Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Newman's Into the Storm  (Read 7423 times)

Online W. Tracy Parnell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
    • W. Tracy Parnell Debunking JFK Conspiracy Theories
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2019, 03:28:43 AM »
Advertisement
What "conspiracy theories" have you debunked?


"Harvey & Lee" although I had quite a bit of help with that.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2019, 03:28:43 AM »


Offline Tom Scully

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2019, 04:33:46 AM »
« Last Edit: April 23, 2019, 04:41:26 AM by Tom Scully »

Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1094
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2019, 10:44:27 PM »

"Harvey & Lee" although I had quite a bit of help with that.

What part of "Harvey & Lee"?  The notion of two Oswalds goes back long before John Armstrong's research. Furthermore, you're claim was in the plural and this would be just one.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2019, 10:44:27 PM »


Online W. Tracy Parnell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
    • W. Tracy Parnell Debunking JFK Conspiracy Theories
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2019, 11:41:09 PM »
What part of "Harvey & Lee"?  The notion of two Oswalds goes back long before John Armstrong's research. Furthermore, you're claim was in the plural and this would be just one.


The exhumation of LHO in 1981 debunked the 2 Oswald theory of Michael Eddowes. It also debunked H&L before it was even devised. I have over twenty articles that help to debunk minor theories associated with H&L. But you don't need to ask me about this here (unless you are just trying to start something), you can read the articles and judge my work for yourself. Thanks for your interest.

Online W. Tracy Parnell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
    • W. Tracy Parnell Debunking JFK Conspiracy Theories
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2019, 08:41:49 PM »
Part 3 of my review of Newman's book looks at Veciana's "lost" testimony, Veciana and the Army and Zabala's Revelation.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2019/04/into-storm-part-3.html

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2019, 08:41:49 PM »


Offline Mark A. Oblazney

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2019, 12:15:55 PM »
Part 3 of my review of Newman's book looks at Veciana's "lost" testimony, Veciana and the Army and Zabala's Revelation.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2019/04/into-storm-part-3.html

Well said, sir+

Online W. Tracy Parnell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
    • W. Tracy Parnell Debunking JFK Conspiracy Theories
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2019, 02:08:30 PM »
Well said, sir+


Thanks very much for your interest Mark.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2019, 02:08:30 PM »


Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: Newman's Into the Storm
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2019, 09:14:17 PM »
Part 3 of my review of Newman's book looks at Veciana's "lost" testimony, Veciana and the Army and Zabala's Revelation.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2019/04/into-storm-part-3.html
Another solid piece. Thanks Tracy.

As you pointed out, Newman shows that Veciana has been curiously reluctant to discuss his contacts/relationship with the US Army during this period in question. Except for that one mention in (I believe) Fonzi's book, he never discusses it. It's nowhere in his book. Very odd.

It seems pretty clear that Veciana simply didn't want to work with the CIA because he'd have to give up too much control over his group to the US. No more of those attacks on Soviet ships. And the CIA wasn't going to work with his group unless they had greater control over it. So the relationship was a no-go from the start. I think after the missile crisis in particular that the CIA simply wasn't going to let some of these groups have a free rein. Certainly not to allow them to attack foreign owned ships in Cuban harbors.

At this point, I think we can fundamentally dismiss anything Veciana says. His credibility is just shot.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2019, 01:07:35 AM by Steve M. Galbraith »