Steve Duffy Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 3 pages so far....Correct me if I'm wrong..but wasn't this, really, about David saying he still has a firm belief in the WC..and has a new pal that does, too? If so, that's great, David...be like having a conversation with yourself... I'm with Dean, let you're friend come read for himself.... David causes another circus, and the hoops are jumped through again... Meanwhile, if anyone can answer my actual, real interested question that's been pushed back a page or two now for this pointless thread...let me know.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) I'm posting this here, for the first time, anywhere, as a symbolic, thumb in the eye, of those hobbled by an inability to do anything other than read and parrot official line. The "line" is officially intended to keep any of us from going to places like this, ever! : http://www.google.com/search?q=phillip+joachim&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=bks:1&q=%22*Safford+solved+this+by+designing+a+typewriter+which+he+called+a+special+code+machine.33%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=1b516791715d36a5Betrayal at Pearl Harbor: how Churchill lured Roosevelt into World ... James Rusbridger, Eric Nave - 1991 - 302 pages - Snippet view ... was that they only had two radio operators capable of receiving and transcribing kana texts from Morse code transmissions. Safford solved this by designing a typewriter which he called a special code machine.33 On 26 November 1924, he sent details to John T. Underwood of the Underwood Typewriter Company, who examined Safford's specifications with his chief designer, Charles A. Joerissen. Two weeks later, on 10 December, they offered to build Safford four such machines for $645. The makers called them the Underwood Code Machine, http://www.google.com/search?q=phillip+joachim&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=bks:1&q=%22Underwood+code+machine%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22Underwood+code+machine%22&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=1b516791715d36a5 Cryptologia: Volume 8 Albion College. Dept. of Mathematics, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology - 1984 - Snippet view Known In Its early life as the Underwood Code Machine, the RIP-5 was the regular typewriter normally furnished for radio circuit operators but with type faces which printed "Kana" characters (In Japanese brush-stroke form) Instead of ... books.google.com - More editions Betrayal at Pearl Harbor: how Churchill lured Roosevelt into World ... James Rusbridger, Eric Nave - 1991 - 302 pages - Snippet view The makers called them the Underwood Code Machine, and the US Navy CSP-602, which designation was changed to Radio Intelligence Publication 5 (RIP-5) on 24 July 1930. The machine's keyboard was the same as the regular typewriters ... "Charles" A. Joerissen was actually this man.: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?app=forums&module=post§ion=post&do=reply_post&f=126&t=17411Official gazette of the United States Patent Office - Page 601 United States. Patent Office - 1918 - Free Google eBook - Read 1246931. COMBINED TYPE- WRITING AND COMPUTING MACHINE. Carl A. Joerissen, Washington, D. C, assignor to Underwood Computing Machine Company, New York, NY, a Corporation of New York. Filed Oct. 28, 1911. Serial No. 657286. (CI. 235— 58. .. http://www.google.com/search?q=phillip+joachim&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=nws:1%2Car%3A1&q=%22Carl+A.+Joerissen%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22Carl+A.+Joerissen%22&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=748ccb14d716bc92 WINS FRENCH DECORATION.; Order of the Ruban Violette... New York Times - Oct 17, 1911 The Frencli Embassy to-daM announced that thel French Government had bestowed th $ Order of the Ruban Violette upon Carl A. Joerissen, a local business man, ... SCARSDALE BRIDAL FOR MISS MONTAGUE; Hitchcock Memorial... $3.95 - New York Times - Sep 20, 1938 ... son of Mrs. Carl A. Joerissen of Chevy Chase, Md. K- Hitchcock Memorial Cl, urch Is Scene of Her Marriage to Phillip Nance Joachim DR. ... NUPTIALS ARE HELD FOR KAY JOERISSElq; She Is Wed to Lt.... $3.95 - New York Times - Sep 10, 1944 Carl A. Joerissen of Washington and Miami Beach, and r daughter of the late Mr. Joerissen, was married to Lieut. Comdr. Wil[liam Helvestine, USCGR, ... TROTH ANNOUNCED OF MISS MONTAGUE; Scarsdale Couple's... $3.95 - New York Times - Jul 25, 1938 ... Miss Franes Lee Montague, to Phillip Nance ?oachim of Washington, son of Mrs . Carl A. Joerissen of Chevy Chase, Md. TROTH OF MISS Scarsdale Couple's ... Social Activities in New York and Elsewhere $3.95 - New York Times - Feb 13, 1942 Arthur Iselin had guests aboard his yacht Gander at the Docks. r. and Mrs. Carl A. Joerissen entertained for their house guests, Mr. and Mrs. Philip Nance ... United States District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals... Pay-Per-View - United States District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals Reports - Jul 11, 1938 ... Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia Patent infringement suit by Carl A Joerissen against Remington Rand Inc ... Carl A. Joerissen happened to also be the step-father of a retired US Navy Rear Admiral.: http://www.google.com/search?q=phillip+joachim&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=nws:1%2Car%3A1&q=+joachim+Helvestine&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=+joachim+Helvestine&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=748ccb14d716bc92Retired Navy Officer Slain By Gunman . Ellensburg Daily Record - Oct 22, 1962 Joachim's mother, Elmina Joerrissen, and sister, Kay Helvestine, live in miami Fla. A brother, Phillip, has been employed as an editor in the ... http://www.google.com/search?q=phillip+joachim&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers#sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&tbs=nws:1%2Car%3A1&q=%22dr+p.l.+joachim%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=%22dr+p.l.+joachim%22&psj=1&bav=on.1,or.&fp=748ccb14d716bc92 Nance-Joachim. Pay-Per-View - Atlanta Constitution - May 18, 1910 one or tne most oxne June weddings will be that of Miss Elmina Nance and Dr P. L. Joachim of Washington D. C.. It takes place on the morning of the 2d at ... ...a Navy "employee" who just happened to be eight years out of the Annapolis academy, when he apparently was put on record as being George DeMohrenschildt's "landlord"! NODULE X15 DALLAS: JUNE 1962 TO MARCH 1963 NAZI SPY GEORGE VON ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View MOHRENSCHILDT. For the most up-to-date version of this Nodule go to ...... 3822 BENTON STREET. In October 1942 the FBI interviewed Paul Joachim, ... http://ajweberman.com/noduleX15-DALLAS%20JUNE%201962%20TO%20MARCH%201963.pdf GEORGE DE MOHRENSCHILDT Joachim told the FBI that he was employed at the time in the Navy building.(209) The other occupants of the house were Lt. Cdr. Harry Hull of the U.S. Navy, ... http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo4/jfk12/hscademo.htm [PDF] HSCA Volume XII: George de Mohrenschildt File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML Benton Street house, Paul Joachim. Joachim told the FBI that he was employed at the time in the Navy building. (209) The other occu- ... 'Fess up, David....with all the free time you promoters of the official line must have on your hands, compared to me with my time consuming burden of satisfying my curiousity, you must have an incredibly high bowling average and an impressively low golf handicap? Why do you think details of Paul Joachim's commission as a Naval officer are to this day, by the FBI and Assassination Records? I am sure you are confident that Admiral Joachim's murder was solved, or you are not the least bit curious? Edited February 26, 2011 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B. A. Copeland Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 The original CTers were the cops: "The initial instincts of experienced law enforcement personnel are not always accurate -- but there are certain types of cases, crimes and crimes scenes where you have aspects that are almost impossible NOT get right at first glance. Those aspects really are that black and white. One such aspect of this case which stood out to people like Wade and Scott -- this was not the work of one man acting on impulse." http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t106-what-law-enforcement-officials-really-thought-that-weekend I love topics such as this lol...I terribly weep for the young man who will undoubtedly attempt to teach others that LHO was "guilty as hell" when that is so unbelievably far from the truth as to be irrational unfortunately. History has given us so much evidence of a very powerful and protected special interest that have dominated this country (and even the world in some sense) for a couple of centuries. Hey there Greg, I'll even expand on your words by stating that RFK was one of the FIRST CONSPIRACY THEORISTS. The problem with that term (CT) is that I believe that the PTB in some way, have created an atmosphere for that term to be used in such a way where it becomes detrimental where an actual Conspiracy has indeed taken place. To put it lightly, they created what most people see or believe is a CT (Alex Jones, Media use, etc) and so by a kind of "Inception" planted in our or the viewer/hearer's mind, when they hear the term CT is acts as some kind of switch by which a perception and analysis is quickly formed before studying any kind of evidential proofs. When one studies the JFK murder, it is not long before one SHOULD realize that if powerful, powerful interests are involved and if the Intelligence Services that THEY themselves created are involved.....is there no surprise that "no evidence" would come up...? They are trained to leave "no evidence" so it is going to be a challenge and should be expected. The real question is, given their planning and involvement of the murder, how exactly did they go about it even though they, in general, are in control (to a great degree) of investigations, etc. So the simply, cop-out claim that "there is not ONE shred (which is a lie or false actually lol) of evidence that JFK was murdered as the result of a conspiracy" is just plain nonsense and shows clearly a complete lack of research on the part of the claimant. The verdict is out, LHO is not guilty of murdering JFK. Now, lets figure out how exactly and of course, why. Spending another 40+ years on "did Oswald do it?" is pure disinfo designed to run honest researchers and revolutionaries (those who do not believe everything the Govt. says and those who truly see who is running things if you will) into the ground or in complete circles. Please just google "CIA fakes" for more info on this complex structure that has been active and in place for so many years that I care to count. Let us consider honest and RATIONAL individuals who consider "conspiracy" carefully POST-examination of evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 (edited) I will go this far: I believe that the Powers that Be drummed into the MSM, the phrase "Conspiracy Theorists" as a reaction to Stone's film. Except that the term dates back to the 1860's at least. 1868 Australia - http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=89hhAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HJEDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7299,5590479&dq=conspiracy-theorists+%7C+conspiracy-theorist+%7C+conspiracy-theory&hl=en 1871? UK - http://books.google.com/books?id=_6EEAAAAQAAJ&q=Conspiracy-Theorists+OR+Conspiracy-Theorist+OR+Conspiracy-Theory&dq=Conspiracy-Theorists+OR+Conspiracy-Theorist+OR+Conspiracy-Theory&hl=en&ei=74hpTeTROZKCtgem-rTmAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAg 1875 US- http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F10A16F93A5D127588DDAF0994DE405B858BF0D3 Edited February 26, 2011 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Got any evidence in support of your pet theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 No kidding Sherlock. This made me laugh uncontrollably as to Len's late 1800s reaserch for the word "Conspiracy Theorist" which was just around the time that Sherlock Holmes was created Perfect use of a put down by Jimmy D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 I just named the Pipes book. Did you miss that? (ANd BTW, you should trace down who Pipes is for further evidence of this being a message from on high.) How about the flip that Kathryn Olmstead did? Or are you unaware of that also? Or what about Mathews getting the MSNBC gig after he tries to discredit the Bay of Pigs code name in Haldeman's book? And he tries to blame it on the co author DI Mona. Is Greenland nice? The Pipes book didn’t come out till 1999 8 years after the movie came out. I have no idea what you are going on about in the other cases Hardball began in 1994 several years before Matthews book on Kennedy and Nixon. Did Olmstead or Matthew use the term CT derisively? But at best you are citing anecdotal evidence. Empirical evidence is much better. Got any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) DAVID LIFTON SAID: Oh pleez...I'm really sick and tired of seeing Dale Myers quoted "in defense of" Vincent Bugliosi. Dale Myers was a paid ghost writer for Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History." Hundreds and hundreds of pages were written/rewritten by Myers. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I have a very strong feeling that Mr. David S. Lifton doesn't know what the hell he's babbling about here. Vincent Bugliosi gave full credit to Dale K. Myers for Dale's writing contributions in the "Acknowledgments" section of "Reclaiming History". So that eliminates Mr. Myers as a "ghostwriter" right there, because ghostwriters are NOT ACKNOWLEDGED AT ALL in the book that they are helping to "ghostwrite". And why on Earth David Lifton has it etched in his mind that Dale Myers wrote (or rewrote) "hundreds and hundreds of pages" of "Reclaiming History" (or even whole chapters, as Lifton has practically alluded to in the past as well) is a real mystery to me. Myers HELPED Bugliosi write PORTIONS of "Reclaiming History" (just as the late Fred Haines did), and Vince has acknowledged that fact IN PRINT right inside the book itself, but I'm at a loss to comprehend just exactly why Lifton believes that Myers wrote practically all of Chapter 1 ("Four Days In November"). Here is exactly what Vincent Bugliosi says on this matter, on Page 1515 of "Reclaiming History": "Dale [Myers] helped me in the writing of several sections of Book One [i.e., the first two-thirds of "Reclaiming History"], most notably on acoustics, 'Four Days in November' [Chapter 1 of the book] (particularly in the Oswald interrogations), and all matters dealing with still photography. I am deeply grateful to Dale for lending his time, energy, and considerable expertise to this literary project." -- Vince Bugliosi And we can also know that David Lifton is full of crap about his alleged "ghostwriting" allegation by taking another look at the following comment made by Bugliosi's personal secretary, Rosemary Newton: "In response to David Lifton's outrageous, malicious and contemptible lie regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...where he claims ghost writers wrote this great book (which will be read by generations to come, long after Mr. Lifton and the rest of us are gone, including all the die-hard conspiracy theorists)...I say, unequivocally, that NO section of Mr. Bugliosi's book was ghostwritten." -- Rosemary Newton; July 2007 Another reason, of course, to seriously doubt Lifton's claims about Dale Myers is to re-examine the very same allegation that Lifton made against author Patricia Lambert. On May 24, 2007, during an appearance on Black Op Radio [HERE and HERE], Lifton came right out and made the bold and ludicrous claim that Pat Lambert had written virtually ALL of the "Jim Garrison/Oliver Stone" chapter in "Reclaiming History". Well, within a few weeks of Lifton's May 2007 allegation, Ms. Lambert put that issue to rest for all time (but I suppose Lifton thinks Lambert was lying her ass off when she said this): "For the record: I did not write one single word of Vince Bugliosi's book, not even a footnote. I never saw Vince Bugliosi's manuscript. I never saw any portion of Vince Bugliosi's manuscript. I didn't even get a peek at the galleys. No comma, colon, semi-colon, parenthesis, hyphen, apostrophe or period is my doing, to say nothing of sentences, paragraphs and a whole chapter. .... I have indeed been in touch with Bugliosi; we have talked on the telephone and I provided him with some documents. That is the full extent of my involvement in his book. I cannot imagine what prompted Lifton to make such a stunningly false allegation about me. But false it is. I am not a ghostwriter. I have never been a ghostwriter. I have no intention of being a ghostwriter. Since I know unequivocally that Lifton is wrong about the role he assigned to me, I see no reason to believe he is correct about the other unidentified writers on whom he has bestowed the credit for having written Vince Bugliosi's book. David Lifton owes me an apology. David Lifton owes Vince Bugliosi an apology." -- Patricia Lambert; July 2, 2007 Therefore, since we KNOW beyond all doubt that David Lifton was 100% dead wrong about his ghostwriting allegations that he levelled against Pat Lambert, why in the world would anyone put any stock or faith in ANYTHING ELSE this man named Lifton has to say about the SAME TOPIC of "Reclaiming History" being ghostwritten by various individuals? That's nutty. DAVID LIFTON SAID: There are two signed contracts (at least) between Myers and Bugliosi and/or his publisher. The first contract was when Myers first hired onto the project. The second contract (or contracts) occurred when Myers and Bugliosi found they couldn't get along with one another ("creative differences" is the Hollywood term) and so a legal "divorce" had to be arranged. Both contracts included provisions that Dale Myers could not talk about the role he played--in other words, complete "confidentiality" was a part of the legal arrangement--both in the case of the original "marriage" and then the "divorce." [...] Again, I repeat: it's absurd to be citing Dale Myers "in defense of Bugliosi" since he (Myers) wrote such a substantial portion of both "Reclaiming History," and of [the 2008 follow-up paperback volume] "Four Days in November." DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I'll let Dale Myers speak for himself on this (naturally, Mr. Lifton won't believe a word uttered by Mr. Myers, but I'll pass these quotes along anyway--just "for the record"): "Lifton is questioning Bugliosi's credibility? Isn't Lifton the guy that claimed at one time that snipers were firing from inside artificial trees that had been installed and removed from the grassy knoll by crane? .... Lifton's problem is not Bugliosi's book or the secret gaggle of authors who supposedly wrote the master's work for him. David Lifton's problem is himself. As long as he continues to haunt the fringes of rational thought we can expect to be entertained with more ridiculous and unfounded accusations." -- Dale K. Myers; July 5, 2007 "As to Mr. Lifton's 'ghostwriting' allegations regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...charges and assertions without support don't mean much to me. I note that in the year since Mr. Bugliosi's secretary Rosemary Newton challenged Lifton...that Mr. Lifton failed to grab what would apparently be (according to Lifton's 'ghostwriting' claims) an easy $100 grand, and instead continues to trash-talk Mr. Bugliosi's book. Seems to me there would be an easy way to settle all of this - Why doesn't Lifton simply post the contracts for all of Mr. Bugliosi's 'ghostwriters' which he claims to be privy to? I know the idea of some kind of evidentiary support for an allegation is a novel idea to most conspiracy theorists, but come on! .... Extraordinary charges require extraordinary proof, yes? As to your question: "Do you then categorically deny that any such relationship existed between yourself and Vince Bugliosi?", perhaps you [a person named "Duke", to whom Myers was talking to here] missed Mr. Bugliosi's acknowledgements on page 1515 of 'Reclaiming History'?" -- Dale K. Myers; May 7, 2008 http://JFKFiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/liftons-ghost.html DAVID LIFTON SAID: DVP: do yourself and others on this forum a favor, and "get real." DAVID VON PEIN SAID: LOL. This is hilarious. Just imagine, folks, David "JFK'S BODY WAS STOLEN OFF OF AIR FORCE ONE" Lifton is telling another person to "get real". The irony and pot/kettle nature of that statement is so thick you could slice it with a knife. In reality, David, I got "real" a long time ago. In fact, it was a short time after being exposed to your book of total fantasy ("Best Evidence") in 1981 that I started to get more and more interested in the JFK assassination. And after looking into the REAL EVIDENCE in the case (vs. Mr. Lifton's impossible-to-pull-off fantasy version of it), I soon began to realize that President Kennedy was shot only from BEHIND, and the person who shot him was most certainly a man named Lee Harvey Oswald. But thanks for today's laugh-fest, David. I enjoyed it. http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/ghostwriting.html http://Best-Evidence.blogspot.com Edited February 28, 2011 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 DAVID LIFTON SAID: Oh pleez...I'm really sick and tired of seeing Dale Myers quoted "in defense of" Vincent Bugliosi. Dale Myers was a paid ghost writer for Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History." Hundreds and hundreds of pages were written/rewritten by Myers. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I have a very strong feeling that Mr. David S. Lifton doesn't know what the hell he's babbling about here. Vincent Bugliosi gave full credit to Dale K. Myers for Dale's writing contributions in the "Acknowledgments" section of "Reclaiming History". So that eliminates Mr. Myers as a "ghostwriter" right there, because ghostwriters are NOT ACKNOWLEDGED AT ALL in the book that they are helping to "ghostwrite". And why on Earth David Lifton has it etched in his mind that Dale Myers wrote (or rewrote) "hundreds and hundreds of pages" of "Reclaiming History" (or even whole chapters, as Lifton has practically alluded to in the past as well) is a real mystery to me. Myers HELPED Bugliosi write PORTIONS of "Reclaiming History" (just as the late Fred Haines did), and Vince has acknowledged that fact IN PRINT right inside the book itself, but I'm at a loss to comprehend just exactly why Lifton believes that Myers wrote practically all of Chapter 1 ("Four Days In November"). Here is exactly what Vincent Bugliosi says on this matter, on Page 1515 of "Reclaiming History": "Dale [Myers] helped me in the writing of several sections of Book One [i.e., the first two-thirds of "Reclaiming History"], most notably on acoustics, 'Four Days in November' [Chapter 1 of the book] (particularly in the Oswald interrogations), and all matters dealing with still photography. I am deeply grateful to Dale for lending his time, energy, and considerable expertise to this literary project." -- Vince Bugliosi And we can also know that David Lifton is full of crap about his alleged "ghostwriting" allegation by taking another look at the following comment made by Bugliosi's personal secretary, Rosemary Newton: "In response to David Lifton's outrageous, malicious and contemptible lie regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...where he claims ghost writers wrote this great book (which will be read by generations to come, long after Mr. Lifton and the rest of us are gone, including all the die-hard conspiracy theorists)...I say, unequivocally, that NO section of Mr. Bugliosi's book was ghostwritten." -- Rosemary Newton; July 2007 Another reason, of course, to seriously doubt Lifton's claims about Dale Myers is to re-examine the very same allegation that Lifton made against author Patricia Lambert. On May 24, 2007, during an appearance on Black Op Radio [HERE and HERE], Lifton came right out and made the bold and ludicrous claim that Pat Lambert had written virtually ALL of the "Jim Garrison/Oliver Stone" chapter in "Reclaiming History". Well, within a few weeks of Lifton's May 2007 allegation, Ms. Lambert put that issue to rest for all time (but I suppose Lifton thinks Lambert was lying her ass off when she said this): "For the record: I did not write one single word of Vince Bugliosi's book, not even a footnote. I never saw Vince Bugliosi's manuscript. I never saw any portion of Vince Bugliosi's manuscript. I didn't even get a peek at the galleys. No comma, colon, semi-colon, parenthesis, hyphen, apostrophe or period is my doing, to say nothing of sentences, paragraphs and a whole chapter. .... I have indeed been in touch with Bugliosi; we have talked on the telephone and I provided him with some documents. That is the full extent of my involvement in his book. I cannot imagine what prompted Lifton to make such a stunningly false allegation about me. But false it is. I am not a ghostwriter. I have never been a ghostwriter. I have no intention of being a ghostwriter. Since I know unequivocally that Lifton is wrong about the role he assigned to me, I see no reason to believe he is correct about the other unidentified writers on whom he has bestowed the credit for having written Vince Bugliosi's book. David Lifton owes me an apology. David Lifton owes Vince Bugliosi an apology." -- Patricia Lambert; July 2, 2007 Therefore, since we KNOW beyond all doubt that David Lifton was 100% dead wrong about his ghostwriting allegations that he levelled against Pat Lambert, why in the world would anyone put any stock or faith in ANYTHING ELSE this man named Lifton has to say about the SAME TOPIC of "Reclaiming History" being ghostwritten by various individuals? That's nutty. DAVID LIFTON SAID: There are two signed contracts (at least) between Myers and Bugliosi and/or his publisher. The first contract was when Myers first hired onto the project. The second contract (or contracts) occurred when Myers and Bugliosi found they couldn't get along with one another ("creative differences" is the Hollywood term) and so a legal "divorce" had to be arranged. Both contracts included provisions that Dale Myers could not talk about the role he played--in other words, complete "confidentiality" was a part of the legal arrangement--both in the case of the original "marriage" and then the "divorce." [...] Again, I repeat: it's absurd to be citing Dale Myers "in defense of Bugliosi" since he (Myers) wrote such a substantial portion of both "Reclaiming History," and of [the 2008 follow-up paperback volume] "Four Days in November." DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I'll let Dale Myers speak for himself on this (naturally, Mr. Lifton won't believe a word uttered by Mr. Myers, but I'll pass these quotes along anyway--just "for the record"): "Lifton is questioning Bugliosi's credibility? Isn't Lifton the guy that claimed at one time that snipers were firing from inside artificial trees that had been installed and removed from the grassy knoll by crane? .... Lifton's problem is not Bugliosi's book or the secret gaggle of authors who supposedly wrote the master's work for him. David Lifton's problem is himself. As long as he continues to haunt the fringes of rational thought we can expect to be entertained with more ridiculous and unfounded accusations." -- Dale K. Myers; July 5, 2007 "As to Mr. Lifton's 'ghostwriting' allegations regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...charges and assertions without support don't mean much to me. I note that in the year since Mr. Bugliosi's secretary Rosemary Newton challenged Lifton...that Mr. Lifton failed to grab what would apparently be (according to Lifton's 'ghostwriting' claims) an easy $100 grand, and instead continues to trash-talk Mr. Bugliosi's book. Seems to me there would be an easy way to settle all of this - Why doesn't Lifton simply post the contracts for all of Mr. Bugliosi's 'ghostwriters' which he claims to be privy to? I know the idea of some kind of evidentiary support for an allegation is a novel idea to most conspiracy theorists, but come on! .... Extraordinary charges require extraordinary proof, yes? As to your question: "Do you then categorically deny that any such relationship existed between yourself and Vince Bugliosi?", perhaps you [a person named "Duke", to whom Myers was talking to here] missed Mr. Bugliosi's acknowledgements on page 1515 of 'Reclaiming History'?" -- Dale K. Myers; May 7, 2008 http://JFKFiles.blogspot.com/2007/07/liftons-ghost.html DAVID LIFTON SAID: DVP: do yourself and others on this forum a favor, and "get real." DAVID VON PEIN SAID: LOL. This is hilarious. Just imagine, folks, David "JFK'S BODY WAS STOLEN OFF OF AIR FORCE ONE" Lifton is telling another person to "get real". The irony and pot/kettle nature of that statement is so thick you could slice it with a knife. In reality, David, I got "real" a long time ago. In fact, it was a short time after being exposed to your book of total fantasy ("Best Evidence") in 1981 that I started to get more and more interested in the JFK assassination. And after looking into the REAL EVIDENCE in the case (vs. Mr. Lifton's impossible-to-pull-off fantasy version of it), I soon began to realize that President Kennedy was shot only from BEHIND, and the person who shot him was most certainly a man named Lee Harvey Oswald. But thanks for today's laugh-fest, David. I enjoyed it. http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/ghostwriting.html http://Best-Evidence.blogspot.com Oy vey, David! You went there! You know dang well that your hero Bugliosi, in the book in question, praises Lifton's research abilities, and only questions the conclusions he comes to. You know dang well that Lifton acknowledges he was wrong about Lambert, and that this led him to be SURE about his claims the second time around. You know as well that there are a number of contradictions in Bugliosi's book, on things like the back wound location and timing of the second shot. Now, this suggests either 1) more than one writer was involved, 2) the scope of the material was too much for the Bugliosi, and he couldn't keep track of what he claimed was the truth from one page to the next, or 3) Bugliosi is senile. Now, which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) Uh Len, if you search for the Pipes book etc., you will see how this is part of many books on this subject. ANd I am not talking about Mathews book on Kennedy and Nixon. He did that column for a newspaper before he got the MSNBC job. As per empirical evidence, that is empirical. I think you mean direct evidence. If you do, then sorry, those meetings don't get transcribed. ANd those directives don't get declassified for years--see the one on the CIA managing the media on teh JFK case. Have you dug up any of these by the way? You are not known as a front rank primary documents kind of researcher right? I meant statistical evidence of a significant uptick in the use of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ in a derogatory sense after the movie came out rather than 2 - 3 anecdotes. I don’t think that is the case in 1990 there were 303 hits for the term in Google News and 655 in 1993 which suggests use of the term increased 2.16x, but more recent articles are more likely to be indexed. I did searches for "scientific theory" in the same years and got 130 and 183 results a 1.41x increase thus use of CT increased 53% more than the `control’. The same holds with books use of CT increased 51.2% and ST 8% thus the former increased 40% more than the latter not exactly a radical change especially since a motion picture promoting a CT had recently been a major hit and doesn’t fit with you theory that “the Powers that Be drummed into the MSM, the phrase "Conspiracy Theorists" as a reaction to Stone's film.” Please provide a link to the Matthews article. Edited February 28, 2011 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) You know dang well that Lifton acknowledges he was wrong about Lambert. When did he ever do that, Pat? I sure don't recall ever hearing his retraction re Lambert. Bugliosi...praises Lifton's research abilities. Yeah, I know. And Vince was way too kind to Lifton when it comes to David's "research", too. Because anyone who believes that ALL of the shots came from the front, with ZERO shots coming from the TSBD or anywhere to the rear of JFK's limousine, doesn't deserve even the slightest bit of praise, IMO. What type of serious "research" could possibly make any JFK researcher come to such a totally absurd conclusion re the location of all of the gunshots? It's too crazy to even discuss. The "All Shots Came From The Front" silliness is probably even more ridiculous than Lifton's "body alteration" tripe. Edited February 28, 2011 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 You know dang well that Lifton acknowledges he was wrong about Lambert. When did he ever do that, Pat? I sure don't recall ever hearing his retraction re Lambert. As I recall the circumstances of Lifton's claims re Bugliosi and Myers... Lifton's gut instinct was that Lambert helped Bugliosi. He then got slapped around for it. He then contacted his friends in the publishing world to get the real story, and found that, while Lambert and others in LN-land were NOT involved, the two men he identified, and who are acknowledged by Bugliosi in his book, were heavily involved, and were, in effect, co-writers. (You can probably find his posts claiming as much on this forum.) My instinct tells me Lifton is right. 1. Unlike almost everyone else on this forum, Lifton has had a best-seller. I don't think it's unrealistic to suspect that, as a result, he would be able to get the skinny on something like the real identity of Bugliosi's ghost-writers. 2. As annoying as I find Bugliosi's book, I would like to think he personally is not as dishonest and shallow as indicated by some of the inconsistencies in his book. As a result it makes more sense to me to believe these inconsistent passages were written by different writers, and that Bugliosi's crappy editor is partly to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 You know dang well that Lifton acknowledges he was wrong about Lambert. When did he ever do that, Pat? I sure don't recall ever hearing his retraction re Lambert. As I recall the circumstances of Lifton's claims re Bugliosi and Myers... Lifton's gut instinct was that Lambert helped Bugliosi. He then got slapped around for it. He then contacted his friends in the publishing world to get the real story, and found that, while Lambert and others in LN-land were NOT involved, the two men he identified, and who are acknowledged by Bugliosi in his book, were heavily involved, and were, in effect, co-writers. (You can probably find his posts claiming as much on this forum.) My instinct tells me Lifton is right. 1. Unlike almost everyone else on this forum, Lifton has had a best-seller. I don't think it's unrealistic to suspect that, as a result, he would be able to get the skinny on something like the real identity of Bugliosi's ghost-writers. 2. As annoying as I find Bugliosi's book, I would like to think he personally is not as dishonest and shallow as indicated by some of the inconsistencies in his book. As a result it makes more sense to me to believe these inconsistent passages were written by different writers, and that Bugliosi's crappy editor is partly to blame. First off, Greg Parker mentions that the first conspiracy theorists were the cops, and indeed, two of the top Secret Service agents, when the met up immediately after the assassination, agreed that the murder was "a plot." As for Bug's ghost writers. In his Acknowledgements (p. 1513-1518), Bugliosi, "...For Book One, I was fortunate to have two people who made noteworthy writing contributions. Even though he worked with me for a relatively short part of my long journey, no one helped me as much as Dale Myers, the Emmy Award-winning computer animation specialist and superb student of the assassination from Detroit, Michigan. Dale helped me in the writing of several sections of Book One, most notably on acoustics, "Four Days in November" (particularly in the Oswald interrogations), and all matters dealing with photography. I am deeply grateful to Dale for lending his time, energy, and considerable expertise to this literary project." "The other person who played a writing role, though a smaller one, was Fred Haines, a soft-spoken and extremely well-read intellectual. Fred's fine hand has survived in several places of the "Lee Harvey Oswald" and "Four Days in November" sections." And it was Fred's suggestion, a great one, I feel, and one for which I am indebted to him, to have the latter section, and to a lesser extent the Oswald biography (as opposed to every other part of the book), written in a narrative style normally reserved for fiction, giving this part of this nonfiction book a literary quality it would not have had without it...." The guy I am most interested in however, is one Starling Lawrence. "The following people have helped me the most in this terribly long journey I am now bringing to an end. I must start with my erudite editor - by my lights, the best in the business - Starling Lawrence. Star's limitless patience and unconditional support always saying yes, never no, to whatever I needed, coupled with the sagacious advice and guidance he gave me through the many years, elevates him to a very special position on my list. No one has a better ear, if you will, for the right or wrong word in a sentence. And the times were very numerous when Star immediately caught that word, or told me I was going over the top on some point. And when someone as highly critical as I am (I'd find fault with a beautiful morning sunrise) accepts the advice of someone over 90 percent of the time, that person has to be special. And Star is. I've been so blessed to have him as my editor on this monumental odyssey of mine." But Vincent, you are not on this Odyssey alone, as there are many of us who have also sailed these waters. And Vince, you don't mention the money Starling Lawrence gave you, many thousands of dollars over decades, and the money he paid Myers and Haines and other mercenaries you hired to finish the book, and the million or so you got from HBO and Hanks. Where did Lawrence get the money? W.W. Norton? And how come real journalists like Dick Russell, Tony Summers, Bill Turner or any of a dozen other real, independent reporters, can't get that kind of money or support or documentary film/TV serial backing? I asked this question to David Lifton, as he seems to have inside publishing sources, but he failed to reply to my question about Starling Lawrence, so now I ask it again, and for anyone who has any background info on Lawrence and where the money came to support Bugliosi's "research" for two decades, and two ghost writers. BK JFKcountercoup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted February 28, 2011 Author Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) My guess would be that the stuff about Bugliosi getting a "$1-million advance" (as some CTers have suggested) is blown up way out of proportion. And given Lifton's totally-shot-to-hell credibility regarding this "Reclaiming History" matter, why on Earth would anyone believe anything he says about it? I suppose Rosemary Newton, Bugliosi's secretary, is a rotten xxxx and cover-up artist too, eh, when she said this in 2007?: "In response to David Lifton's outrageous, malicious and contemptible lie regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...where he claims ghost writers wrote this great book (which will be read by generations to come, long after Mr. Lifton and the rest of us are gone, including all the die-hard conspiracy theorists)...I say, unequivocally, that NO section of Mr. Bugliosi's book was ghostwritten." -- Rosemary Newton; July 2007 Edited February 28, 2011 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 ... I suppose Rosemary Newton, Bugliosi's secretary, is a rotten xxxx and cover-up artist too, eh, when she said this in 2007?: "In response to David Lifton's outrageous, malicious and contemptible lie regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book...where he claims ghost writers wrote this great book (which will be read by generations to come, long after Mr. Lifton and the rest of us are gone, including all the die-hard conspiracy theorists)...I say, unequivocally, that NO section of Mr. Bugliosi's book was ghostwritten." -- Rosemary Newton; July 2007 You're getting defensive David Von Pein, nice show for Rosemary, but no cigar son. I say David Lifton has thrown the proverbial wrench into Vin's Reclaiming Hstory credibility... after 20 years of research and this is the best Vin could do? Hire two writers to do a good portion of the gig? Oh, my! And what does Dale *look at my EMMY* Myers have say about all this? Does he think his cartoons are the final word? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now