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

[W. Niederhut]

Pat,

    With all due respect, your superficial conciliatory "analysis" here simply ignores the fact that there was-- and still is-- an organized, heavily-funded psy op to promote Allen Dulles's "Lone Nut" WCR narrative about the conspiracy to murder John F. Kennedy.

    Yes, we all want cordiality and civility, but let's not pretend that people involved in the 60 year CIA psy op to blame the JFK assassination on Oswald are engaging in honest, bona fide "research" about JFK's murder.

    On the contrary, they have systematically tried to conceal and lie about the damning contrary evidence, while orchestrating smear campaigns against the honest investigators, attorneys, and film makers who have exposed their fraudulence-- e.g., Jim Garrison, Fletcher Prouty, Oliver Stone, James DiEugenio, et.al.

     Fred Litwin's sales pitch to smear Jim Garrison is merely the latest example of this 60 year CIA-funded public relations scam.

Edited Thursday at 04:21 PM by W. Niederhut

[James DiEugenio]

I love Fred's latest.

Uh, Truly had just seen Oswald had he not?

Jerry Rose penned a  neat article on this that Bart Kamp has on his site.

[Steve Roe]

21 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This was already dealt with by David Boylan.

@David Boylan I'm not sure what DiEugenio is exactly referring to, but it appears it was the fake 544 Camp Street flyers, not the Corlis Lamont pamphlets which did have 544 Camp Street stamped on them.

Have you done research on this? If so, would like to see your conclusions. 

Having researched a couple of years back with Fred, it looks like someone has faked these flyers.

[Fred Litwin]

Dr. Niederhut: Thanks for reminding me. I have to phone Langley to ask them why have yet to deposit any money into my bank accounts.

fred

[James DiEugenio]

Pat's plea does not apply in this case.

For multiple reasons.

1.  As Matt D noted, Fred has never produced his Commission critic articles from those days when he was in the critical camp.

2.  He is somehow confused about when he had his St. Paul on the way to Damascus vision.  Was it 1979 and the HSCA, or was it 1993 with Case Closed.  That is a space of 14 years, how can one confuse the time when it is split over three decades?

3.  And both of those sources turned out to be fraudulent.  With the HSCA, the report lied about the Bethesda vs Parkland witnesses to the hole in the rear of the skull.  And no one will admit they wrote that fraudulent section.  With Posner we have people not just saying he stuffed words in their mouths, but that they never talked to him.  These are really serious problems of credibility. Another example, take a look at Posner's book on p. 473, he has his sniper looking the wrong way.

And let us never forget about the moment when Posner wrote that Oswald never associated with Ferrie in the CAP. Oh really Gerald?  What about this picture of them together?

BAM! Custard pie in the face.

Edited Thursday at 05:18 PM by James DiEugenio

[Fred Litwin]

Mr DiEugenio: What complete nonsense.

1. I did produces articles from when I was in the critical camp.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/fred-litwin-conspiracy-theorist

2. Mr. Douthit has his facts all wrong I told him that it was the HSCA volumes of evidence, which I obtained in the early 1990s on CD-Rom, that really helped change my mind. Back in 1979, I was totally out of the JFK assassination since I decided to apply myself to get an MBA.

3. As for Mr. Ferrie and the picture with Oswald, well have a read of this:

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/did-david-ferrie-know-lee-harvey-oswald

cheers,

Fred

P.A. when are going to explain the use of faked handbill in your documentary series?

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Fred Litwin said:

Dr. Niederhut: Thanks for reminding me. I have to phone Langley to ask them why have yet to deposit any money into my bank accounts.

fred

Hmmm... I thought Langley used their numerous shell companies for that sort of thing.  🙄

[Jonathan Cohen]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

     Fred Litwin's sales pitch to smear Jim Garrison is merely the latest example of this 60 year CIA-funded public relations scam.

This is a highly objectionable comment from a forum moderator and amounts to accusing another forum member of being a paid government propagandist. Why is this being allowed?

[Jean Ceulemans]

6 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Hmmm... I thought Langley used their numerous shell companies for that sort of thing.  🙄

Dr. N., let´s make it easy, who are the EF members here that you believe are CIA funded (direct or indirect).

[W. Niederhut]

13 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

This is a highly objectionable comment from a forum moderator and amounts to accusing another forum member of being a paid government propagandist. Why is this being allowed?

Jonathan,

     Do you deny that CIA-affiliated propagandists have been active in the U.S. mainstream media, and on social media?

     Was William Colby lying to the Church Committee about CIA Operation Mockingbird?

     How about John McAdams?

 

     

Edited Thursday at 06:42 PM by W. Niederhut

[Jonathan Cohen]

13 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Jonathan,

     Do you deny that CIA-affiliated propagandists have been active in the U.S. mainstream media, and on social media?

     Was William Colby lying to the Church Committee about CIA Operation Mockingbird?

     How about John McAdams?     

Irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is that you appear to be directly accusing another forum member of being a paid government disinformation agent, with zero evidence to back it up.

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Pat,

    With all due respect, your superficial conciliatory "analysis" here simply ignores the fact that there was-- and still is-- an organized, heavily-funded psy op to promote Allen Dulles's "Lone Nut" WCR narrative about the conspiracy to murder John F. Kennedy.

    Yes, we all want cordiality and civility, but let's not pretend that people involved in the 60 year CIA psy op to blame the JFK assassination on Oswald are engaging in honest, bona fide "research" about JFK's murder.

    On the contrary, they have systematically tried to conceal and lie about the damning contrary evidence, while orchestrating smear campaigns against the honest investigators, attorneys, and film makers who have exposed their fraudulence-- e.g., Jim Garrison, Fletcher Prouty, Oliver Stone, James DiEugenio, et.al.

     Fred Litwin's sales pitch to smear Jim Garrison is merely the latest example of this 60 year CIA-funded public relations scam.

While I have no doubt the Johnson Administration and CIA used their powers to stifle conspiracy talk in the 60's, and have no doubt some of the politicians on the HSCA were worried their reputations would suffer if the committee said Oswald was innocent, and encouraged Blakey to push Oswald as the shooter, I think it's silly to believe anyone in Washington today knows enough about what happened in 1963 to cover anything up. 

Instead what we see today is what we always see. People digging in their heels over crap they know nothing about. I mean, I think most of us have read Weisberg. Well, among the most revealing bits in Weisberg's books are his descriptions of his dealings with the various agencies and archives. He had to educate them, constantly, about the significance of this and that...because they had no idea. 

Now, as far as "smear" campaigns... It is fairly common for people disagreeing with the message to attack the messenger. I know I have. I have chapters devoted to the mistakes/nonsense spewed by Specter, Lattimer, Bugliosi and so on, and have vented about a number of CTs as well. 

So it doesn't surprise me when people displeased with Garrison go after him, and I fail to see their doing so as some part of a plot. 

I have met many and perhaps most of the top researchers on the JFKA. They are all human. They all have their flaws and blindspots. But there are certain patterns of behavior among CTs and LNs that are commonplace...that are not symptomatic of a plot. 

A common characteristic of CTs is that they take disagreements with their position personally, and assume those disagreeing with them are either brainwashed idiots or part of a plot against them.

And a common characteristic of LNs is that they take disagreements with their position personally, and assume those disagreeing with them are either anti-American, or mentally deranged. 

As stated, I think the world would benefit from a website in which, say, Fred presents an argument explaining why he thinks Garrison lied about such and such, that is then followed by a counter-argument from Jim in which Fred's logic and sources are questioned, and new information is added. Put it all on the table. Let the reader decide. 

Ideally, such a website would trade off. Perhaps Jim would then present an argument about this witness or that--and why they should be believed. After which Fred could counter his argument with additional facts and analysis. 

These arguments would then be locked and added to a database, so someone coming to this website could look at a list of subject headings and say "Who is this Rose Cheramie" and look up the thread on Rose Cherami. New information could be added, but only new information. Not cheerleading or insults. 

Now, I know, because I am one of the vets of this place, that this is what John Simkin wanted for this forum. Point. Counter-point. Let the reader decide. An Education Forum. He never intended for it to be a safe house for conspiracy theorists where they could spew unchallenged. He personally invited prominent LNs and CTs to this forum in an attempt to create a dialogue, or at least lay bare the issues. 

 

Edited Thursday at 07:13 PM by Pat Speer

[W. Niederhut]

17 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is that you appear to be directly accusing another forum member of being a paid government disinformation agent, with zero evidence to back it up.

Jonathan,

     IMO, we need to have an open, honest discussion on the Education Forum about the CIA propaganda establishment.

     Most of us are aware of the Church Committe findings about CIA Operation Mockingbird, and some of us are familiar with Cass Sunstein's proposals for U.S. government "Cognitive Infiltration" of social media forums where "conspiracy theories" about government black ops are discussed.

      Col. Fletcher Prouty discerned the hallmarks of a professional CIA psy op in the prompt mass media promotion of Oswald as a Lone Assassin.

     Most of us know that John McAdams was an internet propagandist who spent his career disparaging researchers who had debunked the Warren Commission Report.

     Most of us are also aware of the bogus media coverage of the JFK Revisited documentary-- including the ridiculous "review" of JFK Revisited published in the Washington Post by Fred Litwin's associate, Alecia P. Long.

      We know that Fred Litwin had a successful sales and marketing career prior to his recent career work promoting public criticisms of Jim Garrison, Oliver Stone, and James DiEugenio.

      I asked Mr. Litwin a few weeks ago if he had ever contracted with any government-affiliated agencies to promote public criticism of Warren Commission debunkers, but he never answered my question.

      

     

Edited Thursday at 07:16 PM by W. Niederhut

[Pat Speer]

11 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Jonathan,

     IMO, we need to have an open, honest discussion on the Education Forum about the CIA propaganda establishment.

     Most of us are aware of the Church Committe findings about CIA Operation Mockingbird, and some of us are familiar with Cass Sunstein's proposals for U.S. government "Cognitive Infiltration" of social media forums where "conspiracy theories" about government black ops are discussed.

      Col. Fletcher Prouty discerned the hallmarks of a professional CIA psy op in the prompt mass media promotion of Oswald as a Lone Assassin.

     Most of us know that John McAdams was an internet propagandist who spent his career disparaging researchers who had debunked the Warren Commission Report.

     Most of us are also aware of the bogus media coverage of the JFK Revisited documentary-- including the ridiculous "review" of JFK Revisited published in the Washington Post by Fred Litwin's associate, Alecia P. Long.

      

     

I spent several years on McAdams' newsgroups, trying to counter his belligerent nonsense. I had more success than most. And I am also the one who first noticed CIA banner ads on his personal internet radio station, and brought that to the attention of the research community.

But I ultimately concluded he was not "working" for the CIA but marching to his own drummer--a drummer influenced by his hardcore Catholic and pro-business beliefs.

He had a personal blog, in which he spent as much time complaining about feminists and environmentalists as he did JFK conspiracists. He saw us all as threats to the world in which he wanted to live. He was a zealot. 

Edited Thursday at 07:23 PM by Pat Speer

[W. Niederhut]

5 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

I spent several years on McAdams' newsgroups, trying to counter his belligerent nonsense. I had more success than most. And I am also the one who first noticed CIA banner ads on his personal internet radio station, and brought that to the attention of the research community.

But I ultimately concluded he was not "working" for the CIA but marching to his own drummer--a drummer influenced by his hardcore Catholic and pro-business beliefs.

He had a personal blog, in which he spent as much time complaining about feminists and environmentalists as he did JFK conspiracists. He saw us all as threats to the world in which he wanted to live. He was a zealot. 

C'mon, Pat.

If the CIA Mockingbird establishment has invested so much money (since the 1950s) in mainstream media propaganda, are we supposed to believe that they wouldn't spend money on 21st century internet propagandists?

That concept makes no sense at all-- especially in an era when so many people are getting their "news" and information from internet sources.

One thing that I realized, while reading about CIA psy ops in books by Fletcher Prouty, David Talbott, Stephen Kinzer, et.al., is how diabolically clever Allen Dulles, Frank Wisner, Phillip Graham, Edward Lansdale, et.al., were in matters of propaganda psy ops.

Those guys were brilliant, to begin with, but they were also remarkably prescient about propaganda-- going back to their WWII days in the OSS.