Am I the only one who goes through this?

[Jon Banks]

Over the last decade or so, my interest in the Kennedy assassination peaks every November.

I don't know why it is but each year as November 22 approaches I typically read new JFK related books and watch JFK related films. 

Does anyone else's interest peak around this time of year?

[Gerry Down]

Not me. It stays the same for me all year round.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Over the last decade or so, my interest in the Kennedy assassination peaks every November.

I don't know why it is but each year as November 22 approaches I typically read new JFK related books and watch JFK related films. 

Does anyone else's interest peak around this time of year?

I used to be that way as well - at least during the major commemorations like the 50th or 40th. I first joined up here (or the earlier site) on the 50th in 2013. But since then my interests come and go even on the anniversary. I'll post here and then disappear for weeks.

As to new books. Other than the Shenon book (which made much too much, I think, about Oswald and Mexico City) I don't seriously read many more books. I'll look at them, shrug, and move on. What's come out in the past 5-6 years of note?

Look, the enemy of conspiracies is time. Over time the conspiracy (if it involves many people) is exposed. People talk, documents are found, evidence uncovered. People are people; they want to talk, want to admit guilt, get caught.

But time is also the enemy of conspiracy theories too. Because over time more evidence is found that doesn't show a conspiracy, that doesn't provide the smoking gun. It's been almost 60 years since the assassination. Thousands of men and women have gone through Washington, leading or surrounding the leaders of the CIA and FBI and other agencies. Liberals and conservatives and moderates, Republicans and Democrats, Kennedy haters and lovers, conspiracy believers and lone assassin believers. To think that any large conspiracy has been suppressed over this time by all of these various people is simply, to me, not possible.

But others disagree. And here we are.

[Jon Banks]

I used to be that way as well - at least during the major commemorations like the 50th or 40th. I first joined up here (or the earlier site) on the 50th in 2013. But since then my interests come and go even on the anniversary. I'll post here and then disappear for weeks.

As to new books. Other than the Shenon book (which made much too much, I think, about Oswald and Mexico City) I don't seriously read many more books. I'll look at them, shrug, and move on. What's come out in the past 5-6 years of note?

Look, the enemy of conspiracies is time. Over time the conspiracy (if it involves many people) is exposed. People talk, documents are found, evidence uncovered. People are people; they want to talk, want to admit guilt, get caught.

But time is also the enemy of conspiracy theories too. Because over time more evidence is found that doesn't show a conspiracy, that doesn't provide the smoking gun. It's been almost 60 years since the assassination. Thousands of men and women have gone through Washington, leading or surrounding the leaders of the CIA and FBI and other agencies. Liberals and conservatives and moderates, Republicans and Democrats, Kennedy haters and lovers, conspiracy believers and lone assassin believers. To think that any large conspiracy has been suppressed over this time by all of these various people is simply, to me, not possible.

But others disagree. And here we are.

The problem with the JFK case is, people have talked or confessed so far as their knowledge of a conspiracy but it's not possible in every instance to know if they're lying or are full of crap. Yes, there are some obvious BS stories about people who claim to have been involved but there are also some where it's plausible that they're telling the truth but it can't be corroborated.

Also, time doesn’t resolve the inconsistencies and problems with the evidence in the JFK assassination (including the worst autopsy in American history). Declassified files since the ARRB have led to increased speculation, not closure.

But aside from those facts, the case is so complex and broad that I still learn something new every year that I didn't know about prior investigations or old evidence. 

[Bill Chapman]

I used to be that way as well - at least during the major commemorations like the 50th or 40th. I first joined up here (or the earlier site) on the 50th in 2013. But since then my interests come and go even on the anniversary. I'll post here and then disappear for weeks.

As to new books. Other than the Shenon book (which made much too much, I think, about Oswald and Mexico City) I don't seriously read many more books. I'll look at them, shrug, and move on. What's come out in the past 5-6 years of note?

Look, the enemy of conspiracies is time. Over time the conspiracy (if it involves many people) is exposed. People talk, documents are found, evidence uncovered. People are people; they want to talk, want to admit guilt, get caught.

But time is also the enemy of conspiracy theories too. Because over time more evidence is found that doesn't show a conspiracy, that doesn't provide the smoking gun. It's been almost 60 years since the assassination. Thousands of men and women have gone through Washington, leading or surrounding the leaders of the CIA and FBI and other agencies. Liberals and conservatives and moderates, Republicans and Democrats, Kennedy haters and lovers, conspiracy believers and lone assassin believers. To think that any large conspiracy has been suppressed over this time by all of these various people is simply, to me, not possible.

But others disagree. And here we are.

And here I go:

'want to admit guilt'
_I fully admit that Lee Harvey Oswald is guilty

'I feel much better now'--- HAL 9000, A Space Odyssey

[Rick Plant]

The problem with the JFK case is, people have talked or confessed so far as their knowledge of a conspiracy but it's not possible in every instance to know if they're lying or are full of crap. Yes, there are some obvious BS stories about people who claim to have been involved but there are also some where it's plausible that they're telling the truth but it can't be corroborated.

Also, time doesn’t resolve the inconsistencies and problems with the evidence in the JFK assassination (including the worst autopsy in American history). Declassified files since the ARRB have led to increased speculation, not closure.

But aside from those facts, the case is so complex and broad that I still learn something new every year that I didn't know about prior investigations or old evidence.

That's the problem with this case, since a lot of nonsense has been pushed by conspiracy theorists people tend to believe any new evidence is just another conspiracy theory when it very well could be factual. That's why some people back in the day put out ludicrous theories to muddy the waters so people will dismiss any new claims as a just crazy  conspiracy theory. 

[Jon Banks]

That's the problem with this case, since a lot of nonsense has been pushed by conspiracy theorists people tend to believe any new evidence is just another conspiracy theory when it very well could be factual. That's why some people back in the day put out ludicrous theories to muddy the waters so people will dismiss any new claims as a just crazy  conspiracy theory.

I agree. It's a huge challenge for those who don't believe the LN narrative.

The solution is to keep digging for corroboration if the evidence is credible.

[Rick Plant]

I agree. It's a huge challenge for those who don't believe the LN narrative.

The solution is to keep digging for corroboration if the evidence is credible.

Exactly! Any credible evidence needs to be accepted and not dismissed as just a conspiracy theory like some people always do.