25-06-2018, 10:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 25-06-2018, 10:37 PM by Jim DiEugenio.)
Geez thanks Mark.
Any author who will use Gregory Douglas as a source is indulging in fantasy. And I thought I explained this in my review. Or maybe there are still people out there who do not know that Douglas (which is just one of his names) is and was a forger of documents. I was very careful in showing how he had done the same in his book on the JFK case. And I interviewed Trento on this issue. But Janney used him anyway.
Now, if you want to excuse Janney for that, go ahead. But I don't see how that advances his reputation as a writer. How anyone else does escapes me.
I also pointed out all the problems with Damore. Now if you really believe that Damore had a confession from the hit man and that he never sent it to his agent and that it disappeared after, and Janney could not find it, then fine. Go ahead and believe it. But Mark will disabuse you of that, if I have not. Again, this is fantasy.
As Tom Scully proved, with some very interesting work, this guy who spilled his guts out to Damore CANNOT be the guy who Janney then door stopped at his home in California. Repeat: CANNOT! And if you want to excuse that, then fine. Go ahead.
If you also think that somehow Fletcher Prouty was interviewed by Damore about the Meyer case, then again, fine. Believe it. But there is not a trace of this in any of Fletcher's records and Prouty never once mentioned that case or Damore to Len Osanic. No one spent more time with Prouty than Len did and no one had more access to his archives than Len did.
If you also want to buy into the idea that somehow Mary was a foreign policy maven to rival George Kennan, and no one knew this, then again, go ahead. The problem is Mary studied art and there is utterly no evidence she had these kinds of longstanding interests or inclinations from anyone who knew her or in any articles she left behind. It is nothing but a naked assumption on Janney's part.
And the fact that it is such is buttressed by the real truth about this matter. One that was covered up for decades by the MSM. Kennedy himself was an authority on the whole issue of communism and the Third World by 1957. That is when he gave his great speech on Algeria in the senate. Schooled by Edmund Gullion, who Janney leave out of his fantasy, he studied the whole dispute there for over a year before delivering that tour de force performance. So the idea that somehow Mary Meyer turned JFK on the issue is simply risible.
As is another source Janney used: Tim Leary. As I noted in my review, and again somehow is ignored, you will not find one single reference to Mary in all of Leary's books, and he wrote many, many of them until he published Flashbacks in the eighties. I know since I spent a long time going through his other books. Did anyone else here? In Flashbacks you will also read that Leary had an affair with Marilyn Monroe. Yeah, sure, and i used to go out with Penelope Cruz. Again, why would Janney use such a source with no back up or corroboration? But of course he once said he talked to David Heymann. ::pullhairout::
And as Scully also found out, it looks like Dovey Roundtree ended up manufacturing a witness to make it appear as if Crump was not lying in wait where Mary was jogging. You know, Crump, the guy who was there to go fishing without a fishing pole.
Finally, over the weekend, I met with an absolutely first rate researcher. One who has been praised in the CJR among other places. She has some very interesting things to say about Damore and his association with the other fraudster David Heymann. (Which may be where Janney got the idea to talk to the lying scumbag.) She will be opening up a web site on this subject in the future. Her materials all are very clear and in B and W. No fantasies; no forgeries. That is the kind of scholarship I enjoy reading and studying, for the simple reason that I can learn something from it and build upon it.
Everyone has the right to disagree with someone else. The point is what you base those disagreements upon. I did a lot of work on the Mary M case years prior to Janney's book appearing. And I also did prior work on Damore. So I knew what i was getting into with Janney's book. Others were not aware of this morass. So they jumped on board and were shocked when the reviews by Lisa and myself came out. And then Scully did that really fine work.
I have never been of the school that anything that posits a conspiracy in a case that is related to JFK is above criticism, or cannot be panned. That is what separates Kennedysandking from many other sites. It is also what separates us from the other side. I exposed Jean Davison's really bad book Oswald's Game in all of its omissions and errors awhile back. Somehow that did not make a dent with the likes of Reitzes and Von Pein or McAdams. They refused to even acknowledge it. Our side cannot and should not do that. Not ever. Not if we wish to maintain the high ground, both morally and intellectually.
Any author who will use Gregory Douglas as a source is indulging in fantasy. And I thought I explained this in my review. Or maybe there are still people out there who do not know that Douglas (which is just one of his names) is and was a forger of documents. I was very careful in showing how he had done the same in his book on the JFK case. And I interviewed Trento on this issue. But Janney used him anyway.
Now, if you want to excuse Janney for that, go ahead. But I don't see how that advances his reputation as a writer. How anyone else does escapes me.
I also pointed out all the problems with Damore. Now if you really believe that Damore had a confession from the hit man and that he never sent it to his agent and that it disappeared after, and Janney could not find it, then fine. Go ahead and believe it. But Mark will disabuse you of that, if I have not. Again, this is fantasy.
As Tom Scully proved, with some very interesting work, this guy who spilled his guts out to Damore CANNOT be the guy who Janney then door stopped at his home in California. Repeat: CANNOT! And if you want to excuse that, then fine. Go ahead.
If you also think that somehow Fletcher Prouty was interviewed by Damore about the Meyer case, then again, fine. Believe it. But there is not a trace of this in any of Fletcher's records and Prouty never once mentioned that case or Damore to Len Osanic. No one spent more time with Prouty than Len did and no one had more access to his archives than Len did.
If you also want to buy into the idea that somehow Mary was a foreign policy maven to rival George Kennan, and no one knew this, then again, go ahead. The problem is Mary studied art and there is utterly no evidence she had these kinds of longstanding interests or inclinations from anyone who knew her or in any articles she left behind. It is nothing but a naked assumption on Janney's part.
And the fact that it is such is buttressed by the real truth about this matter. One that was covered up for decades by the MSM. Kennedy himself was an authority on the whole issue of communism and the Third World by 1957. That is when he gave his great speech on Algeria in the senate. Schooled by Edmund Gullion, who Janney leave out of his fantasy, he studied the whole dispute there for over a year before delivering that tour de force performance. So the idea that somehow Mary Meyer turned JFK on the issue is simply risible.
As is another source Janney used: Tim Leary. As I noted in my review, and again somehow is ignored, you will not find one single reference to Mary in all of Leary's books, and he wrote many, many of them until he published Flashbacks in the eighties. I know since I spent a long time going through his other books. Did anyone else here? In Flashbacks you will also read that Leary had an affair with Marilyn Monroe. Yeah, sure, and i used to go out with Penelope Cruz. Again, why would Janney use such a source with no back up or corroboration? But of course he once said he talked to David Heymann. ::pullhairout::
And as Scully also found out, it looks like Dovey Roundtree ended up manufacturing a witness to make it appear as if Crump was not lying in wait where Mary was jogging. You know, Crump, the guy who was there to go fishing without a fishing pole.
Finally, over the weekend, I met with an absolutely first rate researcher. One who has been praised in the CJR among other places. She has some very interesting things to say about Damore and his association with the other fraudster David Heymann. (Which may be where Janney got the idea to talk to the lying scumbag.) She will be opening up a web site on this subject in the future. Her materials all are very clear and in B and W. No fantasies; no forgeries. That is the kind of scholarship I enjoy reading and studying, for the simple reason that I can learn something from it and build upon it.
Everyone has the right to disagree with someone else. The point is what you base those disagreements upon. I did a lot of work on the Mary M case years prior to Janney's book appearing. And I also did prior work on Damore. So I knew what i was getting into with Janney's book. Others were not aware of this morass. So they jumped on board and were shocked when the reviews by Lisa and myself came out. And then Scully did that really fine work.
I have never been of the school that anything that posits a conspiracy in a case that is related to JFK is above criticism, or cannot be panned. That is what separates Kennedysandking from many other sites. It is also what separates us from the other side. I exposed Jean Davison's really bad book Oswald's Game in all of its omissions and errors awhile back. Somehow that did not make a dent with the likes of Reitzes and Von Pein or McAdams. They refused to even acknowledge it. Our side cannot and should not do that. Not ever. Not if we wish to maintain the high ground, both morally and intellectually.