Allen Lowe

I should mention just as an interesting sidenote. A friend of mine has been working on a book about Chuck Berry, and he contacted me last year because he knew Bolden was on my friends list on Facebook, and it turns out Bolden’s son, who died very young, was Chuck Berry’s first drummer. they did get in contact and apparently had a good interview. Bolden is an incredibly nice guy.

The Henry Lee exchange is in the book? I just ordered it.

Also, Gaeton Fonzi’s book is filled with accounts of leads that were ignored or discouraged.

I was making a joke.

I would acquire the book but I think it’s overpriced.

Just to note, first of all, if the Paines thought it was right wing radicals who killed JFK, they wouldn’t have said “we know who did it,” which is cryptic and somewhat anonymous, and not how people talk unless they are trying to avoid saying something specific. Second of all I find that post above about Marina, portrayed as sexually wanton, as some kind of stereotypical tramp who, god forbid, smoked cigarettes, to be extremely sexist and offensive. It is one thing to simply be citing old-style mores; but another to use that kind of tone. I find that post to be very troubling.

Oh come on. He is saying he was guilty of participating in the plot, just not in the way Garrison charged him. “Garrison had the right idea. He was almost right.” He would not have said this if he had no connection to the plot.

It’s funny but you guys always like to bring up the crazy people. Except you leave out key people like Gus Russo and Gerald Posner.

Except for the fact that if you read Joan Mellen’s book A Farewell to Justice, Shaw made a death bed confession to having participated in the plot.

I am not a fan of LBJ and consider him to be a war criminal, but to call the President who passed the most important and comprehensive Civil Rights Legislation of his time "completely amoral" is not accurate. Contradictory as it all may seem.

Deleted

Oswald was innocent, but he wasn't an innocent, IMHO. Nagell warned him well before the assassination that it was in the works and that he was being manipulated. But he was making some money and he likely was too naive to realize how vulnerable he was.

first of all it was no crime to be anti-Communist in the 1950s, and I am not talking about McCarthy-ite types. If you know anything about sectarian battles on the Left, a lot of anti-Communist response was in reaction to Stalin and Soviet expansion in Eastern Europe. Do you support Stalin? The Russian invasion of Hungary? The KGB murders in Czechoslavakia? There was an entire (socialist) Left that opposed communism; read Irving Howe, Harold Greenberg, Theodore Solatoroff, and many others. I suppose you also support forced collectivization and the Gulag, two Russian policies that resulted in the deaths of millions. And what pro-military action are you referring to?

that article above about Lowenstein is so completely dishonest that I don't know where to start. I knew Lowenstein and worked in his campaign around 1970 - which he LOST because of Republican gerrymandering. Kind of a surprise since he was a CIA asset, huh? Aside from that there is not ONE scintilla of actual, written file evidence that Lowenstein was anything other than a misguided idealist in his early dealings with the NSA, something which he indeed talked about in later years (I remember one late-night session where he answered a question about this). And your citations are bogus - footnote #37 in that article, after claiming "he CIA was known to secretly pay for ventures such as Lowenstein’s field work in large amounts of cash," then indicates "Wilford mentions a payment of $10,000 in $50 bills Tom Braden made to Walter Reuther to give to his brother Victor Reuther in Europe. Wilford, The Mighty Wurlitzer, 63. " WTF? Something you may not be aware of was that Lowenstein approached RFK first for the Dump Johnson movement before he went to McCarthy when RFK turned him down. How the hell can you twist the Dump Johnson movement into something that was pro-CIA? I wa there, I was alive and in the anti-War movement of the time, and you have no sense of the history of that movement or of Lowenstein's brilliant work in galvanizing progressives. Yes, McCarthy was ultimately a disappointment, but he STOPPED LBJ, the president who had been previously cited as the CIA's man in the White House when he tried to subvert JFK's Vietnam policy. As for the Freedom Riders claims, you mention the "young recruits who followed Lowenstein to Mississippi, like Dennis Sweeney (who later became Lowenstein’s assassin), only to be abandoned and betrayed when Lowenstein quit the Mississippi scene because he thought others in the organizations there were communists, were caught in crossfire they did not fully understand, mostly because they thought they were fighting for Civil Rights, not against communism." Proof? What organizations was Lowenstein worried about? Can you quote the associates who were disappointed in Lowenstein? Proof, please. You say "For the Freedom Riders who had risked much during the struggle, Lowenstein appeared to betray not only them but the cause for which they were fighting." Who are these Freedom Riders? Proof? Citations? Let's see 'em. And you might try reading this article, which credits Lowenstein with being the FIRST person to start galvanizing student presence in the South during the Civil Rights movement: https://medium.com/stanford-magazine/martin-luther-king-speech-at-stanford-and-allard-lowenstein-pave-way-for-freedom-summer-87842ec98b0e Lowenstein was not perfect, but he was brilliant and progressive and was ultimately stopped by the right-wing establishment who saw him as a threat and an obstacle. So please stop spreading this pathetic disinformation. You have nothing but supposition and guilt by association. It is hateful the way the Left is so intent on self destruction, to the point of eating its own.

please try and keep up. It has been conclusively proven that Russo made his statements implicating Shaw and Ferry BEFORE he was given the sodium pentothal.

it's quite hilarious to see Parnell and Roe drool on and on about how the film was a flop. They are using criteria that is so outdated, it shows their desperation. So the measure of success is MSM and the networks and big media outlets? That model hasn't existed for over 20 years, now that social media and media visibility is so widely (and democratically) disbursed, on cable, streaming, you tube and on laptops for private use. Next they will tell us, to support their point of view, that Walter Cronkite refuses to interview Stone.

actually, not necessarily true. Equalization/filters can restore the sound to its more accurate original sound if done correctly, especially when one is working on a badly done recording. The original is no more "real" than a processed version. Each one is just an analog.

for someone who likes evidence, you sure make up a lot of stuff - like the whole scenario of putting the photos with her language records. Pure invention on your part, and not made any more real by so many layers of fake detail. If the back yard photos were real, they were put there for one purpose only: to "expose" Oswald in the aftermath as a crazy lefty/Communist. Of course there are a lot of problems with this, but you have to remember what the USA was like in 1963/64. This was all a big code for subversion and the cold war effects of American rabid anti-communism.

"He was of the Quacker affiliation..." well, you know what they say, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....

the problem with all of this "look alike"stuff is that to our contemporary eyes a lot of people look the same in these years because hair was generally clipped so short. Not to mention that everybody was thin in those days.That's a problem here; there were probably 10 LHO look-alikes on every Dallas block.

nice try but that's the kind of "truth" that tends to discredit assassination research. This is third-party testimony and by none other than Humes and Boswell, who lied repeatedly about the autopsy. You are going to have to do better, maybe a memo or testimony by Burkley himself, or by RFK et al. Because we know that military and CIA disinformation has continually tried to blame the victims in the murder.

to me, sorry, that's all part of the CIA disinformation campaign, to blame the victim(s), JFK and then RFK. Of course the CIA tried to blame the assassination on blowback, to JFK's supposed attempts to assassinate Castro; but as Jim DiEugenio has pointed out, the CIA's own report on the Castro assassination efforts made clear that it was done without JFK's knowledge. JFK was getting ready to negotiate RECOGNITION of Cuba; Operation Mongoose was basically busy work to keep the anti-Castroites off his back. And can you cite any real and documented proof that RFK felt guilt about the assassination?

problem with this is that the Zapruder film did not go public until 1975; we did NOT see it in the '60s. You probably saw it at the same time I did (as young as you might have been; but I was only 21) -

yes I want to dispute that. What shred of evidence do you have?

I'm only going to add my knee-jerk reaction, which starts, as with Jim and Pamela, by agreeing that historically JFK's very progressive agenda is now understood to have extended even to the Middle East, giving us even more reason to admire him; but to warn, as I have seen in a few places on Facebook where the Israeli connection has been cited, against what, in that forum (FB) has regularly turned to stereotypical anti-Semitic ravings about Jews controlling the world. Of course I am NOT saying that this is happening here in any way, only that we need to be cautious in this respect and that I have to admit my defenses rise up whenever I see Israel mentioned in this context.