So Gerald Ford wasn't such a great guy afterall..

[Amianthus]

Nixon was a co-conspirator in the JFK.  He insured that E Howard Hunt got a million dollars so that Hunt wouldn't "...open up that whole 'Bay of Pigs' thing..." which Halderman said (in his book) he eventually took to be code or a euphemism for the JFK assassination.

Not a fact, but another hypothesis, this time by Haldeman.

Ford was on the Warren Commission and signed his name to the lies told in the report.  Ford also simply falsified evidence by "clarifying" the location of the bullet hole in Kennedy's back.

Again, not a fact. I have seen no evidence that the report contains lies.

In the way that Nixon was held hostage by Hunt for a million dollars, Ford was held hostage for a presidential pardon.  (Note:  Nixon didn't have to pick up the phone or meet Ford in a darkened parking garage to tell Ford that the pardon had to happen OR ELSE.  When the stakes are as high as the revelation that two sitting presidents were co-conspirators with a past president and with at least one future president, no one has to threaten anyone to get what everyone knows they absolutely must have.  Call it quid pro quo or a family sticking together or everyone holding everyone by the short hairs but it doesn't have to be spoken.)

Again, not fact but hypothesis.

Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Bush 41 ALL had a hand in JFK's murder on one level or another.  Even Reagan declined to extradite Edgar Eugene Bradley to NO for Jim Garrison.

And again, not fact but hypothesis.

[Brassmask]

Dude, go read Jim Marrs' Crossfire and come back when you have the slightest bit of a clue about the truth in regard to the JFK Murder.

[Amianthus]

Dude, go read Jim Marrs' Crossfire and come back when you have the slightest bit of a clue about the truth in regard to the JFK Murder.

Sorry if you can't come up with evidence.

Reading another hypothesis will not provide me with any evidence.

[Amianthus]

Dude, go read Jim Marrs' Crossfire and come back when you have the slightest bit of a clue about the truth in regard to the JFK Murder.

Should I read this book by Jim Marrs as well?

Will I find out that aliens had a hand in the JFK assassination? Shall I also spend some time reading David Icke's stuff about the "Reptilian Agenda"?

[Brassmask]

Read that book if you like but I can't speak for that one.  I only know that Crossfire is a valued and respected piece of investigative work and contains numerous, detailed looks at the lies of the Warren Commission.

Are we not to consider facts in one book that concerns one event when someone writes another book about other events and ideas that are suspect?

Are you saying that David Ickes is incapable of writing a sound book of investigative journalism since he has written about other stuff that is crazy?

Would I be disqualified from writing a book on how to participate in online forums if I were to write a book that details the RBE?

[Amianthus]

Would I be disqualified from writing a book on how to participate in online forums if I were to write a book that details the RBE?

They are both conspiracy theories. When one writes about multiple conspiracy theories, and a bunch of them are nuts, then all are suspect.

Evidence should consider the source as well. You are more likely to believe an article published by MSNBC than the same article published by Fox News, are you not?

[Amianthus]

I only know that Crossfire is a valued and respected piece of investigative work and contains numerous, detailed looks at the lies of the Warren Commission.

Also, from a review of Crossfire:

[Jim Marrs] sees no Washington-based assassination plot, simply a willingness at the highest level (specifically Lyndon Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover) to relax protective vigilance enough to allow the deed to be done.

http://www.amazon.com/Crossfire-Plot-That-Killed-Kennedy/dp/0881846481

So, apparently even Jim Marrs does not agree with your hypothesis that Nixon and Ford were in cahoots to kill, then cover up the killing of JFK.

[Brassmask]

I only know that Crossfire is a valued and respected piece of investigative work and contains numerous, detailed looks at the lies of the Warren Commission.

Also, from a review of Crossfire:

[Jim Marrs] sees no Washington-based assassination plot, simply a willingness at the highest level (specifically Lyndon Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover) to relax protective vigilance enough to allow the deed to be done.

http://www.amazon.com/Crossfire-Plot-That-Killed-Kennedy/dp/0881846481

So, apparently even Jim Marrs does not agree with your hypothesis that Nixon and Ford were in cahoots to kill, then cover up the killing of JFK.

That's funny because he talks about Nixon in his book and examines the Warren Commission's findings thoroughly and finds that they lied.  True he doesn't say that Nixon's pardon was a result of Ford's and his involvement in the murder but that wasn't why I was telling you to read Crossfire.  My direction to that exercise was in the interest of dispelling this remarkably willful stupidity exemplified by this statement:  I have seen no evidence that the report contains lies.

I did not even remotely imply that Marrs' book would verify my theory in regard to Nixon and Ford's shenanigans as fellow assassination conspirators.  I'm sorry you have either problems with reading comprehension or feel the only way to have any discourse is by changing the subject from whether or not the Warren Commission contains lies or not to whether or not Jim Marrs thinks that Ford had to pardon Nixon because he knew Nixon had the drop on him.

What's even more ludicrous is by changing the subject that way, you have actually set it up to appear that if Marrs doesn't believe that, it somehow makes my beliefs "less than" but then you go on to stupidly cut Marrs off at the knees by implying that since he believes in aliens, he must be wrong in every way about the mountains of evidence he's compiled in his book on the JFK assassination.  Which is it?  Is Marrs a nutty who believes in any number of nutty theories and not worth reading let alone reading or is he the guy who by his valiant non-adherence (exhibited by his never mentioning it) to my theory on the Nixon pardon by Ford validates your belief that I am crazy?

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is much that still smells fishy of the assassinations of JFK, RFK, MLK and maybe even Malcolm X in the 1960's, but barring some major and credible deathbed confession or something of that ilk, I see no point in rehashing it. Less conspiratorial were the attempts on Ford, Wallace and Reagan.

[Brassmask]

Which is it?  Is Marrs a nutty who believes in any number of nutty theories and not worth reading let alone reading or is he the guy who by his valiant non-adherence (exhibited by his never mentioning it) to my theory on the Nixon pardon by Ford validates your belief that I am crazy?

Your silence says it all.

[Amianthus]

Your silence says it all.

That I'm bored with your lack of evidence? Yup, it sure says that.