John Simkin Thought John McAdams Was a CIA Propagandist

[David Von Pein]

2 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Bugliosi and Posner have been major sources of CIA-funded propaganda promoting the WCR/LN narrative. We all know that.  

Total nonsense (of course).

 

[W. Niederhut]

1 minute ago, David Von Pein said:

Total nonsense (of course).

 

David,

     Read DiEugenio's point-by-point demolition of Bugliosi's bunk.

     Don't remain clueless forever.

[James DiEugenio]

I already noted Posner and Loomis.  

Posner's book had an immense effect.  In fact Jeff Greenfield for one still used it against Jim Hougan on FB.

Bugliosi very likely had meet ups with David Phillips and engaged in a correspondence with him, where those meet ups in UK were discussed.

Edited October 10 by James DiEugenio

[W. Niederhut]

22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

I already noted Posner and Loomis.  

Posner's books had an immense effect.  In fact Jeff Greenfield for one still used it against Jim Hougan on FB.

Bugliosi very likely had meet ups with David Phillips and engaged in a correspondence with him, where those meet ups in UK were discussed.

Jim,

    I was genuinely flabbergasted by Pat Speer's Sunday post denying and downplaying the role of Bugliosi, Posner, and McAdams in promoting the CIA's WCR/LN disinformation.

   In fact, that's what prompted me to research and initiate my thread about John Simkin's 2005 Operation Mockingbird thread, in which Simkin explicitly referred to McAdams as a purveyor of "CIA disinformation."

   There's some serious gaslighting happening on this forum-- about CIA disinformation promoting the debunked WCR/LN narrative of the JFK assassination.

Edited October 10 by W. Niederhut

[Pat Speer]

7 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Geez... get real, Pat.   I'm finer than frog's hair.

Bugliosi and Posner have been major sources of CIA-funded propaganda promoting the WCR/LN narrative.

We all know that.  

I was disgusted to see their propaganda tomes for sale at the Dealey Plaza book store -- and none of the accurate historiography--when I visited Dealey Plaza in December of 2019.

As for McAdams, John Simkin, himself, disagreed with your lame denial of McAdams' shilling for the CIA.

 

Look what you are doing!

You are claiming Bugliosi and Posner are "CIA-funded"? 

You have no evidence for that outside that they are saying things you don't like.

And then you claim "We all know that".

Who is this "we"? There is no "we" on this issue, unless you are counting a small subset of JFK researchers as this "we" and ignoring most everyone else.

People like Cyril Wecht most certainly believed as I, that people like Bugliosi and Specter were suck ups to the government position and not paid disinformants. 

As far as John Simkin, he never joined McAdams' forum to see him at work, bullying and squabbling and doing more to hurt his "cause" than help it. And he never met the man in person. And he came to this opinion before McAdams made a public spectacle of himself for harassing a student teacher for her liberal views--not exactly spy stuff. So my current opinion on McAdams carries far more weight  than the opinion of my friend and mentor, John Simkin, when he denounced McAdams. . 

Edited October 10 by Pat Speer

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Read DiEugenio's point-by-point demolition of Bugliosi's bunk.

Don't really need to. I've gone dozens of rounds with DiEugenio regarding Bugliosi, point by point [link below]. And, IMO, Jim is totally wrong about virtually all of his intense, non-stop criticisms of Vince (to the point where many of his anti-VB rants are just downright silly and laughable).

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / search=James DiEugenio & Vincent Bugliosi

 

Edited October 10 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

53 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Don't remain clueless forever.

Well, you don't seem to mind taking up permanent residence in Clueless Land.

 

Edited October 10 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

The sentence above by William should be amended.

There is little doubt that the CIA supports the WC verdict on the case.

We know that from  the Countering the Critics  memorandum.

We also know that Gates sent Chase Brandon to Hollywood after Stone's film was released.  His job was to make sure that did not happen again.

So in the sense that certain authors  are helped by that, yes that is true.

In the case of Posner, I am sure Loomis gave him a nice advance and a good contract.

In the case of Bugliosi, I mentioned the communications with Phillips, but he was such a big name he could have gotten  his book published on his own.  BTW, it bombed.  I hope I had something to do with that.

Simply put, Pat and I disagree on McAdams.

[W. Niederhut]

19 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Look what you are doing? 

You are claiming Bugliosi and Posner are "CIA-funded"? 

You have no evidence for that outside that they are saying things you don't like.

And then you claim "We all know that".

Who is this "we"? There is no "we" on this issue, unless you are counting a small subset of JFK researchers as this "we" and ignoring most everyone else.

People like Cyril Wecht most certainly believed as I, that people like Bugliosi and Specter were suck ups to the government position and not paid disinformants. 

As far as John Simkin, he never joined McAdams' forum to see him at work, bullying and squabbling and doing more to hurt his "cause" than help it. And he never met the man in person. And he came to this opinion before McAdams made a public spectacle of himself for harassing a student teacher for her liberal views--not exactly spy stuff. So my current opinion on McAdams carries far more weight  than the opinion of my friend and mentor, John Simkin, when he denounced McAdams. . 

What sort of evidence would we look for Pat, to prove that Bugliosi, Posner, McAdams, and others were funded by the CIA "Mockingbird" propaganda establishment to promote the false WCR/LN narrative?

Do tell.

We, certainly, know that the CIA has had a major "Mockingbird" propaganda establishment-- based on Colby's Church Committee testimony, Carl Bernstein's 1977 essay about the CIA and the Media, and biographical texts about Allen Dulles, Katherine Graham, et.al.

We also know that Dulles and his cronies were extremely invested in selling the WCR/LN narrative to the American public.

So, 1) the CIA wanted to promote the WCR/LN narrative and, 2) they had the means.

Next question.

Who, then, were their salesmen?

Any ideas?  🙄

[Ron Bulman]

22 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

This is one of the saddest things I've read on this forum.

Pat, you failed to note I agreed with Sandy's 1st 3 points, not the last three.  LN's are useful.  Debunking their trope is part of the purpose of the forum, so those visiting will be objectively informed. In the search for the Truth.

If anyone ever looks at the bottom of the page we virtually always have way more anonymous visitors looking in than members.   Who are they I've wondered?  All CIA observers?  No, of course not.  They're people new to or interested in the subject who don't care to join the conversation.  They need a more objective view than the WC got it right, Oswald acted alone.  After all it is the Education Forum, right?

One of the saddest experiences I remember on the forum was when Bart Kamp left.  We have DVP to blame for that. Though he is useful and amicable I'd trade you two DVP's for one Bart.

Your saddest comment made me think of the saddest experience I've ever known, and this song, with no one here in mind.  As you were in the music business surely you remember it.

 

Edited October 10 by Ron Bulman

[Ron Bulman]

 

Regarding Mr. Simkin and this thread.  Essential reading for anyone looking for the Truth.

Operation Mockingbird (spartacus-educational.com) 

[James DiEugenio]

William:

When Bugliosi's monstrosity came out, one of the things I hammered him on was the fact that in his intro, he said that in this book he would make the arguments that the critics would themselves make and he then would vitiate them.

This was complete and utter baloney.

DVP was not even aware of this quote.  Even though he was shilling for the book before it came out.

I then pointed out 25 instances in the text where Bugliosi went back on his word for this early pledge.  One big one was this: he did not mention the fact that one of the 3 major indices on the polygraph was turned down during Ruby's exam.  Yet he had to know this since the other info in the section came from the source that had his in it.

Know what DVP said, You want to call him a l--r, alright.

I was not calling him that, I had just PROVED that. And I went on to 24 other examples of the same.

This is what I mean when I disagree with Pat, no there are not two versions of a fact.  And my God what Bugliosi wrote about Doug Horne is simply sick.  I mean it should turn anyone's stomach.

Edited October 10 by James DiEugenio

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Pat, you failed to note I agreed with Sandy's 1st 3 points, not the last three.  LN's are useful.  Debunking their trope is part of the purpose of the forum, so those visiting will be objectively informed.  In the search for the Truth.

 

Of course, I agree with Ron on this.

I said earlier that LNer forum members contribute to our cause by fact checking and critiquing our posts. I later realized that their presence is also useful for JFKA newbies in their search for the truth. Without the feedback provided by LNers, newbies wouldn't know if they could trust the objectivity of CTer posts.

 

Edited October 10 by Ron Bulman

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

William:

When Bugliosi's monstrosity came out, one of the things I hammered him on was the fact that in his intro, he said that in this book he would make the arguments that the critics would themselves make and he then would vitiate them.

This was complete and utter baloney.

DVP was not even aware of this quote.  Even though he was shilling for the book before it came out.

I then pointed out 25 instances in the text where Bugliosi went back on his word for this early pledge.  One big one was this: he did not mention the fact that one of the 3 major indices on the polygraph was turned down during Ruby's exam.  Yet he had to know this since the other info in the section came from the source that had his in it.

Know what DVP said, You want to call him a l--r, alright.

I was not calling him that, I had just PROVED that. And I went on to 24 other examples of the same.

This is what I mean when I disagree with Pat, no there are not two versions of a fact.  And my God what Bugliosi wrote about Doug Horne is simply sick.  I mean it should turn anyone's stomach.

As you know, I went through Bugliosi's description of the shooting, and the sources for his description, and proved he'd misrepresented a large percentage of his sources. It was a bunch of b.s.

https://www.patspeer.com/chapter19bvincentbistherealoliverstone

But I've seen enough on this and other forums to know for a fact--more clearly than most will ever know anything in their life--that that you don't have to be a CIA shill to be full of b.s., and that people deceive themselves into thinking white is gray and gray is black all day long. 

As far as what Bugliosi wrote about Horne, I defended Horne at the time. But when one steps back one should be able to see that it's a two-way street--that CTs have routinely attacked the character of LNs for making the same kind of mistakes they themselves make. 

I mean, there were numerous attempts to paint Mark Lane as someone who could not be trusted because he had received money from Russia. And here we have people just as sure that John McAdams was a paid agent for the CIA--when there is NO evidence he received even a dime from them. 

I know for a fact that more progress can be made by confronting someone's evidence than by attacking them personally. And I know this for a fact because I have engaged with the likes of McAdams and demonstrated the folly of their thinking, to such an extent even that many of their supporters told them they were wrong. 

 

 

Edited October 10 by Pat Speer

[Jean Ceulemans]

11 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

What sort of evidence would we look for Pat, to prove that Bugliosi, Posner, McAdams, and others were funded by the CIA "Mockingbird" propaganda establishment to promote the false WCR/LN narrative?

Do tell.

 

You made the statement, you´re the one that needs to proove it, just like any other member. You do post a lot of generalisations, IMO that´s often a sign of  ignorance. What part of the JFKA have you actually studied?