Another Awful JFK Book Coming

[Larry Hancock]

As to financing the book, well a brief dive into Diversion Press:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversion_Books

Diversion Books, originally founded as a digital publisher in 2010, is an American publishing company based in New York City. It publishes up to forty titles per year in physical, digital, audio, and other formats

It suggests they do a bunch of books across a wide variety of subjects but some of the titles suggest to me that they are particularly open to pitches from agents who can base history related book proposals on personal experience.  Sort of a "peripheral insider" thing that can give some punch to the books marketing. Not exactly "tell all" but with some similarity given their new book titles "Finding Jackie" or "Protecting Diana".

https://diversionbooks.com/

As to Gregory and his credentials and getting to a publisher:

"Paul Gregory is a Research Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution and a pioneer in the study of Soviet and Russian economics. In addition to his scholarly work, he has been an active blogger on Russian affairs for Forbes, The Hill, and Wall Street Journal."

All in all I would say that given Gregory's credentials he would have no problem getting an agent (I can relate this from sad personal experience) and in turn the agent would find it easy to shop an insider story about Oswald (which is greatly exaggerated in the promotion pieces ie. "only friend"). 

In my limited experience that's the way the publishing game is being played for history oriented books these days, if you want an easier road to publishing do a travel or children's book...

 

 

[Gerry Down]

I don't see anything wrong with self publishing though. 

[Benjamin Cole]

45 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

As to financing the book, well a brief dive into Diversion Press:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversion_Books

Diversion Books, originally founded as a digital publisher in 2010, is an American publishing company based in New York City. It publishes up to forty titles per year in physical, digital, audio, and other formats

It suggests they do a bunch of books across a wide variety of subjects but some of the titles suggest to me that they are particularly open to pitches from agents who can base history related book proposals on personal experience.  Sort of a "peripheral insider" thing that can give some punch to the books marketing. Not exactly "tell all" but with some similarity given their new book titles "Finding Jackie" or "Protecting Diana".

https://diversionbooks.com/

As to Gregory and his credentials and getting to a publisher:

"Paul Gregory is a Research Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution and a pioneer in the study of Soviet and Russian economics. In addition to his scholarly work, he has been an active blogger on Russian affairs for Forbes, The Hill, and Wall Street Journal."

All in all I would say that given Gregory's credentials he would have no problem getting an agent (I can relate this from sad personal experience) and in turn the agent would find it easy to shop an insider story about Oswald (which is greatly exaggerated in the promotion pieces ie. "only friend"). 

In my limited experience that's the way the publishing game is being played for history oriented books these days, if you want an easier road to publishing do a travel or children's book...

 

 

LH-

All true, but I cannot imagine any publisher giving anything more than a modest advance, if any, for another JFK book. 

In that sense, the Deep State financed this book by giving a home to Gregory for decades, including his perch at the Hoover Institution, but also many other appointments and positions. Gregory could afford to write this book, and who knows perhaps received a related stipend from somewhere. 

Gregory is an earnest anti-communist and Russia-wary, positions I happen to agree with. 

But perhaps Gregory also believes the ends justify the means.

That is, from Gregory's view, it is better now for the JFKA to be put to rest, rather than have it come out that elements of the CIA were involved in the JFKA, or that LHO was at least for a while, a CIA asset. 

Russia an active threat, communism is still a threat (see China), so for the good of the cause....

Just IMHO....

 

[Larry Hancock]

I too would be amazed at an advance for a JFK book, or almost any book that does not have a large market estimate - tens of thousands.

And although I hate to be a contrarian (ha)....I would personally not call it the Deep State since I think that term is generically overused and not very useful.

My view is that Peter Dale Scott had it right in the first place and what  you see at work with Gregory is the support provided by Deep Politics, the existence of a well funded infrastructures (both liberal and conservative) which establishes positions for individuals and pays foundations, academics, media outlets etc to constantly present its views. 

Which means folks like Gregory, with the right academic or prior government/administration credentials, can always find a job which literally pays them to get out a message they either find profitable or sincerely believe in - and that in turn gives them publisher access.

For what its worth I think there is another entity closer to what most call the Deep State - we young radicals called it The Establishment centuries ago. Its much more corporate, oligarchic, profit focused and involves what is called the military industrial complex with the addition of Big Energy and Big Pharma.

Sort of a modern day "robber baron" thing, all about the money; its composition morphs and changes composition and structure much more often than Deep Politics. Deep Politics seems to me to be similar to in some ways resemble articles of faith, something in the nature of a religious belief system.  Its not just about the money.

Possibly picky of me but I've sort of become obsessed with defining terms...

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Larry Hancock

[Benjamin Cole]

22 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

I too would be amazed at an advance for a JFK book, or almost any book that does not have a large market estimate - tens of thousands.

And although I hate to be a contrarian (ha)....I would personally not call it the Deep State since I think that term is generically overused and not very useful.

My view is that Peter Dale Scott had it right in the first place and what  you see at work with Gregory is the support provided by Deep Politics, the existence of a well funded infrastructures (both liberal and conservative) which establishes positions for individuals and pays foundations, academics, media outlets etc to constantly present its views. 

Which means folks like Gregory, with the right academic or prior government/administration credentials, can always find a job which literally pays them to get out a message they either find profitable or sincerely believe in - and that in turn gives them publisher access.

For what its worth I think there is another entity closer to what most call the Deep State - we young radicals called it The Establishment centuries ago. Its much more corporate, oligarchic, profit focused and involves what is called the military industrial complex with the addition of Big Energy and Big Pharma.

Sort of a modern day "robber baron" thing, all about the money; its composition morphs and changes composition and structure much more often than Deep Politics. Deep Politics seems to me to be similar to in some ways resemble articles of faith, something in the nature of a religious belief system.  Its not just about the money.

Possibly picky of me but I've sort of become obsessed with defining terms...

 

Not at all, and perhaps upon consideration I agree with you--although we could discuss and define and refine, and re-refine these terms the "Deep State", "Shadow Government," "National Security State" and "The Establishment" for hours.... 

For what is is worth, I see a schism between the National Security State, which has wary eyes on China (and yes, on larger budgets), and the globalist-multinationals, who want trade relations with China left sacrosanct.

Where are the ideologues, the anti-communists? I don't know. Hiding in the bushes. Beijing's increasingly autocratic Xi-CCP seems to get a pass....except from The Epoch Times. 

In my view, the globalists have been running DC for 40 years, and have somewhat converted the military into a mercenary global guard service. But not always...and maybe not on China.  

Interesting topic. 

I remember my older brother being against "the establishment" back when the Beatles were the Beatles. I just wanted a motorcycle. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Shouldn't Marina's face be blue ? Didn't she became a US citizen in the 1980's ?

Doesn't matter, but where they got the inspiration is clear

 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Michael Griffith]

On 10/17/2022 at 4:21 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

https://bookhaven.stanford.edu/2022/10/how-a-21-year-old-texas-college-student-became-lee-harvey-oswalds-only-friend?utm_source=blog

Egads. The author, Paul R. Gregory, is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, knew LHO for less than four months, and depicts an unhappy couple, and LHO as a disagreeable character. 

"From June through mid-September of 1962, I was the sole companion of Lee Harvey and Marina Oswald outside of Lee’s immediate family. I visited this young married couple often in the duplex where they settled after Lee’s return from his defection to the USSR."

LHO behaved poorly towards Marina, recounts Gregory, and Gregory soon left the couple's acquaintance.

OK, fine, if that is someone's honest take on LHO, then that is their take. Many have said there was marital strife in the Oswald household, and LHO was not always a nice guy. 

But then there is this paragraph:

My next image was November 22, 1963, as a bruised Lee was dragged into Dallas police headquarters to my shock and horror. Sitting in front of a TV screen at Norman, Oklahoma, I immediately understood that Lee had done it, and why, and that he had done it alone.

This is a scholar? Gregory is gifted---he divined the truth of the JFKA while watching TV at home in Oklahoma on Nov. 22.

Gregory's book is a throwback to the "leftie, loser, loner" image of LHO in the early post-JFKA days. LHO seeking recognition to balance a life lacking accomplishments. (Forget that LHO got through Marine boot camp at 17, served in a tech position in Atsugi Airbase, traveled to Russia, got married, and likely did not measure success in traditional career terms anyway). 

"As we were meeting in 1962, I considered him (LHO) a poseur Marxist, who had taken on a radical leftist persona to divert attention from his many failings," writes the author. 

What is crazy is even if LHO had all the shortcomings Gregory posits...LHO could have all the more easily been taken advantage of as part of a conspiracy. 

How would anyone know on Nov. 22 that LHO had not fallen in with the mob, or had been suckered into a situation, or blackmailed, or offered large amounts of cash, transit to Cuba, or any other number of circumstances consistent with a conspiracy? 

Many readers here probably know the type of organization that is the Hoover Institution. 

You think there is no Deep State? If not, somebody is not quitting on the LHO as leftie, loser, loner version of the JFKA. 

What is especially disappointing about this propaganda book is the number of endorsements it has received from scholars who should know better, including Mark Updegrove, author of Incomparable Grace: JFK in the Presidency, and Mark Kramer, the director of the Cold War Studies Project at Harvard University. The fact that scholars such as Updegrove and Kramer would endorse this work of trash just shows the huge disconnect between academia and factual history. 

Edited October 26, 2022 by Michael Griffith

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

What is especially disappointing about this propaganda book is the number of endorsements it has received from scholars who should know better, including Mark Updegrove, author of Incomparable Grace: JFK in the Presidency, and Mark Kramer, the director of the Cold War Studies Project at Harvard University. The fact that scholars such as Updegrove and Kramer would endorse this work of trash just shows the huge disconnect between academia and factual history. 

Thanks for commenting.

The incredibly large and powerful constellation of globalist institutions in the NY-DC circuit is overwhelming. Every once in a while I post the 10 "most influential" think tanks in the US, and they are all globalist in nature.

Academia is nearly 100% on the globalist ticket, and the worst sin is to been seen as parochial, non-cosmopolitan, or "against foreigners." 

I don't need to tel you the largest companies in the word--Apple, Morgan Stanley, Disney, GM, Wal-mart, BlackRock et al---are globalist. 

And to be in the globalist community, even yet, one cannot be a "JFK assassination nut." The Grassy Knoll crowd. 

What is nutty is Gregory saying he knew LHO was the lone assassin while watching TV at home on Nov. 22. I guess Gregory got an advance copy of Katzenbach's memo.

I wonder if I can get a book published. It will say, "When I saw LHO on television on Nov. 22, 1963 I knew immediately he was a CIA asset but had been set up as a patsy in the JFK assassination!" 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Michael Griffith]

On 10/17/2022 at 5:29 AM, David Von Pein said:

Oh for Pete sake, just because somebody (like myself, for example) thinks Lee Oswald was a lefty, a loser, and a lone assassin doesn't mean that the person believing those things is a member of the "Deep State".

But, how can you think this about Oswald given all that we now know about him? How? Oswald's IQ was "in the upper range of bright, normal intelligence." He mastered the very difficult language of Russian. And Oswald's intelligence connections are too well documented for rational disputation.

"Lone assassin"? Even now, in 2022, after the new information that has come to light about Oswald's whereabouts during the shooting, not to mention his mediocre marksmanship skills, etc., etc.? 

The lone-gunman tale is a comfort lie, a lie that some people embrace because the idea of an assassination conspiracy is too unsettling and disturbing for them. It is so much easier to believe that JFK's public execution was just the act of a lone, nutty gunman, and not the result of a powerful conspiracy that involved elements of the CIA, the Mafia, and anti-Castro Cubans.