Confessions of a Terrorist

Time | 8/31/03 | Gerald Posner

[Keith]

Posner's work on JFK and MLK shows that he is a shill for US Intel apologists. I am not saying he doesn't have some good info, but you should take into consideration the source...

[RichardW]

News flash! Lee Harvey Oswald murdered Kennedy.

[ConservativeMan55]

When I read the headline I thought it was about Jethro and the Beast.

[Lexington Green]

Interesting... but Posner's defense of the Warren Report proves that he is intellectually unchaste.

[philosofy123]

I don't know the guy, but I remember there used to be a Russian guy on TV called Posner? He used to be a comentator on CNN?

[Paladin2b]

Posner is a liberal with respect to domestic issues, but he is a solid hawk on national and homeland security. More importantly he is sharp as a tack, and one of the most thorough investigative reporters in the country. His training as a lawyer has served him well in that he can spend weeks focusing on a trail of data that would be too mind-numbingly boring to the average newspaper hack to be able to follow through on, until he reaches the pots of gold. I think Posner's definitely on to something, and it is very likely the same trail that Danny Pearl was following when he was killed.

[Paladin2b]

Posner didn't "defend" the Warren Commission...he pointed out numerous flaws in their analysis, not the least of which was the total refutation of which bullet did what. His argument was that the Commission reached the right conclusion (Oswald acted alone) for all the wrong reasons.

[Ichneumon]

I don't know the guy, but I remember there used to be a Russian guy on TV called Posner?

That was Vladimir Posner, a different guy.

[Ichneumon]

I don't know the guy, but I remember there used to be a Russian guy on TV called Posner?

That was Vladimir Posner, a different guy.

[Ichneumon]

Posner's work on JFK and MLK shows that he is a shill for US Intel apologists.

I haven't read his work on MLK, but I've read his book on the JFK assassination, and unless one is a conspiracy nut who feels the need to demonize anyone who pokes holes in favorite conspiracy theories, it's hard to escape the conclusion that in fact Posner is one of the most painstakingly thorough, intellectually honest investigators alive. He's frank about conflicting evidence, things which can't be known, gaps in various theories (including his own), and opposing claims or explanations. He doesn't overstate his case or jump to conclusions. In fact, for the most part he simply spends years gathering massive amounts of evidence (often unearthing long-lost reports or interviews, or finding still-living witnesses to re-interview), then organizing it and presenting it in a coherent manner, letting the reader draw their own conclusions. And thanks to his incredibly thorough job in "Case Closed" (his book on the JFK assassination), his title is entirely justified. I have, quite literally, never seen such an immensely well-researched, comprehensive, convincing book on a historical dispute.

I am not saying he doesn't have some good info, but you should take into consideration the source...

I shall, after having determined for myself that this source is extremely credible, fairminded, and meticulous.

[FlatLandBeer]

What proff do you other than he holds an opinon on the JFK murder different that yours?

[Ichneumon]

but Posner's defense of the Warren Report proves that he is intellectually unchaste.

Excuse me? He defended the Warrent Report against several unjust criticisms by providing massive amounts of evidence that it was, on the whole, correct. And he openly pointed out the things that the Warren Report had gotten wrong (most notably, when the three shots were fired and which ones went where).

In my view, that makes him intellectually honest.

[Uncle Miltie]

when Zubaydah was confronted by the false Saudis, writes Posner, "his reaction was not fear, but utter relief." Happy to see them, he reeled off telephone numbers for a senior member of the royal family who would, said Zubaydah, "tell you what to do." The man at the other end would be Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz

Al Qaeda is a Saudi construct. Leadership, personnel, funding, cover, schooling, ideology, etc. All are Saudi.

If SA had a covert military arm to propagate Wahabbism, it would be indistinguishable from Al Queda.

[Lexington Green]

"His argument was that the Commission reached the right conclusion (Oswald acted alone) for all the wrong reasons."


... like I said - This persuades me that he is intellectually dishonest. IMHO, folks who believe that Oswald acted alone are pitifully naive and/or willfully uninformed.

[RichardW]

"This persuades me that he is intellectually dishonest. IMHO, folks who believe that Oswald acted alone are pitifully naive and/or willfully uninformed."

Count me in as one of those people. I believe that in fact Oswald acted alone. He had the motive, means, and opportunity. 40 years have passed and not a single reliable piece of evidence points to a conspiracy. Oswald did it. It's over. It's done. Let's forget about it.

[norraad]

Oh, come, come now, where's the fun in that?

[zchip]

40 years have passed and not a single reliable piece of evidence points to a conspiracy. Oswald did it. It's over. It's done. Let's forget about it.

40 years have passed and not a single reliable piece of evidence exists, or ever existed, that leads to the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President Kennedy. Someone shot the President, Lee Harvey Oswald did not. It's over. It's done. Let's forget about it!

[Keith]

News Flash...Lee Harvey Oswald couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. Check his USMC riflery records. And the Warren Commission did everything they could to try to find any evidence that he ever practiced. They failed.

Former sniper and author Criag Roberts wrote a book about how this was a tough shot for an expert with good equipment if shooting from that window. This was a crappy rifle with a misaligned scope and a lousy shot gets a head and neck shot in 7 seconds? He says it could'nt have happened. Add in that the last shot was a frangible bullet, not the hard-jacketed ammo Oswald supposedly used and Posner is another card-stacking propagandist for the Intel community which had big time egg on it's face for Dallas.

His book is only well-researched if you don't know the facts he conveniently left out or misrepresented. Just imagine Posner as Al Franken and Michael Moore stitched together and you know what I mean...

I have researched this subject for 15 years and helped organize a ground-breaking conference in 1993 that included medical experts from around the USA including a panel organized by the editor of the AMA. Posner had an agenda before he even began. If you want a well-researched book on these issues, you could read John Newman's "Oswald and the CIA". Newman is a double PhD who teaches at the University of Maryland. Before that, he retired from the Army as a Major and was an analyst for the DIA. His first book "JFK and Vietnam" was highly praised by all sides in this case for it's scholarship.

Posner has been shilling for the Intel apologists for years. He made his initial fealty plain in his early books on children of the Nazi Party and his book on Josef Mengele. He needed intel connections to write those books and now is their public mouthpiece. Now don't get me wrong, I support the agencies of US intelligence and what they need to do to protect us. THere are some, however, whose screw ups in the past need to be protected by rewriting history. We don't need revisionist history. It would be better had we gotten it right the first time. And getting it right is admitting that JFK was caught in a crossfire as his secret service agents in the vehicle stated in their Warren Commission testimony instead of hiring hack writers to cover for these people 35 years later when their incompetence in rooting out this protection screw-up is finally exposed.

[Keith]

for my "proff" see my post above...