29-03-2015, 07:16 AM
(This post was last modified: 30-03-2015, 09:06 PM by Jim DiEugenio.)
Over at Washington Decoded there is a review of the Don Carpenter book on Clay Shaw.
I tried reading this thing many months ago. When I got to World War 2, I had to stop. I realized what the guy was up to. There was not one mention of James Bacque.
Why is this important? As I explained in Reclaiming Parkland, Bacque uncovered the fact that there was a giant cover up about what the US military did to German prisoners of war at the end. He then wrote an explosive book about it which was examined in advance and endorsed by historian Steve Ambrose. Ambrose said he could not deny the significance of the work since Bacque had the evidence. Of course, after a visit to a military academy, Ambrose changed his mind--after all you don't get on TV and in the NYT if you back subversive work like this. But Bacque kept all the letters Ambrose wrote him praising his work and showed him up for the giant hypocrite he was.
Why is this significant? Because as Bacque shows, Clay Shaw's commanding officer was involved in this crime. Which, as his book Other Losses demonstrates, was covered up by the military. Well Carpenter completely ignores this. He swallows the cover up. Which was enough for me to stop reading. I mean if he was going to ignore that revealing episode, I mean what was he going to do with Clinton-Jackson, Permindex, Shaw's covert security clearance with DOD, the CIA lying about his actual Agency status etc.
Wallace Milam furthered my initial reaction to Carpenter and his cover up book. Wallace told me that Carpenter got in contact with him about the Holland McCombs collection at a university near his house in Tennessee. McCombs was an executive at Life who knew Shaw and was part of the secret reinvestigation by that magazine into the Kennedy case in 1966. Wallace told me, "Jim, I knew where Carpenter was headed with that thing after the first time I talked to him." Wallace was a very good JFK researcher who retired from the field in his late sixties.
Well, Stephen Roy or Dave Blackburst (which I think was his alias at one time) now went over to Holland's site to give Carpenter's cover up book a positive review. (Which, of course, Jefferson Morley featured on his site.) Boy does that say a lot about Roy/Blackburst and this book. Holland is one of the very worst of, what I call today, the Warren Commission Crazies. I mean McAdams (the student teacher terrorizer) actually negatively reviewed the Douglass book there. We all know what Holland is about don't we? The CIA gave him an award.
In this review, Blatburst/Roy tries to turn back the clock to the days of James Kirkwood. He says that, as Carpenter shows, the only evidence against Shaw is the testimony of Perry Russo.
Oh really? What was Shaw doing with Ferrie and Oswald in Clinton-Jackson? Where literally dozens of witnesses saw them, and where he showed Sheriff Manchester his ID? Were they shopping around for farmland?
What about Clyde Johnson, who was actually supposed to be Garrison's prime witness, so important that JG hid him away at a college dorm. The CIA found out about this and beat the living daylights out of him on the eve of the trial. So much so that he couldn't testify. Johnson said that Shaw told him to keep on writing incendiary speeches about Kennedy so as to attract him to come down south. Maybe Carpenter thinks Shaw wanted JFK's autograph?
What about Shaw's scheduling of a trip to the San Francisco Trade Mart on the 22nd. Shaw had never met Monroe Sullivan, the director of that organization before. But Shaw wanted to put on a luncheon and he agreed to pay for everything. When the news came in that Kennedy had been shot, Sullivan was stunned. Shaw conveyed no reaction. When the news came in that Kennedy was dead, Sullivan asked Shaw if he still wanted to go through with his luncheon, and Shaw said yes he did. Sullivan never forgot Shaw's incredibly cool reaction to the shock of Kennedy's murder. Shaw lied--one of many-- about who invited who at his trial.
I could go on and on. But most of this is in the second edition of Destiny Betrayed. Its pretty clear now where Roy/Blatburst is coming from. He has been promoting his upcoming book for years and years now, and promoting himself as a great researcher and unbiased adjudicator of evidence in this case. Yep, and so is Max Holland. One is judged by where one chooses to write and who one wishes to promote.
If anyone had any doubts about Roy/Blatburst and his upcoming book, they are now dispelled. Its going to be a straight Oswald did it tome. Which is just untenable today. Roy/Blatburst is going to be our next version of Leslie Nielson doing his "Nothing to see here" act, as the building behind him burns wildly in the night with explosions going off.
I tried reading this thing many months ago. When I got to World War 2, I had to stop. I realized what the guy was up to. There was not one mention of James Bacque.
Why is this important? As I explained in Reclaiming Parkland, Bacque uncovered the fact that there was a giant cover up about what the US military did to German prisoners of war at the end. He then wrote an explosive book about it which was examined in advance and endorsed by historian Steve Ambrose. Ambrose said he could not deny the significance of the work since Bacque had the evidence. Of course, after a visit to a military academy, Ambrose changed his mind--after all you don't get on TV and in the NYT if you back subversive work like this. But Bacque kept all the letters Ambrose wrote him praising his work and showed him up for the giant hypocrite he was.
Why is this significant? Because as Bacque shows, Clay Shaw's commanding officer was involved in this crime. Which, as his book Other Losses demonstrates, was covered up by the military. Well Carpenter completely ignores this. He swallows the cover up. Which was enough for me to stop reading. I mean if he was going to ignore that revealing episode, I mean what was he going to do with Clinton-Jackson, Permindex, Shaw's covert security clearance with DOD, the CIA lying about his actual Agency status etc.
Wallace Milam furthered my initial reaction to Carpenter and his cover up book. Wallace told me that Carpenter got in contact with him about the Holland McCombs collection at a university near his house in Tennessee. McCombs was an executive at Life who knew Shaw and was part of the secret reinvestigation by that magazine into the Kennedy case in 1966. Wallace told me, "Jim, I knew where Carpenter was headed with that thing after the first time I talked to him." Wallace was a very good JFK researcher who retired from the field in his late sixties.
Well, Stephen Roy or Dave Blackburst (which I think was his alias at one time) now went over to Holland's site to give Carpenter's cover up book a positive review. (Which, of course, Jefferson Morley featured on his site.) Boy does that say a lot about Roy/Blackburst and this book. Holland is one of the very worst of, what I call today, the Warren Commission Crazies. I mean McAdams (the student teacher terrorizer) actually negatively reviewed the Douglass book there. We all know what Holland is about don't we? The CIA gave him an award.
In this review, Blatburst/Roy tries to turn back the clock to the days of James Kirkwood. He says that, as Carpenter shows, the only evidence against Shaw is the testimony of Perry Russo.
Oh really? What was Shaw doing with Ferrie and Oswald in Clinton-Jackson? Where literally dozens of witnesses saw them, and where he showed Sheriff Manchester his ID? Were they shopping around for farmland?
What about Clyde Johnson, who was actually supposed to be Garrison's prime witness, so important that JG hid him away at a college dorm. The CIA found out about this and beat the living daylights out of him on the eve of the trial. So much so that he couldn't testify. Johnson said that Shaw told him to keep on writing incendiary speeches about Kennedy so as to attract him to come down south. Maybe Carpenter thinks Shaw wanted JFK's autograph?
What about Shaw's scheduling of a trip to the San Francisco Trade Mart on the 22nd. Shaw had never met Monroe Sullivan, the director of that organization before. But Shaw wanted to put on a luncheon and he agreed to pay for everything. When the news came in that Kennedy had been shot, Sullivan was stunned. Shaw conveyed no reaction. When the news came in that Kennedy was dead, Sullivan asked Shaw if he still wanted to go through with his luncheon, and Shaw said yes he did. Sullivan never forgot Shaw's incredibly cool reaction to the shock of Kennedy's murder. Shaw lied--one of many-- about who invited who at his trial.
I could go on and on. But most of this is in the second edition of Destiny Betrayed. Its pretty clear now where Roy/Blatburst is coming from. He has been promoting his upcoming book for years and years now, and promoting himself as a great researcher and unbiased adjudicator of evidence in this case. Yep, and so is Max Holland. One is judged by where one chooses to write and who one wishes to promote.
If anyone had any doubts about Roy/Blatburst and his upcoming book, they are now dispelled. Its going to be a straight Oswald did it tome. Which is just untenable today. Roy/Blatburst is going to be our next version of Leslie Nielson doing his "Nothing to see here" act, as the building behind him burns wildly in the night with explosions going off.
: