|
|
(Larger Image)
|
Plausible Denial
by Mark Lane
Product Group: Book
Publisher: Thunder's Mouth Pr (1991-12-01)
ISBN: 1560250003
EAN: 9781560250005
Dewy Decimal #: 973.922092
Hardcover: 393 pages
Edition: 1st
SKU: 08030429
Condition: Very Good Very Good
Comments: Hardback First Edition, First Printing 1991. very good condition with no markings. Dust jacket in very good condition with minor shelf wear. Tight binding and clear crisp text. Very nice book.
|
Editorial Reviews
|
Product Description
The assassination of President Kennedy in 1963 continues to be shrouded in mystery and controversy. Now, for the first time in almost thirty years, explosive new evidence reveals much about the CIA's involvement in an event that devastated the entire nation and irrevocably altered the course of history. In "Plausible Denial," Mark Lane makes startling revelations about the CIA's involvement in a plot to murder the president.
|
Customer Reviews
|
The Truth Shall set you Free
Rating  (4)
Date: 2009-01-05
This is an excellent book on the JFK murder and story of how the legal system works when you have a good lawyer. The late E. Howard Hunt sued the Spotlight newspaper over articles concerning his involvement in the JFK assination and almost bankrupted it.
Mark Lane, an early critic of the Warren Commission, represented the Spotlight, although Lane is Jewish and the Spotlight was known for its veiled anti-semitism. He won in court, proving Hunt to be a liar if not the Spotlight the paragon of journalistic virtue.
This is a great book for running down the history of the era, how Gerald Ford was a conduit for info from the Warren Commission to the FBI during the hearings, how JFK fired Allen Dulles over the Bay of Pigs fiasco and was later appointed to the Warren Commission, and how JFK was determined to pull us out of Vietnam before his death.
The book contains a forward by Col. Fletcher Proudy, the Col. "X" of the film JFK, the man who probably knew more about the JFK murder than anyone who never told.
It is well worth reading and retaining on your bookcase. Well written, down to earth, and lead pipe factual. Great book.
|
|
The Smoking Gun of the JFK Assassination
Rating  (5)
Date: 2008-06-18
This chillingly true, first hand account of a court case in Florida (suppressed by the corporate state's propaganda arm-mainstream media) is the smoking gun that all but solves the JFK assassination. The court case is a libel suit by CIA agent E. Howard Hunt against a magazine that published another CIA's allegation that E. Howard Hunt was in Dallas on the Day of JFK's murder. Since there were also incriminating pictures to accompany the allegation, E.Howard Hunt thought it best to file suit and make the magazine proove he was in Dallas on the day JFK was shot. They did. E. Howard Hunt lost one of the most famous court cases in US history and the people (proles) outside of United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida knew nothing about it. The author of this book, MARK LANE, was the attorney for the winning defense. His documented evidence is superb! It just so happens that E. Howard Hunt died in January of 2008. Left behind was a tape offerring up some names responsible for the assassination. To hear the tape, go to Wikipedia and search for E. Howard Hunt. But I'm sure it's all just another...conspiracy...
|
|
Jury finds CIA involved in JFK assassination
Rating (5)
Date: 2007-11-23
Lane's Plausible Denial is an account of his defense of the Spotlight newspaper and the author of an article, Victor Marchetti, implicating E. Howard Hunt in the assassination of JFK. Hunt accused Spotlight of libel, and Lane defended the article's truthfulness. He proved this in court, and the jury accepted that the CIA was responsible for JFK's assassination.
You've probably never heard of this book, or of the trial. Why is that? First of all, there was a media blackout, and second, most publisher's refused to take the book. This is not really that strange after you actually read the book. Lane cites documents showing the CIA's heavy handed work at defaming American citizens via its agents in the media.
Lane cites testimony by various CIA officials (e.g. Richard Helms) admitting that Frank Sturgis and Clay Shaw were CIA assets. The most damning testimony is Marita Lorenz (mother of Fidel Castro's son, and CIA agent), who places both Sturgis and Hunt in Dallas on Nov. 21, 1963, preparing for a big operation.
The book is worth reading simply for the astonishment you will experience when reading the testimony of these CIA spooks. Their lies are so transparent, and Lane exposes their duplicity with such skill, that entertainment is guaranteed.
My favourite moments: Hunt swearing that he never engaged in blackmail, and yet admitting that he threatened Nixon that unless he was paid, he would reveal illegal operations in addition to Watergate; Hunt asserting that Marchetti's article caused him great stress because he had to convince his children that he was not in Dallas during the assassination, and then claiming that he was with them the day of the assassination (they were his only non-CIA witnesses to this fact, and yet none of them testified).
Thank you, Mark Lane, for having a conscience, and the courage stand up for the truth!
|
|
Plausible Denial:
Rating (5)
Date: 2006-10-11
8 out of 8 customers found this reveiw helpful
I came to know Mark Lane very intimately over a period of ten years - where we shared, exchanged, many long hours of intense discussion on the JFK and MLK assassinations.
He captivated me with intricate details of the various events and supportive data sources. Through him - I relived these very complexed parts of American History as he awakened me to a darker deeper side of political shennanigans - not too unlike those which continued to take place in my own country.
This very calm ... quiet man - often barely audible is one of the five most thought provoking people in my personal life. Yes, Mark Lane makes you think - without bludgeoning one over the head with senseless rhetoric or inflamatory diatribes.
I recall how Oliver Stone borrowed Plausible Denial in preparation for his movie of the JFK Assassination - only to return it many months later (having discarded it as unhelpful) and yet using direct quotes from the book in the actual movie.
This seems to be the way of naysayers ... their modus operandi - to negate those with whom they disagree by plagarising them.
Is this then not the highest form of flattery?
I highly recommend anyone with an independent mind to read Plausible Denial - for it will open your mind to a lot more critical thinking - by questioning rushed decisions by those in power - whether politically, the private sector or public life.
|
|
Does Lane know what he's talking about ????????
Rating (5)
Date: 2006-08-30
15 out of 16 customers found this reveiw helpful
Witness the two articles below, one written about six weeks before the assassination:
The New York Times
October 3, 1963 p. 34
The Intra-Administration
War in Vietnam
By Arthur Krock
... One reporter in this category is Richard Starnes of the Scripps-Howard newspapers. Today, under a Saigon dateline, he related that, "according to a high United States source here, twice the C.I.A. flatly refused to carry out instructions from Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge . . . [and] in one instance frustrated a plan of action Mr. Lodge brought from Washington because the agency disagreed with it." Among the views attributed to United States officials on the scene, including one described as a "very high American official . . . who has spent much of his life in the service of democracy . . . are the following:
The C.I.A.'s growth was "likened to a malignancy" which the "very high official was not sure even the White House could control . . . any longer." "If the United States ever experiences [an attempt at a coup to overthrow the Government] it will come from the C.I.A. and not the Pentagon." The agency "represents a tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone."
... The C.I.A. may be guilty as charged. Since it cannot, or at any rate will not, openly defend its record in Vietnam, or defend it by the same confidential press "briefings" employed by its critics, the public is not in a position to judge. Nor is this department, which sought and failed to get even the outlines of the agency's case in rebuttal. But Mr. Kennedy will have to make a judgment if the spectacle of war within the Executive branch is to be ended and the effective functioning of the C.I.A. preserved. And when he makes this judgment, hopefully he also will make it public, as well as the appraisal of fault on which it is based.
______________________________________________________________
... and one written exactly four weeks after the assassination by former President Harry S. Truman, no less:
The Washington Post
December 22, 1963 - page A11
Harry Truman Writes:
Limit CIA Role To Intelligence
By Harry S Truman
INDEPENDENCE, MO., Dec. 21 -- I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency--CIA. At least, I would like to submit here the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency during my Administration, what I expected it to do and how it was to operate as an arm of the President.
I think it is fairly obvious that by and large a President's performance in office is as effective as the information he has and the information he gets ...
... But their (C.I.A.'s) collective information reached the President all too frequently in conflicting conclusions. At times, the intelligence reports tended to be slanted to conform to established positions of a given department. This becomes confusing and what's worse, such intelligence is of little use to a President in reaching the right decisions.
... For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations ... But there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special field--and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.
We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.
______________________________________________________________
YOU BE THE JUDGE!
|
|
|
|
|