Jump to content
The Education Forum

Anthony Thorne

Members
  • Posts

    552
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

9,832 profile views

Anthony Thorne's Achievements

  1. It sounds horrendous. Recent review by Martin J. Kelly. https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2021/10/cruising.html Is this stuff meant to coincide with the JFK documents decision? I mean, get a load of this. Alecia Long links the above review on her Twitter, and notes, "Thanks to Martin J. Kelly and Max Holland." Kelly and Holland are both cited, along with a few others, at the bottom of this Fred Litwin article slamming Josiah Thompson's recent book. So I think you're facing a group effort here. https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/a-reminder-read-nick-nalli-s-important-review-of-josiah-thompson-s-book-last-second-in-dallas And I see the former site is Holland's. That explains most of it.
  2. Some additional info. Sharon Litwin published this article in 2016. https://www.vianolavie.org/2016/07/12/new-orleans-and-the-kennedy-assassination-29758/ James and Wardlaw were the co-authors of the 1967 book PLOT OR POLITICS?: THE GARRISON CASE AND ITS CAST. So go figure why Litwin would choose to speak to the authors of a Garrison book that had been written nearly half a century earlier, rather than an author that had looked at the events years later.
  3. Sharon Litwin passed away in 2016. https://www.vianolavie.org/2016/06/24/in-memory-and-honor-of-sharon-litwin-nolavie-co-founder-and-president-26824/ There can't be that many Litwin's in the world involved in studying the JFK case, but Fred Litwin wrote I WAS A TEENAGE JFK CONSPIRACY FREAK. If Fred Litwin is writing a book debunking JFK assassination theories, and Sharon Litwin is collecting papers on Clay Shaw that end up being used in another debunker's book on the same topic, you wouldn't really be going out on a limb by wondering if Fred and Sharon Litwin were related. Regarding Alecia Long, the author of CRUISING FOR CONSPIRATORS, I wrote this back in May.
  4. I'm been looking at Joan's book on the Liberty incident this week. Very in-depth and striking - and seeing Richard Helms briefly shown in a good light (or at least better than horrible) was unexpected.
  5. Early reviews are in for H.P. Albarelli's COUP IN DALLAS. I have a new, 4000 word essay appearing at the end of COUP IN DALLAS, which was written by me earlier this year following several months discussion and research with Albarelli's co-author Leslie Sharp. The process of putting together that essay uncovered a number of additional bits and pieces, some of which will eventually be posted here on the board. COUP IN DALLAS is out very soon on Amazon, and there are listings of either October 26th or mid November for the release date. It went to the printers a couple of weeks ago, so there will be no more delays.
  6. I think you could expand the group of witting participants - Dallas, Secret Service etc - if you figure that some of them knew that something had been planned, and had then been done, but they still had no idea who did it or planned it. i.e "Do us a favour and let Jack Ruby through the door / keep the crowd at bay while these guys get in a Rambler and escape / stop any nosy journalists from asking questions etc etc etc". Followed by "You don't need to know the details. But keep everyone happy and you'll be rewarded." There could be plenty of 'insiders' who were on the periphery of the plot, who played a part, and who benefited, yet who truthfully have no idea who planned it, who the triggermen were, what the full details of the plot was. All they likely knew was if they played their part and did their piece and kept their mouths shut, they'd be happy with what they were given afterwards.
  7. It gets even more interesting if the latter group was doing any work on behalf of the former (and I have no special knowledge or insights, but it seems possible). So both authors could be more correct than not.
  8. Really good review and I need to go back to my Kindle and have another look at Newman's book, which I've read most of but not all of. I think Volume 4 isn't too far off.
  9. Beyond his work in maybe a hundred different think tanks (CSIS being a key one for him), James Woolsey has spent decades helpfully putting his name to endless reports and blue ribbon commissions urging more weapon sales for the Pentagon. So when Woolsey puts his name to a book on the JFK assassination, you’re really getting the Cold War hawk perspective unfiltered.
  10. Dylan Avery's new film, online in a few days. From the clips it looks like the title points back to James Douglass' JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE, redirecting the focus towards the events of 2001.
  11. The hardcover is here if you need to look further. https://archive.org/details/legendsecretworl00epst/page/n7/mode/2up
  12. Good question. The narrator and director of the piece is Coleman Lowndes. He worked (2013-2015) for Media Matters for America, a non-profit org (funded by somebody) that specialised in attacking conservatives. Fair enough. https://www.linkedin.com/in/colemanlowndes Hany Farid, the 'Professor at University of California, Berkeley', is also a 'Senior Advisor' to the Counter Extremism Project. The CEO of that outfit, Bush appointee Mark Wallace, is also the CEO of United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), which has Mossad chiefs Meir Dagan and Tamir Pardo, and R. James Woolsey as members. https://docs.house.gov/meetings/FA/FA13/20171025/106544/HHRG-115-FA13-Bio-WallaceM-20171025.pdf Hany Farid is also an advisor to the Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity, which I'm sure means well for everyone. The Executive Director of that, Ann Cleaveland, was previously a director for the Climateworks Foundation, which has Nancy Lindborg on the board. Lindborg is CEO of the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, set up by weapons profiteer and Team B funder David Packard, who spent a lot of the early 80's on boards and reports and commissions urging new weapons expenditures. R. James Woolsey was on a lot of those commissions alongside him. So nice company Farid keeps. Without being able to pinpoint exactly who said what to Vox, or who asked Farid to give his expert opinion, I think the Vox piece is junk with an agenda, which everyone here guessed already.
  13. That stuff is typical of The Guardian. Dylan Avery's new feature film THE UNSPEAKABLE releases online next week. I'm not sure if this is the forthcoming Avery feature I heard about on the grapevine. He may well have another one on the way besides this one. Rosie O'Donnell will be doing a live Q&A with Avery and some of the interviewees when it launches. https://www.ae911truth.org/theunspeakable?fbclid=IwAR1rtncDN6LDM1Uw3pyx15Iflmm04ax_k1qr0IsvZCLqv5Y4ImseW3fcd9w
  14. Zelikow was also on the National Security Council Principals Committee (NSC/PC) when Allison was involved in the NSC as well, and he then followed Allison to the same department at Harvard. The NSC/PC is the 'senior interagency forum for consideration of policy affecting national security', which should give you an idea of their outlook on planning the future directions of the Pentagon, the national security state, and the military industrial complex, all of which had reps deeply wired into Allison's group at Harvard. The NSC/PC also has the autonomy of making decisions without Presidential approval. It was set up as an adjunct of the regular NSC, so it could cover stuff in a hurry without having to bother the President about it. In reality, this also gave the group free reign to go behind the President's back, if they wanted to.
  15. The rewrite was co-written with Philip Zelikow, a protege of May’s who became a fixture in Allison’s department.
×
×
  • Create New...