Jump to content
The Education Forum

James DiEugenio

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About James DiEugenio

  • Rank
    Super Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

27,465 profile views
  1. My pal Aaron Good got the editors over at Covert Action magazine to print this essay. It took some work but I think it turned out well. I could not have so profusely filled it out with all those pictures. I only had one problem with the editing. They wanted to include a footnote to Hersh's Dark Side of Camelot. I said anyone who knows me would understand I would not use a footnote to that book even if I was undergoing enhanced interrogation techniques. So we got that straightened out. These people are trying to revive the paper Zine of BIll Schaap and Ellen Ray who made history when they pu
  2. That was surprising to me also. I don't think Don found that interview with him, which I thought was a real hum dinger. That is why I provided the link. Saxon was really urging a flow of easy credit and the opening of more banks everywhere with competitive interest rates. And he specifically named the Fed and Chase Manhattan in the interview. The Steel Crisis was a tell tale event in retrospect. I think the guy you are referring to is Elmer Moore. There is little doubt today by anyone in the know, Moore was a keystone in the cover up in more than one way. And he despised Kennedy
  3. I would be willing to wager that almost no one ever heard of James Saxon. Very, very few books ever mention the man. Turns out to be an important figure. Once you fit him into Kennedy's economic program. The best book I know of on that is Don Gibson's Battling Wall Street. Which, again few people have read. IMO, its the best book on the subject of Kennedy's economic policy. JFK was opposed in this also by the Power Elite. Just recall the Steel Crisis, which I go into here. It was over more than just steel. And James Saxon was just about starting a rebellion against the Fed and David
  4. Litwin's book on Garrison is so bad that I literally have to take a break for a couple of hours, sometimes a whole day or two. Because I start getting a headache. Who could possibly use as many dubious sources as Fred does? Its not just Aynesworth. You call the roll, they are all here: James Phelan, Dick Billings, David Chandler, Aaron Kohn, Harry Connick, the NBC special. I mean how can anyone use the last two--or any of these discredited people-- in this day and age? But Fred does, with no context or background--its like he is in a vacuum. Page after page, its literally a deluge of s
  5. BTW, John, i see in another thread, you were looking for Roy's book on Ferrie. You might want to ask Litwin for it. He references it in his Garrison book. From the quotes he uses, Roy's work is about what I thought it would be: a whitewash . From Freddie Boy's quoting from it, Roy apparently wrote that Ferrie probably just did not remember Oswald out of all his CAP students, and this may explain what he said to the FBI afterwards. I have not laughed so hard since reading David Heymann. Ferrie had just worked with Oswald that summer of 1963 and been seem with him at 544 Camp Street.
  6. Henry Hurt sources them to both the NO States Item and Ny TImes of February 20, 1969. I do not know if that is simply a report on them or if it actually is a picture exhibit.
  7. Yes it was. Officer Habighorst typed it in after he asked Shaw at his booking. Habighorst typed it in on the fingerprint card. It was also in the arrest report which was filled in while Shaw was present. Habighorst did not know anything about the importance of this issue, or if Shaw even had an alias. To him it was just a routine. He was the booking officer and he did fingerprints. After he went home that day, he was sitting with his wife watching television. The news came on and they talked about how Garrison thought Shaw was the Bertrand mentioned by Andrews in the Warren Report
  8. In the article I read in Politico, it does not say she had to put it in writing. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/20/senate-biden-intelligence-inauguration-460834 What is your source for that. It would seem really unusual, because it would have to be something that would have to be cleared with Biden.
  9. Wallace Milam, who was good on the medical evidence and NAA, also came to this conclusion.
  10. Let me add this. What this covert operation did, or should have done, was to expose what I consider two criminals in the DOJ. Carl Eardley and Carl Blecher. They both should have been thoroughly examined by the WC and HSCA. IMO, they helped cover up the true circumstances of what happened at the morgue that night. And they started way before the trial of Clay Shaw in 1969.
  11. I have a hard time buying that for a lot of different reasons. What is his evidence for that?
  12. He was a Colonel in the Army. He was working out of the AFIP in Washington at the time. He had been board certified in forensic pathology in 1961. But Humes and Boswell also requested an outside expert be brought in. That request was denied, which I think is important. Milton Halpern of NYC was the most famous forensic pathologist in America at the time. In fact, he was the first celebrity forensic pathologist. He said that he was so sure he was going to be called, he actually packed his bags. And he prepared a list of who he wanted as assistants. The thing is, what FInck testif
  13. Gary Aguilar did a nice job of showing that whole Kennedy family interference thing was a mirage. And he has done it more than once. Finck said he could not recall who the guy was who said, "I am in charge." He just described him as an Army general, which would eliminate Burkley, Mchugh and Lemay. The first was Navy, and the second and third were Air Force. I am assuming a military guy like Finck would know the difference in uniforms.
  14. No, the idea that Morales was not there was later proven by David Talbot and Jeff Morley. O'Sullivan later admitted he was in error in his book. BTW, when Talbot started that investigation, he was really convinced it was Morales. I know because i talked to him at that time.
  15. And he is about to get a 1-2 shot after David Mantik. Reading his book about Garrison is a real ordeal. Its so bad, I have to take a break about every other chapter for about two days so I don't get a migraine. But what does one expect about a book that was endorsed by Aynesworth, Gus Russo, and Paul Hoch? One example: How can anyone review the trial of Clay Shaw today and 1.) Not even mention the testimony of Pierre Finck, and 2.) Not note the number of provable lies by Shaw. Fred can. And that is why he got those endorsements.
  • Create New...