General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: JFK Conference: Mark Lane Addressed the Secret Government’s Role in the Assassination [View all]zappaman
(20,606 posts)I guess that is something to be proud of?
"His publishers promote the book by proclaiming Lane had successfully persuaded a jury that the CIA killed Kennedy. On the inside book flap they loudly state, Mark Lane has tried the only case in the history of America . . . in which jurors concluded that the CIA killed President Kennedy. In fact, the jury concluded nothing of the sort."
--
In support of his allegations against Hunt, Lane makes reference to an alleged confession. The Huntcircumstances of St John Hunts interview with his father are fraught with problems, not least the fact E. Howard Hunt was heavily medicated at the time he confessed, but Lane does not disclose this to his readers. Hunts memoirs were published posthumously and he vehemently denies any involvement in the JFK assassination. Hunt did . . . not believe the CIA had anything to do with JFKs death. He even discloses that Lanes irresponsible accusations caused his family great suffering. Additionally, Hunts confession is nothing more than his own guesswork and ruminations as to who killed JFK. He may even have used this opportunity to vent his spleen over those in government who did not give him any support after he was indicted in the Watergate affair.[19]
--
In the end the sumptuous appeal of Lanes book, the deliberate demonization of a federal agency without any real proof, doesnt need to make sense. His work nourishes the appetite of a ready-made audience eager for stories that will prop up a belief system they are not willing to abandon. So the question remainswill Lanes recitation of decades-old lies and myths about the assassination and alleged CIA responsibility provide ready-made paranoiacs with a larger arsenal of imagery and rumor? The answer to that is assuredly yes."
http://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2012/05/lane.html
Yep.