| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() Gutschein erhalten
Tauschen Sie jetzt Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy gegen einen Amazon-Gutschein in Höhe von EUR 1,50 ein - einlösbar für Tausende von Artikeln bei Amazon.de. Entdecken Sie mehr eintauschbare Bücher im Bücher Trade-In Shop. Bitte beachten Sie die Teilnahmebedingungen.
Jetzt für Amazon Student anmelden und um 20% erhöhten Eintauschwert sichern. |
Produktinformation
Möchten Sie die Produktinformationen aktualisieren oder Feedback zu den Produktabbildungen geben?
Ist der Verkauf dieses Produkts für Sie nicht akzeptabel? |
Tags(Was ist das?)Bei einem Tag handelt es sich um ein Schlagwort, das zum Produkt passt.
Tags erleichtern allen Kunden die Suche und die Sortierung ihrer Lieblingsprodukte. |
i'm not big on 'conspiracy' but i found this book to hold an amazingly wealth of information. if this subject matter interests you at all, why not pick up the book that was much of oliver stone's inspiration for the movie JFK.
the summation of this book is what the warren commission report *should* have been.
What he does best is ask questions, many of which we will have come across before, How did Oswald manage what no expert marksman has since? Why would Oswald have contracted Gonorrhoea in the line of duty? How is it that Oswald was able to speak fluent Russian, without the trace of an accent, if he taught himself from books? Why did more people originally feel that shots were fired from the grassy knoll than the depository? The list of such ponderables is too long to do justice to.
Do not expect to follow a simple theory however, if you were to believe everything that is written about, and every avenue explored, you would arrive at the conclusion that almost everyone killed Kennedy, and that there were more assassins there that day than bystanders! Marrs leaves nothing out, and that is part of its charm.
One criticism aired is that the Warren commission did not set out to find the actual assassin, rather to reassure everyone that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone , and that there was no conspiracy, they twisted evidence to suit their conclusion rather than objectively evaluating evidence. I am afraid this might just as well be a criticism of Crossfire. I am no expert in this area but I found it easy to find instances where Marrs had included evidence, which has been shown to be false. A case in point would be the letter allegedly written by Oswald to a Mr Hunt, Marrs captions this letter, reproduced within crossfire as a photograph, as having been proven to be in Oswald's handwriting. In truth experts agreed that whilst the handwriting seemed to be consistent with Oswalds he had seemingly spelt his own name wrong, and that the care taken to write this was suggestive of the fact that this was written to look like it was by Oswald! Marrs also paraphrases Ruby's request to be moved to Washington to make it appear as though he is afraid that he is in danger from other conspirators when in fact he actually asked to be moved to Washington to prove he was not part of any such conspiracy. Despite its obvious flaws, Marrs never questions the credibility of any pro conspiracy witness, but does more comprehensively question those who seemed to give evidence supporting the lone assassin theory. This remains an epic work which demands the reader form an opinion, and does much to put the case for the much maligned conspiracist. You may find that you begin to question whether you knew anything at all before you read this.
If I had to criticize his book it would be for the reasons below :
a. Lesen Sie weiter...
|
Das Forum zu diesem Produkt
Fragen stellen, Meinungen austauschen, Einblicke gewinnen Aktive Diskussionen in ähnlichen Foren
Kundendiskussionen durchsuchen
|
Ähnliche Foren
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|