It's a safe bet, imho.Can I quote you on this? (oooohhh, I just did!)
the 11/22/63 book is based on false data.
- Thread starter lee shepherd
- Start date
-
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
I will PM Frank my address just in case. But I agree hit and run
See how easy it can be to get members' addresses?
Erk, you forget you were my contact on the old boards. My address has changed.
Oh but thank god the time travel part is real...and that hammer ain't, and like type stuff
Love it!!! but.............. the hammer aint real????? my world is shattered!!!! Welcome to SKMB ... have you read any other SK books or just this one? I personally loved the book.. regardless as to the actual events.
This site often makes me laugh, but they're smart a lot of the time. Here's their take on the JFK single shooter conspiracy theory:
5 Conspiracy Theories That Are Shockingly Easy to Debunk | Cracked.com
5 Conspiracy Theories That Are Shockingly Easy to Debunk | Cracked.com
I personally love "11/22/63", and realize that it is a story based on a historical event that we may never have all the facts about.
I didn't read it for a history lesson. I read it for entertainment and I more than got my money's worth in that regard.
I didn't read it for a history lesson. I read it for entertainment and I more than got my money's worth in that regard.
Skimom...always the voice of reason. Your kids must feel safe growing up with you as their mom.
I'm gonna be RICH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (only because I'm going to track down the OP and offer him $100 to post something- anything)
The ironic part of your post? I actually agree with you as far as I don't think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. However, it's a valuable life lesson to realize that you don't have to agree with someone's point of view in order to still respect it. I don't remember seeing 11/22/63 in the history section of my local bookstore. Following your logic, would Mr. King's portrayal of vampires as villains in Salem's Lot be offensive to fans of Twilight? Just a thought...lol
I hope so! I'm a pragmatist and try not to let stuff get to me. And I like to use my big ol' 747 brain for more than a hatrack--lol!
Per Wikipedia...
Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy is a book by attorney Vincent Bugliosi(Norton, 2007; 1,632 pages; ISBN 0-393-04525-0) that analyzes the events surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy, focusing on the lives of Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby. The book is drawn from many sources, including the Warren Report. Bugliosi's 1,632-page, 1,535,791-word book (with a CD-ROM containing an additional 1,000+ pages of footnotes) analyzes all aspects of the assassination and the rise of the conspiracy theories about Kennedy's assassination in the years subsequent to the event. Bugliosi argues that the Warren Commission is right about Lee Oswald acting alone in shooting Kennedy. The book won the 2008 Edgar Award for the Best Fact Crime category.[1]
Reclaiming History - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy is a book by attorney Vincent Bugliosi(Norton, 2007; 1,632 pages; ISBN 0-393-04525-0) that analyzes the events surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy, focusing on the lives of Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby. The book is drawn from many sources, including the Warren Report. Bugliosi's 1,632-page, 1,535,791-word book (with a CD-ROM containing an additional 1,000+ pages of footnotes) analyzes all aspects of the assassination and the rise of the conspiracy theories about Kennedy's assassination in the years subsequent to the event. Bugliosi argues that the Warren Commission is right about Lee Oswald acting alone in shooting Kennedy. The book won the 2008 Edgar Award for the Best Fact Crime category.[1]
Reclaiming History - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
well.. I'm still upset about the hammer!
...it was one of my twisted Google finds...
Would it help if I mentioned I've had about a dozen constussions, uh, 'consticussions, um, concussions, yeah yeah, that's it, those
?
