posted on Feb, 19 2013 @ 08:50 AM
reply to post by lynxpilot
If you've ever looked closely at JFK assassination research, you can see how certain areas seem to be no-go areas and anything that's revealed
in those areas is quickly plagued with disinformation and sidetracking. The technology is different these days, but the end goal remains the same.
Look at how McAdams and Bugliosi go after JFK conspiracy theorists. McAdams uses a website and shows up in discussions on other websites. Bugliosi
used a book. The information they presented was just as easy to debunk as that of the 'conspiracy theorists'. It makes me wonder if they are paid to
distract, distort, and keep any investigation from touching some sensitive areas where the CIA doesn't want them to go.
I disagree with a fair bit of what McAdams and Bugliosi say, and trust me when I say that I am very familiar with those guys, but I also disagree with
what you say about them too. See, I'm very passionate about the JFK case, as are a lot of other conspiracy theorists. We want the truth and we want
all the facts to be revealed about the case not tomorrow, but today. But at the same time I genuinely believe that those guys are in the exact same
boat, they just happen to be on the opposite end of it to me. Do you see what I mean here? It doesn't make myself, or them, part of some kind of
disinformation campaign or anything like that, it's just that we're rather passionate about our chosen topics and we think we're right etc.
The exact same thing applies to all other topics discussed here on ATS, and elsewhere too.
Also, I have to ask.. you say certain ares of the JFK case are no-go areas, care to enlighten us on that? I've been researching this thing for years
now, the only "no-go" areas I've seen are the wild, wacky, out there, stupid, obviously impossible theories. Nothing that actually holds some water is
largely ignored or seen as "no-go". Period.
edit on 19-2-2013 by Rising Against because: (no reason given)