David Lifton on the Paines (2017)

[Greg Doudna]

David Lifton on Ruth Paine

The following are excerpts from a machine transcription of an interview of David Lifton by Max Good, footage not used in the film, "The Assassination and Mrs. Paine". Max Good has posted the full video interview (61 minutes) and the machine transcription on his page on Patreon, available to member supporters (https://www.patreon.com/maxgood/posts ). The interview was done Oct 21, 2017. 

[START Lifton]

There is a fork in the road. Some of these traditional researchers blame the Paines for everything. In fact, Lee Oswald is just operating under the auspices of a handler. If he had lived in Motel Six instead of at the Paine residence, I guess they would do a background investigation on the Motel Six manager and see if he could be implicated simply because he was using their storage area to have a rifle and a camera and this and that.

But a lot of these critics blame the Paines for all of this, and they're not to blame. That's blaming the messenger instead of reading the message correctly. And so my research is about understanding the message. And if you understand that he had a handler, everything can be explained. His movements, one city to another, the constant moves, the way he behaves.

All of it can be explained right up until November 22nd, when the blame, the the Paines get blamed for some of these things, including the very interesting fact that she did make a phone call that was instrumental to him getting the job. And I can explain that completely, but not at this moment. Okay. I see the Paines as essentially innocent.

(. . .) 

I mean, I do see them as essentially innocent. The Paines are not guilty because of the fact that Oswald had a rifle in a garage. The Paines are not guilty because Ruth Paine telephoned the Texas School Book Depository. I understand all of that.

The Paines are not guilty because Ruth, who accepted the official version right away, didn't react adequately. Let's say when Oswald asked her on the phone to get him a lawyer. But there are people who are willing to send Ruth Paine to prison because they actually believe she got him the job. She didn't do the right thing on the phone when she asked for a lawyer. The rifle was in her garage. There was a camera in her garage. You know, that's ridiculous. If he had stayed at Motel Six, all those things might have been true. Well, except for the business of asking for the for the job, if he had used the storage area of a Motel Six. But these some of these were researchers in the Kennedy case blame the Paines.

(. . .)

But are they guilty, involved, guiltily involved in the assassination? No, but the Paines are someone who I think are CIA connected indirectly, as I've indicated. But that does not make them part of a plot to kill President Kennedy. I don't think so. I really don't think so, because I've I met with Michael Paine.

He started to cry during the interview about, I mean, he had a tremendous empathy, I think, for Oswald. But in the days following the assassination, right away, Michael Paine gave an interview to The New York Times, which is really important because it was on Saturday. He sat for the interview, it was published on Sunday, and he said that Lee Oswald did not renounce violence and the pursuit of revolutionary ends.

Well, that's all an act. That's Oswald acting out his role. He's a role player. And here's this role player. They don't know he's a role player. They think he's a real communist living, you know, his wife is living with them. 

(. . .)

If you don't approach this with adequate analysis and with sufficient subtlety, you end up blaming the Paines because of the garage, because he lived there, because she made the phone call to the Texas School Book Depository, because of the behavior afterwards.

And suddenly the Paines are, you know, prime movers in the assassination in order to be hung just the way Surratt was in connection with the Lincoln assassination. I don't buy into that at all. Well, that's a very if that were true, that's very important. And I can understand where they're coming from. For example, at the end of Lee's New Orleans stay, Ruth Paine it was arranged for Ruth Paine to pick them up and and travel with Marina all the way from New Orleans back to Dallas. And you have to ask, was that simply done out of the goodness of Ruth Paine's heart? Now, the argument that it might have been is that she's such a codependent person. I mean, she really is the kind of person that will go out of her way to help another person.

(. . .) 

He's going to be the role player and he acts out. So once you know that, that's what's going on, the Paines are simply the canvas. He's painting this picture. He transmits the message, it's on their pampas, the murder occurs, they're asked to testify, and you get the hundreds of pages of testimony and all those pages of FBI reports and then cut to the researchers who believe the Paines are responsible for the Kennedy assassination.

It's really very unfair, but that's what I think is going on. 

(. . .)

And you can't just say that because one believes that the other one believes it. Michael told me that Will Fritz try to get him to go into the cell and talk to Oswald and he wouldn't do it. And somewhere in there he started to cry in my interview with him, and I think he had more empathy for Oswald than did Ruth.

I mean, Ruth was irritated and I think the reason Ruth's with irritated was that she was so close to Marina and she saw that Oswald had mistreated Marina and, you know, had threatened Marina to send her back to the Soviet Union and all that kind of stuff. I don't think Michael had those same experiences. Well, she's a Quaker. She's a pacifist. She said that if she had known that Oswald had a gun in the garage, she wouldn't have approved of it. 

(. . .)

At some point we have to talk about the job. (. . .) Okay. Well she calls on Tuesday is it, okay. The week is Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. She makes the phone call on Tuesday and speaks to Roy Truly. And I think we're Monday night and Monday and then he goes in for the interview on Tuesday and he starts work on Wednesday. That's what happened. Okay, we have to start we're talking to somebody that doesn't know anyone anything about it.

We have to start with the fact that the people involved in this thing, involved in this plot need to have had have done site selection in advance. They're planning to murder President Kennedy on this trip to Texas and specifically to Dallas. And the site, Dealey Plaza has been selected and the building the Texas School Book Depository has been selected.

Oswald is going to get a job at that building. That's the set up and it's been arranged for him to do that, to call in. Now, the question is, what precedes that? Well, the way it was set up and I'll be getting into this and Final Charade is that they were going to advertise in an employment, you know, an employment agency.

So here we go in and say, I'm looking for work. And they would give him the lead and then he would apply and they'd say, Oh, sure, come on in for an interview. That's the way the set up was supposed to work. But Lee got imaginative and he did such a good job moaning about the fact that he was unemployed.

He didn't have any money, and he was threatened that Ruth Paine the do gooder on Tuesday morning or called the Depository and so she like interjected herself she did this Good Samaritan type of favor and Roy Truly said, oh, send them in. You know, they didn't have to use the employment agency ploy, which is standard operating procedure for a spy agency.

Okay. That's the way it would work. So it didn't have they didn't have to do it. So the result is he starts work there on Wednesday and Ruth Paine now in history looks as if she got him the job. That completely ignores the original plan that Lee would be working at the Depository irrespective of whether he knew her or met Ruth Paine, he would have gotten that job.

That's a setup that was arranged by those who are involved in the plot to kill President Kennedy. But Lee, you might say, dragged Ruth Paine into it and the handler must have been delighted. Oh my God, we don't even have to use the employment agency business. You know, Ruth Paine will look like she did this. And it fits with the whole business that everything's a quirk of fate.

It's coincidence. That's what I think happened. And she has to live with that. She made that phone call. She has to live with that. And she's told the truth. She said, look, the guy needed a job. He has a baby was on the way. I made the phone call and look what she's now look what she's bought into.

Yeah, she has to admit it. And when Gerald Ford heard her story, he said this was just a bunch of housewives having a coffee klatch. So this whole thing is a coincidence. There's no plot here. But if you if they did the kind of investigation that I've done, they're going to come up with the whole employment agency thing, and they don't know about that.

And that'll be The Final Charade of there's a two parts of that answer. First of all, I think it was a coincidence. But on the other hand, I'm going to tell you right now that because of the fact that the Texas School Book Depository is located downtown and they're living out in Irving, I do not believe it is a coincidence that when they had another person apply in September from Irving, Texas, who had a car, namely Buell Wesley Frazier, they said, Oh, sure, make sure he works there.

Oswald will have a ride. You follow what I'm saying? So by accepting Frazier as an employee back in September, around approximately September 10th, they created a situation for like a carpool, a situation where when Oswald got there, he would be able to have transportation to and from Irving to downtown. So, of course, Linnie May Randle knew about that.

Her her her brother worked there. But I don't believe that the acceptance of Buell Wesley Frazier's application for work was coincidental. I think that that was viewed positively by those involved in this thing, because how else is Oswald, was he going to take a cab every day from Irving, Texas, to downtown Dallas? So by having Buell Wesley Frazier work there in September, he would have a when they got him the job there.

(. . .)

I think I can only speculate about what Ruth Paine feels about the situation, but she's tied to the Kennedy assassination in ways that she probably never intended or expected to be.

And so for all time, she probably takes a look at the Lincoln assassination and realizes that Mary Surratt has been black[ened] and, you know, her name is blackened in history. And historians say, well, that she didn't deserve to be, Ruth Paine. As the passage of time goes on and people look more into how Oswald got this job and to who Oswald really was and to how he was framed, she probably never would have expected that she would be blamed for the frame up of Oswald or for the Kennedy assassination in any way, shape or form.

But now she's having to view the fact that, yeah, that's happening, and now she suddenly has to mount defenses against in the ninth inning of her life. I don't know how she handles it, but it must be very upsetting. 

[END Lifton]

Edited December 21, 2022 by Greg Doudna

[W. Tracy Parnell]

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

[Allen Lowe]

19 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

David Lifton on Ruth Paine

The following are excerpts from a machine transcription of an interview of David Lifton by Max Good, footage not used in the film, "The Assassination and Mrs. Paine". Max Good has posted the full video interview (61 minutes) and the machine transcription on his page on Patreon, available to member supporters (https://www.patreon.com/maxgood/posts ). The interview was done Oct 21, 2017. 

[START Lifton]

There is a fork in the road. Some of these traditional researchers blame the Paines for everything. In fact, Lee Oswald is just operating under the auspices of a handler. If he had lived in Motel Six instead of at the Paine residence, I guess they would do a background investigation on the Motel Six manager and see if he could be implicated simply because he was using their storage area to have a rifle and a camera and this and that.

But a lot of these critics blame the Paines for all of this, and they're not to blame. That's blaming the messenger instead of reading the message correctly. And so my research is about understanding the message. And if you understand that he had a handler, everything can be explained. His movements, one city to another, the constant moves, the way he behaves.

All of it can be explained right up until November 22nd, when the blame, the the Paines get blamed for some of these things, including the very interesting fact that she did make a phone call that was instrumental to him getting the job. And I can explain that completely, but not at this moment. Okay. I see the Paines as essentially innocent.

(. . .) 

I mean, I do see them as essentially innocent. The Paines are not guilty because of the fact that Oswald had a rifle in a garage. The Paines are not guilty because Ruth Paine telephoned the Texas School Book Depository. I understand all of that.

The Paines are not guilty because Ruth, who accepted the official version right away, didn't react adequately. Let's say when Oswald asked her on the phone to get him a lawyer. But there are people who are willing to send Ruth Paine to prison because they actually believe she got him the job. She didn't do the right thing on the phone when she asked for a lawyer. The rifle was in her garage. There was a camera in her garage. You know, that's ridiculous. If he had stayed at Motel Six, all those things might have been true. Well, except for the business of asking for the for the job, if he had used the storage area of a Motel Six. But these some of these were researchers in the Kennedy case blame the Paines.

(. . .)

But are they guilty, involved, guiltily involved in the assassination? No, but the Paines are someone who I think are CIA connected indirectly, as I've indicated. But that does not make them part of a plot to kill President Kennedy. I don't think so. I really don't think so, because I've I met with Michael Paine.

He started to cry during the interview about, I mean, he had a tremendous empathy, I think, for Oswald. But in the days following the assassination, right away, Michael Paine gave an interview to The New York Times, which is really important because it was on Saturday. He sat for the interview, it was published on Sunday, and he said that Lee Oswald did not renounce violence and the pursuit of revolutionary ends.

Well, that's all an act. That's Oswald acting out his role. He's a role player. And here's this role player. They don't know he's a role player. They think he's a real communist living, you know, his wife is living with them. 

(. . .)

If you don't approach this with adequate analysis and with sufficient subtlety, you end up blaming the Paines because of the garage, because he lived there, because she made the phone call to the Texas School Book Depository, because of the behavior afterwards.

And suddenly the Paines are, you know, prime movers in the assassination in order to be hung just the way Surratt was in connection with the Lincoln assassination. I don't buy into that at all. Well, that's a very if that were true, that's very important. And I can understand where they're coming from. For example, at the end of Lee's New Orleans stay, Ruth Paine it was arranged for Ruth Paine to pick them up and and travel with Marina all the way from New Orleans back to Dallas. And you have to ask, was that simply done out of the goodness of Ruth Paine's heart? Now, the argument that it might have been is that she's such a codependent person. I mean, she really is the kind of person that will go out of her way to help another person.

(. . .) 

He's going to be the role player and he acts out. So once you know that, that's what's going on, the Paines are simply the canvas. He's painting this picture. He transmits the message, it's on their pampas, the murder occurs, they're asked to testify, and you get the hundreds of pages of testimony and all those pages of FBI reports and then cut to the researchers who believe the Paines are responsible for the Kennedy assassination.

It's really very unfair, but that's what I think is going on. 

(. . .)

And you can't just say that because one believes that the other one believes it. Michael told me that Will Fritz try to get him to go into the cell and talk to Oswald and he wouldn't do it. And somewhere in there he started to cry in my interview with him, and I think he had more empathy for Oswald than did Ruth.

I mean, Ruth was irritated and I think the reason Ruth's with irritated was that she was so close to Marina and she saw that Oswald had mistreated Marina and, you know, had threatened Marina to send her back to the Soviet Union and all that kind of stuff. I don't think Michael had those same experiences. Well, she's a Quaker. She's a pacifist. She said that if she had known that Oswald had a gun in the garage, she wouldn't have approved of it. 

(. . .)

At some point we have to talk about the job. (. . .) Okay. Well she calls on Tuesday is it, okay. The week is Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday. She makes the phone call on Tuesday and speaks to Roy Truly. And I think we're Monday night and Monday and then he goes in for the interview on Tuesday and he starts work on Wednesday. That's what happened. Okay, we have to start we're talking to somebody that doesn't know anyone anything about it.

We have to start with the fact that the people involved in this thing, involved in this plot need to have had have done site selection in advance. They're planning to murder President Kennedy on this trip to Texas and specifically to Dallas. And the site, Dealey Plaza has been selected and the building the Texas School Book Depository has been selected.

Oswald is going to get a job at that building. That's the set up and it's been arranged for him to do that, to call in. Now, the question is, what precedes that? Well, the way it was set up and I'll be getting into this and Final Charade is that they were going to advertise in an employment, you know, an employment agency.

So here we go in and say, I'm looking for work. And they would give him the lead and then he would apply and they'd say, Oh, sure, come on in for an interview. That's the way the set up was supposed to work. But Lee got imaginative and he did such a good job moaning about the fact that he was unemployed.

He didn't have any money, and he was threatened that Ruth Paine the do gooder on Tuesday morning or called the Depository and so she like interjected herself she did this Good Samaritan type of favor and Roy Truly said, oh, send them in. You know, they didn't have to use the employment agency ploy, which is standard operating procedure for a spy agency.

Okay. That's the way it would work. So it didn't have they didn't have to do it. So the result is he starts work there on Wednesday and Ruth Paine now in history looks as if she got him the job. That completely ignores the original plan that Lee would be working at the Depository irrespective of whether he knew her or met Ruth Paine, he would have gotten that job.

That's a setup that was arranged by those who are involved in the plot to kill President Kennedy. But Lee, you might say, dragged Ruth Paine into it and the handler must have been delighted. Oh my God, we don't even have to use the employment agency business. You know, Ruth Paine will look like she did this. And it fits with the whole business that everything's a quirk of fate.

It's coincidence. That's what I think happened. And she has to live with that. She made that phone call. She has to live with that. And she's told the truth. She said, look, the guy needed a job. He has a baby was on the way. I made the phone call and look what she's now look what she's bought into.

Yeah, she has to admit it. And when Gerald Ford heard her story, he said this was just a bunch of housewives having a coffee klatch. So this whole thing is a coincidence. There's no plot here. But if you if they did the kind of investigation that I've done, they're going to come up with the whole employment agency thing, and they don't know about that.

And that'll be The Final Charade of there's a two parts of that answer. First of all, I think it was a coincidence. But on the other hand, I'm going to tell you right now that because of the fact that the Texas School Book Depository is located downtown and they're living out in Irving, I do not believe it is a coincidence that when they had another person apply in September from Irving, Texas, who had a car, namely Buell Wesley Frazier, they said, Oh, sure, make sure he works there.

Oswald will have a ride. You follow what I'm saying? So by accepting Frazier as an employee back in September, around approximately September 10th, they created a situation for like a carpool, a situation where when Oswald got there, he would be able to have transportation to and from Irving to downtown. So, of course, Linnie May Randle knew about that.

Her her her brother worked there. But I don't believe that the acceptance of Buell Wesley Frazier's application for work was coincidental. I think that that was viewed positively by those involved in this thing, because how else is Oswald, was he going to take a cab every day from Irving, Texas, to downtown Dallas? So by having Buell Wesley Frazier work there in September, he would have a when they got him the job there.

(. . .)

I think I can only speculate about what Ruth Paine feels about the situation, but she's tied to the Kennedy assassination in ways that she probably never intended or expected to be.

And so for all time, she probably takes a look at the Lincoln assassination and realizes that Mary Surratt has been black[ened] and, you know, her name is blackened in history. And historians say, well, that she didn't deserve to be, Ruth Paine. As the passage of time goes on and people look more into how Oswald got this job and to who Oswald really was and to how he was framed, she probably never would have expected that she would be blamed for the frame up of Oswald or for the Kennedy assassination in any way, shape or form.

But now she's having to view the fact that, yeah, that's happening, and now she suddenly has to mount defenses against in the ninth inning of her life. I don't know how she handles it, but it must be very upsetting. 

[END Lifton]

I’m sorry the guy passed away, and I hate to agree about anything with Parnell, but that is one incoherent piece. Makes no sense, makes dumb mistakes, and contradicts itself. 

[Greg Doudna]

On 12/21/2022 at 8:12 PM, Allen Lowe said:

I’m sorry the guy passed away, and I hate to agree about anything with Parnell, but that is one incoherent piece. Makes no sense, makes dumb mistakes, and contradicts itself. 

Allen would you care to give a reaction on Lifton's idea of the employment agency as the originally intended mechanism to get Oswald placed at TSBD? 

Of the three possibilities, (a) setup via employment agency for Oswald placed TSBD; (b) rely upon a cold call from a housewife in Irving to talk Truly of TSBD over the phone into hiring Oswald; or (c) no prior intent to have Oswald at TSBD (accident), which strikes you as making the best sense on the assumption that there was a criminal conspiracy to kill the President in Dallas? (or a "d")

I do not recall Lifton's employment agency idea having been developed or put on the table before. The question of curiosity to me is what were the specifics of Lifton's argument, if he had specifics (since what Lifton said in this film interview footage is only an opening statement or reference to a forthcoming argument).

What it calls to mind is the exploration of the employment agency scene in Dallas/Fort Worth argued in the background of the hiring of Buell Wesley Frazier at the TSBD in the paper, John Manning, "Oswald's Job--Exposing the Setup", at https://gregrparker.com/3615-2/. It has occurred to me that if Lifton did have some worked-out argument for an employment agency scenario it could overlap with some of the material in the Manning article. Perhaps a posthumous publication of some of Lifton's working papers may answer this question better. 

Edited December 24, 2022 by Greg Doudna

[Allen Lowe]

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Allen would you care to give a reaction on Lifton's idea of the employment agency as the originally intended mechanism to get Oswald placed at TSBD? 

Of the three possibilities, (a) setup via employment agency for Oswald placed TSBD; (b) rely upon a cold call from a housewife in Irving to talk Truly of TSBD over the phone into hiring Oswald; or (c) no prior intent to have Oswald at TSBD (accident), which strikes you as making the best sense on the assumption that there was a criminal conspiracy to kill the President in Dallas? (or a "d")

I do not recall Lifton's employment agency idea having been developed or put on the table before. The question of curiosity to me is what were the specifics of Lifton's argument on that exactly, if he had specifics (since what Lifton said in this film interview footage is only like an opening statement or reference to a forthcoming argument without its substance or content).

What it calls to mind to me is the exploration of the employment agency scene in Dallas/Fort Worth argued to be in the background of the hiring of Buell Wesley Frazier at the TSBD in the paper by John Manning, "Oswald's Job--Exposing the Setup", at https://gregrparker.com/3615-2/. It has occurred to me that if Lifton did have some worked-out argument for an employment agency scenario it could overlap with some of the material in the Manning article. Perhaps a posthumous publication of some of Lifton's working papers will at some point answer this question better. 

I have no idea except to say that one of Lifton’s major flaws was to come up with a theory, throw it around, and then soon start talking about it as though it was established fact. It was like watching a really warped game of Telephone. So I came to trust very little that he said (or wrote).

[W. Tracy Parnell]

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.

[Allen Lowe]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

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.

So now - you are agreeing with Lifton. Tell us about the JFK body alteration, if he is such a good source.

and Griffin, who told us the WC was perfect in its report.  You are killing whatever credibility you have left by attaching yourself to non-credible sources,

[Max Good]

The content about Griffin was posted on my private Patreon account with a very clear statement:

This material is provided for research purposes and cannot be published without express permission.

Greg Doudna ignored this and he has now been banned from my Patreon.  His thread posted here was also deleted by the moderators.  Fred Litwin is now carrying the torch on this.  I guess Griffin gave him permission to publish the letter, so that is now public.

You will find Fred Litwin, Burt Griffin, Greg Doudna, Paul Hoch, W. Tracy Parnell, and probably a few others all working together to attack my film.

 

Edited December 28, 2022 by Max Good

[W. Tracy Parnell]

17 minutes ago, Max Good said:

The content about Griffin was posted on my private Patreon account

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.

[Denny Zartman]

25 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

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.

He was fairer than she deserved and you know it. Make your own god-damned documentary if you're so smart.

[Micah Mileto]

47 minutes ago, Max Good said:

The content about Griffin was posted on my private Patreon account with a very clear statement:

This material is provided for research purposes and cannot be published without express permission.

Greg Doudna ignored this and he has now been banned from my Patreon.  His thread posted here was also deleted by the moderators.  Fred Litwin is now carrying the torch on this.  I guess Griffin gave him permission to publish the letter, so that is now public.

You will find Fred Litwin, Burt Griffin, Greg Doudna, Paul Hoch, W. Tracy Parnell, and probably a few others all working together to attack my film.

 

Boo. Abolish intellectual property.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

54 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said:

He was fairer than she deserved and you know it. Make your own god-damned documentary if you're so smart.

I think your comment is inappropriate.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

53 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Boo. Abolish intellectual property.

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

[Denny Zartman]

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

Boo. Abolish intellectual property.

Max Good did the legwork and he deserves to be paid for the work he did. And you know he's not making a mint off of this movie.

You are not entitled to access everyone's intellectual property for free all the time, just as you are not allowed to enter anyone's home or office at any time. It's his creation. Go do your own interviews and research on your own dime and time, and then give it all away if you want. When doing your research you may rely solely on the work of amateurs and hobbyists if it pleases you. Is that really how you pursue intellectual efforts, or do you just steal all your books written by professional writers? I'm going to respect the time and effort that real professionals put into creating their intellectual property and I strongly reject the notion those properties should be stolen from them.

Takes as much effort (and much more money) to cross the country and record an interview as it does to knit a sweater. If you're stealing that sweater, you're stealing. If you're stealing that interview, you're still stealing. It's the same theft of the time, energy, and money that it took to create both. If the information in that intellectual property has value to you, then it has value. You are not entitled to get it, or anyone else's intellectual property, for free.

Sorry. I just cannot stand the attitude of someone expecting professionals to work for free, as if their time, effort, and expenses incurred weren't worth anything at all. In my view, that attitude discourages any future aspiring professionals from working, especially on this particular case, which seems to be such a thankless task for so many researchers.

[Denny Zartman]

And let's be clear: this stuff isn't being stolen from Max Good in a heroic attempt at distributing information for the common good and history; it's a deliberate attempt to sabotage his Patreon account and impair his ability to generate income.