Phil Nelson on Joan Mellen's "Faustian Bargains" book

[Gene Kelly]

I saw the Airplane in November 1968 at The Electric Factory in Philadelphia.  To put it mildly, she had an irreverent and dynamic stage personality.  After 1972, they split into two groups: Jorma Kaukonen and Jack Casady moved on full-time to their own band, Hot Tuna. Grace Slick, Paul Kantner, and the remaining members of Jefferson Airplane recruited new members and regrouped as Jefferson Starship in 1974, eventually adding Marty Balin.  Here is what Grace said about creating White Rabbit:

The song is a little dark. It’s not saying everything’s going to be wonderful. The Red Queen is shouting “off with her head” and the “White Knight is talking backwards”. Lewis Carroll was looking at how things are run and the people who rule us.  All fairytales that are read to little girls feature a Prince Charming who comes and saves them. But Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland did not ... Alice was on her own, and she was in a very strange place, but she kept on going and she followed her curiosity – that’s the White Rabbit. A lot of women could have taken a message from that story about how you can push your own agenda. The 1960s resembled Wonderland for me. Like Alice, I met all kinds of strange characters, but I was comfortable with it. I wrote White Rabbit on a red upright piano that cost me about $50. It had eight or 10 keys missing, but that was OK because I could hear in my head the notes that weren’t there.

[Ron Bulman]

10 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

 but, they were Jefferson Airplane when I saw them in U.K. @ Bath Festival of Blues and Progressive Music June 1970.

As is often the case, it was damp and when Grace took hold of her mike she got a belt.  Her language was shocking too!

I don't mean to take the topic off the subject either posting links to classic songs, but to attract attention to it.  Maybe it will attract someone younger to the subject through grandads songs.  And give them a reason to believe.

Enjoy the fiddle and steel. 

[Gene Kelly]

I am a fan of Joan Mellen, although she has some stubborn notions about certain topics.  However, I am not a fan of Phil Nelson's work, nor his conjectures about LBJ.  And his criticism of Mellen's writing style seems vindictive and over the top ... can we take seriously a retired property-casualty insurance agent commenting on a university professor who teaches creative writing?  Here is how Joseph Green described Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book in a 2013 Kennedy's and King article:

Phillip F. Nelson with a sizable work on the subject, wanting to go further than anyone has before. His view of Johnson is comparable to Sherlock Holmes’s description of Professor Moriarty: “He is the Napoleon of crime … He sits motionless like a spider in the centre of its web, but that web has a thousand radiations, and he knows very well every quiver of each of them.”

To put us back on track - or at least address Jim and David's comments about Allan Eaglesham and Pitzer - there is also an enlightening discussion thread on the EF ("William Bruce Pitzer") begun on May 9, 2004 with comments from Allan, who debates Wim Dankbaar and JVB.  A guest named "Dangerous Dan" (purportedly Marvin himself) also participates.  The entire debate goes on for several months, with ad hominem attacks by Dankbaar, nonsensical comments by JVB, and a debate about the left-handed/right-handed aspect (Allan points out that Pizer played golf right-handed). Notably, Mrs. Pitzer pursued the autopsy report after being influenced by author Harrison Livingstone. Jerrol Custer's credibility is questioned, including the fact that he told William Law that Pitzer's right hand was congenitally deformed. Also, he appears to have overstated his familiarity with Chief Pitzer ... he asserted to William Law that he knew Pitzer well, which was inconsistent with his statement to the ARRB in October 1997.  Eaglesham backed off in 1995 with his efforts to get the case reopened because - having learned of Pitzer's extramarital affair - he was sensitive to the repercussions for Mrs. Pizer if all that it proved was that he had committed suicide.  A 2011 article by John Kays entitled "Can We Rely on Eaglesham’s Proof, LCDR William B. Pitzer Died from Suicide?" states the following:

Allan Eaglesham had initially believed in a homicide argument for Lieutenant Commander William B. Pitzer’s mysterious death, on October 29, 1966. A great deal of investigation into Pitzer’s death unpeeled the layers of mythical conspiracy (for Eaglesham), and brought him to the shores of logic.  Eaglesham couldn’t back everything out of the ‘conspiracy parking lot.’ The most auspicious tidbit that Eaglesham couldn’t repudiate is what Lt. Col. Dan Marvin told the camera for Episode 6. Dan Marvin was contracted by the CIA to kill Pitzer, but eventually turned it down.  

Gene

[James DiEugenio]

But if you recall Pitzer's nephew, there were three key points that Allan confirmed:

1. Pitzer was right handed.

2. His right hand was not deformed.

3. No film of the autopsy ever showed up.  And how they searched.

Edited October 14, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Speaking of Joe Green, Nelson actually encountered Joe later.  He told him something like, I know you had to do that.  Meaning that somehow I had assigned Joe's article and made him write a negative review of Nelson's "Mastermind" book.

I never tell our writers what to write.  If I did that, they would not work for us.

Everything I do on somebody else's work comes after the fact.  For example Seamus Coogan, who was one of the best writers we had-his article on the CIA and UFO's  is a classic--wanted to do something on John Hankey. So he did.  But I thought it was too long.  So I cut about 20 per cent out. Seamus had no objection.  But the idea that i make assignments and then tell the writer how to write the piece is nonsense. 

And, I have to add, if I had written the "Mastermind" review it would have been even worse.

 

 

 

Edited October 14, 2021 by James DiEugenio

[David Andrews]

It wasn't hard to disbelieve Dan Marvin, even before Eaglesham did.  What kind of spook tells you who he wants you to shoot before you're fully recruited?

However, what kind of naval officer shoots himself on the job, at a world-recognized facility?  If it were so, it's a revenge act.  Pitzer was alleged to have been looking forward to a career in commercial media.

Edited October 14, 2021 by David Andrews

[Pete Mellor]

More of Phil Nelson's rebuttals of 'Faustian Bargains.

REFRAMING HISTORY with More Myths: Mellen’s “Faustian Bargains” — Wrong on Many Levels – LBJ: Master of Deceit (lbjthemasterofdeceit.com)

[Joe Bauer]

On 10/14/2021 at 10:41 AM, David Andrews said:

It wasn't hard to disbelieve Dan Marvin, even before Eaglesham did.  What kind of spook tells you who he wants you to shoot before you're fully recruited?

However, what kind of naval officer shoots himself on the job, at a world-recognized facility?  If it were so, it's a revenge act.  Pitzer was alleged to have been looking forward to a career in commercial media.

I want to review Colonel Dan Marvin's Pitzer claims in the TMWKK documentary.

To see if he gives a clear time line regards when he was actually given the name William Bruce Pitzer?

Could it be he "did" agree to a hit assignment ( fully recruited ) before he was told the actual name of the target?

I know some here have tried to discredit Dan Marvin. I haven't looked at those older postings in a long time.

Maybe someone can bring back one or two older Dan Marvin threads?

I am often drawn to persons with JFK event connections ( third or even forth rung removed ) who go public and make claims that if true, are truth shaking in their inferences and implications.

Especially persons whose important position backgrounds check out more credible than not.

Dan Marvin claims he was involved in real assignments of human target removal.

He was a colonel in special forces. 

Why would he risk his entire military career reputation ( and maybe even putting himself in physical harm risk? ) by going public and making the astounding anti-military/government claims he did? 

And I found his TMWKK interview extremely compelling. If his emotionally heavy feelings of regret testament was an act ... the man deserves some recognition as a dramatic actor of notable talent imo.

I can't easily dismiss persons like Col. Dan Marvin whose quite extraordinary military achievement background checks out. Mentally unstable people usually don't have 20+ years of that kind of structured and successful commitment effort.

Did Marvin have a mental breakdown before his TMWKK interview?

And I agree regards Pitzer's alleged choice of location and manner of suicide being suspect imo.

How many suicide victims choose their work location to do the deed?

One might consider a Vince Foster suicide location choice a more logical one as many choose to do this act in a place of serenity? Don't most suicide victims do this in their own homes as well?

 

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by Joe Bauer

[David Andrews]

13 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Dan Marvin claims he was involved in real assignments of human target removal.

He was a colonel in special forces. 

Why would he risk his entire military career reputation ( and maybe even putting himself in physical harm risk? ) by going public and making the astounding anti-military/government claims he did? 

 

Well, Joe, I'm going to let one of the characters in my novel answer:

“Special Ops guys inevitably talk.  Literally or figuratively, they all want to get laid.”

[Joe Bauer]

19 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Well, Joe, I'm going to let one of the characters in my novel answer:

“Special Ops guys inevitably talk.  Literally or figuratively, they all want to get laid.”

In Colonel Marvin's case I think what he wanted more than getting laid were loving hugs from his grandchildren and not losing their love because someday they would find out about the more nefarious and dark things he did in his military career.

Edited October 27, 2021 by Joe Bauer

[David Andrews]

2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

In Colonel Marvin's case I think what he wanted more than getting laid were loving hugs from his grandchildren and not losing their love because someday they would find out about the more nefarious and dark things he did in his military career.

"Literally or figuratively" is meant to cover a lot of ground.  Eventually they can't stand that the things they've seen and done are secret, and they have to broadcast their experience, reaching out sometimes unwholesomely.

Who were Marvin's grandkids going to find out from, except him?

Edited October 27, 2021 by David Andrews