Fred Litwin's new book

[Guest]

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

Fred Litwin's new book, Oliver Stone's Film-Flam: The Demagogue of Dealey Plaza, is now available on Amazon:

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/oliver-stone-s-film-flam

I forgot to mention on my Raleigh call thread that Dr. Grover Proctor, Jr., thinks Stone's JFK "might be pretty close to what actually happened."

Michael Shermer, with whom I once briefly corresponded even if many of my views are quite different from his, offered the following about Stone and Fred's book. Sounds like something I could've written:

"In preparation for hosting Oliver Stone on my podcast, I watched his four-part four-hour documentary series JFK: Destiny Betrayed … twice. I thought I was prepared, but there are so many details in Stone’s account of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy that no matter what I said Stone had another “but what about…?” What I needed was Fred Litwin’s new book, Oliver Stone’s Film-Flam, which dissects the major claims made in the film and shows them to be mistaken, exaggerated, misquoted, misunderstood, misrepresented, or taken out of context. The devil is in the details and Litwin has done the heavy lifting necessary to counter conspiracisms’ demagoguery. Everyone interested in the JFK assassination story should read this book and thank Fred Litwin for his tireless work." 

The endless "But what about THIS?" ploy is why I analogize debating with CTers to wrestling with a pig or playing Whack-a-Mole. I'm done with it. I'll offer what I have to say as the spirit moves me, and you may ignore or dispute it as you wish, but I am through playing the "But what about THIS?" game.

 

Wow. Shermer is a piece of work, a total tool. I met him at a local talk, and we exchanged emails after agreeing to have a serious discussion of the Kennedy assassination. After I sent him some stuff demonstrating problems with the single-bullet theory, he cut me off, and said if you looked at the details of the shooting, you would get lost in the minutiae, and that the only way to understand what happened was to look at the big picture, and not question the details. Now he praises Litwin for his hard work and attention to detail. What a hypocrite! It's like people who praised Bugliosi's book saying it answered all the questions who never read the book, and would never read a comparably-sized book (such as my website) or Harold Weisberg's books. 

"It's got a lotta words and footnotes and tells me what I want to hear so it's gotta be smurt!" 

 

Edited January 27, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Joe Bauer]

First of all let me express a more positive and defending take on the "WHACK-A-MOLE" game box machines that for years adorned the interiors of the more tacky bars/clubs and children's arcade rooms across the country.

I don't see them anymore, however, I think LP may be missing a deeper, truer, more meaningful value to that particular arcade piece.

In my mind it was a great stress reliever!

Now regards Stone's 1991 "political thriller" film "JFK" which I just viewed again yesterday.

Are we still reading the same "factual deviancies" criticism cr*p that has been expressed with outrage by Stone haters from before the film was even released 33 years ago?

Yes, unfortunately.

Stone himself has admitted his use of much dramatic license in telling his film "story" so many times it's almost nauseating to still read this outrage criticism when these critics have been validated in their main point by Stone himself!

Stone has said, his goal was to create an alternate reality dramatic story...to counter-balance the Warren Commission lone nut finding one regards the assassination of JFK.

The film was never created to be a strict fact reporting documentary.

Who would pay money to see such a dry docu-film like that?

If the viewers of JFK believed more of Stone's film story than the Warren Commission version... that says it all regards how little trust the majority of Americans had in our official government conclusion of the truth about the JFK event.

A dark suspicion minded lack of trust and confidence that had festered inside of them for almost 30 years before Stone's JFK film.

The integrity failure of the Warren Commission and those that created and promoted their work and finding is what the JFK film was all about.

Stone's film reflected this society mistrust mind set and was actually a visceral release of their decades of pent up gut wrenching angst regards feeling and/or sensing something disturbingly wrong about the government's findings about JFK...and the MLK and RFK murders as well...imo anyways.

And let me add once again...Stone's JFK film was just as gripping, intriguing and entertaining yesterday as it was when I first viewed it twice in theaters when it first came out.

In so many ways.

That highest level entertainment staying power film achievement is proof of the film's greatness imo. A real masterpiece. Definitely one of the greatest American films ever made.

Every character in the film ( dozens) just holds you in their performances. 

And is there any other American film with so many of our top award winning actors in the cast?

That could have backfired into a dizzying "too much" ensemble jumble, but Stone remarkably made it all work which is an incredible film production achievement in itself imo.

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Anthony Thorne]

Haha, bloody hell. Here's Fred's book,

https://www.amazon.com.au/Oliver-Stones-Film-Flam-Demagogue-Dealey-ebook/dp/B0BSZV3BK7/ref=sr_1_4?qid=1674847546&refinements=p_27%3AFRED+LITWIN&s=books&sr=1-4&text=FRED+LITWIN

Many will have comments but everyone here should go read the long introduction, and then take the time to say hello to Fred personally, as he's clearly reading the forum and digging into folk's Twitter profiles and so on. Hi Fred.

The introduction to the Kindle version quotes Max Boot with approval, and could have been written by Boot himself. I'm surprised he didn't get Frank Gaffney, Michael Ledeen and Richard Perle to chip in with their thoughts and world-view. Maybe next time.

Side note -  go see Matt Taibbi's recent Tweet, where the list of 'Russian bots spreading disinfo' that the mainstream media touted for many months, was largely comprised of regular American citizens, and included Consortium News editor Joe Lauria. 

 

 

 

Edited January 27, 2023 by Anthony Thorne

[John Kowalski]

20 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said:

Many will have comments but everyone here should go read the long introduction, and then take the time to say hello to Fred personally, as he's clearly reading the forum and digging into folk's Twitter profiles and so on. Hi Fred.

Why talk to Fred?

[David G. Healy]

On 1/27/2023 at 10:35 AM, Lance Payette said:

[...]

 but I am through playing the "But what about THIS?" game.

 

and I bet you ponder: *why am I always on the outside looking in, eh?"

You should feel blessed that you're even allowed to take those personalities and names in vain. With the exception of Litwin, of course.... Get a life dude....

[Guest]

On 1/27/2023 at 10:29 AM, Pat Speer said:

Wow. Shermer is a piece of work, a total tool. I met him at a local talk, and we exchanged emails after agreeing to have a serious discussion of the Kennedy assassination. After I sent him some stuff demonstrating problems with the single-bullet theory, he cut me off, and said if you looked at the details of the shooting, you would get lost in the minutiae, and that the only way to understand what happened was to look at the big picture, and not question the details. Now he praises Litwin for his hard work and attention to detail. What a hypocrite! It's like people who praised Bugliosi's book saying it answered all the questions who never read the book, and would never read a comparably-sized book (such as my website) or Harold Weisberg's books. 

"It's got a lotta words and footnotes and tells me what I want to hear so it's gotta be smurt!" 

 

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette

[Guest]

On 1/28/2023 at 11:59 AM, David G. Healy said:

and I bet you ponder: *why am I always on the outside looking in, eh?"

You should feel blessed that you're even allowed to take those personalities and names in vain. With the exception of Litwin, of course.... Get a life dude....

Hi

Edited February 15, 2023 by Lance Payette
deleted insult

[Anthony Thorne]

3 hours ago, John Kowalski said:

Why talk to Fred?

I was joking. The hair-raising intro to his book suggests he browses the forum here with an aggrieved look of hostile rage on his face, searching through posts and profiles for new things to set him off.

[Cory Santos]

On 1/27/2023 at 7:35 AM, Lance Payette said:

Fred Litwin's new book, Oliver Stone's Film-Flam: The Demagogue of Dealey Plaza, is now available on Amazon:

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/oliver-stone-s-film-flam

I forgot to mention on my Raleigh call thread that Dr. Grover Proctor, Jr., thinks Stone's JFK "might be pretty close to what actually happened."

Michael Shermer, with whom I once briefly corresponded even if many of my views are quite different from his, offered the following about Stone and Fred's book. Sounds like something I could've written:

"In preparation for hosting Oliver Stone on my podcast, I watched his four-part four-hour documentary series JFK: Destiny Betrayed … twice. I thought I was prepared, but there are so many details in Stone’s account of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy that no matter what I said Stone had another “but what about…?” What I needed was Fred Litwin’s new book, Oliver Stone’s Film-Flam, which dissects the major claims made in the film and shows them to be mistaken, exaggerated, misquoted, misunderstood, misrepresented, or taken out of context. The devil is in the details and Litwin has done the heavy lifting necessary to counter conspiracisms’ demagoguery. Everyone interested in the JFK assassination story should read this book and thank Fred Litwin for his tireless work." 

The endless "But what about THIS?" ploy is why I analogize debating with CTers to wrestling with a pig or playing Whack-a-Mole. I'm done with it. I'll offer what I have to say as the spirit moves me, and you may ignore or dispute it as you wish, but I am through playing the "But what about THIS?" game.

 

Again you claim to be “done” or “through” yet here you are …….

 Odd you attack conspiracists yet your ufo beliefs could make one view you as a conspiracist. 

Feel free to stop anytime.   Help is out there.    
Oh and Cliff says:

“6.5mm FMJ don’t leave shallow wounds in soft tissue.  Ergo, the evidence is phony...See how easy this is?“

[Gerry Down]

Did Oliver Stone consult with any LNers in the making of JFK:Revisited or was it all CTers?

[Cory Santos]

Just now, Gerry Down said:

Did Oliver Stone consult with any LNers in the making of JFK:Revisited or was it all CTers?

He read the Warren commission.  Is that not enough wacky for one day?

[Gerry Down]

3 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

He read the Warren commission.  Is that not enough wacky for one day?

I thought a main talking point of JFK:Revisited was that Oliver Stone was examining all the evidence that has came out since the ARRB. If Stone only examined the LNer side using the 1964 WC report, then that could hardly be considered a fair and balanced examination of the evidence of the 60 years since the assassination occurred. 

[Cory Santos]

Just now, Gerry Down said:

I thought a main talking point of JFK:Revisited was that Oliver Stone was examining all the evidence that has came out since the ARRB. If Stone only examined the LNer side using the 1964 WC report, then that could hardly be considered a fair and balanced examination of the evidence of the 60 years since the assassination occurred. 

So what new lone nut evidence should he have considered in your opinion?  It sounds like you haven’t watched the two films.  
Usually when I present my case in court I argue my clients position rather than that of the other party.      

[Gerry Down]

3 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

So what new lone nut evidence should he have considered in your opinion?  It sounds like you haven’t watched the two films.  
Usually when I present my case in court I argue my clients position rather than that of the other party.      

He should have considered all the counter-evidence which Fred Litwin posts in his book which counters many of the claims based on ARRB documents. Stone only looked at the ARRB releases from the CTer point of view, but does not seem to have considered them from the LNer point of view. That's an imbalanced examination of the ARRB evidence. That's why Netflix rejected his documentary and it didn't have any where near the reach it could have had had he ran many of his claims by LNers such as Fred Litwin, Posner etc.