+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy (/thread-9490.html)
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Magda Hassan - 08-07-2012
What would you like to see Lauren?
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Seamus Coogan - 08-07-2012
I completely agree with you Lauren Jim had a good idea for the basics! Jim what was the evidence for JFK and Meyer? The stuff I have seen aint been convincing!
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Charles Drago - 08-07-2012
The posthumous assassination of JFK is supported by the arguments that:
A) The combination of drugs and sex was sufficient to prompt a sea change -- from Cold Warrior to peacenik appeaser -- in his world view and, by extension, inform his actions as president.
B) He was a committed pacifist/socialist long before he sought public office -- ideological choices that prompted treasonous acts before and during his presidency.
These points of view are mutually exclusive. Which doesn't necessarily mean that they weren't weaponized and intentionally offered simultaneously and to great desired effect within a broad range of targeted audiences.
There is, however, a third option -- one that takes into account the never-ending spiritual and intellectual growth for which I continue to argue and that remains anathema to materialist thinkers.
James Douglass, in Gandhi and the Unspeakable: His Final Experiment with Truth, writes of the life-long (and beyond) testing and refinement conducted by his subject -- a man whose spiritual and intellectual growth are commonly assumed to have ended long before he left the earth -- on the most basic of guiding principles.
"In the course of his experiments with truth, Gandhi discovered there was a third choice besides state terrorism and revolutionary terrorism. Satyagraha, truth-force, was based on a harmony of means and ends. Gandhi saw 'there is just the same inviolable connection between the means and the end as there is between the seed and the tree. We reap exactly as we sow.'" (p. 101)
Read it again: "In the course of his experiments with truth, Gandhi discovered ... " [emphasis added]
I suppose that Gandhi and Kennedy have yet to reach a point at which movement toward enlightenment ends -- which is to say, when enlightenment has been attained. But who can say with any degree of certainty -- other than Gandhi and Kennedy, of course.
Bet the farm that both great men died in states of transition -- sacred movements toward the ultimate state to which we all aspire.
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Lauren Johnson - 08-07-2012
Magda Hassan Wrote:What would you like to see Lauren?
There is a wealth of information here at DPF. As someone who mostly lurks and continues to discover gems in the archives, I continue to learn of what the founders and long time contributors know in a much more complete way.
With regards to JFK, DPF has its own idiosincracies as well as going along with much of CT received knowledge. I would think that a Guide to the Killing of JFK would be a public service and something of an antidote the JFK disinformation floating around out there.
I have long silently cussed at how difficult it is to put things together here. It is like listening to tapes from the in group. Many don't intend to be a researchers which is true of myself. But it would be helpful to have some summaries of key issues expressing a kind of editorial stance on key issues. Starting with JFK would be a good place to start.
I'll write more later.
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 08-07-2012
Dunne gave a reply to Mr Di on EF. I'm not sure the issue has been resolved by anyone, though admittedly Jim Di has the momentum by cutting down Janney's uncredible sources.
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Jim DiEugenio - 08-07-2012
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Magda Hassan Wrote:What would you like to see Lauren?
There is a wealth of information here at DPF. As someone who mostly lurks and continues to discover gems in the archives, I continue to learn of what the founders and long time contributors know in a much more complete way.
With regards to JFK, DPF has its own idiosincracies as well as going along with much of CT received knowledge. I would think that a Guide to the Killing of JFK would be a public service and something of an antidote the JFK disinformation floating around out there.
I have long silently cussed at how difficult it is to put things together here. It is like listening to tapes from the in group. Many don't intend to be a researchers which is true of myself. But it would be helpful to have some summaries of key issues expressing a kind of editorial stance on key issues. Starting with JFK would be a good place to start.
I'll write more later.
Please do. I really worry that all these useless distractions--Janney, Saint John Hunt, Waldron-Hartmann--are going to sidetrack us into nonsensical cul de sacs. When in fact there is real work to be done.
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Dawn Meredith - 08-07-2012
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Lauren Johnson Wrote:Magda Hassan Wrote:What would you like to see Lauren?
There is a wealth of information here at DPF. As someone who mostly lurks and continues to discover gems in the archives, I continue to learn of what the founders and long time contributors know in a much more complete way.
With regards to JFK, DPF has its own idiosincracies as well as going along with much of CT received knowledge. I would think that a Guide to the Killing of JFK would be a public service and something of an antidote the JFK disinformation floating around out there.
I have long silently cussed at how difficult it is to put things together here. It is like listening to tapes from the in group. Many don't intend to be a researchers which is true of myself. But it would be helpful to have some summaries of key issues expressing a kind of editorial stance on key issues. Starting with JFK would be a good place to start.
I'll write more later.
Please do. I really worry that all these useless distractions--Janney, Saint John Hunt, Waldron-Hartmann--are going to sidetrack us into nonsensical cul de sacs. When in fact there is real work to be done.
It seems unfair to me to put Janney in the same catagory as Hunt, and Waldron-Hartmann. You can disagree with what the author writes without resort to calling him disinformation. That detracts greatly from your valid points.
I saw chapter one posted at a fb site earlier and this particular part jumped out at me:
"She continued walking in her customary westerly direction, as the October noonday sun warmed the morning chill. Throughout the past year, there had been several incidents of someone intruding into her home. The incidents started in January, only weeks after Dallas. Then, after being away for some time that summer, she was sure someone had been inside her house while she was gone. In another instance, she had found the heavy basement door, which was impossible for her to move even with the help of her two sons, ajar. But the finale had been seeing somebody leaving her house as she had walked in. She was sure of it. [27] What were they after?"
What indeed? This certainly ads to the view that Crump was a frame up.
Dawn
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Jim DiEugenio - 08-07-2012
Dawn:
This was reported as far back as Nina Burleigh in her book, which was published many, many years ago.
And this is what I mean by a useless distraction.
If you term this like say Janney wants you to do--right after Dallas, what were they after--then yes, you can jump to a conspiratorial conclusion. But to place it in Janney's specific framework, then it has to be only one thing, the so-called diary. What else could it be in Janney's construct?
Here is the problem with the Janneyesque creation: The best evidence is that there was no such diary. At least not in the normal sense. What it was was a sketchbook with traces of her romance with Kennedy. And this is if you believe Ben Bradlee. But he is the best of the worst, so I go with him.
And further, no so called "diary" has ever showed up anywhere. In over 48 years. Yet, if you read Janney, Damore found it three times! Except its not anywhere to be seen today. And guess what? Angleton had a copy! But yet, that is nowhere to be found. And somehow Jim A. could not get it into the NY TImes? (Yeah bullshit. It would have been on the front page.) Guess what else? Mitchell had one too! So did the AIM group. Maybe Angleton was running off copies, like Oswald with his flyers in Banister's office? Except we have those flyers today. No one has this so called diary today. No one has even a facsimile of it. No one has one pulled page of it. No one has the cover of it.
I wonder why.
See, when you do something like that, you just go to his Facebook page and pull a quote and say, "Well look at this Jim!" See, that is kind of insulting to me. I know you don't mean it that way. But here is why: Its what I wrote on Spartacus. Janney tries to take advantage of people who do not know the Meyer case well. Lisa does know it. And I know it even better than Lisa does. So I understand the techniques Janney uses to ensnare the novice--like what just happened with you. I did a lot of reading on the Meyer case many years ago for my original essay, "The Posthumous Assassination of John F. Kennedy". And I minutely examined every written source on this so called "search for the diary". There were at least five. And i reviewed them all there. Perhaps you forgot. OK. But you cannot understand the Meyer case unless you read that essay--which Janney does not want you to do.
Therefore, what do you call a supposed lead that is based upon a mythological artifact? And what do you call an author who uses that technique to entice the reader? (BTW, Robert Slatzer then borrowed this "diary" lead for his book on Marilyn Monroe.) Its a technique that goes nowhere, except into a cul de sac.
If that is not disinfo, I need your own definition then. Therefore I reserve my right to classify Janney with Saint John Hunt and Waldron-Hartmann. I earned it many years ago. The hard way.
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Dawn Meredith - 08-07-2012
Of course I read that piece. But I need to go back and re-read it. I will read it in your book when I go on vacation, I will take the book with me. I admit all this controversay has caused me to now order Janney's book, which I also plan to read at the beach, so I am glad you alerted me to what you wrote on the diary. I am tempted to re-read your article here online, but it is so long and I have some work to do today that I have put off long enough. But yours and Lisa's book seems to be the perfect companion piece for my beach reading later next month.
As for people going into her home, I am assuming she told people about this. As for a relationship she may have had with JFK, in all liklihood they were friends at least since they shared such similar worldviews and
traveled in the same circles. By which I do mean Bradlee, who I do NOT trust on matters of importance. I will better appreciate the review after I read the book.
As for the romance and the acid...another matter. It could well be a Timmy fantasy. I admit that I like the idea, but agree that it is likely made up.
Dawn
Mary's Mosaic: Entering Peter Janney's World of Fantasy - Albert Doyle - 08-07-2012
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Here is the problem with the Janneyesque creation: The best evidence is that there was no such diary. At least not in the normal sense. What it was was a sketchbook with traces of her romance with Kennedy. And this is if you believe Ben Bradlee. But he is the best of the worst, so I go with him.
And further, no so called "diary" has ever showed up anywhere. In over 48 years. Yet, if you read Janney, Damore found it three times! Except its not anywhere to be seen today. And guess what? Angleton had a copy! But yet, that is nowhere to be found. And somehow Jim A. could not get it into the NY TImes? (Yeah bullshit. It would have been on the front page.) Guess what else? Mitchell had one too! So did the AIM group. Maybe Angleton was running off copies, like Oswald with his flyers in Banister's office? Except we have those flyers today. No one has this so called diary today. No one has even a facsimile of it. No one has one pulled page of it. No one has the cover of it.
I wonder why.
But if Bradlee was a Mockingbird shill he would have an incentive to deny the diary and invent the sketchbook canard, right? By your own logic you can't use Bradlee as a source.
Who knows what copies those other people had or what their intentions were? If they did have copies how do you know they were original and not forgeries intended to disseminate disinformation?
Maybe the original was so precise of JFK's telling Mary Meyer all his inside problems with CIA that they had to disappear it? That would explain why none of it was leaked because it was all about the problems that led to JFK's assassination. The sex and LSD stories being made up later as a pretext for its disappearance.
And don't forget Damore himself shares a Kennedy "disappearante" fate like many others.
By the way, what were those intruders looking for?