Anthony Thorne

I'm clicking the link and it's asking me to log in with a user name and password. Is this an error, or something we need to do to read it?

Finn, the Screen Daily writer, mentioned to me that was tough to distil the scope of the film into a review (her words) but she’s happy that people appreciate what she wrote about it. It’s one of the few seemingly honest reviews I’ve read about the movie so far. Most others bring their axe to grind.

It barely seems worth noting that Jason Solomons, the author of the lines above, is himself a white male. More noteworthy is the fact that Solomons is a BBC figure and appears regularly on BBC TV and radio. So he's going to be following party mainstream establishment line no matter what, I think.

Many of those reviews aren't really reviews. But I expect journalists working for mainstream outlets to keep the party line when they encounter a film like this one.

Finn Halligan, the Screen Daily critic, had originally cited John Foster rather than Allen Dulles in her review. I wrote her a friendly correction and she wrote a thank you back, noting that it was the only thing she had wanted to check before posting but had been in a rush because of everything happening at Cannes. It's now been fixed. Quite a favourable review. Owen Gleiberman's review for Variety is half grudging concession about the documentary's fine technical qualities, half an uninformed rant arguing the case for Oswald's guilt.

Positive review. https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/jfk-revisited-through-the-looking-glass-cannes-review/5161529.article

Jesse Ventura was on The View a few times, talking about both JFK and 9/11 stuff and promoting his books (which were usually co-written with Dick Russell). In one instance - I think regarding his ‘government documents’ volume, which is fairly good - when Ventura returned, Whoopi told him on air that she had read his book, and to my eyes her demeanour suggested a few things in it had shaken her a little.

I'm looking forward to watching the documentary.

And they're rolling out the anti-Stone / anti-JFK conspiracy propaganda, for sure. Below, The Guardian's choice of front page headline for a minor news update in Australia about government vaccine contracts.

I thought Goldberg and Sutherland were perfect choices. Goldberg makes the material slightly more accessible to a mainstream audience, and Sutherland will impart the same power, tension and drama that he did in the original film.

I remember proof reading that section for Greg. It struck me when I read it that it was all research I’d never come across before. He’s quite a researcher and I hope his health improves.

John Loftus has printed the same story about Nixon and Dulles in a couple of his books, but I’ve only read it in Google Preview so haven’t checked his footnotes.

Both parts are good, and the Gladio stuff is very solid.

Newman drops a couple of historical bombshells throughout the years building up and into the Kennedy admin - including his perspective on the JCS, among others, making plans to carry out a successful nuclear strike against the Soviets. I'm keen to see how he expands upon his thesis in his book coming out at the end of the year.

And a quick observation. In part one, Newman makes reference to General David A. Burchinal, and the differing accounts of Burchinal's travels on the day of JFK's murder.

On November 4th, 1963, a schedule of presenters for the National War College was sent out to Agency Training Officers in the CIA. Burchinal was rostered to appear at the College later that month, to give a presentation and meet with people there. According to the CIA memorandum below (CIA-RDP78-03090A000100050044-7), Burchinal's session in Washington - discussing future U.S. military strategy - was scheduled for 0900 on the morning of November 22nd, 1963.

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78-03090A000100050044-7.pdf

Giving this a new thread so everyone can easily see the listing. The screenshots are identical, but this is a two-part presentation.

Part 1

Part 2

This is part 1.
 

https://youtu.be/BkyQIGGp3dA

Yes, both parts (from yesterday and today) should be up by the weekend.

Excellent review Jim. I read it, and will re-read it again tomorrow, as there’s quite a bit that deserves a chance to sink in.

John’s presentation today was good. 

Miles Copeland's 1969 book GAME OF NATIONS is here, downloadable as a PDF if anyone needs it.

https://archive.org/details/milescopelandthegameofnationstheamoralitzlib.org/page/n15/mode/2up

And his follow up volume WITHOUT CLOAK OR DAGGER is here.

https://archive.org/details/without-cloak-or-dagger-ocr/page/n1/mode/2up?q=without+cloak+or+dagger

Agree. I didn't detect malice in Calvin's posts, although this one made me raise my eyebrows.

Peter posted links to a podcast this week, noting that he was discussing stuff that he'd kept out of his books but was willing to talk about in an interview. I"ll have to check it out.

Yeah, but that’s Lance, not Scott.

Scott’s three big recent deep political books (RT9, AWM, ADS) all cover different, complimentary stuff.

Yeah I pretty much agree. I have most of Scott's books, and when I dig into them I usually find a bunch of stuff that I'd missed earlier. 

Joseph’s comments are always welcome. That noted, Calvin has linked to a pseudonymous post on a little known forum written by someone called ‘Firestarter’ who offers barely any detail to support the claim, and who seems largely unfamiliar with Scott’s career. So I think the assertion is already on shaky ground.

‘Too many books’?

Scott wrote less than ten political books over a 50 year period. Was that too many?

Quote

Since 2013, the mainstream media has really shut down dissent on the case

This is possibly a glass half full / glass half empty thing.

I think the media didn't shut down dissent, so much as they shut down reporting on it. And the reason they shut down reporting on it, was because the case for conspiracy has been made very strongly, a lot of people doubt the official story, and there's a wealth of info now available for anyone who wants to educate themselves on the topic.

Also - 

Quote

Public opinion polls are still "on our side" but nowhere near the large margins they once were from roughly 1988-2003ish

Who does the polling? If the Washington Post ever held a poll on the subject, and then printed the numbers, I wouldn't trust the numbers they printed. Ditto The Guardian.

Alecia Long has been sponsored by the Ford Foundation. She's the director of the Listening to Louisiana Women Oral History Project at Louisiana State University. The Ford Foundation covered the grant that started that project, from 2009 to 2013, and Long was put in charge of it.

Currently, the director of the Ford Foundation is Darren Walker, who is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Before joining the Ford Foundation, Walker was a Vice President of the Rockefeller Foundation. I'm assuming Long's book on Garrison will be warmly received by people who have sponsored her in the past.