My New Book, A Heritage of Nonsense: Jim Garrison's Tales of Mystery and Imagination

[James DiEugenio]

This was already dealt with by David Boylan.

[Gerry Down]

Congrats on the new book Fred. Looking forward to listening to some of your interviews covering it.

[James DiEugenio]

Here is another debunking of Fred.

Please read Matt's review all the way to the end.

Because that little exchange between Matt and Fred tells you every thing you need to know about Fred Litwin.

And why he is not worth reading.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/fred-litwin-on-the-facts-of-the-jfk-case

[Jonathan Cohen]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Nothing shows us the kind of man, and writer, that Fred Litwin is than this.

It turned out that Weiss was lying because he did not want to be pulled into the case.

And this shows you not just who Litwin is but who Jonathan Cohen is.

I am happy to stand with authors and researchers on EITHER side of this debate who have debunked decades worth of nonsense -- in this case, the ramblings of the mentally ill Richard Case Nagell.

[Fred Litwin]

So, Mr. DiEugenio explain your use of a fake flyer.

fred

[Bill Brown]

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Two witnesses of Rose Cheramie's foreknowledge of the JFK assassination in Dallas were Lt. Francis Fruge of the Louisiana State police, and psychiatrist, Dr. Victor J. Weiss, Jr. 

Both Lt. Fruge and Dr. Weiss documented Cheramie's foreknowledge of the JFK assassination through contacts with the Dallas PD, and A.H. Magruder, respectively.

Rose Cheramie (spartacus-educational.com)

 

 

 

Fruge and Weiss never said anything about any of this until AFTER Cherami was dead.

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

For those who did not read through Matt D's fine review.

Here is the ending.

Please note, Fred cannot recall when he decided to enter the SBT camp.  Was it 1979, or was it 1993.  Well, since that is a period of 14 years, its quite a big difference.

Litwin relayed a story to me:

It’s a story that should be in my Teenage Conspiracy Freak book, but isn’t. It goes like this. As I was slowly changing my opinion, I decided it was time to read Posner's book. I bought it…but I couldn't open it. It sat there for days…until I decided to read the medical evidence chapter. I thought it was a great chapter—in fact, I wish I had written it…and I knew then that there was no conspiracy…and I put the book down…a changed man. (1/15/21 Facebook message)

I was taken aback by this. First of all, in his book, he says what turned him around on the JFK case was the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1979. Now that is moved forward to 1993? And he still cannot provide any evidence of anything he wrote while he was in the critical community camp? Second, Gary Aguilar interviewed two Kennedy autopsy doctors, Dr. Boswell and Dr. Humes, who both denied the words Posner put in their mouths. Boswell went even further: he said he never talked to Posner. (Click here for details) The truth of the matter is that Gerald Posner’s book Case Closed has been debunked 7 ways to Sunday ever since it was first published in 1993. (Click here for details)

I reminded Litwin of this and he just said: “It has not been debunked.” I then proposed, “If I could prove it has been debunked, what would you say?” Litwin retorted: “If you could prove the earth is flat, what would I say?” (ibid.) When I told him “Baden says it’s possible a shot from the knoll”, Litwin retorted: “It’s possible we are being visited by flying saucers; and it is possible that Bigfoot exists.” (4/5/21 Facebook message)

Folks, that’s Fred Litwin for you.

[James DiEugenio]

Note also, as Matt does, Litwin has yet to provide an article from his so called Commission critic days.

Well, if you cannot recall when you left that camp, 1979 or 1993, that might explain why you cannot locate anything.

But please note that closing.  A shot from the front of Kennedy--backed up by the hole in the back of the skull, the Z film, the larger particles in the rear, and if you buy it, the acoustics--this is like saying the earth is flat?  Or that Bigfoot exists?

This is why some doubt the whole origin story about Litwin and the JFK case.

And no rational person could possibly say that Posner's book has not been debunked.  I mean get in line for a ticket to that exhibit.  Its a long line.

And btw, Boswell is not the only guy who said he did not talk to Posner, but who is quoted in his book.

Edited Wednesday at 11:46 PM by James DiEugenio

[David Von Pein]

7 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

There was no such roll call.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / The Roll Call

 

Edited Wednesday at 11:53 PM by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

9 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

In Fred Litwin's book "I Was a Teenage Conspiracy Freak", Fred wrote that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only person missing from the Texas School Book Depository after the assassination.

It's not true. Charles Givens was also missing, among others.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Missing Depository Employees

 

Edited Wednesday at 11:53 PM by David Von Pein

[Denny Zartman]

Good work by @James DiEugenio on this thread. Parts of it echo my thoughts on the matter.

It's funny that Fred urges people to read his new book with an "open (mind)." That's what I did when I read his earlier book "I Was a Teenage Conspiracy Freak." I was especially interested in reading what it was that made him believe there was a conspiracy in the first place, and how his thoughts turned around on that evidence specifically. But, unless I missed it, he never lets his readers know what it was that first made him a conspiracy freak.

Maybe I overlooked it, because when I got to the false claim about Oswald being the only missing warehouseman, it immediately undermined all my confidence in Fred as an author. It's an easily verifiable fact that Charles Givens was another warehouseman who worked for Roy Truly like Oswald did, and who moved books and filled orders like Oswald did, and it's a fact that Givens was also not present after the JFKA. It's not a matter of opinion. It's just a fact. People here may try to spin it every which way but loose with subjective opinion on what might have happened, but no amount of spin will alter the truth. Saying Oswald was the only missing warehouseman is not accurate.

I will say that Fred is correct in this regard: Oswald was the only missing TSBD employee that mattered - because Oswald was the designated patsy.

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Denny.

I think it was Mark Bridger who wrote an article that exposed the fact that here was really no formal roll call after the shooting.

So the database is faulty. 

 

PS: Yes it was Mark Bridger in The Dealey Plaza Echo Vol. 11 No. 2

Edited Wednesday at 11:58 PM by James DiEugenio

[Gerry Down]

6 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

it's a fact that Givens was also not present after the JFKA.

He was also not present before the JFKA. He left around 12 noon. And presumably told his work colleagues he was leaving.

In this sense Givens was not missing. Much like Frankie Kaiser was not missing. They knew where they were, but not Oswald.

"Missing" and "not present" can mean two different things.

It could be said that after the assassination, all the warehouse men were accounted for except Oswald.

Edited Thursday at 05:50 AM by Gerry Down

[Fred Litwin]

Truly did not consider Givens to be missing. You can see this in testimony (Volume 7, page 382)

Mr. Ball: Was he the only man missing?

Mr. Truly: The only I noticed at that time. Now, I think there was one or two more, possibly Charles Givens, but I had seen him out in front walking up the street just before the firing of the gun.

Volume 3, page 230

Mr. Belin: Did you ask for the names and addresses of any other employees who might have been missin?

Mr. Truly: No, sir.

Mr. Belin: Why didn't you ask for any other employees?

Mr. Truly: That is the only one that I could be certain right then was missing.

Truly did not consider Givens was missing. He was not there, but not missing.

fred

[Pat Speer]

On 10/1/2024 at 9:10 AM, Fred Litwin said:

Jonathan: I think you will find it interesting. I got a copy of his Stasi file from Germany, and that included a 26-page psychiatric report.

 

fred

I hope I'm not the only one who can see the gray between the black and white. 

To me it's clear Garrison thought he was on to something, and went down some unfortunate cul-de-sacs. 

To me it's clear a lot of earnest reporters and writers concluded Oswald did it, and felt it was their duty to help shut down talk of conspiracy. 

To me it's clear the U.S. government as an entity considers Public Relations a big part of its raison d'être, and routinely uses its resources to influence public opinion. 

To me it's clear then that the government would in such case try to catch kill, or spin any story it considered a threat to its reputation. 

In other words, it's clear to me the government would actively combat talk of conspiracy regardless of the truth of the matter. It's bad for business. It's like a restaurant rumored to have roaches. It is never gonna say "Yes, we have roaches." It will say "There never was a roach. Some drunk person thought he saw one. But it was just spots before his eyes." Or it will say "There was one roach, and it was brought in by an immigrant, and smashed by a waitress." Or "There were two roaches, but we got them both." Anything but admit it has roaches. Because the truth could be bad for business.

If you're LBJ, you're thinking it's best for this assassination distraction to be swept aside--no matter what really happened. "I've got bills to pass and wars to wage, and a chance to be a great man...and I can't let that my legacy be de-railed by obsessing on the past."

Now, all that said, I do think the research community could benefit...TREMENDOUSLY...by a ceasefire. The problem is not that conspiracy theorists are all honest campers and Oswald-did-its are all lying suck-ups to the government. Nor is it that conspiracy theorists are all loons. And nor is it that the research community has been infiltrated or any such thing. No, to me it's clear we have met the enemy, and it is US. 

Humans--and perhaps Americans most of all--are incredibly reticent to re-think their position. And those who do re-think their position often become zealots. I think most of us remember the 70's. In the early 70's everyone was smoking, but by the late 70's many had quit. Well, who among us was the most militant about having non-smoking sections and the most militant about singling out people who were violating the new rules? Former smokers, right?

So, to me, it makes total sense that Fred used to be a conspiracy theorist. He had an inkling but then he saw the "light."

 

Now, for me, it's not hopeless. I would like to believe that in time LNs who retain an interest and CTs who are not afraid of cooties will work together on a website...that presents arguments on key issues side by side...so that the next generation can be exposed to both sides of an argument before becoming indoctrinated. I suspect such a website will be extremely useful. And that the existence of such a website will be the only way to move forward.

Because as it is, most young people think this issue is a total waste of time, and akin to a bunch of old farts arguing over which TV show was better--Gunsmoke or Bonanza. 

 

Edited Thursday at 03:39 PM by Pat Speer