James DiEugenio

Here is an interesting interview with McLaren. Note, at the start, she talks about Brown v Board and Galbraith. Unlike Eisenhower and Nixon, the Kenendys announced they were going to support the Brown decision. Galbraith's whole economic philosophy was Keynesian, and also for the use of tax money to support public projects, in other words those that would help the populace in general. Galbraith of course worked for JFK. As she talks further, she explains how the super wealthy are repelled by that idea. This is why these people hated the Kennedys.

It was when I read Weisberg's analysis of Troy West's testimony in Whitewash that I first began to question the whole "Oswald's paper bag" concept in the Warren Commission. The obvious mystery then becomes, "Where did he get the paper?" I guess the conspirators realized that could be a problem also, since they sent the brown paper to Ruth Paine's house a day or so before the assassination.

Could you tell how the bag was constructed? Weisberg: Well I can tell you how they say it was constructed. I do not vouch for it and I do not believe it. The bag is supposed to have been made from wrapping paper, taken from a roll of wrapping paper, that was then currently used in the Book Depository building, and to have been shaped by folding and to have been sealed by paper tape that is used to wrap packages to seal them. Now there was one man, and only one man who was in charge of the wrapping table. And he was unlike most of the other employees of the Texas School Book Depository. A man who was almost lashed to his work bench. O’Connell: This was Troy Eugene West? Weisberg: Troy Eugene West. The commission, which has so much trouble with the testimony on the bag, and which had to use testimony, which was diametrically opposed to its conclusion, decided that it had best forget all about the testimony of Troy Eugene West, and he is not mentioned in the report. But it was the testimony of West that he got to work early, filled a pot with water so he could make coffee, and thereafter never left his work bench, the wrapping table, for the rest of the day. O’Connell: What day was that? Weisberg: The day of his testimony, I don't recall, but he- O’Connell: No I mean, when did he ... he's referring to his arrival at the Depository. Weisberg: Every day. O’Connell: I see. Weisberg: This was his custom. He never left his work bench, he said. And he said that Oswald was never there, that Oswald never got any paper, that he never had access to any paper. He testified 100% against the interests of the commission's story that Oswald was the assassin.

OMG, going from this interesting book to Bush pressuring Canada not to release Bloomfield documents? McLaren's book sounds like a fascinating expose of a whole school of government that arose in direct opposition to what had come about because of the Kennedy brothers--that is the idea that government can be a positive force in the public square. Believe me, I know the depth of this antipathy in the upper classes toward the Kennedys. Since I have been exposed to it and read about it. They really considered him the anti Christ. Her book exposes the Libertarian ruse that was used to counter Kennedy's appeal by cloaking it in a pseudo populist manner. And working in the field of education for decades I thoroughly understand how that conspiracy works--and that is what it is, make no mistake about it. When did real estate developer Eli Broad become an expert in education? The whole idea of charter schools, "choice" schools, breaking down teachers unions and privatizing education is backed by bundles of Broad money. Sort of like the Right to Work bills, which really are right to be poor and have no benefits acts. That is what this is about. Two opposed philosophies of government. And this board has to reduce it to Bush? Please. Let us see the big picture once in awhile.

Amazing how far afield this has gone. I guess no one can supply a credible answer to the original question.

Thanks for this. Always nice to have new evidence. I had never heard of this woman before.

In those days Harold was really a one man wrecking crew. I mean the guy completely destroyed the Warren Report many times over. I think his best two books were his first two, Whitewash and Whitewash 2. Let us also never forget what he says about Troy West here. That is crucial.

I am pretty sure Weisberg was the only first generation critic to begin to question Marrion Baker's story about the second floor lunch room encounter. He did so in his book Whitewash 2. In this interview he also talks about the dubious Howard Brennan. Those were the days when critics could easily get on Pacifica. No more. Harold was really outspoken and direct in these interviews. https://kennedysandking.com/videos-and-interviews/harold-weisberg-on-howard-brennan-and-marrion-baker

Let me repeat: As I wrote, he rather arbitrarily eliminated 3 possible sites. He then settled on the site that was behind the picket fence almost perpendicular to the car as it passes. As I noted this is not a smart choice. But it gave Gary the opportunity to say, no cannot be that since it would have hit Jackie. When he knew this was wrong........ And where does he then go? The sixth floor "sniper's nest" window. And where does the show end at? There. Images Ken, images.

The reason I asked that Ken is because in the review I trace how Gary walks around the plaza with his marksman trying to find a spot for a front shot. As I wrote, he rather arbitrarily eliminated 3 possible sites. He then settled on the site that was behind the picket fence almost perpendicular to the car as it passes. As I noted this is not a smart choice. But it gave Gary the opportunity to say, no cannot be that since it would have hit Jackie. When he knew this was wrong. And where does he then go? The sixth floor "sniper's nest" window. And where does the show end at? There. Do we have to connect the dots here? I don't think so.

One of the judges in the New Orleans circuit would not let the Commission be entered as evidence in court. In fact, he giggled when Shaw's lawyers tried to do so. No she is not a man, but that is not her real name. The HSCA data and raw information is much better than the Warren Commission. Which is why it was classified. The interviews by the HSCA, and by the ARRB under Jeremy Gunn and Doug Horne, the sum total of that evidence contains a quantum leap in this case. I could not have written what I did in The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today without that declassification and investigatory process. To me it was a continuation and extension in detail of what Finck said under oath at the Shaw trial.

Not really. He is saying that they did not happen at that certain time. Veciana has not replied yet. But that does that matter to Parnell? Heck no.

What the HSCA did with the Ida Dox drawings was a disgrace. BTW, I hope everyone knows, that is not her real name. Would you call this, "protecting the guilty"?

Ken: Did you read the articles I posted carefully? I don't think you did. In the documentary ITTC, does Gary mention the acoustics? If so, I must have missed it. Now, he lined up his GK shot from a point behind the fence that is almost perpendicular to the car. The reason he did this is so he could say that "No. Could not come from there since it would have hit Jackie." Groden pointed out to him that this was wrong since he had falsely arranged the actors. But anyone can see in the Z film that this is wrong anyway. But Gary kept it in the show. That is not journalism, it is propaganda. Secondly, when you watch the program you will see that Gary bypasses the spot where most commentators think the actual assassin did fire from. This is further down the fence, where it juts out toward the street and you would be standing over a storm drain. I defy anyone to stand in that spot with a scoped rifle and say a professional assassin would miss. And that is the reason Gary passed it up. If you want to continue to defend Gary, and take cheap shots at me, go ahead. But I know both the programs pretty well. What's next Ken? Gary is right and Ruby had no help getting into the police station?

Let me put it this way, I have never been to Tyler to check on it myself. But the estimate was that there were something like 200 people there. If anyone would have said he was not there, I think that info would be out there by now.

My review of Baker's book is below: https://kennedysandking.com/reviews/baker-russ-family-of-secrets

The late Mike Ruppert had some rather unkind comments about Wheaton. To put it mildly, he did not trust him.

Joe: That was the point that Frank was trying to make at the end. See, the whole Power Elite arrangement today does not necessitate that kind of extreme measure. As its evolved, especially after the film JFK, the pattern is to simply marginalize any dissident voices. And once you have them off in the corner, then you caricature them and ridicule them and that has the impact of discouraging anyone from going there. We got a good example of this in 2013 during Cyril Wecht's 50th anniversary conference in Pittsburgh. Time Magazine sent a reporter there to cover it. Who did he focus his article on? John McAdams. There were some very good presentations there but this guy just happens to hook up with McAdams, and focuses his article on his feud with Lisa Pease. I simply do not buy that this was an accident. And Alec Baldwin confirmed this at the Houston mock trial dinner. He said that at the fiftieth he had proposed to NBC a documentary special on the JFK case. They said words to the effect that they had more or less reconciled themselves to the official story. And this is a big TV/ film star! I mean that is how compromised the Power Elite is on this case. Now if you link Baldwin's rejected proposal with what was happening in Dallas at the time through Mayor Mike Rawlings, you understand how and why that anniversary turned out to be a disgraceful spectacle. Gary Mack sent the email to City Hall a bit less than two years in advance, and the rest of the Power Elite fell into place.

I think that is pretty much accurate Steven. But it does tells us something about the society we live in, and more pointedly, the MSM that controls it. I mean if Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews are still shoveling crap for the Power Elite in 2017, that says a lot does it not? And this is the allegedly liberal MSNBC.

Toward the end of Frank's review, he brings up a point that may be overlooked. In referring to Garrison's Playboy interview, he quotes him as saying he feared that America was becoming kind of a proto fascist state. Different in both cause and impact from the German and Italian models. And Frank brings in that fine comparison of Bertram Gross' book Friendly Fascism. Garrison continued that, with him, the real test of a democratic society was: What happens to the person who dissents? As did the DA, as did Oliver Stone, as does Groden. Unlike in Germany and Italy, they don't just liquidate you. At least most of the time. Instead they do something more insidious and more effective. They marginalize you, they ridicule you, they smear you, they harass you, they intimidate you. Until your name becomes synonymous with things like alien abductions. This is more effective for a simple reason: it sets you up as an example to others. See what we did to Oliver Stone, don't even think of going there. It works.

Robert Parry dwarfed Hersh in stature, honesty and range. And he was not a sell out on JFK.

This is an interesting incident. Which is kind of murky after all these years. Oswald wanted either Abt or an ACLU lawyer. According to Manchester, the ACLU had been turned away already. According to more than one witness, including Marrion Baker, Oswald was very loud and insistent about getting an attorney. (Armstrong, p. 893) Oswald first mentioned Abt on Friday at about 6 PM. He then asked for him again in the wee hours of Saturday morning. he then asked for him again on Saturday at about 11:30 AM. Later than afternoon, after taking to his brother Robert, he tried to call Abt, but it was not succesful. He then called Ruth Paine and gave her the info on Abt. Ruth said she was irritated by the request but did make one call to Abt. I do not think there are long distance records which show this. Has anyone seen any? According to Lou Nichols of the Dallas Bar, Oswald also wanted him to get Abt. Reportedly, Abt was out of town that weekend and therefore could not be contacted anyway. Oswald not having an attorney surely influenced what happened when he was in detention. And it might have helped prevent his shooting on Sunday.

Ron: To be fair to the late Gary Mack. In my article, which is Part 3 of my review of the show ITTC, I try and explain what I think happened to Gary. IMO, it was a confluence of events that caused him to go over to the Sixth Floor. He first marriage broke up, and he was forced to sell his nice home in a divorce sale, he lost his job, and he now became friendly with Dave Perry who was introduced to him by Gus Russo. So, although I do not condone what he did, I think those conditions at least put it in some perspective. We should also recall this: in the original series The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Gary was one of the two main talking heads, along with Groden. And I have to say, I thought Gary was pretty effective in that role, probably due to his prior radio experience. This is what I think gives Plaza Man its depth, contrast and also its sense of pathos and isolation. Groden refused the offer and he stayed true to that pledge he made at Arlington over Kennedy's grave. And we see the price he paid for that. Since the whole Power Structure of Dallas is arrayed against him. Again, as Frank Cassano wrote, quoting Garrison, "What happens to the individual who dissents?" Well, this film shows what happens. You get thrown in jail, you get ticketed 82 times, and on the anniversary, you get sidelined and marginalized by 200 cops as part of a Potemkin Village display. As I said, there is a longer version of the film that may come out later. I hope it shows more of that utterly sickening power play at the Fiftieth.

One last point vs Parnell. The idea that Gary Mack was only a "consultant" on those two Discovery Channel programs really defies all logic. Gary was not just the main talking head on both of them, he was really the controlling talking head, the dominant talking head. To the point that he was really more like the host. Secondly, not only was he given a producer creditor on ITTC, but if you look at the IMDB cast and crew roster, there is no writer listed for either show. I leave everyone to draw their own conclusions about that. Especially since it was Gary who did the online Q and A after.

1.) Tracy, those articles were written while he was alive! Gary had ample opportunity to reply to them point by point. To my knowledge, he never did. He only replied to ingenue types in an online Q and A. 2.) Why does one need a stage name when one is not on stage anymore? 3.) Disagree with his beliefs? ITTC's spurious point about Jackie being in the line of fire is even worse than I wrote above. How could fit be worse you may ask? As stated, Groden pointed out the falsity of the arrangement of the actors in the car during production. In other words before the thing was edited and broadcast. Yet, when it was broadcast, Mack still said Jackie would have been in the line of fire. He was then confronted with this false statement online. He now admitted it was wrong. Two comments. He was alerted to this during the production by Groden. Second, the audience in those online forums was much smaller than those who watched the film. Because of this, I did not give him the benefit of the doubt when he "erred" and said Oswald left a note for Marina the morning of the assassination.