Yeah, I’d say the Times bends over backwards to insist there was no conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination. I still don’t believe it was Oswald acting alone. If it was, why did they get Arlen Specter to lie about the magic bullet?
The Times lies to us about so many things “for our own good.”
If there really is a thousand or fifteen hundred year Templar conspiracy to rule the world… well, you gotta’ admire their stick-to-it-iveness.
If you changed the names of the people involved, put it in some anonymous central-european country: charismatic leader assassinated when touring in hostile city, “assassin” gunned down in police custody soon after, DAMN RIGHT it would be obvious that there was a conspiracy.
The “magic bullet” wasn’t all that magical. But those who created a cottage industry and made a fortune by pushing the “magic bullet” theory sure are magical. Ten Bears, the Templars (Holy Blood, Holy Grail) are interesting, but the real story here are the Cathars who invented them.
Indeed, Im, indeed, but more people have been to Templar history than Cather.
I am especially grateful to the Times for sitting on the warrantless eavesdropping by the Bush administration story until after the 2004 election. Look how much good that decision did for us.
I haven’t believed anything reported or commented on in the Times for more than 20 years. I haven’t bothered reading it at all for the past 10.
Why would the NYT even care to rebut any JFK conspiracies at this late date, unless it had strong connections to people/entities who were in on the job?