BTW– I was not able to carry that dang turkey beyond that stop light! Hubby put it on the gas tank in front of him and kept it balanced until we got home! 🙂

* Note: My high school sweetheart had just been discharged from the US Air Force. He had been stationed in Fukuoka Japan from 1961/2/3(?) for one year. While there he was frequently on “top secret duty” to Viet Nam. He was sent to Vietnam to repair airplanes that were being shot at by snipers. One repairman had been shot by a sniper while working on the wing of a plane. He brought the motorcycle when he came home in early 1963

There is no evidence that anyone other than Oswald shot at the car that day. None.

There have been many speculations designed to sell books and lecture tours. Many of the authors and lecturers lied. Not made mistakes; they lied. One of the first and most obvious was, “nearly everyone in Dealy Plaza heard more than three shots.”

No. Virtually everyone agreed on three. It doesn’t matter how many times Joe Rogan insists Woody Harrellson’s dad was a shooter.

I don’t know anything about the Parkland film. But the book deals with just about everything – including a chapter on the Oliver Stone film.

And the JFK movie was a pack of lies

Looks that way – the Bugliosi book link you gave for searching also convinced me that the actual “sitting positions of JFK and Governor Connaly” explained a lot.

Just bought the Parkland (film) blu-ray – if you’ve seen it, is it pretty close to the Bugliosi book? I have seen the movie a long time ago, but didn’t know about the book back then…

And there it is for all to see. Just below center screen is a woman eating vanilla pudding. Was she thinking “paid a lot for these tickets, gonna get my money’s worth?”

NO! Clearly as she appears to savor her dessert, she is signaling to fellow conspirators that the deed is done, that Bell Helicopter’s future profits are secured.

Agreed. That book was the definitive one but when Bugliosi’s came out I felt it was a great deal more comprehensive. Of course, Posner’s has the advantage of relative brevity.

the odds that sources and methods would be given up after 60 years seems unlikely we have seen how they hid the 28 pages, the January 6th tapes et al,

why people are cynical, specially because of an apparat that arose after 9-11 that seems more vast than that that operated in the 60s, and certainly less competent,

Even before Stone, the stories that were spun to say Bill Kurtis, about say the three corsican gunmen, which failed for a host of reasons, notably the fact at least one of the suspects, were in prison, and one was at sea,

As Trump – who has seen many of the secret files – said in his Rogan interview, it was to protect the privacy of living people who testified or whose relatives were involved as agents. “Involved” does NOT mean “implicated” or “credibly implicated”, although some people assume it does. It means informants or CIA agents involved in the investigation, and their methods. No smoking gun.

AI is helpful on what Bugliosi’s stance on the subject was:

Bugliosi believes the primary reason for keeping some files classified is to protect the identities of intelligence sources and the methods used to gather information, not necessarily to cover up a conspiracy.

He argues that the majority of the unreleased documents likely wouldn’t reveal any substantial new information regarding the assassination itself, as the evidence overwhelmingly points to Oswald as the lone shooter.

Bugliosi is a strong critic of conspiracy theories surrounding the JFK assassination, and believes that the continued secrecy around some documents fuels speculation even when the information itself is not particularly damning.

That’s certainly the case. Plus, I would add that even their release, and the non-revelations contained therein, would hardly silence the conspiracy believers. I don’t think anything would.