NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
You hit the nail on the head Mr Schuler , but you have to admit..there WAS something very 'fishy' regarding 911 AND the Kennedy assassination.
Not much to add. but very nicely said.Sure, that is. But that doesn't mean there's irrefutable evidence of it. There has to be space left to the hypothesis that a disturbed guy with a rifle or a bunch of men in a dusty cave can change history for the worse.
That's also suspicious in some conspiracy theories. They include a defense mechanism that's a viral, vicious thing: once you talk of conspiracies, any lack of material evidence becomes circunstantial evidence of the conspiracy itself, and points to the fact that the conspiracy in question is actually even darker, even more successful. It tends to spiral down in circular logic, and circular logic is bad.
What does the absense of a 'deep throat' for 9/11, Roswell, Kennedy.... etc. mean ?
He offered nothing in the form of evidence only wild speculation than neither made sense or was logical. The guy spewed lot of crap, and to be honest as a guest, he was was one of the worst i have heard in the many years of listening to this show. His not informative, he is believer in everything as long as it can make him a few bucks.
The questions about the Kennedy assassination are accurate and long-standing. Even a House committee in the 1970s ruled it was a conspiracy, but did nothing further to find the perpetrators. The rest is a mixed bag. Typical conspiracy theory stuff, but a good way to learn what lots of people, in addition to Marrs, think about it.
As I said, it's a show where you enjoy the ride and not expect solid evidence in every case.
The questions about the Kennedy assassination are accurate and long-standing. Even a House committee in the 1970s ruled it was a conspiracy, but did nothing further to find the perpetrators. The rest is a mixed bag. Typical conspiracy theory stuff, but a good way to learn what lots of people, in addition to Marrs, think about it.
As I said, it's a show where you enjoy the ride and not expect solid evidence in every case.
He is bat crazy Gene, maybe i am the only one who taught so?
No, I think that too. I just said it more politely and in a more analytical fashion.
Marrs? No. He's mostly just a story teller. That you disagree with his conspiratorial bent doesn't make him insane or even close. Even if it's all about selling books, it's still not a bad way to make a living. It's not as if he's not entertaining at the very least.
The question is whether anyone cares anymore. How many people around today even remember Kennedy?
If and when we want to do a whole show on the subject, rather than a brief reference. The question is whether anyone cares anymore. How many people around today even remember Kennedy? Sad.
No, I think that too. I just said it more politely and in a more analytical fashion.