2022-10-03, 22:53
  #9205
Medlem
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Dumheter. Här är din citerade text igen:
Jag länkade till en artikel, en lång artikel, ur vilken jag valde ut några rader.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934694/

Det finns fler rader.
Meningen innan lyder:

Finally, it was shown that a second delayed backward acceleration (delayed relative to the impulse and recoil, but still rapid by everyday experience) is detectable in data published previously by [9], and this acceleration occurs on the President's entire upper body (not just his head).
Artikel författaren har gjort egna observationer och ställt upp beräkningsmodeller för hur Kennedys huvud rör sig.

I den mening som jag citerade uppger författaren att resultatet av hans undersökning får stöd i en tidigare utförd undersökning (HSCA:s).

*fotnoten [9]:
9. Thompson J. Random House; New York, NY: 1967. Six Seconds in Dallas: A Micro-Study of the Kennedy Assassination, Bernard Geis Associates.

Är det godkänd och relevant litteratur?
Citera
2022-10-18, 10:55
  #9206
Medlem
Från Rockefeller Commission Report, publicerad i juni 1975, hämtar jag följande:

The Panel members separately submitted their respective conclusions.
...
They were also unanimous in finding that the violent backward and leftward motion of the President’s upper body following the head shot was not caused by the impact of a bullet coming from the front or right front.
JFK:s kraftfulla rörelse bakåt och åt vänster, efter att ha träffats i huvudet av en kula, orsakades inte av att sagda kula avlossades från en plats framifrån eller framifrån till höger om presidenten.

Drs. Spitz, Lindenberg and Hodges reported that such a motion would be caused by a violent straightening and stiffening of the entire body as a result of a seizure-like neuromuscular reaction to major damage inflicted to nerve centers in the brain.
En sådan rörelse orsakas av den neuromuskulära responsen på skadan i hjärnan.

Länk till rapporten;
https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/contents/church/contents_church_reports_rockcomm.htm
Citera
2022-11-03, 21:18
  #9207
Avstängd
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Här är meningen i sin helhet:
”Istället hade kanske eftervärldens syn på Kennedy präglats av att han satte igång Vietnamkriget, ljög om sina hälsoproblem och var en man utan sexuella spärrar.”

Utdrag från: Bengt Liljegren. ”John F. Kennedy”. Apple Books.
Han hävdar således i samma andetag att Kennedy ljög om sin "Addison disease", att Kennedy hade ett vidlyftigt sexliv och att han, "satte igång Vietnamkriget".

Om nu Liljegren menar att JFK kan ha satt igång Vietnamkriget om han inte hade mördats, så skulle han formulerat sig på ett annat sätt.

Men även om han nu menar det så finns det ingenting som tyder på att JFK under några som helst omständigheter skulle ha intervenerat militärt i Vietnam = satt igång Vietnamkriget om han inte hade mördats. Att allt istället tyder på motsatsen.

Jag garderade dessutom för båda tolkningarna av vad Liljegren skriver:
JFK satte ingalunda igång Vietnamkriget när han levde, ej heller hade han "satt igång" det om han inte hade mördats, helt oavsett vilken del av den pågående konflikten Liljegren här avser.
Det kommer mer om Liljegren och Vietnam framöver, men stannar här för nu.

Så här skriver Liljegren lite senare i samma kapitel:
”Inget i det historiska källmaterialet talar för att Kennedy hade för avsikt att trappa ner USA:s engagemang eller dra sig ur Vietnam.”

---Utdrag från: Bengt Liljegren. ”John F. Kennedy”. Apple Books.
Dvs, Liljegren menar att om JFK inte hade mördats så hade han gjort precis som sin efterträdare LBJ, "startat Vietnamkriget" = intervenerat militärt i den pågående konflikten i Sydvietnam.

Liljegren listar därpå en rad argument och påståenden som stöd till den slutsatsen.

Mer om det framöver.
Citera
2022-11-05, 13:05
  #9208
Avstängd
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Så här skriver Liljegren lite senare i samma kapitel:
”Inget i det historiska källmaterialet talar för att Kennedy hade för avsikt att trappa ner USA:s engagemang eller dra sig ur Vietnam.”

---Utdrag från: Bengt Liljegren. ”John F. Kennedy”. Apple Books.
Dvs, Liljegren menar att om JFK inte hade mördats så hade han gjort precis som sin efterträdare LBJ, "startat Vietnamkriget" = intervenerat militärt i den pågående konflikten i Sydvietnam.

Liljegren listar därpå en rad argument och påståenden som stöd till den slutsatsen.

Mer om det framöver.

Vi börjar med rena faktafel:
”I manuskriptet till det tal som Kennedy hade tänkt att hålla på Dallas Trade Mart direkt efter bilkortegen den 22 november 1963 deklarerade han att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”

---Utdrag från: Bengt Liljegren. ”John F. Kennedy”. Apple Books.
Nej, någon sådan deklaration finns inte det talet.

Titta själva:
REMARKS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY AT THE TRADE MART IN DALLAS, TX, NOVEMBER 22, 1963 [UNDELIVERED]

View related documents. Folder

President John F. Kennedy
November 22, 1963

I am honored to have this invitation to address the annual meeting of the Dallas Citizens Council, joined by the members of the Dallas Assembly – and pleased to have this opportunity to salute the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest.

It is fitting that these two symbols of Dallas progress are united in the sponsorship of this meeting. For they represent the best qualities, I am told, of leadership and learning in this city – and leadership and learning are indispensable to each other. The advancement of learning depends on community leadership for financial and political support and the products of that learning, in turn, are essential to the leadership's hopes for continued progress and prosperity. It is not a coincidence that those communities possessing the best in research and graduate facilities – from MIT to Cal Tech – tend to attract the new and growing industries. I congratulate those of you here in Dallas who have recognized these basic facts through the creation of the unique and forward-looking Graduate Research Center.

This link between leadership and learning is not only essential at the community level. It is even more indispensable in world affairs. Ignorance and misinformation can handicap the progress of a city or a company, but they can, if allowed to prevail in foreign policy, handicap this country's security. In a world of complex and continuing problems, in a world full of frustrations and irritations, America's leadership must be guided by the lights of learning and reason or else those who confuse rhetoric with reality and the plausible with the possible will gain the popular ascendancy with their seemingly swift and simple solutions to every world problem.

There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable.

But today other voices are heard in the land – voices preaching doctrines wholly unrelated to reality, wholly unsuited to the sixties, doctrines which apparently assume that words will suffice without weapons, that vituperation is as good as victory and that peace is a sign of weakness. At a time when the national debt is steadily being reduced in terms of its burden on our economy, they see that debt as the greatest single threat to our security. At a time when we are steadily reducing the number of Federal employees serving every thousand citizens, they fear those supposed hordes of civil servants far more than the actual hordes of opposing armies.

We cannot expect that everyone, to use the phrase of a decade ago, will "talk sense to the American people." But we can hope that fewer people will listen to nonsense. And the notion that this Nation is headed for defeat through deficit, or that strength is but a matter of slogans, is nothing but just plain nonsense.

I want to discuss with you today the status of our strength and our security because this question clearly calls for the most responsible qualities of leadership and the most enlightened products of scholarship. For this Nation's strength and security are not easily or cheaply obtained, nor are they quickly and simply explained. There are many kinds of strength and no one kind will suffice. Overwhelming nuclear strength cannot stop a guerrilla war. Formal pacts of alliance cannot stop internal subversion. Displays of material wealth cannot stop the disillusionment of diplomats subjected to discrimination.

Above all, words alone are not enough. The United States is a peaceful nation. And where our strength and determination are clear, our words need merely to convey conviction, not belligerence. If we are strong, our strength will speak for itself. If we are weak, words will be of no help.

I realize that this Nation often tends to identify turning-points in world affairs with the major addresses which preceded them. But it was not the Monroe Doctrine that kept all Europe away from this hemisphere – it was the strength of the British fleet and the width of the Atlantic Ocean. It was not General Marshall's speech at Harvard which kept communism out of Western Europe – it was the strength and stability made possible by our military and economic assistance.

In this administration also it has been necessary at times to issue specific warnings – warnings that we could not stand by and watch the Communists conquer Laos by force, or intervene in the Congo, or swallow West Berlin, or maintain offensive missiles on Cuba. But while our goals were at least temporarily obtained in these and other instances, our successful defense of freedom was due not to the words we used, but to the strength we stood ready to use on behalf of the principles we stand ready to defend.

This strength is composed of many different elements, ranging from the most massive deterrents to the most subtle influences. And all types of strength are needed – no one kind could do the job alone. Let us take a moment, therefore, to review this Nation's progress in each major area of strength.

I.

First, as Secretary McNamara made clear in his address last Monday, the strategic nuclear power of the United States has been so greatly modernized and expanded in the last 1,000 days, by the rapid production and deployment of the most modern missile systems, that any and all potential aggressors are clearly confronted now with the impossibility of strategic victory--and the certainty of total destruction – if by reckless attack they should ever force upon us the necessity of a strategic reply.

In less than 3 years, we have increased by 50 percent the number of Polaris submarines scheduled to be in force by the next fiscal year, increased by more than 70 percent our total Polaris purchase program, increased by more than 75 percent our Minuteman purchase program, increased by 50 percent the portion of our strategic bombers on 15-minute alert, and increased by 100 percent the total number of nuclear weapons available in our strategic alert forces. Our security is further enhanced by the steps we have taken regarding these weapons to improve the speed and certainty of their response, their readiness at all times to respond, their ability to survive an attack, and their ability to be carefully controlled and directed through secure command operations.
Forts.
Citera
2022-11-05, 13:06
  #9209
Avstängd
Forts.
II.

But the lessons of the last decade have taught us that freedom cannot be defended by strategic nuclear power alone. We have, therefore, in the last 3 years accelerated the development and deployment of tactical nuclear weapons, and increased by 60 percent the tactical nuclear forces deployed in Western Europe.

Nor can Europe or any other continent rely on nuclear forces alone, whether they are strategic or tactical. We have radically improved the readiness of our conventional forces – increased by 45 percent the number of combat ready Army divisions, increased by 100 percent the procurement of modern Army weapons and equipment, increased by 100 percent our ship construction, conversion, and modernization program, increased by 100 percent our procurement of tactical aircraft, increased by 30 percent the number of tactical air squadrons, and increased the strength of the Marines. As last month's "Operation Big Lift" – which originated here in Texas – showed so clearly, this Nation is prepared as never before to move substantial numbers of men in surprisingly little time to advanced positions anywhere in the world. We have increased by 175 percent the procurement of airlift aircraft, and we have already achieved a 75 percent increase in our existing strategic airlift capability. Finally, moving beyond the traditional roles of our military forces, we have achieved an increase of nearly 600 percent in our special forces – those forces that are prepared to work with our allies and friends against the guerrillas, saboteurs, insurgents and assassins who threaten freedom in a less direct but equally dangerous manner.

III.

But American military might should not and need not stand alone against the ambitions of international communism. Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others, and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the Communist world to maintain their independence of choice. Our assistance to these nations can be painful, risky and costly, as is true in Southeast Asia today. But we dare not weary of the task. For our assistance makes possible the stationing of 3-5 million allied troops along the Communist frontier at one-tenth the cost of maintaining a comparable number of American soldiers. A successful Communist breakthrough in these areas, necessitating direct United States intervention, would cost us several times as much as our entire foreign aid program, and might cost us heavily in American lives as well.

About 70 percent of our military assistance goes to nine key countries located on or near the borders of the Communist bloc – nine countries confronted directly or indirectly with the threat of Communist aggression – Viet-Nam, Free China, Korea, India, Pakistan, Thailand, Greece, Turkey, and Iran. No one of these countries possesses on its own the resources to maintain the forces which our own Chiefs of Staff think needed in the common interest. Reducing our efforts to train, equip, and assist their armies can only encourage Communist penetration and require in time the increased overseas deployment of American combat forces. And reducing the economic help needed to bolster these nations that undertake to help defend freedom can have the same disastrous result. In short, the $50 billion we spend each year on our own defense could well be ineffective without the $4 billion required for military and economic assistance.

Our foreign aid program is not growing in size, it is, on the contrary, smaller now than in previous years. It has had its weaknesses, but we have undertaken to correct them. And the proper way of treating weaknesses is to replace them with strength, not to increase those weaknesses by emasculating essential programs. Dollar for dollar, in or out of government, there is no better form of investment in our national security than our much-abused foreign aid program. We cannot afford to lose it. We can afford to maintain it. We can surely afford, for example, to do as much for our 19 needy neighbors of Latin America as the Communist bloc is sending to the island of Cuba alone.

IV.

I have spoken of strength largely in terms of the deterrence and resistance of aggression and attack. But, in today's world, freedom can be lost without a shot being fired, by ballots as well as bullets. The success of our leadership is dependent upon respect for our mission in the world as well as our missiles – on a clearer recognition of the virtues of freedom as well as the evils of tyranny.

That is why our Information Agency has doubled the shortwave broadcasting power of the Voice of America and increased the number of broadcasting hours by 30 percent, increased Spanish language broadcasting to Cuba and Latin America from 1 to 9 hours a day, increased seven-fold to more than 3-5 million copies the number of American books being translated and published for Latin American readers, and taken a host of other steps to carry our message of truth and freedom to all the far corners of the earth.

And that is also why we have regained the initiative in the exploration of outer space, making an annual effort greater than the combined total of all space activities undertaken during the fifties, launching more than 130 vehicles into earth orbit, putting into actual operation valuable weather and communications satellites, and making it clear to all that the United States of America has no intention of finishing second in space.

This effort is expensive – but it pays its own way, for freedom and for America. For there is no longer any fear in the free world that a Communist lead in space will become a permanent assertion of supremacy and the basis of military superiority. There is no longer any doubt about the strength and skill of American science, American industry, American education, and the American free enterprise system. In short, our national space effort represents a great gain in, and a great resource of, our national strength – and both Texas and Texans are contributing greatly to this strength.

Finally, it should be clear by now that a nation can be no stronger abroad than she is at home. Only an America which practices what it preaches about equal rights and social justice will be respected by those whose choice affects our future. Only an America which has fully educated its citizens is fully capable of tackling the complex problems and perceiving the hidden dangers of the world in which we live. And only an America which is growing and prospering economically can sustain the worldwide defenses of freedom, while demonstrating to all concerned the opportunities of our system and society.

It is clear, therefore, that we are strengthening our security as well as our economy by our recent record increases in national income and output – by surging ahead of most of Western Europe in the rate of business expansion and the margin of corporate profits, by maintaining a more stable level of prices than almost any of our overseas competitors, and by cutting personal and corporate income taxes by some $11 billion, as I have proposed, to assure this Nation of the longest and strongest expansion in our peacetime economic history.

This Nation's total output – which 3 years ago was at the $500 billion mark – will soon pass $600 billion, for a record rise of over $100 billion in 3 years. For the first time in history we have 70 million men and women at work. For the first time in history average factory earnings have exceeded $100 a week. For the first time in history corporation profits after taxes – which have risen 43 percent in less than 3 years – have an annual level of $27.4 billion.

My friends and fellow citizens: I cite these facts and figures to make it clear that America today is stronger than ever before. Our adversaries have not abandoned their ambitions, our dangers have not diminished, our vigilance cannot be relaxed. But now we have the military, the scientific, and the economic strength to do whatever must be done for the preservation and promotion of freedom.

That strength will never be used in pursuit of aggressive ambitions – it will always be used in pursuit of peace. It will never be used to promote provocations – it will always be used to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes.

We in this country, in this generation, are – by destiny rather than choice – the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of "peace on earth, good will toward men." That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago: "except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain."

https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/dallas-tx-trade-mart-undelivered-19631122
Säg gärna till om du/ni hittar något i texten som ens med den vildaste fantasi kan låna sig till Liljegrens påstående här ovan.
Citera
2022-11-08, 11:31
  #9210
Medlem
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Vi börjar med rena faktafel:
”I manuskriptet till det tal som Kennedy hade tänkt att hålla på Dallas Trade Mart direkt efter bilkortegen den 22 november 1963 deklarerade han att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”

---Utdrag från: Bengt Liljegren. ”John F. Kennedy”. Apple Books.
På vilket sätt har det eventuella faktafelet i Bengt Liljegrens bok något med mordet på JFK att göra?
Citera
2022-11-08, 14:33
  #9211
Avstängd
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av PekkariP1
På vilket sätt har det eventuella faktafelet i Bengt Liljegrens bok något med mordet på JFK att göra?

Om nu JFK hade för avsikt att i Dallas deklarera "att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”, så försvagas ju argumentet för att han aldrig skulle ha intervenerat militärt i Vietnam = att det därmed med avseende på Vietnam inte fanns något motiv till att mörda honom.

Nej, JFK yttrade aldrig (vad som är känt) att han under några som helst omständigheter skulle intervenera militärt i Vietnam.

Istället så insisterade han genomgående benhårt på att USA endast kunde assistera Sydvietnam med pengar, vapen och rådgivare/utbildare. Att det till syvende och sist endast var Sydvietnameserna själva som kunde vinna eller förlora konflikten med Vietcong/Vietminh.

Trots återkommande nästan dagliga påtryckningar från hökarna i den egna administrationen, Kina-lobbyn, stora delar av MSM och MIC.
Citera
2022-11-10, 09:28
  #9212
Medlem
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Om nu JFK hade för avsikt att i Dallas deklarera "att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”, så försvagas ju argumentet för att han aldrig skulle ha intervenerat militärt i Vietnam = att det därmed med avseende på Vietnam inte fanns något motiv till att mörda honom.

Nej, JFK yttrade aldrig (vad som är känt) att han under några som helst omständigheter skulle intervenera militärt i Vietnam.

Det är ett historiskt faktum att JFK intervenerade militärt i Syd-Vietnam.

Så här skriver utrikesminister Dean Rusk:
(https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v03
/d66)

The prestige of the U.S. in Asia can be seriously damaged if it becomes widely known that American aviators are killing Vietnamese peasants.
Amerikanska flygare dödar Vietnamesiska bönder, enligt Dean Rusk.

We may be able to explain that defoliants are weed killers, but we cannot expect to explain why American pilots are using bombs, napalm, and machine guns against Vietnamese peasants in a war where our role has been publicly defined as limited to training, equipping, and supplying the Vietnamese in the prosecution of their own defensive war.
Dean Rusk är orolig för att den Amerikanska militärens roll och insatser ska bli vida känd. Den är alltså inte begränsad till träning och utrustning av Vietnameserna.

Under Kennedys regim sjösätts allt det som vi förknippar med kriget, avlövning, napalm, folkomflyttningar, dränering av träsk, förgiftning av jordbruksmark etc.
Citera
2022-11-10, 14:18
  #9213
Avstängd
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av PekkariP1
Det är ett historiskt faktum att JFK intervenerade militärt i Syd-Vietnam.

Så här skriver utrikesminister Dean Rusk:
(https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v03
/d66)

The prestige of the U.S. in Asia can be seriously damaged if it becomes widely known that American aviators are killing Vietnamese peasants.
Amerikanska flygare dödar Vietnamesiska bönder, enligt Dean Rusk.

We may be able to explain that defoliants are weed killers, but we cannot expect to explain why American pilots are using bombs, napalm, and machine guns against Vietnamese peasants in a war where our role has been publicly defined as limited to training, equipping, and supplying the Vietnamese in the prosecution of their own defensive war.
Dean Rusk är orolig för att den Amerikanska militärens roll och insatser ska bli vida känd. Den är alltså inte begränsad till träning och utrustning av Vietnameserna.

Under Kennedys regim sjösätts allt det som vi förknippar med kriget, avlövning, napalm, folkomflyttningar, dränering av träsk, förgiftning av jordbruksmark etc.

Nu byter du ämne. Frågan är om Liljegren har rätt när han hävdar att det tal som JFK skulle hålla i Dallas Trade Mart samma dag som han mördades innehöll en deklaration om "att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”

Svaret är som sagt ett entydigt, nej. Någon sådan deklaration finns INTE i det tal/draft som Liljegren refererar till.
Citera
2022-11-10, 14:51
  #9214
Medlem
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Nu byter du ämne. Frågan är om Liljegren har rätt när han hävdar att det tal som JFK skulle hålla i Dallas Trade Mart samma dag som han mördades innehöll en deklaration om "att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”

Svaret är som sagt ett entydigt, nej. Någon sådan deklaration finns INTE i det tal/draft som Liljegren refererar till.

Borde inte eventuella faktafel i Bengts bok diskuteras i litteratur forumet? (https://www.flashback.org/f41.)

Din frågeställning ("Om nu JFK hade för avsikt att i Dallas deklarera "att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”, så försvagas ju argumentet för att han aldrig skulle ha intervenerat militärt i Vietnam = att det därmed med avseende på Vietnam inte fanns något motiv till att mörda honom.") känns väldigt krystad och konstruerad. Jag passar den gärna.
Citera
2022-11-10, 15:22
  #9215
Avstängd
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av PekkariP1
Borde inte eventuella faktafel i Bengts bok diskuteras i litteratur forumet? (https://www.flashback.org/f41.)
Nej. Liljegrens bok är inte deklarerad som skönlitteratur. Den ska utgöra faktagranskad facklitteratur i genren historia/biografier och är skriven av en historiker, utgiven av ett förlag specialiserat på ämnet Historia.

Citat:
Din frågeställning ("Om nu JFK hade för avsikt att i Dallas deklarera "att amerikanska trupper skulle sättas in i Vietnam om situationen så krävde.”, så försvagas ju argumentet för att han aldrig skulle ha intervenerat militärt i Vietnam = att det därmed med avseende på Vietnam inte fanns något motiv till att mörda honom.") känns väldigt krystad och konstruerad.
Igen, jag skrev:
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Som sagt, det har ju nyligen kommit ut en bok på svenska om JFK's liv och som även i en epilog (Eftertankar) tar upp mordet på honom och de därpå följande officiella utredningarna och ett antal privatspanares försök att klargöra vad som verkligen ägde rum och varför.

Bokens författare är historikern, Bengt Liljegren, och titeln är kort och gott, John F. Kennedy.

Jag avser att framöver i mån av tid beta av de värsta faktafel som Liljegren bjuder på, samt förklara varför han har fel i det han skriver.

En punkt i taget.
Fattar du nu?

Citat:
Jag passar den gärna.
Ja, passa den gärna till Liljegren själv om du får tillfälle.
Citera
2022-11-10, 16:06
  #9216
Medlem
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Nej. Liljegrens bok är inte deklarerad som skönlitteratur. Den ska utgöra faktagranskad facklitteratur i genren historia/biografier och är skriven av en historiker, utgiven av ett förlag specialiserat på ämnet Historia.
Jag har inte påstått att Bengt skrivit en skönlitterär bok. Rimligtvis måste det finnas utrymme för faktaböcker i litteratur delen av flashback.
Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av onopono
Igen, jag skrev:

Jag avser att framöver i mån av tid beta av de värsta faktafel som Liljegren bjuder på, samt förklara varför han har fel i det han skriver.

En punkt i taget.
Du har föredömligt tydligt signalerat din avsikt att i denna tråd gå igenom Beng Liljegrens bok om JFK, på det traditionella "en punkt i taget" sättet. Jag är inte helt övertygad om att detta är rätt tråd för ändamålet.
Citera

Skapa ett konto eller logga in för att kommentera

Du måste vara medlem för att kunna kommentera

Skapa ett konto

Det är enkelt att registrera ett nytt konto

Bli medlem

Logga in

Har du redan ett konto? Logga in här

Logga in