Mark Lane

[Myra Bronstein]

What do members think about the research of Mark Lane? A member of the Democratic Party, he helped establish the Reform Democratic Movement in 1959. A supporter of John F. Kennedy, he managed his presidential campaign in New York.

In 1960 Lane was elected to the New York Legislature. Over the next couple of years he campaigned to abolish capital punishment and worked closely with Mary Wagner in her attempt to deal with the city's housing problem. Lane was also the only public official arrested as a Freedom Rider.

After JFK was assassinated, Lane founded the Citizens' Committee of Inquiry. He volunteered to defend Lee Harvey Oswald before the Warren Commission. This offer was rejected but he was retained by Oswald's mother, Marguerite Oswald. Lane also wrote an article explaining how he would have defended Oswald. It was rejected by all the main newspapers and magazines but eventually appeared in the left-wing National Guardian (19th December, 1963).

Lane has written several books on the assassination of JFK. This has included Rush to Judgment (1966) and A Citizen's Dissent (1968). He also wrote two screenplays on the case, Executive Action and Plausible Denial. Lane also helped Jim Garrison in his attempts to prove that Kennedy had been assassinated by a right-wing group that involved Guy Bannister, Clay Shaw and David Ferrie.

In August, 1978, Victor Marchetti published an article about the assassination of JFK in the liberty Lobby newspaper, Spotlight. In the article Marchetti argued that the House Special Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) had obtained a 1966 CIA memo that revealed E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis and Gerry Patrick Hemming had been involved in the plot to kill Kennedy. Marchetti's article also included a story that Marita Lorenz had provided information on this plot. Later that month Joseph Trento and Jacquie Powers wrote a similar story for the Sunday News Journal.

The HSCA did not publish this CIA memo linking its agents to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Hunt now decided to take legal action against the Liberty Lobby and in December, 1981, he was awarded $650,000 in damages. Liberty Lobby appealed to the United States Court of Appeals. It was claimed that Hunt's attorney, Ellis Rubin, had offered a clearly erroneous instruction as to the law of defamation. The three-judge panel agreed and the case was retried. This time Lane defended the Liberty Lobby against Hunt's action.

Lane eventually discovered Marchetti’s sources. The main source was William Corson. It also emerged that Marchetti had also consulted James Angleton and Alan J. Weberman before publishing the article. As a result of obtaining of getting depositions from David Atlee Phillips, Richard Helms, G. Gordon Liddy, Stansfield Turner and Marita Lorenz, plus a skillful cross-examination by Lane of E. Howard Hunt, the jury decided in January, 1995, that Marchetti had not been guilty of libel when he suggested that John F. Kennedy had been assassinated by people working for the CIA.

After interviewing Marita Lorenz Lane became convinced that Frank Sturgis and E.Howard Hunt had both been involved in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy. Lane outlined his theory about the CIA's role in Kennedy's murder in a 1991 book, Plausible Denial.

Lane also took a keen interest in the murder of Martin Luther King and wrote the book, Murder in Memphis (1993).

I'll just be a dittohead here. Mark Lane's one of the cornerstones of the research community. I've read more dot connecting type books by him than by any other author.

I do wish he'd expand his scope to incorporate RFK however, and ideally Malcolm X.

[Mark Stapleton]

Len Osanic tells me that the Mark Lane interview is now online at:

http://www.blackopradio.com/

A truly fascinating interview. I was unaware that no critical comments about the WC were allowed to be broadcast by the US radio and TV networks for a full year after its publication. Lane was remarkably resourceful and tenacious in countering this wall of silence.

I agree that he's a genuine American hero.

Rush to Judgement remains the most comprehensive demolition of the WC I've read.

[Michael Hogan]

A truly fascinating interview. I was unaware that no critical comments about the WC were allowed to be broadcast by the US radio and TV networks for a full year after its publication. Lane was remarkably resourceful and tenacious in countering this wall of silence.

I agree that he's a genuine American hero.

Rush to Judgement remains the most comprehensive demolition of the WC I've read.

Lane's A Citizen's Dissent remains the most comprehensive demolition of the "free" American press I've read.

Although it enjoyed a much smaller readership, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher was equally devastating to the Commission's findings, in my opinion. Of course, so was Weisberg's Whitewash.

The courage and persistence of Lane, Meagher and Weisberg in the face of incredible opposition are to be admired. It's a shame they never got to see justice administered to President Kennedy's murderers.

[Dawn Meredith]

A truly fascinating interview. I was unaware that no critical comments about the WC were allowed to be broadcast by the US radio and TV networks for a full year after its publication. Lane was remarkably resourceful and tenacious in countering this wall of silence.

I agree that he's a genuine American hero.

Rush to Judgement remains the most comprehensive demolition of the WC I've read.

Lane's A Citizen's Dissent remains the most comprehensive demolition of the "free" American press I've read.

Although it enjoyed a much smaller readership, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher was equally devastating to the Commission's findings, in my opinion. Of course, so was Weisberg's Whitewash.

The courage and persistence of Lane, Meagher and Weisberg in the face of incredible opposition are to be admired. It's a shame they never got to see justice administered to President Kennedy's murderers.

Mike: Do you really think any of us will ever see any kind of justice on this case? I mean it's as much a case- closed -national -security- operation- mockingbird travesty as it was day one. In spite of Mark Lane and all who came ofter him.

I also think Lane is an American hero.

Dawn

Nice to see Shanet back!

[Michael Hogan]

Mike: Do you really think any of us will ever see any kind of justice on this case? I mean it's as much a case- closed -national -security- operation- mockingbird travesty as it was day one. In spite of Mark Lane and all who came after him.

Dawn

Dawn, as far as justice in the true sense of the word, my answer would be no. Far too much time has passed.

If exposing the final truth would be a form of justice, I suppose that is still theoretically possible although I don't have much hope on that count either. I do have the utmost respect for those that are still trying.

Mike

PS) In this thread, I think you, John, Owen, Ron, Terry, Robert, Shanet, Myra, and Mark expressed what Mark Lane achieved and still stands for very well.

Edited November 13, 2006 by Michael Hogan

[Myra Bronstein]

A truly fascinating interview. I was unaware that no critical comments about the WC were allowed to be broadcast by the US radio and TV networks for a full year after its publication. Lane was remarkably resourceful and tenacious in countering this wall of silence.

I agree that he's a genuine American hero.

Rush to Judgement remains the most comprehensive demolition of the WC I've read.

Lane's A Citizen's Dissent remains the most comprehensive demolition of the "free" American press I've read.

Although it enjoyed a much smaller readership, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher was equally devastating to the Commission's findings, in my opinion. Of course, so was Weisberg's Whitewash.

The courage and persistence of Lane, Meagher and Weisberg in the face of incredible opposition are to be admired. It's a shame they never got to see justice administered to President Kennedy's murderers.

Now there's one I hadn't read for some reason. It'll go on the massive jumbo queue. Thanks for the tip Michael.

[Pat Speer]

Now there's one I hadn't read for some reason. It'll go on the massive jumbo queue. Thanks for the tip Michael.

Myra, A Citizen's Dissent is little-known and rarely-read. As Lane's follow-up to his best-selling Rush to Judgment, you'd think it would have received a lot of attention and at least moderate sales. Nope. A few years back, I came across a book from the early 70s on the American media. This book, which took no stance on the assassination whatsoever, nevertheless decided to use A Citizen's Dissent as a case study. It turned out that, while RTJ had received something like 180 reviews nationwide (which amounts to free publicity) A Citizen's Dissent had received less than 5. The author concluded that the book, and its DISSENT, had been deliberately ignored. This, of course, reinforces the theme of Lane's book.

[Myra Bronstein]

Now there's one I hadn't read for some reason. It'll go on the massive jumbo queue. Thanks for the tip Michael.

Myra, A Citizen's Dissent is little-known and rarely-read. As Lane's follow-up to his best-selling Rush to Judgment, you'd think it would have received a lot of attention and at least moderate sales. Nope. A few years back, I came across a book from the early 70s on the American media. This book, which took no stance on the assassination whatsoever, nevertheless decided to use A Citizen's Dissent as a case study. It turned out that, while RTJ had received something like 180 reviews nationwide (which amounts to free publicity) A Citizen's Dissent had received less than 5. The author concluded that the book, and its DISSENT, had been deliberately ignored. This, of course, reinforces the theme of Lane's book.

Ah, thanks Pat. That explains it. My library system doesn't have it so I'll have to do an inter-library loan. Now that I know the back-story I'm determined to read it.

Amazing what Lane has had to go through to get his books published. That is quite the iron curtain the US media has in place.

[Mark Stapleton]

A truly fascinating interview. I was unaware that no critical comments about the WC were allowed to be broadcast by the US radio and TV networks for a full year after its publication. Lane was remarkably resourceful and tenacious in countering this wall of silence.

I agree that he's a genuine American hero.

Rush to Judgement remains the most comprehensive demolition of the WC I've read.

Lane's A Citizen's Dissent remains the most comprehensive demolition of the "free" American press I've read.

Although it enjoyed a much smaller readership, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher was equally devastating to the Commission's findings, in my opinion. Of course, so was Weisberg's Whitewash.

The courage and persistence of Lane, Meagher and Weisberg in the face of incredible opposition are to be admired. It's a shame they never got to see justice administered to President Kennedy's murderers.

Mike, you've talked me into it. It's top of my list.

If A Citizen's Dissent demolishes the notion of a free press, then it's a must read. The 'free press' played a pivotal role in the JFK coverup. It can be argued that had the press really been free and fearless in '63, we wouldn't be here now discussing JFK, MLK, Malcolm X, RFK and all the other controversies.

If the truth about JFK's death could be retrieved from the sea of lies, the biggest loser would not be conspirators but the media who would then be morally obliged to investigate a multitude of other official deceptions. Once the media is convinced that the public know they are lying, then they will end the charade, IMO. We're starting to see it now with Iraq.

It's not employed journalists who are to blame--they follow orders and are dealt with when they stray, as John Simkin and others have pointed out on other threads--but the amorphous presence lurking behind the press which determines what we shall see, and, of course, what we shall not see.

[Michael G. Smith]

A truly fascinating interview. I was unaware that no critical comments about the WC were allowed to be broadcast by the US radio and TV networks for a full year after its publication. Lane was remarkably resourceful and tenacious in countering this wall of silence.

I agree that he's a genuine American hero.

Rush to Judgement remains the most comprehensive demolition of the WC I've read.

Lane's A Citizen's Dissent remains the most comprehensive demolition of the "free" American press I've read.

Although it enjoyed a much smaller readership, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher was equally devastating to the Commission's findings, in my opinion. Of course, so was Weisberg's Whitewash.

The courage and persistence of Lane, Meagher and Weisberg in the face of incredible opposition are to be admired. It's a shame they never got to see justice administered to President Kennedy's murderers.

Mike, you've talked me into it. It's top of my list.

If A Citizen's Dissent demolishes the notion of a free press, then it's a must read. The 'free press' played a pivotal role in the JFK coverup. It can be argued that had the press really been free and fearless in '63, we wouldn't be here now discussing JFK, MLK, Malcolm X, RFK and all the other controversies.

If the truth about JFK's death could be retrieved from the sea of lies, the biggest loser would not be conspirators but the media who would then be morally obliged to investigate a multitude of other official deceptions. Once the media is convinced that the public know they are lying, then they will end the charade, IMO. We're starting to see it now with Iraq.

It's not employed journalists who are to blame--they follow orders and are dealt with when they stray, as John Simkin and others have pointed out on other threads--but the amorphous presence lurking behind the press which determines what we shall see, and, of course, what we shall not see.

Mark Lane to me anyway, was the ground breaker for everyone to follow. His tireless efforts to get to the bottom of the assasination set the bar. Personally i believe he got alot of peoples interest in this case, and got them interested enough to follow in his steps.

It would be great to have him join the forum. The input he could give us, would be irreplaceable. As i told John when i joined the forum, Mr. Lane was, or is still living about 20 mnutes from me in South Jersey. He does, as stated earlier, a weekly radio program on our local radio station covering legal issues i believe. If no one can contact him, let me know, as i can probably contact him. Im not sure if he is still living in the area or not, as the last time i went by his house, it had a "For Sale" sign on it. He has done quite a bit for our community with his radio program and contributions. I went to a local yearlly community get together with silent and live auctions. He had donated two new copies of his out of print books, which were autographed. Needless to say i was out bid! lol! I kick myself for not bidding higher now! lol! --smitty

[Michael Hogan]

Mark Lane to me anyway, was the ground breaker for everyone to follow. His tireless efforts to get to the bottom of the assasination set the bar. Personally i believe he got alot of peoples interest in this case, and got them interested enough to follow in his steps.

It would be great to have him join the forum. The input he could give us, would be irreplaceable. As i told John when i joined the forum, Mr. Lane was, or is still living about 20 mnutes from me in South Jersey. He does, as stated earlier, a weekly radio program on our local radio station covering legal issues i believe. If no one can contact him, let me know, as i can probably contact him.

Smitty,

If you had a copy of Mark Lane's book(s), I'll bet he would be happy to it(them) for you. Who knows, he might share some thoughts with you that were never published. Maybe you should attempt to meet him.

[John Simkin]

John wrote:

"I am of the opinion that the CIA is still able to block the mainstream media from discussing this subject in a rational way."

John just how do you suppose the CIA accomplishes this?

As I have I said I have made these points many times before. See for example, my page on Operation Mockingbird and the forum thread on this subject.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5142

I also wrote the Wikipedia entry for Operation Mockingbird with a full list of references (it originally said that Operation Mockingbird was an urban myth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

However, last night I was reading Ed Haslam's "Dr. Mary's Monkey" and he mentions that because of the Freedom of Information Act he and others have discovered the ways that Alton Ochsner, a CIA asset, helped to smear Mark Lane.

In 1967 Jim Garrison began investigating the activities of Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans. Ochsner told a friend that he feared Garrison would order his arrest and the seizure of INCA's corporate records. Ochsner attacked the Garrison investigation as being unpatriotic because it eroded public confidence and threatened the stability of the American government. In his article, Social Origins of Anticommunism: The Information Council of the Americas (Louisiana History, Spring 1989) Arthur Carpenter claimed that Ochsner launched a propaganda campaign against Garrison. This included sending information to a friend who was the publisher of the Nashville Banner.

According to Carpenter, Ochsner also attempted to discredit Mark Lane, who was assisting the Garrison investigation. He told Felix Edward Hebert that Lane was "a professional propagandist of the lunatic left". Ochsner also instructed Herbert to tell Edwin E. Willis (Chairman of the House Committee) to dig up "whatever information you can" on Lane.

Felix Edward Hebert later sent Ochsner a report on Mark Lane extracted from confidential government files. This included "the files of the New York City Police, the FBI, and other security agencies." These files claimed that Lane was "a sadist and masochist, charged on numerous occasions with sodomy". Hebert also supplied Ochsner with a photograph that was supposed to be Lane engaged in a sadomasochistic act with a prostitute.

Mark Lane already knew about this smear campaign. This is what he says about this in his book Plausible Denial (1991):

More than a decade after the assassination, when I won a lawsuit against various police and spy organizations in the United States district court in Washington, D.C., pursuant to the order of the court, I received many long-suppressed documents.

Among them was a top-secret CIA report. It stated that the CIA was deeply troubled by my work in questioning the conclusions of the Warren Report and that polls that had been taken revealed that almost half of the American people believed as I did. The report stated, "Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse, results." This "trend of opinion," the CIA said, "is a matter of concern" to "our organization." To counter developing opinion within the United States, the CIA suggested that steps be taken. It should be emphasized, the CIA said, that "the members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience, and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society.

The purpose of the CIA secret document was apparent. In this instance, there was no need for incisive analysis. The CIA report stated "The aim of this dispatch is to provide material for countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments." The commission had been chosen in such a fashion so that it might subsequently be asserted that those who questioned its finding, by comparing the known facts to the false conclusions offered by the commission, might be said to be subversive.

Who were these people who wished to throw suspicion upon the leaders of the land? The CIA report listed them as Mark Lane, Joachim Joesten, as well as a French writer, Leo Sauvage. Most of the criticism was directed at me. The CIA directed that this matter be discussed with "liaison and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)," instructing these persons "that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition." The CIA continued: "Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation." The CIA was quite specific about the means that should be employed to prevent criticism of the report:

"Employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passage to assets. Our play should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (i) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (ii) politically interested, (iii) financially interested, (iv) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (v) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Edward Jay Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher Knebel article and Spectator piece for background." According to the CIA, my book, Rush to Judgment, was "much more difficult to answer as a whole." The agency document did not list any errors in the book.

Just in case the book reviewers did not get the point, the CIA offered specific language that they might incorporate into their critiques. "Reviewers" of the books "might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the Report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics."

Among those who criticized Rush to Judgment and other books along lines similar to those suggested by the CIA were the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and, especially, Walter Cronkite and CBS. Among those who did not march in lockstep with the intelligence agencies' effort to destroy the First Amendment were the Houston Post; Norman Mailer, who reviewed Rush to Judgment in the United States and Len Deighton, who reviewed it in London.

The question persists, in view of the elaborate and illegal program undertaken by the CIA to malign American citizens and to discourage publishers from printing dissents from the Warren Commission Report, as to the motivation for these efforts. Again, we turn to the CIA dispatch: "Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation." Yes, the CIA was directly involved and it did make its contribution to the investigation. What else the CIA did to constitute its "direct" involvement in the assassination was left unsaid by the authors of its report.

Let us focus at this point upon the information that the CIA contributed. Its major contribution was the presentation of the Mexico City story to Earl Warren. The CIA seemed desperately concerned that its Mexico City story might be questioned. Indeed, it was this aberrant behavior by the CIA with this aspect of the case that led me to focus more intently on the case.

The first book review of Rush to Judgment was never printed in any newspaper or journal, at least not in the form in which the review originally appeared. The book was published in mid-August 1966. Before I saw the printer's proofs, the CIA had obtained a copy. On August 2, 1966, the CIA published a document entitled "Review of Book - Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane." I did not learn the existence of that document for almost a decade. The review centered upon statements I had written about Oswald in Mexico City: "On pages 351 and 352, Lane discusses the photograph of the unknown individual which was taken by the CIA in Mexico City. The photograph was furnished by this Agency to the FBI after the assassination of President Kennedy. The FBI then showed it to Mrs. Marguerite Oswald who later claimed the photograph to be that of lack Ruby. A discussion of the incident, the photograph itself, and related affidavits, all appear in the Commission's Report (Vol. XI, p. 469; Vol. XVI, p. 638). Lane asserts that the photograph was evidently taken in front of the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City on 27 September 1963, and that it was furnished to the FBI on the morning of 22 November."

The concern about my relatively nonincriminating disclosure was surprising to me at the time, however, a decade after the assassination it became apparent that the case that the CIA had so painstakingly constructed, placing Oswald in Mexico City at the two embassies, had fallen apart as if it were a house of cards. Not one material bit of evidence remained. It was a new day. The war in Vietnam and crimes committed by authorities, including President Nixon, were beginning to convince the American people that simplistic explanations of past national tragedies might be challenged. Statements by leaders of government or federal police officials were no longer sacrosanct.

Of course, you know all about the way JFK assassination investigators are often smeared as communists. You have done the same about the work of Thomas G. Buchanan and Joachim Joesten.

[Don Jeffries]

I was a teenage volunteer with Mark Lane's organization The Citizens Committe Of Inquiry back in the mid-1970s. We lobbied Congress, called t.v. and radio stations and newspapers, and stuffed envelopes. It was a great thrill to meet him in person one afternoon at his office in Washingtion, D.C. I think I recounted in another post how he related to us his long conversation with comedian Freddie Prinze, who was thoroughly obsessed with the assassination. When Prinze "committed suicide" a few months aftewards, it was yet another unnatural death I connected to the assassination. Actually, I tried to email Mark Lane several months ago, asking him about the Prinze death and also about his conversations with Norman Similas (who I had exchanged some truly memorable emails with a few years ago). He never replied. I thought I had his correct email- does anyone know it?

Anyway, Mark Lane was the first researcher I really looked up to. I have read and own all his books, and they are essential reading.

[John Simkin]

I was a teenage volunteer with Mark Lane's organization The Citizens Committe Of Inquiry back in the mid-1970s. We lobbied Congress, called t.v. and radio stations and newspapers, and stuffed envelopes. It was a great thrill to meet him in person one afternoon at his office in Washingtion, D.C. I think I recounted in another post how he related to us his long conversation with comedian Freddie Prinze, who was thoroughly obsessed with the assassination. When Prinze "committed suicide" a few months aftewards, it was yet another unnatural death I connected to the assassination. Actually, I tried to email Mark Lane several months ago, asking him about the Prinze death and also about his conversations with Norman Similas (who I had exchanged some truly memorable emails with a few years ago). He never replied. I thought I had his correct email- does anyone know it?

Anyway, Mark Lane was the first researcher I really looked up to. I have read and own all his books, and they are essential reading.

I have also tried to contact Mark by email. I would love to have him as a member of the forum. Unfortunately, he never replied. However, his email address was given to me by someone who I have since discovered is an unreliable source.

[Myra Bronstein]

I was a teenage volunteer with Mark Lane's organization The Citizens Committe Of Inquiry back in the mid-1970s. We lobbied Congress, called t.v. and radio stations and newspapers, and stuffed envelopes. It was a great thrill to meet him in person one afternoon at his office in Washingtion, D.C. I think I recounted in another post how he related to us his long conversation with comedian Freddie Prinze, who was thoroughly obsessed with the assassination. When Prinze "committed suicide" a few months aftewards, it was yet another unnatural death I connected to the assassination. Actually, I tried to email Mark Lane several months ago, asking him about the Prinze death and also about his conversations with Norman Similas (who I had exchanged some truly memorable emails with a few years ago). He never replied. I thought I had his correct email- does anyone know it?

Anyway, Mark Lane was the first researcher I really looked up to. I have read and own all his books, and they are essential reading.

Wow Don.

I totally missed the Freddy Prinze link.

Thank you.

January 28, 1976 -- Reports surface that comedian Freddie Prinze, activist democrat deeply concerned about who killed JFK & owned a copy of the Zapruder film & spoke openly about his suspicions, committed suicide.

Mae Brussell was deeply suspicious about the Prinze "suicide," and she had great radar.

http://www.maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brussell%...e%20Somers.html