Jim DiEugenio Wrote:If there was such a diary, forensically bulletproof, and it said anything like what Janney is peddling, you can can bet your last penny, Angleton would have gotten it into the press.
Unless the predictable attendant, surviving-to-this-day mystery and/or critical community mayhem were judged to be more useful than the additional character assassination that would have resulted from publication.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Albert:
But ask yourself this: If there was such a diary, forensically bulletproof, and it said anything like what Janney is peddling, you can can bet your last penny, Angleton would have gotten it into the press.
That never came close to happening.
Not necessarily. As Charles pointed-out the diary may have been so accurate in its depiction of Kennedy's quandaries that any attempt to divulge its contents would only have brought further interest in things Angleton didn't want revealed. Maybe it was so good that it would only have spurred protests of Kennedy being smeared so badly that there was an obvious motive behind it. Smear Kennedy too strongly and you're going to create a counter-reaction. You yourself are proof of that.
If Leary had sold-out as an informer then it isn't that far to suggest he was (possibly) wittingly or unwittingly allowing himself to be used as a disinformation source. What better source than a guru of the left?
ALbert:
Now see,you are making another Janneyesque naked assumption.
That according to Janney (and with help from Leary, you know, Mr. "He was changing too fast") somehow JFK confided in Mary about these matters.
Where is there any evidence of that? I mean no one who was close to Mary at the time says anything about it:Toni Bradlee, Ben Bradlee, Ann Chamberlin, Ken Noland.
So in other words, like Janney, you pile up one assumption onto another and this is supposed to explain the first assumption away.
And BTW, I am not sure you know the big hole in Leary's story do you?
Forgive me I have a cold and am a little grumpy.
But what part of Meyers diary being an utter crock of bullshit did people not get the first time around? I know it's hard to give up fond fantasies but there is no real evidence of any diary, nor if perchance one existed theres no proof it had anything to do with JFK. Im getting tired of this speculation as somehow replacing cold balls out fact. This mewling about for nuggets in the Meyer and Janney story remind me of people continually trying to square up crap by saying there's some use in the Gemstone files and Torbitt documents. Looking for any little sheep droppings that confirm a tired old bullshit thesis. How credible are people like Ben Bradlee? Why if there was anything credible about JFk would Angleton have burn't any diary. There is no credible evidence Meyer was murdered via conspiracy. There is no credible evidence she had anything to with JFK. There's no freaking evidence she had any inside rub on the assassination. Give me a break please!
Although I agree with most of that Seamus, there is evidence she was romantically involved with Kennedy.
But everything else IMO has been piled upon that in mythic style.
There is nothing credible to support it.
Quote:When she learned that Mary Meyer had been killed, Anne Truitt telephoned person-to-person from Tokyo for James Angleton. She found him at Mr. Bradlee's house, where Angleton and his wife, Cicely, had been asked to come following the murder.
In the phone call, relaying Mary Meyer's specific instructions, Anne Truitt told Angleton, for the first time, that there was a diary; and, in accordance with Meyer's explicit request, Anne Truitt asked Angleton to search for and to take charge of this diary. Consequently, according to Cicely Angleton, those present agreed that a search should be made. This search was carried out, Mrs. Angleton affirms, in Mary Meyer's house in the presence of her sister, Tony Bradlee, the Angletons and one other friend of Mary Meyer's.
When Tony Bradlee found the diary book and several papers bundled together in Mary Meyer's studio, she gave the entire package to Angleton and asked him to burn it. Angleton followed this instruction in part by burning the loose papers. He also followed Mary Meyer's instruction and safeguarded the diary book. Some years later, he honored a request from Tony Bradlee that he deliver this diary to her. Subsequently, Tony Bradlee burned the diary in the presence of Anne Truitt.
So is this true or not true?
While knowing the defects in book sources is important I get the sense the wrecking ball has demolished too many possible china plates here and that this event should be more carefully back-engineered to see if any valid assassination-related evidence can be garnered. While Jack might not have been tripping with Mary with incense and lava lamps his admitted romantic relationship may have opened an information door with Mary Meyer. Even if the Leary sex and LSD den stuff is false we don't know what Mary Meyer was writing in her diary. While some of the JFK sex stories might be black propaganda I have the feeling they are not all totally untrue. There's something about the Mary Meyer death scene that sets off the same identical alarms as JFK's, Bobby's, and Lennon's. Call it an instinct thing. I can't explain it.
Janney is a person who was in a position to feel the subtle vibrations on the CIA spiderweb he was in direct contact with as a family member. If the Crump murder was a coincidence it is the exception in the Kennedy case. I'd have to read Janney's book. I can't because of serious other research.
Albert:
Can you please source your quote? If you don't I cannot intelligently reply to it.
As for this: "There's something about the Mary Meyer death scene that sets off the same identical alarms as JFK's"
Oh really? Where was the grassy knoll in this one? Where was the smoke rising from behind the picket fence? Where were the cars moving in behind the fence and in front of Bowers? Where were the people running out of the back of the TSBD? Where were the people running over to the smoke rising from the trees? And so on and so forth into infinitum.
There was one suspect in this case. And he was apprehended with plentiful probable cause. Unlike Oswald, he had a very good lawyer. And when she raised reasonable doubt,and he walked, he then went on to lead the life of a chronic criminal. He was arrested 22 times for things like arson, rape, assault with a deadly weapon, firebombing his apartment with his family inside etc.etc.
To compare the scenes is just ludicrous. To compare Crump with Oswald is even worse.
Now please source your quote.
Two additional elements -- at least -- of this story warrant contemplation and publication (perhaps in the forms of academic papers as tentatively titled below):
1. "Deuces Wild: The JFK Conspiracy and Cover-up and the Doppelganger Gambit as Manifested in the Pinchot-Meyer/Marilyn Monroe 'Diaries' Provocations"
2. "Dear Dairy: Assassination Amanuenses and the 'Illiterati's Diaries' Phenomenon in 20th Century American Political Assassinations: Oswald, Monroe, Pinchot-Meyer, Sirhan, Bremer, and the Roles of Novelists, Playwrights and Poets in Assassination Conspiracies and Cover-Ups"
Quote:Writing long books is a laborious and impoverishing act of foolishness: expanding in five hundred pages an idea that could be perfectly explained in a few minutes. A better procedure is to pretend that those books already exist and to offer a summary, a commentary.
Jorge Luis Borges wrote those words in the preface to his masterly collection of short stories: El jardÃn de senderos que se bifurcan.