DR. CHRIS A. MILLER SAID:
Being that it [Lamar Waldron's and Thom Hartmann's 2005 book "Ultimate Sacrifice"] comes entirely from declassified material and interviews with people who were in the Kennedy administration, as well as being free of most JFK iconography, it does an excellent job of putting the whole plot together.
I'm really amazed at how simple the whole thing was, why the coverup had to take place as it did, and why the fallout had to be so severe.
My hat's off to these dedicated researchers. I know what it feels like to sit in front of a microfilm machine from before dawn till after dark in pursuit of something, to request documents without knowing what you are requesting. With this the story is told.
Dr. Chris Miller
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
"Ultimate Sacrifice" is pure subjectivism when it comes to attempting to "solve" the JFK assassination.
To believe in ANY conspiracy theory (above and beyond a very small one that involves Oswald and maybe one other "helper"), you have to completely ignore or distort all of the physical evidence in the case, which all conspiracy theorists invariably do.
And even a "smaller" conspiracy still won't fly, because any helper(s) Oswald might have had on Nov. 22 DIDN'T HELP HIM AT ALL ON GAME DAY.
It's too bad that Waldron and Hartmann have been able to suck you in to their fantasy world.
Here's the actual truth, if you're interested:
http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com
http://The-JFK-Assassination.blogspot.com
It's also kind of interesting to note that even many conspiracy theorists treat Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann as kooks, with James DiEugenio (certainly a bona fide conspiracy kook in his own right) being one such CT. DiEugenio has used the words "God awful" to describe the contents of both of Waldron's JFK books ("Ultimate Sacrifice" and "Legacy Of Secrecy"). And another conspiracy theorist, Len Osanic, has gone one step further, calling Waldron's 2005 book "Ultimate Shit".
CHRIS MILLER SAID:
Dang! And I thought it was evidence, forensics.
I remain in awe at the elevation of fallacy in dogged pursuit of that official story.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Since the "official story" is the "story" that contains 100% of the physical evidence--and all of that evidence points toward every kook's favorite Patsy for all 11/22/63 murders in Dallas--why wouldn't any sane person go with "officialdom"?
It's not a difficult choice at all.
Conspiracy mongers, on the other hand, prefer fantasy -- like Waldron's.
To each his own.
David Von Pein
February 28-March 2, 2010
