I'm more interested in Mitchell and his story rather than Janney's sloppy approach towards Mitchell. If Mitchell is as deep as they say he should have interesting stories to tell. Especially if he has told them before as Damore suggested.
Oh, you mean the meetings and the phone calls between the two of which there are no recordings, no notes, no photos, no descriptions and no nothing.
Even though they would have represented a very large contract for Damore.
Oh yes, that should really be something.
Which is good reason to ask Mitchell isn't it?
Ask him why he never met with Damore?
Now that I've actually read Janney I find Jim's criticisms somewhat lacking. There's much more to this than Lisa's criticisms allowed.
If you do the math, even with Janney's addition errors, he's still within the correct numbers to preclude Crump's being the man in the bushes. This is a bizarre case and I admit there were points in the book where Janney had my Fetzer bullshit meter pegging, however he still has supporting converging evidence that backs his claims. There's no doubt Wistar Janney was faking lack of knowledge of Mary's murder. I'm afraid I have to go with Janney on all counts in regard to the suspicious activities involved with the finding out about the murder and false stories about trying to find the diary. It seems Janney has a good circumstantial case that the Truitts were like the Paines in their supportive complicity with Angleton and Bradlee. It just doesn't seem likely that with Mary's antipathy and fear of Angleton's CIA connection to JFK's murder that she would appoint Angleton to be her book burner. Janney's right, all said and done 1) It isn't likely that known diarist Mary Meyer would not have a separate diary for her deepest thoughts. A diary witnessed by (I think it was) Toni Bradlee as being a known entity she knew Mary always kept on the bookshelf. 2) Angleton's concern with Scott's dangerous papers and Mary's diary fit an exact modus operandi.
I think Leary is credible in this instance. If you backtrack from Mary's known LSD experiment group you have credible reason to believe Leary's story is true. Anne Chamberlin shut her mouth probably because Damore was driven to suicide. There are people like Ken Noland and the Truitts that could corroborate this LSD stuff but probably kept their mouths shut after people starting dropping dead like Mary. I'm afraid the peripheral evidence Lisa omits strongly backs Janney.
I also find Janney's book credible and I believe it pushes the case of the death of MPM where it belongs - as a part of the cover-up of JFK's murder. It brings forth some new names and POI...such as Joe Shimon, to name but one. I think there is MUCH TOO MUCH 'there' in the book to throw it out because of, perhaps, a few flaws. The case against Crump is totally demolished and the case for 'the usual gang' being behind this murder is convincing. IMHO.
William L Mitchell's evasive quietness speaks more than words in my opinion. Crack that guy and you'll find out Janney is on the right track. Mitchell lied about working at the CIA cover safe-house Georgetown University, he listed a known CIA safe-house as his residence, and he lied to friends about the alleged scholarship he received in order to go overseas right after their set-up of Crump failed and people might have asked questions why Mitchell was so interested in fingering Crump. I mean CIA paid for that trip, right? How could Janney's critics ignore that?
Look at the bigger picture here. Peter Janney just openly accused an emeritus college professor of being the CIA assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer in public, in writing, in a book. Mitchell's and the media's response? Nothing. What pattern does that fit? Would a high-profile professor let a slander like that go unanswered? How does this contrast with Mitchell's original pro-active coming forward and serving as witness? Mitchell did disappear and never comment on this again. You would think he would at least have some public thoughts about it over 50 years, right? Something isn't right.
Albert Doyle Wrote:No offense but I think you are switching the point from the current need to interrogate Mitchell to an argument over Janney's poor scholarship and methodology. You've won the contest over Janney's poor research and use of uncredible sources. However, as even Charles pointed out, that doesn't necessarily prove Mary Meyer wasn't covertly assassinated. And even if she was murdered by Crump for totally unrelated reasons, it doesn't preclude all this Janney theory business being used for deep political disinformation purposes. That's the trouble with a room full of mirrors is that it is hard to create just one straight image guided by straight logic. Too many words vs a simple solution Mr D. Simply knock on this Mr Mitchell's door and ask him. Otherwise Tom Scully is just an overly informational bringer of wrong information.
I think you don't understand that we can throw out all that crap Janney offers about Mitchell's possible role and still have a legitimate covert assassination remaining. Just not the way Janney described it. In the end it is still highly suspicious for Mitchell to remain quiet with all that has been said about him in public. I agree with Horne on this because it's obvious and has nothing to do with Janney's scholarship.
Drew Phipps Wrote:So Albert, you admit posting on that other site under the name of "Ralph Yates"? Just curious why you would assume the moniker of an at least "partly-discredited-by-virtue-of-insanity" eyewitness to the Oswald double story. That strikes me as callous. Wasn't the use of the Ralph Yates name the topic of some other seemingly pointless post in the recent past? What are you up to?
PS: I don't believe JVB's story in the slightest, and if there are doubles showing up around here, she's one of them, according to her sometime-defender Edward Haslam...
Quote:Last edited by the author on Jul 1, 2012 8:57:47 AM PDT Ralph Yates says:
Why was Angleton so desperate to confiscate Mary Meyer's diary?
With the CIA hypnosis of Sirhan Sirhan and Mark David Chapman couldn't Crump be a hypno assassin as well? No gun was found so the shots could have been cleverly orchestrated like in Dealey Plaza.
I'm afraid Ms Pease's heavy handed, pedantic technique of criticizing sources and research methods hasn't cleared the Mary Meyer murder from CIA capabilities. Even after Ms Pease's discrediting of Janney's sources and information we are still well within CIA covert assassination abilities. CIA was very interested in Ms Meyer's diary for a reason and her death can't be considered unrelated. CIA killed tangentially-related persons like Florence Smith for similar reasons. Ms Pease accuses Janney of being infatuated with Ms Meyer. I question this approach and think Janney was directly in touch with the vibrations happening on the spiderweb as a household member of the main players involved.
Quote:http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-review...1616087080
Ralph Yates 1 year ago
Report abuse
...............
It's the little things that add up and Mitchell's transfer to England was a way of getting a potential liability near to the wicked domain of MI-6 where he could be taken care of if needed. Mitchell's transformation to a hippy was just a way of diminishing him and his CIA status. Don't forget Mitchell lied about his sponsorship for that trip. Follow the money. The company paid for that relocation. There's no way any innocent emeritus college professor would allow someone to openly accuse him of being the CIA assassin who murdered Mary Meyer in a book without any response. Face it Scully, Janney's got his man.
Quote:Last edited by the author on Aug 16, 2014 2:45:27 PM PDT Ralph Yates says:
Don't listen to Scully. This review section is riddled with places where Scully was asked to live up to the real evidence and never did. He disappears when you attempt to hold him to the real evidence.
Anyone who doesn't see the serious evidence Janney keenly detects is either cognitively impaired or part of the cover-up.
I have posted several times that Leary was documented reacting to Mary Meyer's death when it happened and initiating a documented attempt to investigate what happened to her. There are many more cases such as this that Scully, DiEugenio, and Pease ignore. You can read the reviews to see how Scully ran off each and every time we got to the evidence. I've already posted it several times. You never once made any attempt to answer it. Your attempt to take authority in this thread is laughable considering the level of ignorance you show. Von Pein would be proud of your input since it is almost identical to his own. Some people just don't know evidence of CIA murder when they see it. Fool.
There is an unfortunate situation in the Kennedy assassination community where egotistical pedants are so desperate to push their self-created authority and expertise that they take the result of CIA persecution and use it against the victim like Scully does with Damore. These people don't hesitate and don't consider what a horrific moral violation it is to wage against some of the worst victims and use the damage they suffered against them in order to discredit them so their egotistical doubt with prevail. Meanwhile completely blind Mr Scully with his widely prominent and boldly displayed rump doesn't have any curiosity why an emeritus professor would quietly tolerate public accusations written in a book that he was the CIA assassin of Mary Meyer with not a word of protest or any word in the media about this serious accusation. Mr Scully practices a very loose standard of analysis. A little too loose to be take seriously against what better minds can see Janney shows. Mr Scully is a cartoon character who has blundered into the artwork asking where the art is. A fool.
Quote:September 5, 2014 http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/09/05/the...hot-meyer/
The Murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer
On this edition of Real Politik James is joined by Peter Janney, author of Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace.........
"......Mitchell had a specific role in this event on October 12, 1964. But I do want to make clear that I no longer believe that he was the actual assassin."
Quote:http://tomscully.com/node/12
Will Any Apologies Follow After Author Peter Janney's Long Awaited, Reluctant Admission?
Submitted by Tom Scully on Mon, 09/08/2014 - 04:34
http://www.amazon.com/review/RMUB7ELJ520CB/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF...
T. Scully says:
Ralph, utter garbage from you. Janney at long last made a reluctant admission he was wrong, The premise for his
book, a story of a CIA assassin is exposed for what it is. False, inaccurate. You resent that I located the Crump trial witness who Janney was falsely accusing of murder. You did not want to know this information. Janney has never written a word about his uncle, the Time Life, Inc. board member, Rockefeller protege, Frank Pace, the chairman of General Dynamics who, with the help of Rockefeller friend Roswell Gilpatric and his law partner, Maurice Tex Moore,
Time Life Inc, publisher and brother-in-law of Henry Luce, turned over control of General Dynamics to Henry Crown and his Chicago mob associate, Patrick Hoy. Instead, Janney wrote this empty distraction of a book. Who will write about uncle Frank Pace, if not the intrepid, anti MIC, teller of truths, Peter Janney?
September 5, 2014 http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/09/05/the...hot-meyer/
The Murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer
On this edition of Real Politik James is joined by Peter Janney, author of Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace......In January 2014 Janney deposed William Mitchell as part of a wrongful death civil lawsuit to procure information on Mitchell's potential responsibility for Meyer's murder. "I am still in the last stages of my research that I hope will pull the pieces together that may point to the fact that [William] Mitchell had a specific role in this event on October 12, 1964. But I do want to make clear that I no longer believe that he was the actual assassin."
(Washington DC court records display the fact that on 18 Novemberm 2013 Janney dismissed his lawsuit against William L Mitchell, is which Janney had claimed Mary Meyer was his "surrogate mother: by filing a motion for dismissal with prejudice with that court. Janney's motion for dismissal was granted on 2 Dec, 2013 by Judge
Anthony C. Epstein. : http://tomscully.com/Barb/JanneyMitchellSuit.jpg )
Janney could have conceded in August, 2012, when I first presented this.:
..............
......... Will Any Apologies Follow After Mr. Doyle's Long Awaited, Reluctant Admission?