03-01-2011, 09:29 PM
Well, Nelson apparently does not read dates or footnotes well. Instead he likes calling me a liar. FIrst, its buffoon by Fetzer, and now this.
Hersh wrote two books about My Lai. One in 1970, and one two years later.
I read them both. If you read the first one, it is called My Lai 4. I ask anyone to read it and tell me Hersh is describing a CIA secret op sanctioned by the government.
Now, the second book appeared after the Peers Commission let off everyone but Calley. And then Nixon reduced Calley's term to a three year house arrest. This after over 500 people were slaughtered. Therefore, anyone could surmise, something was wrong someplace. By this time, bits and pieces of the Phoenix Program were being circulated.
So in 1972, Hersh wrote a second book. This was called Cover Up. Now, Nelson insinuates that in footnotes to the Valentine book--which he previously tried to discredit--Doug uses articles written by Hersh in the Ny Times to mention Phoenix. Not so. Doug uses excerpts from the second book. At this time, for reasons previously stated, Hersh could no longer really maintain that My Lai was a spontaneous outburst by combat troops run amok. He had to at least mention Phoenix, since others had also. And this made much more sense as an explanation.
But the incredible thing about the second book is that Hersh still tried to have it both ways. Because although he mentions Phoenix, he also adds this on pages 97-98:
"There was no conspiracy to destroy the village of My Lai 4; what took place there had happened before and would hapen again in Quang Ngai province--although with less than drastic results. The desire of Lt. Colonel Barker to mount another successful, high enemy body count operation in the area. The desire of Ramsdell to demonstrate the effectiveness of his operations, the belief shared by all the principals that everyone living in Son My was staying there by choice because of communists....And the basic incompetence of many intelligence personnel in the Army--all those factors combined to enable a group of ambitious men to mount an unnecessary mission against a nonexistent enemy force, and somehow to find the evidence to justify it all."
Recall, this is 1972. How anyone could write such drivel by that time is just amazing. Apparently Nelson read neither book and he just cherry picked Valentine's. This is a hallmark of his research. He then ignores what Hersh has done with Watergate, his association with Bill Colby in his dispute with Angelton, his work on KAL 007, and most of all his association with Bob Loomis, Mr. JFK Cover up at Random House and sponsor of Jerry Posner. He also ignores the fact that CIA asset Hersh started his book in 1992, right after Stone's film came out.
THat is a lot of stuff to ignore about Nelson's great American Hero.
As per his qualifications now about LBJ as a mastermind, well does this not show the book was mistitled? And I would even argue that point number seven in my list did not at all necessitate Johnson. The military could have curtailed the autopsy itself. But Phil is being less than candid. As Green notes, Nelson goes the whole David Lifton route here. He has LBJ in on the autopsy hijinks right in Dallas. That is how much of a mastermind LBJ really was.
Further, he mentions Harvey and Morales as being enlisted in my previous six points. Harvey has nothing to do with Mexico City or the Paines. Same for Morales. Where was Harvey in New Orleans?
The likely suspects squiring Oswald around as mid level managers from New Orleans to Mexico City to Dallas were Phillips and Hunt. For that we have evidence. For Morales and Harvey we don't.
PS Now that i destroyed Hunt's "confession" and his less than reliable son, Fetzer falls back on Brown, Estes etc. Its his endless shell game.
But like any shell game, there is nothing under the shell.
Hersh wrote two books about My Lai. One in 1970, and one two years later.
I read them both. If you read the first one, it is called My Lai 4. I ask anyone to read it and tell me Hersh is describing a CIA secret op sanctioned by the government.
Now, the second book appeared after the Peers Commission let off everyone but Calley. And then Nixon reduced Calley's term to a three year house arrest. This after over 500 people were slaughtered. Therefore, anyone could surmise, something was wrong someplace. By this time, bits and pieces of the Phoenix Program were being circulated.
So in 1972, Hersh wrote a second book. This was called Cover Up. Now, Nelson insinuates that in footnotes to the Valentine book--which he previously tried to discredit--Doug uses articles written by Hersh in the Ny Times to mention Phoenix. Not so. Doug uses excerpts from the second book. At this time, for reasons previously stated, Hersh could no longer really maintain that My Lai was a spontaneous outburst by combat troops run amok. He had to at least mention Phoenix, since others had also. And this made much more sense as an explanation.
But the incredible thing about the second book is that Hersh still tried to have it both ways. Because although he mentions Phoenix, he also adds this on pages 97-98:
"There was no conspiracy to destroy the village of My Lai 4; what took place there had happened before and would hapen again in Quang Ngai province--although with less than drastic results. The desire of Lt. Colonel Barker to mount another successful, high enemy body count operation in the area. The desire of Ramsdell to demonstrate the effectiveness of his operations, the belief shared by all the principals that everyone living in Son My was staying there by choice because of communists....And the basic incompetence of many intelligence personnel in the Army--all those factors combined to enable a group of ambitious men to mount an unnecessary mission against a nonexistent enemy force, and somehow to find the evidence to justify it all."
Recall, this is 1972. How anyone could write such drivel by that time is just amazing. Apparently Nelson read neither book and he just cherry picked Valentine's. This is a hallmark of his research. He then ignores what Hersh has done with Watergate, his association with Bill Colby in his dispute with Angelton, his work on KAL 007, and most of all his association with Bob Loomis, Mr. JFK Cover up at Random House and sponsor of Jerry Posner. He also ignores the fact that CIA asset Hersh started his book in 1992, right after Stone's film came out.
THat is a lot of stuff to ignore about Nelson's great American Hero.
As per his qualifications now about LBJ as a mastermind, well does this not show the book was mistitled? And I would even argue that point number seven in my list did not at all necessitate Johnson. The military could have curtailed the autopsy itself. But Phil is being less than candid. As Green notes, Nelson goes the whole David Lifton route here. He has LBJ in on the autopsy hijinks right in Dallas. That is how much of a mastermind LBJ really was.
Further, he mentions Harvey and Morales as being enlisted in my previous six points. Harvey has nothing to do with Mexico City or the Paines. Same for Morales. Where was Harvey in New Orleans?
The likely suspects squiring Oswald around as mid level managers from New Orleans to Mexico City to Dallas were Phillips and Hunt. For that we have evidence. For Morales and Harvey we don't.
PS Now that i destroyed Hunt's "confession" and his less than reliable son, Fetzer falls back on Brown, Estes etc. Its his endless shell game.
But like any shell game, there is nothing under the shell.