W. Tracy Parnell

One quote from this interview: "But at 75, Stone can be someone who tilts at windmills — and susceptible to making provocative statements that are hard to defend. Listening to him talk, I found myself not wanting to push back against his questionable assertions, of which there were many."

Exclusive: Perry Russo Talks in Baton Rouge, Part Two (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Celebrities Who Have Been Friendly with Putin (onthetrailofdelusion.com) Oliver Stone Blames the United States for Putin's Invasion of Ukraine (onthetrailofdelusion.com) Oliver Stone has "Garrisonized" JFK Conspiracy Theorists (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Oliver Stone's JFK Revisited Screenwriter Reprimanded by ARRB in 1998 (steveroeconsulting.wixsite.com)

Oliver Stone Says Vladimir Putin Fell into an American Trap (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

The Day Vladimir Putin Fooled Oliver Stone with a Doctored Video (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Good article by Steve Roe: Is This How Real Documentaries Are Made? (steveroeconsulting.wixsite.com) And one by Fred on Roger Waters who is touted by Jim D. as one of the people in "high places" that are promoting Stone's film: Roger Waters Loves "JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass" (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

A couple of new articles by Fred: Oliver Stone Watches Dr. Strangelove with Vladimir Putin (onthetrailofdelusion.com) JFK Supported Ukrainian Independence (onthetrailofdelusion.com) Check out my Fred Litwin JFK Revisited archive: Fred Litwin's JFK Revisited Archive ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

Stone said: "I can't believe we haven't gotten one review from a major media, publication, of this film. One review. Editorials, but no reviews. Not one movie critic. Not one television critic." Of course, this can be interpreted in different ways. But it is an admission that the major outlets and reviewers have ignored him.

Oliver Stone Admits "JFK Revisited" is a Flop (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Stone is a Z-film alteration believer: Oliver Stone Claims the Zapruder Film was Altered (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

I don't know that he will or won't. All I know is the Posner/Litwin vs. Jim D./Stone debate was on the table.

Speaking of debates, there is a standing offer for Jim D and Oliver Stone to debate Fred Litwin and Gerald Posner. So far crickets.

Roe responds here: JFK Revisited Screen Writer Crawfishes on Dallas to Chicago Airmail Overnight Delivery (steveroeconsulting.wixsite.com)

Regarding Jim D's claim that Kleins could not have received Oswald's order in one day: Debunking Another JFK Myth - Overnight Mail from Dallas to Chicago (steveroeconsulting.wixsite.com)

I watched what I could. But I know what is in it. I have friends who have a stronger stomach than I do. 😀

His life savings and his good reputation (at least partially).

There isn't a lot of cinematography in it since it is mostly archival footage. But what is there is good, I guess.

Nightmare Alley.

Why? Let's review. You have a professor of History at LSU who specializes in writing about sexuality. She has written a book on Garrison that is backed up with solid evidence and arguments. Faculty - Alecia P. Long | LSU Department of History You have Fred, a gay man, who has written three books-two about the JFK case. You have Kirchick, another gay man, who is a journalist and is somewhat controversial but so what? All three seem to me to be perfectly qualified to say what they have about Garrison. And let's not forget that Garrison has been criticized for many years by the majority of those who have looked at his investigation. It is only recently that people are catching on to the fact that his investigation was not only improper and wrong-headed but also homophobic (as was much of society at the time). Jim D. has too much into this now to ever quit. But no one can redeem Garrison at this point. History has shown he was wrong, and it is only going to get worse for him.

I just watched part of JFK Revisited the other day. Horrible. I am glad that Fred Litwin and others are debunking it: Oliver Stone's JFK Revisited ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

Fact Checking James DiEugenio, Part Two (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

I see nothing nefarious if Shaw was a paid agent. Everyone that worked for the CIA wasn't in on a plot to kill JFK. I just believe that the evidence tends toward the theory that Fred has put forward.

I don't remember Helms saying anything other than Shaw was a domestic contact. Perhaps you can post a link if you have that info. The bottom line for me is that McDonald based his statement on the HSCA Sequestered CIA collection. That collection is now available, so if the document(s) supporting his statement are there, they will be brought out by someone.

As I mentioned, he was asked if he "worked" for the CIA. That implies being paid and I see nothing beyond the McDonald summary that indicates that. The documents are now available, so certainly someone will be able to find the source document that shows Shaw was paid if it exists. But so far nothing. If you read Fred's article, (I won't bother to repeat these here) he outlines some other problems with McDonald's work which support the idea that he (or staff) could have just made a mistake. Why did Shaw not mention his DCS work under oath? He may have simply thought so little of it that it wasn't worth talking about. EDIT: Or Shaw knew that if he talked about it that Garrison would try to make more of it than there was.