25-01-2016, 01:28 AM
Jim,
Thank you. In your book you wrote:
I've read Peter Vea's index and the memo William Martin wrote to Garrison, dated May 24, 1967,
RE: Martin's luncheon with an unidentified associate who Martin said had worked for CIA and lived
in New Orleans all of his life. I've read that there was also a mention of Stephen Lemann's ties on
a page in the Reissman file, a series of points initialed on the bottom by Garrison, undated but accompanied by
a May 5, 1967 memo to Garrison by ADA Oser. I have it all up, here.:
http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/commen...ent-852016
I know that before the Times-Picayune published Garrison's six page letter of complaint to the FCC on June 18, 1967,
Garrison had included a reference in near the end of the sixth page of the letter describing a prominent lawyer representing
WDSU who was in the past know to distribute CIA funds in New Orleans.
I do not need any additional information from you to complete what I've set out to do.... I want to at the least demand that
Columbia University "disinvite" Nicholas Lemann, but I wondered if you recall who William Martin's "associate" might have been,
or if there were any other sources of Stephen Lemann's connection with the CIA?
I notice you briefly had it out with McAdams in 2014, partially about this, but while the Comment of the week I chose for last
week is still on the front page, and Jeff Morley's court ruling announcement of last Thursday is fresh and certainly not unrelated to
what we are discussing here, I'm hoping you can comment on the thread ( http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/commen...e-week-13/ )
and then after I see (and quickly approve) your comment, follow the thread and read what I intend to present there, and your reaction to it.
I think my new details are a homerun on the order of identifying "missing" William Mitchell.
As you'll appreciate, I will provide irrefutable proof that Nicholas Lemann was not particularly candidate when he told this to the
Federal Court in 1992, or he is too clueless to see what was done to him... the influence on him to write the push back piece against
"JFK the movie," too stupid to be Dean Emeritus at Columbia, or too dishonest.... no in between, I think you will agree when you
read what I've presented.
As you'll soon see, Lemann took an extreme risk. He had the option of writing an objective article. His excuse was, "hey, its a magazine article,
I can write it from any perspective I choose." Even a straightforward writer uncompromised by conflicts of interest undisclosed in the article would be making an unusual excuse for what Lemann was doing. The undisclosed conflicts were troubling enough when they were only limited to what we've already discussed.
Thank you. In your book you wrote:
Quote:[URL="https://books.google.com/books?id=Gcf19iJnAk4C&pg=PT299&lpg=PT299&dq=lemann+monroe+wdsu+cia&source=bl&ots=I-EYGdDhMG&sig=j9ylWO218AWIcHS965HxD3ax_Fk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiM2Iy7xsPKAhVD2R4KHcipA2wQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=lemann%20monroe%20wdsu%20cia&f=false"]
Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case[/URL]
....just how willing and eager they were to indulge
themselves in covert help--and then lie about it.
For when the author discussed this issue with Irvin Dymond
in his office in New Orleans, this is what he did.
He tried to feign that he knew nothing about it.
This is ludicrous. Because Shaw's boss, Lloyd Cobb,
was given a Provisional Security Approval for this
very panel at the time Sheridan's show was broad-cast!
In fact, Dymond knew so much about it that, as the Leemans
affidavit shows, he used it. He even made referrals to it.
This important point, Shaw's lawyers' ties to the
intelligence community, and their dissembling
about it, will be returned to later.
With the above in mind, let us now note how Sheridan
was intent on flipping Garrion's two preliminary hearing
witnesses. Jane Lemann and Nina Sulzer were two New
Orleans Parish prison workers. Lemann was related by
marriage to Steven Lemann of the previously noted
Monroe and Lemann, the CIA related law firm funneling
money to Sheridan and representing WDSU....
I've read Peter Vea's index and the memo William Martin wrote to Garrison, dated May 24, 1967,
RE: Martin's luncheon with an unidentified associate who Martin said had worked for CIA and lived
in New Orleans all of his life. I've read that there was also a mention of Stephen Lemann's ties on
a page in the Reissman file, a series of points initialed on the bottom by Garrison, undated but accompanied by
a May 5, 1967 memo to Garrison by ADA Oser. I have it all up, here.:
http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/commen...ent-852016
I know that before the Times-Picayune published Garrison's six page letter of complaint to the FCC on June 18, 1967,
Garrison had included a reference in near the end of the sixth page of the letter describing a prominent lawyer representing
WDSU who was in the past know to distribute CIA funds in New Orleans.
I do not need any additional information from you to complete what I've set out to do.... I want to at the least demand that
Columbia University "disinvite" Nicholas Lemann, but I wondered if you recall who William Martin's "associate" might have been,
or if there were any other sources of Stephen Lemann's connection with the CIA?
I notice you briefly had it out with McAdams in 2014, partially about this, but while the Comment of the week I chose for last
week is still on the front page, and Jeff Morley's court ruling announcement of last Thursday is fresh and certainly not unrelated to
what we are discussing here, I'm hoping you can comment on the thread ( http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/commen...e-week-13/ )
and then after I see (and quickly approve) your comment, follow the thread and read what I intend to present there, and your reaction to it.
I think my new details are a homerun on the order of identifying "missing" William Mitchell.
As you'll appreciate, I will provide irrefutable proof that Nicholas Lemann was not particularly candidate when he told this to the
Federal Court in 1992, or he is too clueless to see what was done to him... the influence on him to write the push back piece against
"JFK the movie," too stupid to be Dean Emeritus at Columbia, or too dishonest.... no in between, I think you will agree when you
read what I've presented.
Quote:http://www.leagle.com/decision/199214098...BLICATIONS
Perry RUSSO v. CONDE NAST PUBLICATIONS d/b/a Gentlemen's Quarterly.
United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.
November 17, 1992
……
UNDISPUTED FACTUAL BACKGROUND:
In its January, 1992 issue, GQ Magazine published an article entitled "The Case Against Jim Garrison" (hereafter the "GQ article"). The GQ article was written by Nicholas B. Lemann, a New Orleans native and winner of numerous awards for his books and articles. The GQ article was a personal memoir1 of Lemann's recollections of growing up in New Orleans during District Attorney Jim Garrison's prosecution of Clay Shaw for allegedly conspiring to assassinate JFK.
The 1991 movie release, JFK sparked renewed interest in the assassination as well as the prosecution itself of Clay Shaw.....
.....The GQ article published by Lemann took a different slant, expressing his view that Shaw's prosecution was built on flimsy evidence and was a tremendous embarrassment to the city.2...
As you'll soon see, Lemann took an extreme risk. He had the option of writing an objective article. His excuse was, "hey, its a magazine article,
I can write it from any perspective I choose." Even a straightforward writer uncompromised by conflicts of interest undisclosed in the article would be making an unusual excuse for what Lemann was doing. The undisclosed conflicts were troubling enough when they were only limited to what we've already discussed.
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.