that us who are not in the heard of sheep of JFK CT's can actually enjoy some media that does not follow the majority view.
Love is the law...
Almost every film, documentary and book on the assassination of JFK peddles a conspiracy theory. It's great that us who are not in the heard of sheep of JFK CT's can actually enjoy some media that does not follow the majority view.
Actually, nearly every film, documentary and book on the assassination peddles the lone nut theory.
It's very difficult to get one greenlighted or published that doesn't promote the lone nut scenario. Try it sometimes. Yes, some conspiracy books have gotten thru, but even the best-researched have a very difficult time getting printed and distributed, why every poorly-done book pushing the Oswald-did-it line is easily printed and has a good review waiting for it at the New York Times.
OK so that blows the idea that "nearly every...book...peddles the lone nut theory."
Have you tried to get published? is this what this is about? And rather than accept it is just not good enough it's the main stream publishing publishing cabal that is holding you back, keeping you down? If you've wrote a book, self publish it's easy to do and if it's good as you think it is it will be a success.
Parkland (I've not seen it) I understand goes with Oswald, but only in the sense of that what they believed at the time.
Killing Kennedy, based on O’Reilly/Dugard book of the same name certainly seems to go with Oswald.
So certainly all the main films go with the conspiracy
I'm sure if you can find a single LN documentary on Youtube by any old no-mark with a link you will feel justified that you have been proven correct even though there are hundreds on the most wacky conspiracies imaginable
I said you'd pick a book I hadn't mentioned...you did. That's what came up under a google search.
even the best-researched have a very difficult time getting printed and distributed. Some authors have even had to resort to creating their own mini-publishing house to get it out there.
In fact, Bill O'Reilly, who twenty years ago had a much more honest approach to the assassination topic
There are many films on JFK that don't cover the assassination, but of those that do.
JFK, Executive Action, Rush to Judgement all CT.
Parkland (I've not seen it) I understand goes with Oswald, but only in the sense of that what they believed at the time.
Killing Kennedy, based on O’Reilly/Dugard book of the same name certainly seems to go with Oswald.
So certainly all the main films go with the conspiracy theory.
PARKLAND and KILLING KENNEDY promote the lone nut mythology.
Are you now saying a movie which disputes the conspiracy scenario also qualifies as a "conspiracy movie"?
I don't know anything about these "wacky conspiracies" you imagine
Everyone is out to peddle something in this country. I believe that conspiracy theorists peddle their books because more people believe that there was a conspiracy as opposed to those people who do not. Why would more people, even after 50 years, believe that there was a conspiracy? Perhaps, if this had been a simple shooting like what happened with Ronald Reagan, no conspiracy theories would exist. Perhaps, it is because key would-be presidents, like Richard Nixon and Herbert Walker Bush, were in Dallas Texas the day of the assassination but wouldn't provide that information readily when asked. Well, that doesn't make them complicit in the assassination, but the fact that both of them have given different stories as to where they were does add more fuel to the fire. Why not just be forthcoming, else people become suspicious. How about the magic bullet? How about claims that the Zapruder film was doctored at the secret hawkeye lab over at Kodak in Rochester before it even reached Time Inc? There are plausible arguments on both of these points. What about the Parkland hospital MD, Charles Crenshaw, who remained unwavering in his statement that the back of JFK's head presented with an exit wound. There are just far too many inconsistencies to name them here.
Eram quod es, eris quod sum
The entire series was made to subtly embed propaganda inside commoners' heads, wrapped around with beautiful in time-traveling romantic drama.
There's no shred of doubt that it was jointly done by some of the top inside officials; the entire JFK case was patched with breadcrumbs of tons of misconducts and malpractices by every relevant authority to cover their tracks; and Lee was just another fall guy to them. The series didn't even touch the physics and mathematics of the magic bullet of JFK.
Also it blatantly tried to portray with bias, that with JFK alive, world would've been a far worse place than now... A subtle propaganda package with a 'happily ever after' distraction ending.
??? It is not the Answers that Enlighten, but the Questions ???
There's no shred of doubt that it was jointly done by some of the top inside officials
. The series didn't even touch the physics and mathematics of the magic bullet of JFK.
Also it blatantly tried to portray with bias, that with JFK alive, world would've been a far worse place than now... A subtle propaganda package with a 'happily ever after'.