Anthony Thorne

So some of these docs are still redacted. Page two, name or group censored. https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2022/198-10007-10008.pdf

Shenon has been an establishment guy favoured to write limited hang outs and non revealing revelations. The fact that his history of the 9/11 Commission was headlined 'the uncensored history' of that group was pretty funny. Hopefully Newman and others can find some worthwhile things in the new docs today once the staffers have had their coffee and pressed the button to release them.

Dore has over a million subscribers to his channel, and Webb's first volume is now at #419 of all books on Amazon - a best seller. Not bad, hope Trine Day can keep it in print and make themselves some bucks.

Joe - just bought your Wilder and Coen Brothers books and read the latter in an evening. Really good. Will be getting some more of your others in January, should have most of them by Feb (doing a big book buy catch up). Always enjoy your insightful writing.

Z-Library has apparently been mirrored and should be accessible to folks who follow the procedure in the article. I've never used it and have too many books on my Kindle to read already. https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-opens-the-door-to-z-library-and-other-pirate-libraries-221118/

I'm not sure why Shenon cares one way or the other, but anyway - Yeah I gather that the agencies are asserting this, and asserting that. Someone should clear up for me then why Shenon starts off mentioning what the agencies are 'asserting', as in and then he continues with a gee whiz recitation of what the agencies asserted, while providing zero truth that any of it is true, as in Did the documents you gave Shenon list who all those endangered foreigners were, or did the documents just quote people from within the intelligence agencies saying that those folk existed, and that everyone should trust that they exist, and that the documents should be withheld for that reason? Disclaimer - I generally view Shenon as the mainstream guy brought out every time anyone wants him to stand in front of something awkward so he can stand there with his arms stretched wide blocking the doorway saying "Nothing to see here folks!".

I think most of her writings have to do with hidden agendas of some sort. She also has some long articles on 9/11, the anthrax attacks of 2001, blackmail of US politicians and other topics. RFK Jr's next book, out in the next couple of months, is a deep dive into the origins of Covid-19. and by the look of it he jointly implicates US officials and some of their witting counterparts at a facility in China. I have an ebook copy of his last book on Anthony Fauci - it's a very detailed read, heavily footnoted, but I've been too busy to absorb it entirely. I think the general thesis of both Webb and RFK Jr. is that there was a lot of joint work over a certain number of years by government and. military officials to research and possibly create a new type of virus from old ones, and the debate then ranges between how much of what followed was between 'oops, that shouldn't have happened', or alternately 'gee, since this has happened, I guess all these other things we wanted to do can happen too', while various affiliated folks and companies made billions. But I haven't dived yet into the details. Oliver Stone's praise for RFK Jr's earlier book is below, and the upcoming volume is linked under it. https://www.amazon.com.au/Wuhan-Cover-Up-Officials-Conspired-Military/dp/1510773983/ref=sr_1_15?crid=2QTGDV7N8I6I0&keywords=the+real+anthony+fauci&qid=1668368017&qu=eyJxc2MiOiIxLjc1IiwicXNhIjoiMS40NCIsInFzcCI6IjEuNTQifQ%3D%3D&sprefix=real+anthony+%2Caps%2C247&sr=8-15

JFK 11/22 WTF? would be another good one.

The books are also available as regular ebooks on the Apple App Store, same price, and having purchased the first and browsed through the dense text it's my preferred way of reading this. It's quite a chunky read, heavily footnoted, and feels easier to manage for me on my big iMac screen. Webb did a long interview last week with - of all the people - radio host Glenn Beck, and the interview reinforces to a degree my thought that some of Beck's earlier Limbaugh-style persona was constructed for ratings. Anti-establishment discussion is certainly in vogue with the audiences that voted for Trump, and I wouldn't expect to see Beck interviewing every other researcher that we like - there's not a lot else on his channel of particular interest - but this is a decent discussion. A couple of JFK assassination books are referenced in Webb's first volume, Peter Dale Scott's DEEP POLITICS being main among them.

The book is on Kindle and has used copies in both paperback and hardcover. The hardcover looks like a nice piece of work. Sad news and I respect the amount of work he put into his project. https://www.amazon.com/ASSASSINATION-EYEWITNESSES-SPEAK-TOGETHER-SECOND/dp/B09XVGSZTT

Researcher Whitney Webb's two-volume series on the saga of crime, intelligence agencies and blackmail in the US has been released - ONE NATION UNDER BLACKMAIL, volumes 1 and 2. It'd be a stretch to call this directly JFK assassination related but there will likely be new things here that shed light on the overall picture. I thought I'd post this today as there are signs the books are already going in and out of print, or through repeat printings, and I wouldn't want to make bets on how long they may be available. Possibly Kris Milligan is keeping up with demand and these will be perennials but it might be wise to grab them now if you're interested. Volume 1 and 2 are below, with links to the Trine Day bundle, Amazon, and Book Depository. https://www.trineday.com/products/one-nation-under-blackmail-bundle https://www.amazon.com/One-Nation-Under-Blackmail-Intelligence/dp/1634243013/ref=sr_1_1?crid=M09ZFVM8DHO3&keywords=whitney+webb&qid=1668201820&s=books&sprefix=whitney+we%2Cstripbooks-intl-ship%2C342&sr=1-1 https://www.amazon.com/One-Nation-Under-Blackmail-Intelligence/dp/1634243021/ref=d_pd_sbs_sccl_2_1/136-2392897-9243051?pd_rd_w=DX85i&content-id=amzn1.sym.3676f086-9496-4fd7-8490-77cf7f43f846&pf_rd_p=3676f086-9496-4fd7-8490-77cf7f43f846&pf_rd_r=7RG3N9Z9JQF0EKCNCQ39&pd_rd_wg=t8DWV&pd_rd_r=c206cdff-415f-4c65-b04a-820d22569e45&pd_rd_i=1634243021&psc=1 https://www.bookdepository.com/One-Nation-Under-Blackmail-Whitney-Alyse-Webb/9781634243018?ref=grid-view&qid=1668202191508&sr=1-1

Barrie Zwicker - who once interviewed Chomsky for Canadian TV (watchable on Youtube) - had a long chapter on Chomsky in his book TOWERS OF DECEPTION. An excerpt is below -

I was about to write a long post about this but will keep it short and just say that Rolf Mowatt-Larssen's position at the Belfer School at the Kennedy School of Government has kept him in close proximity for years to an extremely interesting group of people intimately connected to the Pentagon, the various Joint Chiefs and advisors that were on duty during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the scandal-prone side of the CIA.

They might have planned Miami and Chicaco and Dallas together all in advance, with the notion that if one f*cked up, the next one a few weeks later would give them another shot.

Agree. At the very least, it would be hard to argue that it wasn't on their minds.

Go follow the activities of the Defense Science Board from the 1960's to the present day - the premiere advisory body in government for defense acquisition, with military leaders repeatedly touting their reports in congress - and then have a look at how many members of it ended up working for defense contractors, or (in one instance) moving from being the Secretary of the Army to becoming the head of Lockheed Martin. The rationale is greater than just making money. Some of them viewed the maintenance of the defense technology base - the trickle down effect of military spending into all other aspects of the economy - as a national security issue. If it waned, so did their lead in other economic areas. If it was boosted, the military spending would enable the entire broad church of American business and industry to reap the profits of innovation and technological investment. And if this helped companies two years down the line come up with a better weapon when required, the investment would be worth it. If they fell behind, how to anticipate what crisis they would fall short of being able to meet in the near to mid term future? That has remained a preoccupation of some members of the Pentagon - and their advisory bodies - for decades. The profits of sitting on a company board that procures weapons are just a pat on the head for ensuring the system is maintained. And the system as described above is fed more fuel for investment, and research, and spending through a long war, rather than a short one.

Thanks. That's an excerpt from what was originally a much longer piece, something like 40 or 50 minutes or so, and the long clip went down when Dawson's main channel was booted. I'm not a fan of seeing anyone's interviews deleted, it will be nice if the full piece resurfaces.

Ryan Dawson includes some 'Israel did it' moments in his recent documentary NUMEC-HOW ISRAEL STOLE THE BOMB. It's a reasonably well made documentary, unlike some of his prior stuff, but I found the JFK bits unconvincing as he doesn't detail them, just notes the timing of various initiatives JFK was about to move on prior to his death re Israel's nuke program. Dawson has said many times that he has a much longer thesis on how Israel, Angleton and others fit into the JFK assassination, but he hasn't made it public (although he apparently did a long interview for a regional channel of VICE where he discussed it for an hour, and the broadcaster either lost or wiped the tape). The documentary is below, you'll need to skip past the initial ramble to around six minutes in for the start of it, and Dawson's general unhappiness with everything the Israelis have been up to nearly gives it that same Michael Collins Piper tone from the outset, so people's mileage will vary. https://rumble.com/v1ijipl-numec-how-israel-stole-the-bomb-watch-party.html Dawson interviewed DiEugenio a couple of years ago. The long interview was on Youtube until that site dumped most of Dawson's stuff. Dawson can be decent on the occasional things here and there (pick your topic) that Israel was involved in, but stumbles when he chucks them in to things that they likely weren't. With Tim Tok being the big thing I expect lots more short and snappy videos appearing from various influencers telling everyone why the conspiracy theorists are off base. Easiest way to start fighting back against it, open a Tik Tok channel, film your favourite 30 second clip from a conspiracy documentary in vertical format with your phone, and upload it. Better than nothing.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/city-man-helps-research-book-132100494.html

Another CIA murder occurred just a couple of week's after Paisley's - largely overlooked, during the HSCA hearings, and of a Latin American specialist. I keep meaning to write it up here. Will try over the coming week or so.

In his most recent JFK book Summers said something like, "So, was there a conspiracy? Maybe, maybe not." I think Jim even pointed this out in his review at the time. Summers is dragged out for TV interviews and articles more than many other researchers. Is saying "Oswald did it." a more lucrative gig? I think it is.

A very good, thoughtful article.

For anyone wishing to chime in with additional posts about contemporary politics, please move it to another thread, otherwise anyone reading this thread to discuss COUP IN DALLAS will eventually be hit with a growing number of pages that are focused on other stuff. Thanks.

Thanks for the detailed response Pat, I appreciate hearing your thoughts in response to my own ramble above.

Yeah I would say Ferrell being a spook who somehow controlled the research community and derailed real research for decades would be a big reach. I didn't mention anything about that in my comment though. And it's great to know that 'having the occasional chat with someone in government who wanted to know what's going on' isn't the crime that she's normally accused of. But I don't care about what crimes she's normally being accused of, largely as I'm not the one making those accusations. I'm simply asking if anyone in intel might have wanted to keep tabs on the research community, and also whether Ferrell could have been a suitable candidate to do such a task. Because as noted, she did keep tabs on the research community. So the responses I've had back are basically, yeah she did, but she couldn't have had an alternate motive in doing so as she was such a warm and helpful person, or, yeah she might have chatted to people in government, but you should see what other people have accused her of, it's really nuts. You then eventually get to my point in the PS part of your message - "If anyone in the CIA or NSA or PSA wanted to know the status of the research community, they wouldn't need to have someone on the inside. The latest research has been routinely presented in newsletters and at conferences." I'll simply note, (a.) would 'having someone on the inside' tell them anything more about the research community? I'm assuming it would. - (b.) is there ever any research done in the field that doesn't get presented in a newsletter or at a conference? I'm assuming there is. - (c.) Do those conferences happen monthly, biannually, or just every November, so would intel be sitting around going, don't worry guys, we know it's six months away but that researcher we've heard about will probably be in Dallas in November, unless he pops up in a newsletter first, and (d.) I know Ferrell (correct me if I'm wrong) didn't write a lot of articles, but I know she sometimes popped up at conferences because she spoke at one at least once, so hearing that she couldn't have been an insider keeping tabs because she attended conferences and helped others organise them, doesn't really strike me as evidence that she couldn't have been an insider keeping tabs. There's been talk a couple of times in this thread that Ferrell has been weirdly accused of being in control of the research community, and / or derailed the work of researchers. I would have figured simply keeping an eye on what was happening would have been a perfectly welcome goal for intel in its own right, and she could have been asked to do it without necessarily having been a super spook who flew back over to Langley every other week likes James Bond. Joe made points about her background, and points about her behaviour when he met her. I'm yet to see them really refuted, other than comments saying jeez, do you really think she was a super spook, or isn't it funny how these crazy accusations get thrown at her. she was such a helpful lady, etc etc. The truth could have been quite mundane. She helped out, and kept an eye out, for decades because she was asked to, and the people asking her to do it didn't need her to do anything more than that. I'm not sure if this is any more astonishing or ludicrous a suggestion than a JFK author (Epstein) later becoming an establishment spokesperson for the neoconservatives, or having a Brandeis academic (Jacob Cohen) come out of the blue when Salandria was offering debates, and then go on to devote most of a 50 year career to attacking JFK conspiracies and the research community. Wondering if Ferrell had been gently asked to assist matters from another angle doesn't strike me as being particularly beyond the pale. Are there many other members of the research community who didn't bother to do much research of their own, but were always around to corral the work of others? Just wondering.