JFK Revisited: Through The Looking Glass

[James DiEugenio]

 

If one recalls, a memorable question that Jeremy Gunn posed to Thornton Boswell was about his involvement in the attempt to obstruct the Shaw trial.  LIke much of the above, we did not know this until the ARRB.  But the DOJ understood that what Pierre Finck was saying on the stand was a tremendous blow to the cover up they constructed.  I mean, Finck was actually telling the truth for God's sake.  So they called in Boswell. They said they needed him to discredit Finck for telling the truth. So they sent him to New Orleans, where Harry Connick  set  him up with  a hotel room which had Finck's testimony laying on a desk. They ultimately decided not to call him.  Probably for two reasons. First Finck was more qualified as a forensic pathologist than Humes or Boswell and Garrison would have pointed that out. But secondly, James Phelan was doing their dirty work for them by spinning each day's testimony for the national reporters through a Maytag dryer to dilute it. 

But my point is this. When Jeremy heard this from Boswell, he said: what was the federal government doing interceding in a state trial in New Orleans with a local DA? Boswell said words to the effect that the feds were on the side of Clay Shaw.  Which is an understatement.

This helps me make my point.  All of the above that we now know about Shaw today---his three different statuses with the CIA (Which does not include Permindex, which is a fourth)-- that what the FBI found out about him coincided with what Garrison had discovered--for example, that he was Bertrand, that he knew Ferrie well, that he was in Clinton/Jackson with Oswald and Ferrie--and that the CIA altered and mutilated his file, this all leads to a question i posed in my review of Litwin's piece of crud book.

 Imagine if it had been a normal situation. In other words, Washington was helping the prosecution instead of obstructing it. IMO, Shaw would have been convicted.  The sheer amount of his perjury would have done it.  The implication being that when you lie that much, you have to be hiding something even worse.

Edited February 7, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[Micah Mileto]

20 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

If one recalls, a memorable question that Jeremy Gunn posed to Thornton Boswell

Of the three main doctors, it seems like Boswell accidentally made the most statements that contradict the official story.

[James DiEugenio]

That might be true forensically and related to the above point. I mean Horne sure thought so.

But it was FInck at the Shaw trial who blew the cover off the control factor, and why the back wound was not dissected.

Let me add one last point about this.

If one were to read the major dailies, Finck's explosive testimony does not come through--probably because of my aforementioned point about Phelan spinning each day's testimony.

The way I learned about this was going to the New Orleans Public Library and reading the States Item coverage. They actually tried to render the testimony as verbatim as they could, and obviously were not at Phelan's rented home getting a chalkboard lesson on what to write.

When I read that testimony I was  startled.  I actually called the late Jerry Policoff from my New Orleans hotel room and told him about it. My publisher then got in contact with the stenographer and she  supplied me with the official transcript.   I placed an appendix with  excerpts in the first edition of Destiny Betrayed.  

Most objective observers today would say that the three most important things about the Shaw trial are Finck's testimony, Shaw's provable numerous perjuries, and the outside incursions into the trial which came from the CIA, DOJ and FBI. 

The worth of Litwin's book can be measured by the fact that he deals with none of those three factors in his chapter on the Shaw trial.

 

Edited February 7, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Announcement about the broad release  of the four parter, JFK Revisited: Destiny Betrayed, on March 8th.

The DVD package will have both versions of the film in  it.

https://www.shoutfactory.com/blog/shout-studios-announces-four-part-documentary-series-jfk-destiny-betrayed-from-award-winning-filmmaker-oliver-stone/

 

PS I placed this notice on Twitter five hours ago.  It has 13,900 impressions already.

PPS Its now at 14, 500 impressions.  

PPPS: After two weeks Posner has not replied to my debate challenge.

Edited February 9, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[Sean Coleman]

On 1/26/2022 at 8:55 PM, James DiEugenio said:

I just saw a bootleg site that was showing JFK Revisited, even though they should not. Since Showtime has screening rights now.  I told the producer.

He said, this is coming up about five times a week.

I guess in a bad way that is kind of good?

It’s great. It means (that forever) anyone, anytime, anywhere on the planet with wifi & a device can watch. And learn.

Wont make the moneymen happy tho

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

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)

[Sean Coleman]

55 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

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)

What would be your recommended watching?

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

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)

 

Ha ha ha!

You're so funny Tracy... not only must you disagree with any conclusions CTers make , but you feel compelled to disagree with any facts they point out!

I suppose you also hate the cinematography?

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I am glad that Fred Litwin and others are debunking it!

 

One thing that I've noticed about Tracy and his comrades is that, when they formally write down that they disagree with something a WC critic says, they will refer to that as a debunking.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

What would be your recommended watching?

Nightmare Alley.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Ha ha ha!

You're so funny Tracy... not only must you disagree with any conclusions CTers make , but you feel compelled to disagree with any facts they point out!

I suppose you also hate the cinematography?

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

[James DiEugenio]

Fred is going to get another reaming from me quite soon.

As Tim Weiner should have not tried to pull a stunt with the discredited Max Holland, James Kirchick should have never tried to pull one with the discredited  Litwin.

[Sean Coleman]

2 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Nightmare Alley.

Nightmare on Elm St. 

🤠

[James DiEugenio]

I made an error above.

The DVD version of both films, the 2 hour and 4 hour ones, are not coming out the first week of March.  Its the digital and streaming versions that are coming out at that time.

Oliver and I have to do a commentary track for the DVD version.  So that will not come out for a few months.

[James DiEugenio]

Tonight on Black Op Radio:

Part One:

Paul Bleau talks about his massive review of the lost files of Jim Garrison as salvaged by Len Osanic and John Barbour. Believe me, this is really interesting.  Mainly because so few people have done it as extensively as Paul has. 

Part Two: 

Jim DiEugenio talks about the insurrection, replies to questions from listeners, and then discusses the American reaction to JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass by the MSM.  He then talks about the upcoming schedule for the 4 hour version, The Book of the Film, and the 2 set package for the DVD which will include commentary by Oliver Stone and Jim.

There is nothing out there like BOR.