Book

[Jerry Freeman]

My first thought is: would anyone be interested in reading such a book? But then again, I spent good money on the purchase of Stephen King’s “11/22/63” fictional book.

Stephen King is in the CIA you know.

[Charles Collins]

The fact there are no evidences seen to support the conclusion does not mean evidences don't exist, right?
Still, this is not a topic about evidences but about searching for an open-minded co-author who will recognize the potential of publishing such a book.

If your goal is to write a fictional story, then you can make up whatever suits your fantasy. If you want to “be right and shake up America,” then evidence might help.

[Patrick Jackson]

If your goal is to write a fictional story, then you can make up whatever suits your fantasy. If you want to “be right and shake up America,” then evidence might help.

The goal is to use as much as possible known facts and fill up the gaps with fiction. But not fiction like aliens, demons, vampires but plausible fiction.
Also, the goal is not to offer documented, solid evidence since I do not have access to them but to open a new direction of research which would lead to new evidence.

[Bill Chapman]

The goal is to use as much as possible known facts and fill up the gaps with fiction. But not fiction like aliens, demons, vampires but plausible fiction.
Also, the goal is not to offer documented, solid evidence since I do not have access to them but to open a new direction of research which would lead to new evidence.

The American Trap
Review: https://decadentdallas.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-american-trap.html

Interesting fiction

[Charles Collins]

The goal is to use as much as possible known facts and fill up the gaps with fiction. But not fiction like aliens, demons, vampires but plausible fiction.
Also, the goal is not to offer documented, solid evidence since I do not have access to them but to open a new direction of research which would lead to new evidence.

Here is one paragraph from Reclaiming History, page 976, that you might find interesting:

In his book The Paranoid Style in American Politics and Other Essays, Richard Hofstadter writes that "the typical procedure of the higher paranoid scholarship is to start with defensible assumptions." He goes on to say, in an observation tailor-made for the conspiracy theorists in the Kennedy case, that "the paranoid mentality is far more coherent than the real world, since it leaves no room for mistakes, failures or ambiguities... It believes it is up against an enemy who is as infallibly rational as he is totally evil, and it seeks to match his imputed total competence with its own, leaving nothing unexplained and comprehending all of reality in one overreaching , consistent theory." Hofstadter says the "qualities" of the paranoid style are "heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy," and a "heroic striving for 'evidence' to prove that the unbelievable is the only thing that can be believed."