W. Tracy Parnell

I'm not sure if he does or not, I don't recall specifically. Here is a blog post about Knudsen though which contains similar information to what is in the book on this matter: "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Autopsy Photographs of JFK (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

See Fred's book Chapter 18 for a discussion of Knudsen.

Litwin has released a (free) list of online references that will be useful for everyone: Sources for "Oliver Stone's Film-Flam" (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Yes, this will become a new reference standard for debunkers.

I had the pleasure to read a draft of this. Great book. Oliver Stone's Film-Flam (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Good job Lance.

No, if she had filed suit, it would have had to be based on legal principles and I understand that. That is why I said I don't think she would prevail. She is possibly a public figure and agreed to participate in the film. So, I don't think she would prevail and I doubt anyone is telling her to do that and she likely has no interest in it anyway. Any personal feelings I mentioned are just that.

I would have liked to see legal action to stop the film because I don't think it is accurate or fair to Ruth Paine. I don't believe that such legal action would prevail, however. The problem with the film is that all you have are the suspicions of people who are predisposed to believe in a conspiracy (Sue Wheaton comes to mind immediately). But you think it is ok to go with these suspicions even when people like Judge Griffin, David Lifton and Joe Alesi (and presumably others) tell you otherwise. That is wrong in my opinion and it is not worth the damage it does to Ruth Paine and the factual record in the JFK case.

You didn't learn from the drug thing did you?

I think your comment is inappropriate.

None of this addresses the issue of why, in a "balanced" presentation, you ignored Lifton and Griffin. I understand Griffin would not allow you to use the footage you filmed but you could have mentioned at least that had advised you that your concerns about Ruth Paine were unfounded.

This may be of interest: A Question for Max Good from Burt Griffin (onthetrailofdelusion.com) So, we now know that Max Good had people on both sides of the debate who told him that Ruth Paine was innocent of any wrong doing. But despite his claim that he wanted to make a "balanced" film, this information did not make the final cut. This is especially notable in the case of Lifton who believed in a conspiracy but did not think Ruth was a part of it.

There is no such implication. The purpose of Ms. Long's book is to document the homophobic nature of the Garrison investigation and is not about the assassination per se. Her book offers no theory, and she refers to Oswald as the “alleged assassin.”

Morley's Bombshell a Dud ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com) Morley Disinfo Leads to Misleading Media Reports ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Scroll down to "Alicia Long" heading: Morley and JFK Revisited ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

What is really left in the files? Redactions, Redactions, Redactions... (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Thanks for that Greg. Now I know why Lifton appeared so little in the film.

He didn't say that. In fact, he confirmed he took them: JFK Revisited Distorts John Stringer's Testimony (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

More Morley Misinformation ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

Was Oswald an Agent of the CIA? (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Good work David. It is surprising what you find in the files sometimes.

I wouldn't support any proven destruction of relevant files. But it happens I suppose. Fortuneately, we have 5 million documents in the JFK Collection and we can see the big picture.

Sure, that makes sense. I wanted to see Veciana's SSCIA testimony for sure. I think it would have helped my case. But I don't subscribe to the idea that we can't know what happened in Dallas unless every piece of paper is released. I've looked at the files and I see what they have been holding back and it is people's names, project names and so on. Just my view.

My own experience with the files has me agreeing with Posner. I have been going over David Phillips' files and while there are still many redactions, it is sometimes easy to figure out what those redactions are or what they relate to at least. I think when this is finally over and all the files are released there will be many disappointed people and others who will say, "what did they destroy?"