Plausible Denial

Rating:
Summary: Plausible Denial
Review: As Iran-Contra testimony revealed, Bush (George Sr.) routinely keeps a diary of PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY, with the same skill employed by a crooked accountant ( Enron of Houston) who maintains two sets of corporate book, one of them cooked.
When Lee Harvery Oswald returned to the US from the Soviet Union he settled in Texas. He was befriended by a wealthy white Russian oil man, named George de Mohenschildt--who was the CIA officer who directed Oswald's actions evidence suggests. de Mohenschildt's address book cantained this entry:[George H.W.(poppy) 1412 Ohio also Zapata Petroleum Midland.] "Operation Zapata" was the secret name of the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba planned by the CIA in 1961. Two of the ships were named "Barbara" and "Houston" George and Barbara Bushes home town and location of Zapata Oil. [read the exact wording on pages 330-333]
If George Sr., aka Poppy, was a man of integrity, and not covering-up, why didn't he investigate the JFK assasination as past--maybe still-- head of the CIA and as US President for 4 years in the 1980's or ask his son, George Jr. serving as President, to clear Texas and the Bush name?

Rating:
Summary: Its truth grips you from beginning to end!
Review: At 2 a.m. this morning I finished reading this book, two days after starting it. Its detailed layout explained the facts and how they played out by the characters that were involved.

I had previously read Lane's book "Rush To Justice", many years ago, and because of it, I began to collect everything I could find regarding the JFK assassination. But somehow, I had missed "Plausible Denial" until I picked it up at a library.

Lane's presentation is phenomenally convincing. The incredibly, meticulous manner in which he explains how he legally exposed the roles that the key people played in the murder plot is astounding.

As he tells the story, the reader is able to analyze the characteristics of many persons who were in the background of E. Howard Hunt's involvement in arranging JFK's assassination for the CIA and higherups in this country.

The shocking reality that the book presents is that we have a government that is invisibly run by wealthy industrial and financial persons, who control the intelligence agencies for their benefit and order them to illegally and clandestinely remove leaders, worldwide, who try to free their people from U.S. control.

If it were not for courageous work by men like Mark Lane, who risk their lives to expose the secrets and tell the truth, life for Americans and others would be hopeless, especially for the young. This book should be in every school and home. It is a must read!!

Rating:
Summary: If only . . .
Review: Fascinating look at the personalities behind the smoky hall of mirrors known as the Central Intelligence Agency. Lane does a wonderful job of bringing these "spooky" (excuse the pun) figures down to earth. I love the anecdote where one such indivdidual gets righteously insulted at being called a "spy." Spies work FOR him, the gentleman claimed, but he himself was no spy!

In any case, it would be wonderful if we could say that Lane solved the murder case in this book. But there are problems. First of all, his attempt to find a motive on the part of the Agency is weak. To see this agency acting as a single unit with a unified objective at the time is oversimplified and probably wrong. There were low-level individuals operating out of the range of their superiors, and this is what ought to have been investigated more closely when the case had warmer leads than it does today. Secondly, and more importantly, Lane bases his solution on the testimony of a single witness. Granted, she has enormous credibility, but I'm not sure it would have been enough to have convicted Hunt of conspiracy at a criminal trial. For the record, though, I tended, like the jury, to believe the witness. Lane found the most plausible scenario describing what happened on the day before the murder. To me, though, it does not suggest that an entire government agency plotted a murder, but suggests a smaller, more localized act of vengeance by small bands of what we would now call terrorists. These small groups had full access to the government agency, and if Lane's witness told the truth, they used their access to accomplish their goal. When you think about it, such a "conspiracy" needn't have been all that "vast" or even very complex.

They've sure done a lousy job of covering it up over the years, haven't they!

Rating:
Summary: At last, a conspiracy theory that names names!
Review: For years, we have heard the reasons why JFK was assassinated by a faction or factions of the government. Influential people have posed questions about the plot or plots to cover up the truth about his death. Mark Lane's riviting explanation of the only trial linked to the JFK murder and it's subsequent subplots is a must read for any assassination buff. One of the base literatures for the Oliver Stone movie "JFK," the book footnotes the investigation by New Orlean's District Attorney Jim Garrison into the alledged conspiracy by tycoon Clay Shaw along with David Ferry, Lee Harvey Oswald and others. It also details the depositions of key government secret operatives, many of which play a later roll in United States history. Men like George Bush, G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt. Once I started reading, I couldn't put the book down, and it made me wonder would another anti-big government/anti-establishment leader in this country meet with the same fate?

Rating:
Summary: The CIA exposed--plain and simple
Review: Lane was the first to open up criticism of the Warren Report with his "Rush to Judgment". Almost three decades later, he once again brings President Kennedy's assassination cover-up in full view, and this time he reveals the culprit behind the killing.

After reading this, there was no doubt in my mind that the CIA had masterminded the killing of JFK, and then carried out the cover-up. They lied under oath, pressured the media, encouraged censorship, presented false evidence, threatened and killed witnesses and potential stool pigeons--it's all right here.

While Lane's work is without question some of the best detective work in the 20th century, he was personally involved with much of the cover-up and experienced persecution as a result of his views. Unlike in his "Rush to Judgment", he has a tendancy to take much of this personal, and it shows. Throughout the book, Lane blows his own horn and vehemently attacks Earl Warren, Howard Hunt, and the like. The evidence might speak for itself, but I can see people being put off by Lane's unproffessional attacks.

Perhaps the most chilling conclusion one gets out of "Plausible Denile" and "Rush to Judgment" are not that the CIA conspired to kill a President, but that they conspired to frame and innocent, unsuspecting citizen for the crime.

Rating:
Summary: Plausible Denial
Review: Lane, in this book, continues his tradition of carefully concealing from his readers any information that might undermine his thesis. He portrays Hunt as having only two alibi witnesses at the trial, and denigrates these because they were CIA employees. But in fact there were three CIA employees who testified at the trial, and three witnesses (two of Hunt's children and a domestic) who swore to the Rockefeller Commission that Hunt was in the Washington area (and not in Dallas) on the day of the assassination. Lane presents Marita Lorenz as a credible witness implicating Hunt as "paymaster" of the plotters. But he conceals the fact that Lorenz claimed that Lee Oswald was among the conspirators in a "caravan" that drove from Miami to Dallas shortly before the assassination. He also conceals Lorenz' claim to have seen Oswald participating in training for the Bay of Pigs invasion -- at a time when Oswald was in the Soviet Union. Finally, Lane insists that he proved to the jury's satisfaction that Hunt was an assassination conspirator. He quotes the single juror who came to that conclusion, but entirely fails to mention at least three other jurors who insisted to the press that the verdict in fact turned on whether the Liberty Lobby acted out of "malice" toward Hunt, as opposed to merely shoddy journalism.

Anybody who wants to believe Lane's conspiracy theory and who is willing to accept his account unquestioningly will be convinced by this book. Those inclined to be critical or to seek independent sources will be unimpressed. For details, see:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/denial.htm

Rating:
Summary: "Due Process" in the Murder of JFK
Review: Mark Lane has done the unthinkable. That's right, he's taken perhaps the most noticeable step in solving the JFK murder case. This book details his trial encounter with E. Howard Hunt, in the famous but not publicized trial - Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby 2.

By clever investigating and excellent lawyer tactics, Lane gets incredible testimony from people who had some parts in the JFK case. Such ones are Marita Lorenz, with her disturbingly believable account of what took place the day before the death of JFK. She pretty much indicts Howard Hunt for what he says he had no part of.

The book is written extremely well, with an excellent forward by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty. Throughout the book Lane shows you key points to solving the case before him. He pretty much did little with regards the actual court case, once he was given permission to persue Hunt for reasons pertaining to JFK. Lane somehow gets great testimony from people such as Richard Helms, and others high up there. Throughout the entire time he's investigating things, he's blocked in many areas from people who don't want to give out info. that deals with case. Remind you of anyone else...(Jim Garrison).

You will thoroughly enjoy this amazing book. I'm very surprised more people aren't aware of it, and the trial it coincides with. Goes to show the gov't hard at work to prevent the truth from surfacing.

Enjoy it!

Rating:
Summary: RIPS APART THE LONE GUNMAN THEORY
Review: Mark Lane has done the unthinkable. That's right, he's taken perhaps the most noticeable step in solving the JFK murder case. This book details his trial encounter with E. Howard Hunt, in the famous but not publicized trial - Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby 2.

By clever investigating and excellent lawyer tactics, Lane gets incredible testimony from people who had some parts in the JFK case. Such ones are Marita Lorenz, with her disturbingly believable account of what took place the day before the death of JFK. She pretty much indicts Howard Hunt for what he says he had no part of.

The book is written extremely well, with an excellent forward by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty. Throughout the book Lane shows you key points to solving the case before him. He pretty much did little with regards the actual court case, once he was given permission to persue Hunt for reasons pertaining to JFK. Lane somehow gets great testimony from people such as Richard Helms, and others high up there. Throughout the entire time he's investigating things, he's blocked in many areas from people who don't want to give out info. that deals with case. Remind you of anyone else...(Jim Garrison).

You will thoroughly enjoy this amazing book. I'm very surprised more people aren't aware of it, and the trial it coincides with. Goes to show the gov't hard at work to prevent the truth from surfacing.

Enjoy it!

Rating:
Summary: Is What's True In A Court Of Law *Really* True?
Review: The truth of what really happened re: the murder of J.F.K. is remarkably complex. Mark Lane tries to simplify it somewhat in this book, with some likely and inevitable distortions. This is, however, one of the more creditable examinations of the assassination, and it's one you *should* read, if you're interested in the subject. The other reviewers have given good descriptions of the basic contents. There are also a couple of truly fascinating items, which I'll point out below.

One must always remember, I think, that all these events took place *before* the Freedom of Information Act. If, at times, the characters involved seem utterly stupid in thinking no one would ever find out what they did...well, in those days, the idea that anyone ever *would* find out was beyond imagination. History has also shown that the CIA has made more than a few unlikely alliances in pursuing their "worthy" goals. In this case, the goal was anti-Castro, and an alliance with organized crime seems not only a possibly, but rather likely...don't you think? It's happened since, too. So, when Mark Lane asks, "Was the CIA involved in the assassination of JFK?"...I have to ask in reply, "Why is that such a far-fetched idea?" You might want to take a look at Don DeLillo's LIBRA for a reasonable depiction of just how the CIA might have been involved, and why.

One of the more interesting bits in this book is Lane's record of the deposition of Castro's girlfriend at the time, Marita Lorenz. She describes an interesting senario of an aborted assassination "attempt" in Miami, and then an all-night drive by several cars to Dallas, where the historical events took place. Again, these events are eerily repeated in DeLillo's LIBRA (without Lorenz, and minus one car). The idea was, it is alleged, that the original idea was to have a *failed* assassination attempt, hoping to turn the country against Cuba, and to overthrow Castro. If this is in any way accurate, boy did that plan go wrong!

Most fascinating of all, Lane includes some information about the CIA's Operation Zapata (AKA The Bay Of Pigs). Lane presents some fascinating evidence that former president George Bush was, in fact, *the* operative in charge of that mission (something the CIA has always denied officially). Consider this, says Lane: Bush was involved in Zapata Petroleum in Texas, and Zapata Off Shore Co. (he was the CEO from 1956 to 1964). And the names of the two boats the CIA used? "Barbara" and "Houston."

What we see in all of this is how intensely focused everything was on Cuba back then. The USA wanted communism out. American business and organized crime wanted their money and property back. It seems likely to me that they were all willing to do most anything and everything to reach that goal. But, were they willing to go so far as this (and other books) suggest? I'm sure each of us will have our own opinion on that.

Rating:
Summary: "Due Process" in the Murder of JFK
Review: This seminal book, not the Warren Commission, should be the jumping off point for any discussion of the murder of JFK.
The Warren Commission never extended to the murdered Oswald the right to defend his reputation by cross examining witnesses, calling witnesses and otherwise having his day in court. In a civil libel case, E. Howard Hunt Vs. The Liberty Lobby (1985) former CIA man, (and convicted Watergate felon) E. Howard Hunt had these traditional legal rights. The issue at stake was whether he had been paymaster of the JFK asassination for the CIA in Dalles. This is a book about a real trial. Lane establishes means , motive, and opportunity, demolishes Hunt's allibi, and places him at the scene with credible eyewitness testimony. Most damaging in my mind was the evidence that Hunt and CIA planted faked evidence to falsely implicate JFK in the murder of South Vietnamese President Diem. The Miami jury overturned a $650,000 libel award by a lower court, and opined that criminal prosecution of Hunt and 5 other ex-CIA operatives was called for. The national media ran from this verdict like it was a live bomb. Few Americans realize that it is a legally true statement that "Hunt and CIA murdered JFK". A brave and brilliant book.