Max Holland Reviews "I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak"

[Jim Brunsman]

No sir, I prefer plastic wrap instead of tin foil hats, just because I try to be original. You don't see a problem with a goofball like Holland espousing scientifically impossible theories in exchange for compensation from the CIA. I do. End of that particular story.

I believe in conspiracies more than most people since a conspiracy is a crime committed by two individuals in concert with each other. Those who cling to the hopelessly moronic SBT love to wield  "conspiracy" as a word weapon so that it no longer conveys its real meaning. You sir, used it in such a fashion, even tossing in the hackneyed "tinfoil hat" designation. One last thing about the CIA. I'm sure the record is mixed and there are outstanding patriotic Americans serving us every day. But there is also a long and terrifying record of CIA "activities" all over the globe spanning decades. Are you denying the truth of that also?

[Thomas Graves]

No sir, I prefer plastic wrap instead of tin foil hats, just because I try to be original. You don't see a problem with a goofball like Holland espousing scientifically impossible theories in exchange for compensation from the CIA. I do. End of that particular story.

I believe in conspiracies more than most people since a conspiracy is a crime committed by two individuals in concert with each other. Those who cling to the hopelessly moronic SBT love to wield  "conspiracy" as a word weapon so that it no longer conveys its real meaning. You sir, used it in such a fashion, even tossing in the hackneyed "tinfoil hat" designation. One last thing about the CIA. I'm sure the record is mixed and there are outstanding patriotic Americans serving us every day. But there is also a long and terrifying record of CIA "activities" all over the globe spanning decades. Are you denying the truth of that also?

Jim,

The CIA is a  band of MOFO ANGELS compared to the CHEKA, NKVD, OGPU, MGB, KGB, FSB/SVR, GRU, etc.

D'oh

-- Tommy 

[Joe Elliott]

Historian Max Holland has reviewed my book, "I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak."

https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2018/12/litwin.html#more

"Now Fred Litwin, in his new book, I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak, traces his transformation from a young, energetic conspiracist to the vigorous debunker he is today. The result is a brisk, bracing, witty, and surprisingly comprehensive read, and one that ought to be considered by anyone in Generation Z who is intrigued by the assassination and thinking of joining the research community."

I have not yet read Mr. Litwin?s book so I cannot comment on it.
However, two researches who I do respect have commented on it: Quoting from Amazon.com?s page on Mr. Litwin?s book:

?As a young man growing up in the heyday of Kennedy assassination theorizing, Fred Litwin believed a conspiracy killed JFK. And then he grew, and he studied and he researched. The result is this volume, a thorough, cogent and meticulously argued case for a lone assassin. A seasoned conspiracy skeptic will learn new things here, and a conspiracy believer open to looking at the other side could do no better than this volume.?
-John McAdams, Associate Professor of Political Science at Marquette University and author of JFK Assassination Logic: How to Think about Claims of Conspiracy

?Mr. Litwin?s book is the best in many, many years in dealing with the truth about this horrendous piece of history?and exposing the fakirs, cons and opportunists who often call themselves ?historians.? A fine presentation!?
-Hugh Aynesworth, Author of November 22, 1963: Witness to History and JFK: Breaking the News

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Steve: The best book on Oswald's motivation is by Jean Davison, "Oswald's Game."  She believes that he read the article
in the New Orleans Times-Picayune in early september 1963 about Castro's warning to American leaders - that they
themselves would not be safe if attacks on Cuban leaders continues.  She believes that that infuriated Oswald, and
by chance, he had an opportunity to strike a blow for the Cuban revolution.

Fred: Yes, I have/read the book. She's an incredibly knowledgeable person on the finer details of the assassination. She also points to the very critical coverage of the Kennedy Administration's polices towards Cuba in the radical left press - the Guardian, the Daily Worker - that Oswald read. Several issues reprinted Castro's speeches denouncing the Kennedy Administration for the guerilla attacks on Cuban soil.

Max Holland mentions that threat from Castro as well in the piece I linked above. Oswald must have read it; it was in the New Orleans Times Picayune. It's interesting that Marina said she came home one day in early September late August (according to her account in the McMillan book) after walking their child and saw Oswald with his rifle dry-firing it. He told her (she said), "Fidel needs help." Three weeks later he's at the Cuban consulate in Mexico City trying to get into Cuba. I wonder if the threat by Fidel was related to Oswald's actions?

Still, the impetuous nature of his act makes me question his motives: he goes to retrieve his rifle on a Thursday, he gets a ride from a friend, he apparently didn't test/practice with the rifle over those two months that it was in the garage, he didn't seem to have any escape route. In contrast to the Walker attempt there wasn't much planning in this action. If he was driven by JFK's policies towards Cuba then why wait until the last second? It seemed more of an impulsive act than a rational one.

Good luck with the book.

[Richard Smith]

Fred: Yes, I have/read the book. She's an incredibly knowledgeable person on the finer details of the assassination. She also points to the very critical coverage of the Kennedy Administration's polices towards Cuba in the radical left press - the Guardian, the Daily Worker - that Oswald read. Several issues reprinted Castro's speeches denouncing the Kennedy Administration for the guerilla attacks on Cuban soil.

Max Holland mentions that threat from Castro as well in the piece I linked above. Oswald must have read it; it was in the New Orleans Times Picayune. It's interesting that Marina said she came home one day in early September after walking their child and saw Oswald with his rifle dry-firing it. He told her (she said), "Fidel needs help." Three weeks later he's at the Cuban consulate in Mexico City trying to get into Cuba. I wonder if the threat by Fidel was related to Oswald's actions?

Still, the impetuous nature of his act makes me question his motives: he goes to retrieve his rifle on a Thursday, he gets a ride from a friend, he apparently didn't test/practice with the rifle over those two months that it was in the garage, he didn't seem to have any escape route. In contrast to the Walker attempt there wasn't much planning in this action. If he was driven by JFK's policies towards Cuba then why wait until the last second? It seemed more of an impulsive act than a rational one.

Good luck with the book.

Because Oswald's opportunity to assassinate JFK arose strictly by chance, that tells us his motive had to be an impulsive one in that situation.  Most assassins tell us a great about themselves and their motivations by who they decide to target.  They generally have to seek out this person.  So the decision as to who they target is important in understanding their motivation.  Oswald was not in that situation.  The opportunity to assassinate JFK fell into his lap.  JFK came to him instead of the reverse.  Even Oswald probably could not articulate the why in a manner that makes any real sense because his act was not that of a rational person.  He likely would have contrived some noble societal purpose but when all is said in done what was going on is that Oswald couldn't stand to be ignored.  He wanted someone to take notice of him.  The extent to which there was any genuine political motivation behind his act is even more speculative.   Oswald needed a cause to promote himself.  He couldn't be a player in mainstream politics but being part of a fringe element allowed him to at least create a fantasy that he was someone important and smarter than the average citizen who he held in contempt.  So he cultivated this fantasy image of himself as some type of revolutionary figure.  It wasn't the cause but desire to be known that was his primary motivation.  The cause was a means to an end in my opinion.  He certainly could have convinced himself that he was acting for noble political reasons - not many people will acknowledge that they are evil - but that was intertwined with a desire to make his mark.

[Bill Chapman]

Because Oswald's opportunity to assassinate JFK arose strictly by chance, that tells us his motive had to be an impulsive one in that situation.  Most assassins tell us a great about themselves and their motivations by who they decide to target.  They generally have to seek out this person.  So the decision as to who they target is important in understanding their motivation.  Oswald was not in that situation.  The opportunity to assassinate JFK fell into his lap.  JFK came to him instead of the reverse.  Even Oswald probably could not articulate the why in a manner that makes any real sense because his act was not that of a rational person.  He likely would have contrived some noble societal purpose but when all is said in done what was going on is that Oswald couldn't stand to be ignored.  He wanted someone to take notice of him.  The extent to which there was any genuine political motivation behind his act is even more speculative.   Oswald needed a cause to promote himself.  He couldn't be a player in mainstream politics but being part of a fringe element allowed him to at least create a fantasy that he was someone important and smarter than the average citizen who he held in contempt.  So he cultivated this fantasy image of himself as some type of revolutionary figure.  It wasn't the cause but desire to be known that was his primary motivation.  The cause was a means to an end in my opinion.  He certainly could have convinced himself that he was acting for noble political reasons - not many people will acknowledge that they are evil - but that was intertwined with a desire to make his mark.

 

[Fred Litwin]

And, guess what Brian?  You couldn't provide ANY evidence for any of your statements at
FP4JFK.  All you can do it quote conspiracy books.

[Fred Litwin]

You're going to bear witness against me in a court?  What, are you delusional?

Again, I'll repeat the challenge from FP4JFK...if you have evidence that Shaw was Bertrand, then post it.