Mark Lane, famed Civil Rights attorney and author of the best-selling book, “Rush to Judgment,” which detailed the facts of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, died late last night at his home in Charlottesville, Virginia, at the age of 89.
82 thoughts on “Mark Lane, leading critic of the Warren Commission, dies at 89”
kennedy63
I find it amusing that the defenders of the Warren Omission and the posthumous defamers of Mark Lane engage in such vitriol, lobby scurrilous remarks and foul innuendo simply because Mr. Lane was paid by a client. Photon, do you not do the bidding of your paymaster(s)? Someone as experienced and successful as Mark Lane had the right to accept clients as he saw fit. The hypocrisy of Photon is that he ignores the chicanery of the Warren Omission (even with its own Commissioners) regarding testimony, evidence, timing of events, and falsely accusing Lee Oswald of the JFK and the Tippit murders, wounding Gov. Connelly, and attempting to shoot Gen. Walker. He blindly supports the political report of a group of hand-picked puppets whose collective intent was obfuscation, innuendo, and dissimulation. Who you submit to is who controls you. Johnson submitted to the rich rulers of America, at the behest of those lackey mouthpieces who launched a concerted chorus for a Blue Ribbon Panel, to ward off congressional investigations into JFK’s murder. He rails on Mark Lane about Jonestown and representing Jim Jones. What about the CIA’s role in the destruction of the People’s Temple, assassination of foreign leaders, drug smuggling, and consorting with the Mafia? Your vilification of Mark Lane, while defending the governmental liars, is astounding. Photon, if Lane was such a hypocrite, then what does that make all those who colluded in suppressing the truth in the JFK murder, while pompously deceiving the American people?
From first time,his misinformation and disinformation technique
is clear.
For example,Jim Jones case,”Conversations With Americans”‘s matter,native american’s bomb transport case…
I read his all book(JFK assassination theme).
Full of mislead,answer first,un-conspiracy information
cover-uped.
He is not a truth-seeker,but only money-grubber.
All of his fun must read ESQUIRE article about Jim Jones.
His hsca testimony as Jame Earl Ray’s lawyer is so bad.
His book “The Strongest Poison” is only joke.
His book “Code Name Zorro” is pack of perjury,
why he not deleted from perjury part form this
book new version?
Much thanks and gratitude to you, Mark Lane. You inspired my journey immensely. Thank you for being relentless in the pursuit of the truth. America owes you a serious debt of gratitude. God be with you.
RIP Mark Lane and thank U for your hard work and clear communication on the JFK assassination. You brought interest and shined a light on part of our history that was being hidden. Many good researchers were drawn into the cause in some way by you. You spoke truth to power. There may be debate over details of some of your words and actions as there can be of anyone who lives long and challenges U.S. intelligence but it is hard to argue with the interviews you put on film. Aquilla Clemons was a witness on the scene moments after the Tippet shooting. She heard the shots. She saw a man with a gun “reloading”. “He was kind of chunky”. “Kind of a short guy”. Their was a second guy, tall and slim. “He told him to go”. Mz Clemons had a visit from a man who said, ” Someone might hurt me if I would talk”. This from an interview from Mark Lane. And just my opinion but I think Mr Lane absolutely whupped William F Buckley in their televised debate. Peace and thank you Mark Lane.
I was reading this site a while back and someone said that if you can find nothing good to say about someone who has just passed, then say nothing. I think that’s good advice.
I am not saying that Mark Lane was perfect. I am not saying that Mark Lane was without his faults. But some of the language used here to describe an elderly gentleman just deceased shames the people that write it.
George Simmons, If I didn’t say what you repeated above in your reply, I was certainly thinking it. Some of you folks are treating the dearly departed as your worse enemy. I’m sure if Mark Lane was human he made mistakes, even big ones. What is even worse is the commentator Tom S. is also caught up in this.
As much as I like and appreciate Jefferson Morley, I believe he has a runaway train here at JFK Facts and the wheels & tracks are greased for a collusion.
Mark Lane may have a publicity hound and a bit of a grandstander, but the large majority of research he did regarding 11/23/63 was superb. Let’s not forget he was also an excellent writer–a quality that went a long way toward making the morass of events on that day navigable for Americans. It would have been easy for an experienced legal mind such as his to produce reams of legal gobbledygook when dissecting JFK’s death. But his prose was always lucid and compelling. In being one of the first citizens brave enough to pull back the veil on government deception and illegality, every American owes him a word of thanks.
Clarence Darrow was a publicity hound and a grandstander. So was Emile Zola. In such cases of flagrant injustice, that’s just the kind of person who is needed.
Donald Ewen Cameron (24 December 1901 – 8 September 1967)[1] — known as D. Ewen Cameron or Ewen Cameron — was a Scottish-born psychiatrist who served as President of the Canadian Psychiatric Association, American (1952–1953) and World Psychiatric Associations, the American Psychopathological Association and the Society of Biological Psychiatry during the 1950s. Notwithstanding his high professional reputation, he has been criticized for his administration, without informed consent, of disproportionately intense electroshock therapy and experimental drugs, including LSD, which rendered some patients permanently comatose. Some of this work took place in the context of the Project MKUltra mind control program.[2]
Evidence of Revision 5 of 5
MK ULTRA and the Jonestown Massacre
. . . . . . . . . .
This video begins with a look at the RFK Assassination, the second part is about the Jonestown Massacre.
Mark Lane was persuasive in word and speech. His approach was that of an adversarial lawyer. If you doubt the Warren Commission’s findings you have to accept Mark Lane fanned the flames of doubt tremendously well.
I beleive he was very important in the pursuit of truth in JFK’s assassination, and I’m very grateful for that.
A Ft. Worth journalist knew about a meeting in The Carousel the night of 11-21. Jack Ruby, JD Tippit, Bernard Weissman(“author” of the full-page ad in the D Morning News 11-22), and a prominent oil man. The reporter was scared to death to report it. But he told Mark Lane and ML told Dorothy Kilgallen, who wasn’t scared. Well, at least until they offed her Nov. 1965.
Mark Lane found out about dozens of major pieces of evidence. Acquilla Clemmons is one. She was repeatedly threatened by American “law enforcement” until she disappeared soon after.
The FBI was totally into the harassment, spying on and attempts to compromise Mark Lane. I recommend a 2006 John Simkin post that touches on this topic. The issue was Hale Boggs and his grave doubts about both the Warren Report and FBI head J. Edgar Hoover.
JOHN SIMKIN:
On January 20, 1975, the Washington Post and other news organizations reported that solid evidence had been uncovered about the existence of what Hoover and the FBI had long denied they possessed: secret damaging dossiers on various members of the House and Senate, compiled through various forms of surveillance. On the following day, January 21,1975, Washington Post reporter Ron Kessler made a further disclosure:
“The son of the late House Majority Leader Boggs has told The Post that the FBI leaked to his father damaging material on the personal lives of critics of its investigation into John F. Kennedy’s assassination. Thomas Hale Boggs, Jr. said his father, who was a member of the Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination and its handling by the FBI, was given the material in an apparent attempt to discredit the critics [of the Warren Commission].
The material, which Thomas Boggs made available, includes photographs of sexual activity and reports on alleged communist affiliations of some authors of articles and books on the assassination.
Boggs, a Washington lawyer, said the experience played a large role in his father’s decision to publicly charge the FBI with Gestapo tactics in a 1971 speech alleging the Bureau had wiretapped his telephone and that of other Congressmen.”
UNQUOTE
More Simkin:
Mark Lane, the long time critic of the Warren Report has often spoken of FBI harassment and surveillance directed against him. While many observers were at first skeptical about Lane’s characteristically vocal allegations against the FBI, the list of classified Warren Commission documents that was later released substantiated Lane’s charges, as it contained several FBI files about him. Lane had earlier uncovered a February 24, 1964 Warren Commission memorandum from staff counsel Harold Willens to General Counsel J. Lee Rankin. The memorandum revealed that FBI agents had Lane’s movements and lectures under surveillance, and were forwarding their reports to the Warren Commission.
Jim DiEugenio paid tribute to Lane at CTKA, and included this rather interesting anecdote:
“Within just three weeks of Kennedy’s death, Lane had issued the first legal arguments against the public stampede to condemn the memory of the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, who had been shot and killed by Jack Ruby while in the custody of the Dallas police. Lane wanted to publish his defendant’s brief in The Nation. But that liberal journal — and several other periodicals — would not accept it. So he went to the even more leftist journal The National Guardian. …
“Marguerite Oswald, mother of the murdered suspect, heard about Lane’s polemic. She wanted him to act as her murdered son’s defense advocate. But the Warren Commission would not allow it. When Lane forwarded his request to the Commission, Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin wired back to him the following message: “The Commission does not believe that it would be useful or desirable to permit an attorney representing Lee Harvey Oswald to have access to the investigative materials within the possession of the Commission or to participate in any hearings to be conducted by the Commission.” ”
Read the book: A Citizen’s Dissent: Mark Lane Replies to the Defenders of the Warren Report, to the press and communications industry, to the Establishment intellectuals and commentators, and tells the often grim story of how his dissent was almost silenced. (1968):
The importance of Rush To Judgement at the time cannot be overstated in regard to the search for the truth. It and the video interviews after the book gave truth to the doubt’s of Loyal U.S. Patriot doubters of the Warren Omission. I thought Plausible Denial (91) was pretty informative for pre JFK the movie regarding the CIA. “Last Word My Indictment Of The CIA In The Murder Of JFK” (2011) was also informative well prior to the 50th.
His attempt to defend Oswald is Historical, no matter his questioned motives by detractors.
His most Historic work as an Attorney may have been done for Liberty Lobby/Victor Marchetti in defense against Howard Hunt of the CIA (at that time left as a dangle by them?).
RIP, With Respect, and Thanks.
Lane’s early-on heretical arguments vs. the Warren Omission attracted the attention of Europeans, which in turn pressured a heretofore lapdog U.S. media into admitting there might be a trifle bit more to the crime than the official phony-baloney.
“I have just received information that the esteemed researcher and my attorney Mark Lane died yesterday. He will be missed by all who have sought the truth about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. May the Peace and Blessings of The Supreme Essence be with him.” — Abraham Bolden, former Secret Service
It’s distressing to see anyone rushing to condemn an 89-year-old man less than 24 hours after his death. Whatever one thinks of his books on other subjects, Mr. Lane contributed a great deal to the search for truth about President Kennedy’s murder, and the film “Rush to Judgment,” as mentioned already, remains an invaluable document, all the more powerful for its total lack of flashiness and its chillingly matter-of-fact presentation.
Jonestown.
Jonestown.
Jonestown.
Not some armchair theories about conspiracies and libelous but harmless claims about the living and the dead. No, Lane was in it up to his eyeballs concerning his relationship with Jones and how he fed his paranoia. He had blood on his hands.
I most certainly can. Lane supplied the myth to Jones that the CIA was after him. In response Jones planned the mass suicide of the community that cost over 900 lives. He fed Jones paranoia with his usual CIA fantasies completely devoid of the truth, fantasies lapped up by naive CTers with no consequences, but deadly when they confirmed the fears of a homicidal megalomaniac.
“Lane supplied the myth to Jones that the CIA was after him…”~Photon
Balderdash. Jones was already connected to CIA as an extension of the MKUltra program. The whole operation was a mind control experiment. The finale was timed to intimidate those investigations going on in Congress by Senator Church. It should be recalled that Congressman Leo Ryan was the sponsor of the House side of the joint Senate-House Committee chaired by Church.
Ryan himself was murdered in Guyana when he flew down there to investigate what was going on.
As usual the mainstream story is the myth. As usual that myth is what Photon propagates with great enthusiasm.
\\][//
George
“libelous but harmless claims”
A contradiction in terms since a necessary element of “libel” is that it does harm.
From Cornell: “Libel is a method of defamation expressed by print, writing, pictures, signs, effigies, or any communication embodied in physical form that is injurious to a person’s reputation, exposes a person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or injures a person in his/her business or profession.”
Well, Photon, Allen Dulles had an ocean of blood on his hands, and you don’t seem to have a problem with him.
If Lane was taken in by Jones, he was far from alone; a shocking number of mainstream liberals, including Jerry Brown and Harvey Milk, fell for Jones’s act and protected him.
Mark Lane’s masterful “Rush to Judgement” was my introduction to the subject that has captivated me since my junior year in high school. I was 13 when JFK was murdered but it was Lane’s book that opened my eyes to the duplicity of a government that I naively believed told its citizens the truth. Among the research community he was a pioneer and a giant and we all owe him a great debt of gratitude. RIP Mark and thank you for devoting your life and energy to the quest for the truth. You were one of the great trailblazers.
Oswald Innocent?—A Lawyer’s Brief
A Report to the Warren Commission by Mark Lane
NATIONAL
GUARDIAN
the progressive newsweekly
VOL. 16 No. 11 NEW YORK, DECEMBER 19, 1963
In his letter to Justice Warren accompanying the brief, Lane urged that defense counsel be named for Oswald so that all aspects of the case might be vigorously pursued, particularly since Oswald was denied a trial during his lifetime. It is an ironic note, as the ACLU statement said, that “if Oswald had lived to stand trial and were convicted, the courts would very likely have reversed the conviction because of the prejudicial pretrial publicity.”
“The GUARDIAN’S publication of Lane’s brief presumes only one thing: a man’s innocence, under U.S. law, unless or until proved guilty. It is the right of any accused, whether his name is Oswald, Ruby, or Byron de la Beckwith, the man charged with the murder of Medgar Evers in Mississippi. A presumption of innocence is the rock upon which American jurisprudence rests. Surely it ought to apply in the “crime of the century” as in the meanest back-alley felony.
We ask all our readers to study this document, show it to as many persons as you can (extra copies are available on request) and send us your comment. Any information or analysis based on fact that can assist the Warren Commission is in the public interest—an interest which demands that everything possible be done to establish the facts in this case.”
—THE GUARDIAN
Lane was a swine of the worst sort. He was the first one to see the financial opportunities in the cottage industry known as the “research community”. His “Rush to Judgement” upon reflection a half century later is full of lies( see-there is Jack Ruby in Dealey Plaza) misleading claims, loaded interviews, claims that actions proven to have been possible over 4 decades were impossible, etc. He supported himself off of the millions he made from this book and the lecture fees he charged the gullible to attend his ” seminars” in NYC during the same time. With the publicity he generated he promoted his law practice, where even human scum like James Earl Ray were considered ” victims. Yes, the “Conversations with America” collection of lies from individuals( many were deserters who never saw combat) was appalling , but even more so were Lane’s responses to Sheehan’s questions about doing simple investigations about those sources.( noted in the NY Times review). Lane simply didn’t give a crap about verification, only that they told stories that he knew were true-evidence didn’t matter ( sound familiar?) If they weren’t true, so what if it drove the narrative ( and made him money)
“James Earl Ray was effectively exonerated of the assassination of MLK, Jr. by Dr. William F. Pepper in a trial at The Circuit Court of Shelby County, Tennessee, 30th Judicial District at Memphis, in 1999. The trial, “Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King III, Bernice King, Dexter Scott King and Yolanda King Vs. Loyd Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators”, is commonly called “the Martin Luther King, Jr. Assassination Conspiracy Trial” and is referred to as such at The King Center website.
Willy, two worlds…. real world and world in which definitive film evidence is not even necessary to prove a blurry blob
in a darkened recessed corner is positively who they claim it is.
Live in one of those two worlds full time, not just when it suits you.
Docket Date Description Messages
12/02/2013 – Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Case With Prejudice Signed and Submitted by Judge Epstein on 12/02/2013
…..
10/21/2013 Motion to Vacate Default Judgment Filed Motion to Vacate Default Judgment Against the Defendant and to Extend Defendant’s Time to Respond Filed. submitted 10/21/2013 12:06. tds
Attorney: PEPPER, Dr WILLIAM F F (464502)
Dr PETER JANNEY (PLAINTIFF); Receipt: 265514 Date: 10/22/2013 …
On August 30 this past week in a Washington D.C. Superior Court, Attorney William F. Pepper, on behalf of author Dr. Peter Janney, submitted a wrongful death suit in a case involving the murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer in 1964…..
Just as the outcome was in Dr. Pepper represented Peter Janney in Janney v. Mitchell, the result in the case you mentioned
was meaningless.
The evidence introduced in King v. Jowers to support various conspiracy allegations consisted of either inaccurate and incomplete information or unsubstantiated conjecture, supplied most often by sources, many unnamed, who did not testify. Important information from the historical record and our investigation contradicts and undermines it. When considered in light of all other available relevant facts, the trial’s evidence fails to establish the existence of any conspiracy to kill Dr. King. The verdict presented by the parties and adopted by the jury is incompatible with the weight of all relevant information, much of which the jury never heard. Accordingly, the conspiracy allegations presented at the trial warrant no further investigation.
VIII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Questions and speculation may always surround the assassination of Dr. King and other national tragedies. Our investigation of these most recent allegations, as well as several exhaustive previous official investigations, found no reliable evidence that Dr. King was killed by conspirators who framed James Earl Ray. Nor have any of the conspiracy theories advanced in the last 30 years, including the Jowers and the Wilson allegations, survived critical examination.
We recommend no further federal investigation of the Jowers allegations, the Wilson allegations, or any other allegations related to the assassination unless and until reliable substantiating facts are presented. At this time, we are aware of no information to warrant any further investigation of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Return to Table of Contents
>
Updated August 6, 2015
rebuke
verb
express sharp disapproval or criticism of (someone) because of their behavior or actions.
Now I do not mind disagreement in debate, but to be rebuked because I have my own opinion, frankly pisses me off.
\\][//
david thurman
In Re: Photon May 12, 2016 “Lane was a swine of the worst sort. He was the first one to see the financial opportunities in the cottage industry known as the “research community”. “He supported himself off of the millions he made from this book and the lecture fees he charged the gullible to attend his ” seminars”
That;s the first thing the cia instructed you folks to do, bring out the financial incentive angle … see these people are in it 4 the $.
david thurman, you cannot lose with that argument, but is it supported most by evidence, emotion, or suspicion? Everyone who disagrees with you is instantly defrocked, backgrounds rendered moot, including Bob Katz and myself. Nicely done!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-katz/jfk-conspiracy-activist-l_b_4318302.html
JFK Conspiracy Activist Looks Back
11/25/2013 09:45 am ET | Updated Jan 25, 2014
Bob Katz
……….
Does the case still matter? Only, I’m afraid, as a cautionary tale about our willingness to accept simplistic explanations for wrenching events (Iraq War? 2008 financial collapse?) that we desperately need to get to the bottom of.
And on this, the 50th anniversary of JFK’s death, nobody wants to talk about that.
Bob Katz was director of the Assassination Information Bureau, which monitored the HSCA investigation, and is the author, most recently, of the novel, Third and Long.
‘is it supported most by evidence, emotion, or suspicion?’
Or OPINION like Katz’s, Frank?
You have done yourself no favors bleating over a lack of supporting evidence when you proffer opinion posted to the site of a known goon.
And that has ZERO to do as to whether Katz is wrong or right in his opinion.
Bill Clarke
I believe that David Thurman is a fan of the “Fletcher Prouty helped write the McNamara/Taylor report in General Krulac’s office”. That would explain a lot.
In Re: Tom S. > May 13, 2016 “david thurman, you cannot lose with that argument, but is it supported most by evidence, emotion, or suspicion?”
How about supported by the FACTS, as follows:
“CIA Instructions to Media Assets:
This document caused quite a stir when it was discovered in 1977. Dated 4/1/67, and marked “DESTROY WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED”, this document is a stunning testimony to how concerned the CIA was over investigations into the Kennedy assassination. Emphasis has been added to facilitate scanning.
CIA Document #1035-960, marked “PSYCH” for presumably Psychological Warfare Operations, in the division “CS”, the Clandestine Services, sometimes known as the “dirty tricks”
department.
RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report
“3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) FINANCIALLY INTERESTED, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein’s theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane’s book is much less convincing that Epstein’s and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)” http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104×765619
Tom S.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_(book)
Raven: …by journalist Tim Reiterman, the book reviews the history of the Peoples Temple….. Background…. While Reiterman was shot, he survived the Peoples Temple’s attack on Ryan’s delegation at an airstrip in Guyana.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_(book)#Reception
…….
Rob Morse of the San Francisco Examiner wrote: “The book is so definitive, it’s tough going.
Q&A: A Jonestown Survivor Remembers – TIME http://content.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1859903,00.html
Nov 18, 2008 – Tim Reiterman’s Raven: ….He began investigating Reverend Jim Jones, the twisted leader of the Peoples Temple cult, for the San Francisco Chronicle 18 months before Jones burst on the world’s stage 30 years ago. Reiterman’s articles caught the attention of Congressman Leo Ryan, who was concerned about constituents who had joined the group…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown#Additional_events….Lane then held press conferences stating that “none of the charges” against the Temple “are accurate or true” and that there was a “massive conspiracy” against the Temple by “intelligence organizations,” naming the CIA, the FBI, and even the U.S. Post Office.[92] Though Lane represented himself as a disinterested party, Jones was actually paying him $6,000 per month to generate such theories.:[93])
….. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown#Notes ….
92. Reiterman & Jacobs 1982, p. 440
93. Reiterman & Jacobs 1982, p. 441…
http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/?page_id=13917
Transcript of press conference held by Mark Lane, Donald Freed
at Peoples Temple, October 3, 1978
………… Lane: …….And that’s just one of the efforts which has been utilized by the United States government to destroy Peoples Temple. …….. We are now concluding the first stage of our investigation, we have filed, on the Freedom of Information Act, against every relevant agency which has been involved in this campaign, the Internal Revenue Service, the FCC, the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency, the American Embassy in Guyana has taken part, and many others, against various individuals, and in 90 days, I believe, there will be a massive, multimillion dollar action filed against all these agencies of government, and against those individuals who are either acting without direct consultation with intelligence agencies or other agencies. And there will be such an action filed. …but with all due respect to the importance of that suit, this one I think will be able to show …millions of dollars of damage inflicted by intelligence organizations against the Peoples Temple and Jonestown and Jim Jones. And I think the major damages will be very high. So we’re now moving to stage of our investigation, ….followed by a massive, multi-million dollar lawsuit against all the agencies of government…..
Q: Mark, would you list those agencies a little more, so we–
Lane: The ones that we have indications of in terms of their involvement now are the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Communications Commission, and Internal Revenue Service, the United States Post Office, the United States Treasury Department, and if there are any agencies present that I left out, I’d like to apologize for that….
Thomas
Calling someone a “swine of the worst sort” upon the news of their death displays a lack of character, integrity, and sound judgment. No more need be said.
In Re: Thomas May 13, 2016 “Calling someone a “swine of the worst sort” upon the news of their death displays a lack of character, integrity, and sound judgment.”
1000% agreed! That’s why i replied to Photon’s vomitous remarks.
Photon,
Maybe you should talk to some relatives of the dead in Cambodia, Vietnam, Guatemala, Pinochet’s Chili, and Suharto’s Indonesia during the Cold War.
\\][//
Photon
Why, Wiily? Did they push for Lane’s disbarment like several Jonestown relatives did? I posted the particulars of that exercise on this blog months ago.
Brian Joseph
Photon, it seems that what your comments and the comments of others who are criticizing Lane is this thread can be boiled down to four words: He was a lawyer.
Lawyers represent those who pay them. When one really thinks about that as a whole lawyering isn’t really a profession based on a high ethical standard. Lane’s comments defending Jones and his claims that Jones was being persecuted were (right or wrong) doing what a lawyer gets paid to do.
Encouraging a homicidal maniac with a god complex to believe unfounded claims that government elements are out to “get him” goes a bit beyond offering standard legal consultation .
“Photon, it seems that what your comments and the comments of others who are criticizing Lane is this thread can be boiled down to four words: He was a lawyer.”
“Lawyers represent those who pay them. When one really thinks about that as a whole lawyering isn’t really a profession based on a high ethical standard. Lane’s comments defending Jones and his claims that Jones was being persecuted were (right or wrong) doing what a lawyer gets paid to do.”
He certainly wasn’t being a lawyer when he wrote his BS book, “Conversations With Americans”. He was being a dishonest writer is what he was doing there.
The worst were his actions concerning the People’s Temple. In his conspiracy world he had no trouble convincing Jim Jones that that the CIA was spying on him and would spare nothing to remove him from the scene, prompting the paranoid Jones to start planning the “White Night ” exercises and mass suicide plans. Lane had to have known that Jones was a psychotic deviant capable of anything, but the lure of publicity-( and People’s Temple dollars) was enough to make him a willing accomplice in Jones demented plans and actions that lead to the death of a Congressman and over 900 individuals. And what did Lane do after escaping from Jonestown-help the survivors? No-he billed a tremendous fee to the remnants of the Temple for services rendered.
I can never accept the CT community simply ignoring Lane’s sordid activity in regard to Jim Jones. Most of his admirers know nothing of it. Many simply ignore it. 900 dead-not some nonsense about phantom CIA sniper squads, but entire families, children and helpless elderly people killed by a homocidal maniac and self -proclaimed messiah named Jim Jones- enabled and supported by Mark Lane.
At the time of the masssacre, CIA agent Richard Dwyer, Deputy Chief of Mission for the U.S. Embassy in Guyana was present. In a tape recording made immediately prior to the killings, Jones can be heard saying, “Get Dwyer out of here!” [http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=EW24bC_huG8]
At the end Jones had accumulated a wealth estimated to be between $26 million and $2 billion. The government receivership determined a figure of $10 million. Much of this money has unaccountably disappeared.
Joe Holsinger, Congressman Leo Ryan’s attorney and friend, said that a few hours after the murder of Ryan he had heard from a White House official that “We have a CIA report from the scene.” Holsinger wrote, ” The more I investigate the mysteries of Jonestown, the more I am convinced there is something sinister behind it all. There is no doubt in my mind that Jones had very close CIA connections. At the time of the tragedy, the Temple had three boats in the water off Brazil. The boats disappeared shortly afterwards. Remember, Brazil is a country that Jones is very familiar with. He is supposed to have money there. And it is not too far from Guyana. My own feeling is that Jones was ambushed by CIA agents who then disappeared in the boats. But the whole story is so mind-boggling that I’m willing to concede he escaped with them.”
Lane admitted he was providing sanctuary in his own residence to a woman claiming Jones was threatening and earnestly attempting to locate, while at the same time Lane was providing legal services that Jones was paying Lane to provide.
Let he who is without bias cast the first stone.
\\][//
Bill Clarke
Willy Whitten
May 13, 2016 at 3:34 pm
“Let he who is without bias cast the first stone.”
I believe Willy that this would prevent anyone here from upturning a stone.
Scott Sullivan
“Lane had to have known . . .”
“. . . a willing accomplice . . .”
” . . . enabled and supported by Mark Lane.”
To quote someone in another thread . . . the above is “characteristic of the weak scholarship and baseless innuendo that comes from much of the [Photon] community.”
Oh. I may have tweaked one word toward the end there.
In Re: Photon > May 12, 2016 Jonestown, cia & Lane.
So are you suggesting the cia did NOT engineer the death of it’s nemesis, Congressman Leo Ryan as he was leaving Jonestown? b/c it’s clear in the footage Dwyer splits off at the last second.
Isn’t it true that what you’re really mad about, is that you know in your heart of hearts that the SBT & the warren commission pronouncements don’t hold up?
Willy, what does anything have to do with anything? You agree with what you read or hear, are you more inclined to think highly of the presenter? Did you ever wonder, for example, if Lane’s recorded telephone call to Helen Markham was planned to confuse her?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bethell1.htm
The Thomas Bethell Diary
……
Sep 12, 1967
Shaw motion to quash over. The decision by the judge is next Monday. I went out to dinner in the evening with Mark Land and his wife Anne-Lise. Contrary to the publicized impression, I found Lane quiet, tactful and thoughtful. He told me about his new book, “Mark Lane Replies.” At one point I told Lane that there was a certain irony in his supporting Garrison, because he had supposedly been retained by Oswald’s mother to defend (posthumously) her son. Garrison’s case against Shaw, I reminded Lane, is contingent upon Oswald’s guilt since Shaw is accused of conspiring with Oswald. Lane’s reply was: “I have never maintained that Oswald is innocent. Nowhere in ‘Rush to Judgement,” do I say that Oswald is innocent.”
“I reminded Lane, is contingent upon Oswald’s guilt since Shaw is accused of conspiring with Oswald. Lane’s reply was: “I have never maintained that Oswald is innocent. Nowhere in ‘Rush to Judgement,” do I say that Oswald is innocent.”~The Thomas Bethell Diary
It is more complex than that isn’t it Tom?
Because half century later we know that Shaw’s guilt was not contingent on Oswald’s guilt. As Oswald turns out most likely to be an agent infiltrating the conspirators in New Orleans.
I never heard of Lane saying that about Oswald not being innocent. I am surprised to read that.
\\][//
“Willy, what does anything have to do with anything?”
Steve Cearfoss, that “sophomoric remark”, is not my remark. It was said to me, not by me.
\\][//
David S
I’m friendly Tom Bethell, who kept a diary of his time working with Garrison in New Orleans. 40 years after fact Bethell still conveyed to me that he thought Garrison was crazy.
My view is that Garrison was on to something, but was overwhelmed and got steamrolled. When Ferrie died, Garrison should have dropped the case. I don’t think Shaw was a major or even minor player, even if he was a contact agent for the CIA.
“What does this have to do with Lane’s groundbreaking work on the JFK assassination?”
I believe Willy that it all goes together. If a fellow was dishonest in one chapter of his life he is likely to be dishonest in the next chapter. While not an expert on the assassination as you are, I’d have a hard time believing anything Lane had to say about anything.
Mr. Clarke, Tom and Photon: You are free to criticize Mark Lane to your heart’s content. Every single word of your criticism may even be factually correct. That said, it took a lot of guts in 1963 to stand up and defend Oswald. At least give the man credit where credit is due.
In Re: John Rowell > May 14, 2016 ” … IT TOOK A LOT OF GUTS in 1963 to stand up and defend Oswald.”
Agreed! RIP Mark Lane. Thanks for your hard work on Civil Rights and your pursuit of truth in the assassination’s of our most able up and coming liberal politicians (there is nothing of equal consequence on the political right).
Russ Tarby
Our entire nation owes a debt of gratitude to Mark Lane.
The film he made in conjunction with his book, “Rush to Judgment,” still holds up well after 50 years. The eyewitness testimony is chilling as are interviews with associates of Jack Ruby…
I agree Russ, Mark Lane was one of the original critics of the nonsensical conclusions of the Warren Report. Brought a lot of information forward, that still needs to be paid attention to.
Are we all commenting about the same guy? Mark Lane failed my, “would you buy a used car from this person?” test.
Amen Tom. The man was a shyster I wouldn’t trust as far as I could throw him. His anti-war book “Conversations With Americans” was totally dishonest. It would have been laughable if the subject had not been so sad.
Mark Lane — Smearing America’s Soldiers – mu
mcadams.posc.mu.edu/smearing.htm
Mark Lane devoted his life and most of his career as the first to responsibly and painstakingly examine the facts about President Kennedy’s assassination. “Rush to Judgment” was a full repudiation of the lie that was the Warren Report ordered by LBJ. Lane did not become wealthy from his many books on the subject, his work in the trial of E. Howard Hunt, Anyone who says that is just uninformed. Lane was a great American who refused to be intimidated by the CIA or Hoover. He continued to tell the truth about who murdered the president throughout his life. His work will live on throughout history as the truth continues to come into focus.
(Tom S. notes- The author of this comment is apparently a first time contributor and is not the “Steve” who regularly submits comments. It would eliminate future confusion if “new Steve” alters his ID choice.)
What a crock. Steve is apparently unaware of how much Lane picked up from the suckers who bought ” Rush to Judgement” and kept it on the Best Seller list for months, nor how much he got for the screenplay of “Executive Action” nor the checks he got for his sequel rehash books. It was millions. Even after paying off two ex-wives he still ended up living in the millionaires’ Charlottesville neighborhood of Bellair where the only African-American or Latino faces to be seen are doing domestic work in the million dollar homes or tending to the gardens of the wealthy. How much did he take out of the People’s Temple-both before and after Jonestown?
How much did his law firm generate?
As they said about the Hawaiian missionaries -he came to do good and he did very well.
Geez Photon. Nobody said the guy was a saint. (I mean to this point. I haven’t read all the comments yet.)He worked for his money. He sold a “product” that people were interested in. That “product” was that we were not told the truth. Do you really think that he didn’t believe any of what he was selling? Are you opposed to capitalism?
He did get mixed up with Jim Jones and that hurt his credibility.
I’m sure that someone who is as well read as you seem to be
is aware of those whacky conspiracy theories about
Mr. Jones involvement with The Company and mind
control stuff.
One of the things that irked me about Lane was that his
party loyalty seemed to get in the way of his conclusions. Here was this vast cover up by a commission appointed by LBJ but he claimed he didn’t think LBJ was involved. I took that to mean that he didn’t think LBJ was in involved in or knowledgeable about the cover up that Lane claimed (some would say proved) happened.
I digressed. When someone makes money by doing something it doesn’t mean they aren’t good at it. It usually means quite the opposite. Lane was good at pointing out the many inconsistencies, avoidances, and questions not answered by the Warren Commission. Most of the people you call “suckers” were interested in what he had to say. I think he did some good work and I don’t begrudge that he made some money off of it but I’m a capitalistso I think it’s nice to be good at something, make some money doing it, and live in a nice house in a nice nieghborhood. That’s why I’m glad I don’t live in Cuba.
No Brian, many here have exactly claimed that he was , in so many words. How else can others simply dismiss his involvement in the deaths of Leo Ryan and 900 others, including scores of innocent children without appealing to his “better nature”? Of course he didn’t force them to drink the Flavor-Aid, but his influence on Jones stimulated that maniac’s paranoia and may have been the contributing factor in the development of the White Night scenario.
Lane was always in it for the money, to the point of going after anybody else he saw as a threat to his ” rice bowl “- ergo the contempt of many noted CT advocates-particularly Harold Weisberg, who never had the financial savvy of most CT authors but could see through many of the charlatans and the more ridiculous claims. His attempt to get on the Garrison bandwagon was a blatant effort to stay relevant and keep the revenue stream coming in.
I don’t begrudge anybody making on honest living. I do begrudge people who do so by publishing lies,make money off of the dead- and becoming the story instead of reporting it.
Mark Lane, famed Civil Rights attorney and author of the best-selling book, “Rush to Judgment,” which detailed the facts of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, died late last night at his home in Charlottesville, Virginia, at the age of 89.
I find it amusing that the defenders of the Warren Omission and the posthumous defamers of Mark Lane engage in such vitriol, lobby scurrilous remarks and foul innuendo simply because Mr. Lane was paid by a client. Photon, do you not do the bidding of your paymaster(s)? Someone as experienced and successful as Mark Lane had the right to accept clients as he saw fit. The hypocrisy of Photon is that he ignores the chicanery of the Warren Omission (even with its own Commissioners) regarding testimony, evidence, timing of events, and falsely accusing Lee Oswald of the JFK and the Tippit murders, wounding Gov. Connelly, and attempting to shoot Gen. Walker. He blindly supports the political report of a group of hand-picked puppets whose collective intent was obfuscation, innuendo, and dissimulation. Who you submit to is who controls you. Johnson submitted to the rich rulers of America, at the behest of those lackey mouthpieces who launched a concerted chorus for a Blue Ribbon Panel, to ward off congressional investigations into JFK’s murder. He rails on Mark Lane about Jonestown and representing Jim Jones. What about the CIA’s role in the destruction of the People’s Temple, assassination of foreign leaders, drug smuggling, and consorting with the Mafia? Your vilification of Mark Lane, while defending the governmental liars, is astounding. Photon, if Lane was such a hypocrite, then what does that make all those who colluded in suppressing the truth in the JFK murder, while pompously deceiving the American people?
From first time,his misinformation and disinformation technique
is clear.
For example,Jim Jones case,”Conversations With Americans”‘s matter,native american’s bomb transport case…
I read his all book(JFK assassination theme).
Full of mislead,answer first,un-conspiracy information
cover-uped.
He is not a truth-seeker,but only money-grubber.
All of his fun must read ESQUIRE article about Jim Jones.
His hsca testimony as Jame Earl Ray’s lawyer is so bad.
His book “The Strongest Poison” is only joke.
His book “Code Name Zorro” is pack of perjury,
why he not deleted from perjury part form this
book new version?
Much thanks and gratitude to you, Mark Lane. You inspired my journey immensely. Thank you for being relentless in the pursuit of the truth. America owes you a serious debt of gratitude. God be with you.
RIP Mark Lane and thank U for your hard work and clear communication on the JFK assassination. You brought interest and shined a light on part of our history that was being hidden. Many good researchers were drawn into the cause in some way by you. You spoke truth to power. There may be debate over details of some of your words and actions as there can be of anyone who lives long and challenges U.S. intelligence but it is hard to argue with the interviews you put on film. Aquilla Clemons was a witness on the scene moments after the Tippet shooting. She heard the shots. She saw a man with a gun “reloading”. “He was kind of chunky”. “Kind of a short guy”. Their was a second guy, tall and slim. “He told him to go”. Mz Clemons had a visit from a man who said, ” Someone might hurt me if I would talk”. This from an interview from Mark Lane. And just my opinion but I think Mr Lane absolutely whupped William F Buckley in their televised debate. Peace and thank you Mark Lane.
I was reading this site a while back and someone said that if you can find nothing good to say about someone who has just passed, then say nothing. I think that’s good advice.
I am not saying that Mark Lane was perfect. I am not saying that Mark Lane was without his faults. But some of the language used here to describe an elderly gentleman just deceased shames the people that write it.
George Simmons, If I didn’t say what you repeated above in your reply, I was certainly thinking it. Some of you folks are treating the dearly departed as your worse enemy. I’m sure if Mark Lane was human he made mistakes, even big ones. What is even worse is the commentator Tom S. is also caught up in this.
As much as I like and appreciate Jefferson Morley, I believe he has a runaway train here at JFK Facts and the wheels & tracks are greased for a collusion.
God bless you Mark. You were a true hero and I will always love you.
Mark Lane may have a publicity hound and a bit of a grandstander, but the large majority of research he did regarding 11/23/63 was superb. Let’s not forget he was also an excellent writer–a quality that went a long way toward making the morass of events on that day navigable for Americans. It would have been easy for an experienced legal mind such as his to produce reams of legal gobbledygook when dissecting JFK’s death. But his prose was always lucid and compelling. In being one of the first citizens brave enough to pull back the veil on government deception and illegality, every American owes him a word of thanks.
Clarence Darrow was a publicity hound and a grandstander. So was Emile Zola. In such cases of flagrant injustice, that’s just the kind of person who is needed.
Can it be argued that Jim Garrison had similar attributes at a certain moment in his life?
Kennedy was flawed, but he was certainly a hero — for a number of days. http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/Cuban-Missile-Crisis.aspx
Donald Ewen Cameron
Donald Ewen Cameron (24 December 1901 – 8 September 1967)[1] — known as D. Ewen Cameron or Ewen Cameron — was a Scottish-born psychiatrist who served as President of the Canadian Psychiatric Association, American (1952–1953) and World Psychiatric Associations, the American Psychopathological Association and the Society of Biological Psychiatry during the 1950s. Notwithstanding his high professional reputation, he has been criticized for his administration, without informed consent, of disproportionately intense electroshock therapy and experimental drugs, including LSD, which rendered some patients permanently comatose. Some of this work took place in the context of the Project MKUltra mind control program.[2]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Ewen_Cameron
\\][//
Evidence of Revision 5 of 5
MK ULTRA and the Jonestown Massacre
. . . . . . . . . .
This video begins with a look at the RFK Assassination, the second part is about the Jonestown Massacre.
https://youtu.be/nus9mnbvflM?t=1035
\\][//
https://youtu.be/nus9mnbvflM?t=1035
I think that Lane was sucked into the whole Jones thing as a way of discrediting him and he took the bait.
Mark Lane was persuasive in word and speech. His approach was that of an adversarial lawyer. If you doubt the Warren Commission’s findings you have to accept Mark Lane fanned the flames of doubt tremendously well.
I beleive he was very important in the pursuit of truth in JFK’s assassination, and I’m very grateful for that.
A Ft. Worth journalist knew about a meeting in The Carousel the night of 11-21. Jack Ruby, JD Tippit, Bernard Weissman(“author” of the full-page ad in the D Morning News 11-22), and a prominent oil man. The reporter was scared to death to report it. But he told Mark Lane and ML told Dorothy Kilgallen, who wasn’t scared. Well, at least until they offed her Nov. 1965.
Mark Lane found out about dozens of major pieces of evidence. Acquilla Clemmons is one. She was repeatedly threatened by American “law enforcement” until she disappeared soon after.
The FBI was totally into the harassment, spying on and attempts to compromise Mark Lane. I recommend a 2006 John Simkin post that touches on this topic. The issue was Hale Boggs and his grave doubts about both the Warren Report and FBI head J. Edgar Hoover.
JOHN SIMKIN:
On January 20, 1975, the Washington Post and other news organizations reported that solid evidence had been uncovered about the existence of what Hoover and the FBI had long denied they possessed: secret damaging dossiers on various members of the House and Senate, compiled through various forms of surveillance. On the following day, January 21,1975, Washington Post reporter Ron Kessler made a further disclosure:
“The son of the late House Majority Leader Boggs has told The Post that the FBI leaked to his father damaging material on the personal lives of critics of its investigation into John F. Kennedy’s assassination. Thomas Hale Boggs, Jr. said his father, who was a member of the Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination and its handling by the FBI, was given the material in an apparent attempt to discredit the critics [of the Warren Commission].
The material, which Thomas Boggs made available, includes photographs of sexual activity and reports on alleged communist affiliations of some authors of articles and books on the assassination.
Boggs, a Washington lawyer, said the experience played a large role in his father’s decision to publicly charge the FBI with Gestapo tactics in a 1971 speech alleging the Bureau had wiretapped his telephone and that of other Congressmen.”
UNQUOTE
More Simkin:
Mark Lane, the long time critic of the Warren Report has often spoken of FBI harassment and surveillance directed against him. While many observers were at first skeptical about Lane’s characteristically vocal allegations against the FBI, the list of classified Warren Commission documents that was later released substantiated Lane’s charges, as it contained several FBI files about him. Lane had earlier uncovered a February 24, 1964 Warren Commission memorandum from staff counsel Harold Willens to General Counsel J. Lee Rankin. The memorandum revealed that FBI agents had Lane’s movements and lectures under surveillance, and were forwarding their reports to the Warren Commission.
Jim DiEugenio paid tribute to Lane at CTKA, and included this rather interesting anecdote:
“Within just three weeks of Kennedy’s death, Lane had issued the first legal arguments against the public stampede to condemn the memory of the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, who had been shot and killed by Jack Ruby while in the custody of the Dallas police. Lane wanted to publish his defendant’s brief in The Nation. But that liberal journal — and several other periodicals — would not accept it. So he went to the even more leftist journal The National Guardian. …
“Marguerite Oswald, mother of the murdered suspect, heard about Lane’s polemic. She wanted him to act as her murdered son’s defense advocate. But the Warren Commission would not allow it. When Lane forwarded his request to the Commission, Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin wired back to him the following message: “The Commission does not believe that it would be useful or desirable to permit an attorney representing Lee Harvey Oswald to have access to the investigative materials within the possession of the Commission or to participate in any hearings to be conducted by the Commission.” ”
http://www.ctka.net/2016/marklane/the-death-of-mark-lane.html
Read the book: A Citizen’s Dissent: Mark Lane Replies to the Defenders of the Warren Report, to the press and communications industry, to the Establishment intellectuals and commentators, and tells the often grim story of how his dissent was almost silenced. (1968):
http://www.amazon.com/Citizens-Dissent-Replies-Defenders-Warren/dp/B00005VLU6
What the Hell does any of this have to do with “Mark Lane, Leading Critic of the Warren Commission?
Oops, foot in mouth again. I was referring to a couple of comments I found objection to. Many others are valuable.
The “darling of the Conspiracy crowd”. Might he be Proud?
http://www.amazon.com/Rush-Judgement-mark-lane/dp/B0000CN5UV
“just a year before All records of the President’s death are to be made public”.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mark-lane-jfk-assassination-conspiracy-advocate-dead-89-article-1.2635458
The importance of Rush To Judgement at the time cannot be overstated in regard to the search for the truth. It and the video interviews after the book gave truth to the doubt’s of Loyal U.S. Patriot doubters of the Warren Omission. I thought Plausible Denial (91) was pretty informative for pre JFK the movie regarding the CIA. “Last Word My Indictment Of The CIA In The Murder Of JFK” (2011) was also informative well prior to the 50th.
His attempt to defend Oswald is Historical, no matter his questioned motives by detractors.
His most Historic work as an Attorney may have been done for Liberty Lobby/Victor Marchetti in defense against Howard Hunt of the CIA (at that time left as a dangle by them?).
RIP, With Respect, and Thanks.
Lane’s early-on heretical arguments vs. the Warren Omission attracted the attention of Europeans, which in turn pressured a heretofore lapdog U.S. media into admitting there might be a trifle bit more to the crime than the official phony-baloney.
Mark Lane, I salute you.
“I have just received information that the esteemed researcher and my attorney Mark Lane died yesterday. He will be missed by all who have sought the truth about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. May the Peace and Blessings of The Supreme Essence be with him.” — Abraham Bolden, former Secret Service
The OIC has suffered a huge loss.
http://www.oswald-innocent.com/
It’s distressing to see anyone rushing to condemn an 89-year-old man less than 24 hours after his death. Whatever one thinks of his books on other subjects, Mr. Lane contributed a great deal to the search for truth about President Kennedy’s murder, and the film “Rush to Judgment,” as mentioned already, remains an invaluable document, all the more powerful for its total lack of flashiness and its chillingly matter-of-fact presentation.
Jonestown.
Jonestown.
Jonestown.
Not some armchair theories about conspiracies and libelous but harmless claims about the living and the dead. No, Lane was in it up to his eyeballs concerning his relationship with Jones and how he fed his paranoia. He had blood on his hands.
Photon,
You cannot blame Lane for the Jonestown massacre.
Like the JFK assassination, the RFK assassination and the MLK assassination, it was an intelligence black op.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/Jonestown.html
\\][//
I most certainly can. Lane supplied the myth to Jones that the CIA was after him. In response Jones planned the mass suicide of the community that cost over 900 lives. He fed Jones paranoia with his usual CIA fantasies completely devoid of the truth, fantasies lapped up by naive CTers with no consequences, but deadly when they confirmed the fears of a homicidal megalomaniac.
“Lane supplied the myth to Jones that the CIA was after him…”~Photon
Balderdash. Jones was already connected to CIA as an extension of the MKUltra program. The whole operation was a mind control experiment. The finale was timed to intimidate those investigations going on in Congress by Senator Church. It should be recalled that Congressman Leo Ryan was the sponsor of the House side of the joint Senate-House Committee chaired by Church.
Ryan himself was murdered in Guyana when he flew down there to investigate what was going on.
As usual the mainstream story is the myth. As usual that myth is what Photon propagates with great enthusiasm.
\\][//
“libelous but harmless claims”
A contradiction in terms since a necessary element of “libel” is that it does harm.
From Cornell: “Libel is a method of defamation expressed by print, writing, pictures, signs, effigies, or any communication embodied in physical form that is injurious to a person’s reputation, exposes a person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or injures a person in his/her business or profession.”
Well, Photon, Allen Dulles had an ocean of blood on his hands, and you don’t seem to have a problem with him.
If Lane was taken in by Jones, he was far from alone; a shocking number of mainstream liberals, including Jerry Brown and Harvey Milk, fell for Jones’s act and protected him.
Mark Lane’s masterful “Rush to Judgement” was my introduction to the subject that has captivated me since my junior year in high school. I was 13 when JFK was murdered but it was Lane’s book that opened my eyes to the duplicity of a government that I naively believed told its citizens the truth. Among the research community he was a pioneer and a giant and we all owe him a great debt of gratitude. RIP Mark and thank you for devoting your life and energy to the quest for the truth. You were one of the great trailblazers.
Oswald Innocent?—A Lawyer’s Brief
A Report to the Warren Commission by Mark Lane
NATIONAL
GUARDIAN
the progressive newsweekly
VOL. 16 No. 11 NEW YORK, DECEMBER 19, 1963
In his letter to Justice Warren accompanying the brief, Lane urged that defense counsel be named for Oswald so that all aspects of the case might be vigorously pursued, particularly since Oswald was denied a trial during his lifetime. It is an ironic note, as the ACLU statement said, that “if Oswald had lived to stand trial and were convicted, the courts would very likely have reversed the conviction because of the prejudicial pretrial publicity.”
“The GUARDIAN’S publication of Lane’s brief presumes only one thing: a man’s innocence, under U.S. law, unless or until proved guilty. It is the right of any accused, whether his name is Oswald, Ruby, or Byron de la Beckwith, the man charged with the murder of Medgar Evers in Mississippi. A presumption of innocence is the rock upon which American jurisprudence rests. Surely it ought to apply in the “crime of the century” as in the meanest back-alley felony.
We ask all our readers to study this document, show it to as many persons as you can (extra copies are available on request) and send us your comment. Any information or analysis based on fact that can assist the Warren Commission is in the public interest—an interest which demands that everything possible be done to establish the facts in this case.”
—THE GUARDIAN
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/OI-ALB.html
\\][//
Lane was a swine of the worst sort. He was the first one to see the financial opportunities in the cottage industry known as the “research community”. His “Rush to Judgement” upon reflection a half century later is full of lies( see-there is Jack Ruby in Dealey Plaza) misleading claims, loaded interviews, claims that actions proven to have been possible over 4 decades were impossible, etc. He supported himself off of the millions he made from this book and the lecture fees he charged the gullible to attend his ” seminars” in NYC during the same time. With the publicity he generated he promoted his law practice, where even human scum like James Earl Ray were considered ” victims. Yes, the “Conversations with America” collection of lies from individuals( many were deserters who never saw combat) was appalling , but even more so were Lane’s responses to Sheehan’s questions about doing simple investigations about those sources.( noted in the NY Times review). Lane simply didn’t give a crap about verification, only that they told stories that he knew were true-evidence didn’t matter ( sound familiar?) If they weren’t true, so what if it drove the narrative ( and made him money)
Photon,
Could you ever ever support what you present with a link to a source?
How much of the criticism of Mark Lane was valid? Harold Weisberg could have authored your comment, but unlike you, he did not hold back.:
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/L%20Disk/Lane%20Mark/Lane%20Mark%201975/Item%2004.pdf
Are you claiming that none of this happened?
“James Earl Ray was effectively exonerated of the assassination of MLK, Jr. by Dr. William F. Pepper in a trial at The Circuit Court of Shelby County, Tennessee, 30th Judicial District at Memphis, in 1999. The trial, “Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King III, Bernice King, Dexter Scott King and Yolanda King Vs. Loyd Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators”, is commonly called “the Martin Luther King, Jr. Assassination Conspiracy Trial” and is referred to as such at The King Center website.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×3101300
Also see: ORDERS TO KILL, By William F. Pepper
\\][//
Willy, two worlds…. real world and world in which definitive film evidence is not even necessary to prove a blurry blob
in a darkened recessed corner is positively who they claim it is.
Live in one of those two worlds full time, not just when it suits you.
Just as the outcome was in Dr. Pepper represented Peter Janney in Janney v. Mitchell, the result in the case you mentioned
was meaningless.
rebuke
verb
express sharp disapproval or criticism of (someone) because of their behavior or actions.
Now I do not mind disagreement in debate, but to be rebuked because I have my own opinion, frankly pisses me off.
\\][//
In Re: Photon May 12, 2016 “Lane was a swine of the worst sort. He was the first one to see the financial opportunities in the cottage industry known as the “research community”. “He supported himself off of the millions he made from this book and the lecture fees he charged the gullible to attend his ” seminars”
That;s the first thing the cia instructed you folks to do, bring out the financial incentive angle … see these people are in it 4 the $.
david thurman, you cannot lose with that argument, but is it supported most by evidence, emotion, or suspicion? Everyone who disagrees with you is instantly defrocked, backgrounds rendered moot, including Bob Katz and myself. Nicely done!
http://www.jfk-online.com/mark-lane-the-left's-leading-hearse-chaser.pdf
‘is it supported most by evidence, emotion, or suspicion?’
Or OPINION like Katz’s, Frank?
You have done yourself no favors bleating over a lack of supporting evidence when you proffer opinion posted to the site of a known goon.
And that has ZERO to do as to whether Katz is wrong or right in his opinion.
I believe that David Thurman is a fan of the “Fletcher Prouty helped write the McNamara/Taylor report in General Krulac’s office”. That would explain a lot.
david thurman submitted an additional comment, of 1085 words. http://www.wordcounttool.com/
In Re: Tom S. > May 13, 2016 “david thurman, you cannot lose with that argument, but is it supported most by evidence, emotion, or suspicion?”
How about supported by the FACTS, as follows:
“CIA Instructions to Media Assets:
This document caused quite a stir when it was discovered in 1977. Dated 4/1/67, and marked “DESTROY WHEN NO LONGER NEEDED”, this document is a stunning testimony to how concerned the CIA was over investigations into the Kennedy assassination. Emphasis has been added to facilitate scanning.
CIA Document #1035-960, marked “PSYCH” for presumably Psychological Warfare Operations, in the division “CS”, the Clandestine Services, sometimes known as the “dirty tricks”
department.
RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report
“3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) FINANCIALLY INTERESTED, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein’s theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane’s book is much less convincing that Epstein’s and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)” http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104×765619
Calling someone a “swine of the worst sort” upon the news of their death displays a lack of character, integrity, and sound judgment. No more need be said.
In Re: Thomas May 13, 2016 “Calling someone a “swine of the worst sort” upon the news of their death displays a lack of character, integrity, and sound judgment.”
1000% agreed! That’s why i replied to Photon’s vomitous remarks.
Maybe you should talk to some relatives of the dead at Jonestown.
Photon,
Maybe you should talk to some relatives of the dead in Cambodia, Vietnam, Guatemala, Pinochet’s Chili, and Suharto’s Indonesia during the Cold War.
\\][//
Why, Wiily? Did they push for Lane’s disbarment like several Jonestown relatives did? I posted the particulars of that exercise on this blog months ago.
Photon, it seems that what your comments and the comments of others who are criticizing Lane is this thread can be boiled down to four words: He was a lawyer.
Lawyers represent those who pay them. When one really thinks about that as a whole lawyering isn’t really a profession based on a high ethical standard. Lane’s comments defending Jones and his claims that Jones was being persecuted were (right or wrong) doing what a lawyer gets paid to do.
And a lawyer is just what anyone needs whom the government goes after.
Encouraging a homicidal maniac with a god complex to believe unfounded claims that government elements are out to “get him” goes a bit beyond offering standard legal consultation .
Brian Joseph
May 14, 2016 at 7:48 am
“Photon, it seems that what your comments and the comments of others who are criticizing Lane is this thread can be boiled down to four words: He was a lawyer.”
“Lawyers represent those who pay them. When one really thinks about that as a whole lawyering isn’t really a profession based on a high ethical standard. Lane’s comments defending Jones and his claims that Jones was being persecuted were (right or wrong) doing what a lawyer gets paid to do.”
He certainly wasn’t being a lawyer when he wrote his BS book, “Conversations With Americans”. He was being a dishonest writer is what he was doing there.
The worst were his actions concerning the People’s Temple. In his conspiracy world he had no trouble convincing Jim Jones that that the CIA was spying on him and would spare nothing to remove him from the scene, prompting the paranoid Jones to start planning the “White Night ” exercises and mass suicide plans. Lane had to have known that Jones was a psychotic deviant capable of anything, but the lure of publicity-( and People’s Temple dollars) was enough to make him a willing accomplice in Jones demented plans and actions that lead to the death of a Congressman and over 900 individuals. And what did Lane do after escaping from Jonestown-help the survivors? No-he billed a tremendous fee to the remnants of the Temple for services rendered.
I can never accept the CT community simply ignoring Lane’s sordid activity in regard to Jim Jones. Most of his admirers know nothing of it. Many simply ignore it. 900 dead-not some nonsense about phantom CIA sniper squads, but entire families, children and helpless elderly people killed by a homocidal maniac and self -proclaimed messiah named Jim Jones- enabled and supported by Mark Lane.
At the time of the masssacre, CIA agent Richard Dwyer, Deputy Chief of Mission for the U.S. Embassy in Guyana was present. In a tape recording made immediately prior to the killings, Jones can be heard saying, “Get Dwyer out of here!” [http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=EW24bC_huG8]
At the end Jones had accumulated a wealth estimated to be between $26 million and $2 billion. The government receivership determined a figure of $10 million. Much of this money has unaccountably disappeared.
Joe Holsinger, Congressman Leo Ryan’s attorney and friend, said that a few hours after the murder of Ryan he had heard from a White House official that “We have a CIA report from the scene.” Holsinger wrote, ” The more I investigate the mysteries of Jonestown, the more I am convinced there is something sinister behind it all. There is no doubt in my mind that Jones had very close CIA connections. At the time of the tragedy, the Temple had three boats in the water off Brazil. The boats disappeared shortly afterwards. Remember, Brazil is a country that Jones is very familiar with. He is supposed to have money there. And it is not too far from Guyana. My own feeling is that Jones was ambushed by CIA agents who then disappeared in the boats. But the whole story is so mind-boggling that I’m willing to concede he escaped with them.”
http://www.friendsofliberty.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3541
\\][//
Lane admitted he was providing sanctuary in his own residence to a woman claiming Jones was threatening and earnestly attempting to locate, while at the same time Lane was providing legal services that Jones was paying Lane to provide.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/drinking-the-kool-aid-a-survivor-remembers-jim-jones/248723/
Teri Buford O’Shea fled Jonestown three weeks before all its inhabitants committed suicide. Here, she explains why the tragedy should be a cautionary tale for everyday people.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1454&dat=19781221&id=KbssAAAAIBAJ&sjid=NBMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3436,4908113&hl=en
….He (Lane) said she left Guyana three weeks before the killings and had been living in Lane’s home in Memphis, Tenn.
Let he who is without bias cast the first stone.
\\][//
Willy Whitten
May 13, 2016 at 3:34 pm
“Let he who is without bias cast the first stone.”
I believe Willy that this would prevent anyone here from upturning a stone.
“Lane had to have known . . .”
“. . . a willing accomplice . . .”
” . . . enabled and supported by Mark Lane.”
To quote someone in another thread . . . the above is “characteristic of the weak scholarship and baseless innuendo that comes from much of the [Photon] community.”
Oh. I may have tweaked one word toward the end there.
In Re: Photon > May 12, 2016 Jonestown, cia & Lane.
So are you suggesting the cia did NOT engineer the death of it’s nemesis, Congressman Leo Ryan as he was leaving Jonestown? b/c it’s clear in the footage Dwyer splits off at the last second.
Isn’t it true that what you’re really mad about, is that you know in your heart of hearts that the SBT & the warren commission pronouncements don’t hold up?
Are we all commenting about the same guy? Mark Lane failed my, “would you buy a used car from this person?” test.
https://books.google.com/books?id=g8v4WH-dHbIC&pg=PT526&lpg=PT526&dq=mark+lane+hiding+buford&source=bl&ots=ySsboBBiYD&sig=AvpPy5fxbOOfETHdBwHXeO0Kz6g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi7uNawqNXMAhUMFR4KHU0rApwQ6AEIJDAB#v=onepage&q&f=false
Raven: The Untold Story of the Rev. Jim Jones and His People
By Tim Reiterman
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/11/drinking-the-kool-aid-a-survivor-remembers-jim-jones/248723/
Teri Buford O’Shea fled Jonestown three weeks before all its inhabitants committed suicide. Here, she explains why the tragedy should be a cautionary tale for everyday people.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1454&dat=19781221&id=KbssAAAAIBAJ&sjid=NBMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3436,4908113&hl=en
….He (Lane) said she left Guyana three weeks before the killings and had been living in Lane’s home in Memphis, Tenn.
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/L%20Disk/Lane%20Mark/Lane%20Mark%20Peoples%20Temple%20Massacre/Item%20024.pdf
Tom,
What does this have to do with Lane’s groundbreaking work on the JFK assassination?
\\][//
Willy, what does anything have to do with anything? You agree with what you read or hear, are you more inclined to think highly of the presenter? Did you ever wonder, for example, if Lane’s recorded telephone call to Helen Markham was planned to confuse her?
http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339252/m1/1/
“I reminded Lane, is contingent upon Oswald’s guilt since Shaw is accused of conspiring with Oswald. Lane’s reply was: “I have never maintained that Oswald is innocent. Nowhere in ‘Rush to Judgement,” do I say that Oswald is innocent.”~The Thomas Bethell Diary
It is more complex than that isn’t it Tom?
Because half century later we know that Shaw’s guilt was not contingent on Oswald’s guilt. As Oswald turns out most likely to be an agent infiltrating the conspirators in New Orleans.
I never heard of Lane saying that about Oswald not being innocent. I am surprised to read that.
\\][//
“Willy, what does anything have to do with anything?” This sophomoric remark completely sums up your post.
“Willy, what does anything have to do with anything?”
Steve Cearfoss, that “sophomoric remark”, is not my remark. It was said to me, not by me.
\\][//
I’m friendly Tom Bethell, who kept a diary of his time working with Garrison in New Orleans. 40 years after fact Bethell still conveyed to me that he thought Garrison was crazy.
My view is that Garrison was on to something, but was overwhelmed and got steamrolled. When Ferrie died, Garrison should have dropped the case. I don’t think Shaw was a major or even minor player, even if he was a contact agent for the CIA.
Willy Whitten
May 12, 2016 at 4:41 pm
Tom,
“What does this have to do with Lane’s groundbreaking work on the JFK assassination?”
I believe Willy that it all goes together. If a fellow was dishonest in one chapter of his life he is likely to be dishonest in the next chapter. While not an expert on the assassination as you are, I’d have a hard time believing anything Lane had to say about anything.
Mr. Clarke, Tom and Photon: You are free to criticize Mark Lane to your heart’s content. Every single word of your criticism may even be factually correct. That said, it took a lot of guts in 1963 to stand up and defend Oswald. At least give the man credit where credit is due.
In Re: John Rowell > May 14, 2016 ” … IT TOOK A LOT OF GUTS in 1963 to stand up and defend Oswald.”
Agreed! RIP Mark Lane. Thanks for your hard work on Civil Rights and your pursuit of truth in the assassination’s of our most able up and coming liberal politicians (there is nothing of equal consequence on the political right).
Our entire nation owes a debt of gratitude to Mark Lane.
The film he made in conjunction with his book, “Rush to Judgment,” still holds up well after 50 years. The eyewitness testimony is chilling as are interviews with associates of Jack Ruby…
I agree Russ, Mark Lane was one of the original critics of the nonsensical conclusions of the Warren Report. Brought a lot of information forward, that still needs to be paid attention to.
May he Rest In Peace.
\\][//
Tom S.
May 12, 2016 at 4:00 pm
Are we all commenting about the same guy? Mark Lane failed my, “would you buy a used car from this person?” test.
Amen Tom. The man was a shyster I wouldn’t trust as far as I could throw him. His anti-war book “Conversations With Americans” was totally dishonest. It would have been laughable if the subject had not been so sad.
Mark Lane — Smearing America’s Soldiers – mu
mcadams.posc.mu.edu/smearing.htm
Do you mean, “Tutankhamen” Mr Clarke?
\\][//
RIP
Thanks for all your hard work on Civil Rights and the JFK assassination
Mark Lane devoted his life and most of his career as the first to responsibly and painstakingly examine the facts about President Kennedy’s assassination. “Rush to Judgment” was a full repudiation of the lie that was the Warren Report ordered by LBJ. Lane did not become wealthy from his many books on the subject, his work in the trial of E. Howard Hunt, Anyone who says that is just uninformed. Lane was a great American who refused to be intimidated by the CIA or Hoover. He continued to tell the truth about who murdered the president throughout his life. His work will live on throughout history as the truth continues to come into focus.
(Tom S. notes- The author of this comment is apparently a first time contributor and is not the “Steve” who regularly submits comments. It would eliminate future confusion if “new Steve” alters his ID choice.)
What a crock. Steve is apparently unaware of how much Lane picked up from the suckers who bought ” Rush to Judgement” and kept it on the Best Seller list for months, nor how much he got for the screenplay of “Executive Action” nor the checks he got for his sequel rehash books. It was millions. Even after paying off two ex-wives he still ended up living in the millionaires’ Charlottesville neighborhood of Bellair where the only African-American or Latino faces to be seen are doing domestic work in the million dollar homes or tending to the gardens of the wealthy. How much did he take out of the People’s Temple-both before and after Jonestown?
How much did his law firm generate?
As they said about the Hawaiian missionaries -he came to do good and he did very well.
Geez Photon. Nobody said the guy was a saint. (I mean to this point. I haven’t read all the comments yet.)He worked for his money. He sold a “product” that people were interested in. That “product” was that we were not told the truth. Do you really think that he didn’t believe any of what he was selling? Are you opposed to capitalism?
He did get mixed up with Jim Jones and that hurt his credibility.
I’m sure that someone who is as well read as you seem to be
is aware of those whacky conspiracy theories about
Mr. Jones involvement with The Company and mind
control stuff.
One of the things that irked me about Lane was that his
party loyalty seemed to get in the way of his conclusions. Here was this vast cover up by a commission appointed by LBJ but he claimed he didn’t think LBJ was involved. I took that to mean that he didn’t think LBJ was in involved in or knowledgeable about the cover up that Lane claimed (some would say proved) happened.
I digressed. When someone makes money by doing something it doesn’t mean they aren’t good at it. It usually means quite the opposite. Lane was good at pointing out the many inconsistencies, avoidances, and questions not answered by the Warren Commission. Most of the people you call “suckers” were interested in what he had to say. I think he did some good work and I don’t begrudge that he made some money off of it but I’m a capitalistso I think it’s nice to be good at something, make some money doing it, and live in a nice house in a nice nieghborhood. That’s why I’m glad I don’t live in Cuba.
No Brian, many here have exactly claimed that he was , in so many words. How else can others simply dismiss his involvement in the deaths of Leo Ryan and 900 others, including scores of innocent children without appealing to his “better nature”? Of course he didn’t force them to drink the Flavor-Aid, but his influence on Jones stimulated that maniac’s paranoia and may have been the contributing factor in the development of the White Night scenario.
Lane was always in it for the money, to the point of going after anybody else he saw as a threat to his ” rice bowl “- ergo the contempt of many noted CT advocates-particularly Harold Weisberg, who never had the financial savvy of most CT authors but could see through many of the charlatans and the more ridiculous claims. His attempt to get on the Garrison bandwagon was a blatant effort to stay relevant and keep the revenue stream coming in.
I don’t begrudge anybody making on honest living. I do begrudge people who do so by publishing lies,make money off of the dead- and becoming the story instead of reporting it.