16-02-2013, 01:09 PM
Albert Doyle Wrote:Again, what is screamingly apparent is how Jim himself would never let someone get away with what he does here. If you read Jim's entry he approaches this by the weakest reference-type, furthest from the facts, approach. Meanwhile Allan, while posing as the expert, offers a very weak character attack-based nickel and dime approach that you could drive a truck through as far as the evidence. I mean I'm outraged that conspiracy exposers would take a hardball approach towards witnesses seeing how they are victims of a system that left them out on their own and vulnerable. I see this as nothing less than taking advantage of that vulnerability in order to polish one's research skills at the expense of the truth. If we look at Allan's input there's nothing there that precludes both Dennis David and Dan Marvin telling the truth. I really don't see any motive for either of those persons to invent a crazy story, which is what Allan is indirectly accusing them of without ever getting around to admitting it. Also, the left hand, right hand controversy does nothing to refute the fact Pitzer was assassinated by CIA as Marvin witnessed. Jesus, talk about being on the wrong side.
Of course, "Doyle" is talking through a hole his head, and it isn't his mouth. I knew LTC Marvin personally and worked with him until I saw the light. For the sake of illustration of the situation, I'll lift a paragraph from my review of Kent Heiner's book "Without Smoking Gun: Was the death of Lt. Cmdr. William Pitzer part of the JFK assassination cover-up conspiracy?":
>This book's weakness lies in its kid-gloves treatment of Dan Marvin and his claims. Although to some extent Heiner keeps the controversial assertions at arm's length with phrases like "Marvin says," "evidently," "what he saw as," "according to Marvin," etc., any benefit of any doubt is given to Marvin. On the other hand, to be fair, if the author had not treated Marvin as favorably as possible there may have been no reason to write this book, or at least it would have been a different book. Not that it did not evolve during writing; it started out as a Heiner-Marvin jointly authored project titled "Smoking Gun: The Conspiracy to Kill LCDR William Bruce Pitzer." Obviously, as shown by the final title, some fundamental rethinking occurred in the mind of Mr. Heiner. It must have troubled him to admit, "Marvin has only been caught in-and has admitted to-only one untruth, that being the number of officers who had volunteered for the assassination training course." (Marvin changed the number from half a dozen to over thirty. Heiner misses the reason for this change. It occurred after "Captain Vance" denied recognizing Marvin, hence Marvin had to bump up the number who took the course to rationalize this lack of recognition.) The operative words in the quote are "and has admitted to," because Marvin has been caught in other "untruths." But that is outside the scope of this review.<
But, don't take my word for the fact that LTC Marvin had a tendency to exaggerate and extrapolate. The following email is also available on the Net, from Special Forces Captain John McCarthy:
From: John McCarthy
To: marvin@trineday.com
Cc: ray kohlman ; larry odaniel
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 1:10 PM
Subject: Erroneous Online Assertions
Ltc Dan Marvin
Dear Dan,
This email will confirm our conversation by phone last evening, August 18, 2002.
I was utterly astounded to read an internet posting at:
http://expendableelite.com/
In an article attributed to you titled; "The Unconventional Warrior, by LTC Dangerous Dan Marvin, Part Three - Orders to Kill, dated August 16, 2002, in paragraph five, line 7, you wrote the following sentence:
"This fact, coupled with similar information that fellow Green Beret Captain John McCarthy told me of a failed CIA/Miami Mafia "Hit" on JFK in Florida during the President's visit there prior to his fatal trip to Dallas, confirmed the conspiracy in my mind."
When I questioned the veracity of your sentence and its attribution to me you said you had a memo of record on the matter and immediately began reading your memo. No where in your memo is the word or phrase, "CIA /Miami Mafia "Hit"." I have never used this name and phrase in any conversation with you or anyone else. I find your rendition of our 1995 conversation to be whole cloth fabrication. Your fabrication places me as a prognosticator for the events in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963. I would certainly hope that the remainder of your conclusions in your manuscript stand the test of time with respect to accuracy. Your interpretation of our 1995 conversation posted on August 16, 2002, gives new meaning to the name "Dangerous Dan" Marvin.
Then you immediately started reading from an online document reference an NSC meeting in June of 1966 in which LBJ directs the CIA and State Department to cease and desist all support for Khmer Serei operations in Cambodia. This document is from the LBJ Presidential Library in Austin, Tx, and is available on line. It is incomprehensible to me how you wish to justify your mis-characterization of your online posting of August 16, 2002, with this document.
I demand an immediate correction, removal and clarification of the above mentioned August 16, 2002, posting on www.expendableelite.com and any other .com posting, periodical, and other promotional means for your soon to be published book. It is my desire that you not include my name or the circumstances of my personal predicament with respect to any pending litigation I have before the US Courts or the circumstances under which these occurred in your own personal writings of your own adventures in Vietnam. However, if you choose to quote from the public record with respect to my personal dealings with various agencies of the US Government, I strongly suggest that you and your publisher/editor check with my attorney as to pending civil action in those areas.
You are aware, I'm sure, that your August 16, 2002 posting has made it to numerous Special Forces Web sites. One of these sent the above referenced article to me.
You are now on Notice, that if the above corrections are not made, a civil action for libel will be filed against you and your publisher. It is also my desire that you not use my name in the promotion of your book.
A copy of this email is being sent to my attorney, , Esq. I strongly suggest that any and all further correspondence to me be sent to Mr. ---- at his office at: --------
I would also advise you to inform any prospective publisher/editor of your manuscript of this Demand Letter. By law, you are required to do so.
Sincerely,
John J McCarthy