06-06-2016, 05:14 PM
The documentation is from Leary's Flashbacks?
LOL :
:
This is exactly what I mean. Doyle is shameless on this. As he has been from the beginning.
I shouldn't even have to say this but I will. When you are measuring evidence in a scholarly way you don't use a 20 year later source that is self-reinforcing. Especially when the guy has credibility problems to begin with. This is like Tony Summers buying into Slatzer on his alleged affair and three day marriage with Marilyn Monroe. That blew up in his face. But it was a part of the industry.
As Leary's biographer wrote, Leary was going to use anything to punch up his book--Mary M, Marilyn Monroe etc. And he succeeded. Because he got the gig with Liddy. And they went on their clown tour after.
What you want is something independent that occurred in the meantime. I couldn't find anything. As an historian, the last source I would use is Flashbacks.
As per the paper, my God did you not read what I wrote about Russo?
This is why I don't like arguing with Doyle about this subject. Because he has so little respect for rules of evidence--or even commons sense. As others have pointed out here, like Lauren, like Walter Bowart, its strongly suspected that Leary was a CIA asset. He was then cut loose. And he then became a complete and total opportunist. What with JFK making his turn toward peace because of his drugs via Mary. When, in fact, Kennedy had already been on this angle since 1951 and his meeting with Gullion.
And he then started asserting it in the White House, not in 1963, but immediately in 1961 with the Congo crisis. (Geez was Leary there at those meetings four days after Kennedy was inaugurated passing around his pills? Can't you just see Dean Rusk on acid?)
The enemy of a pernicious mythology is knowledge and skepticism. Janney had neither.
LOL :
:This is exactly what I mean. Doyle is shameless on this. As he has been from the beginning.
I shouldn't even have to say this but I will. When you are measuring evidence in a scholarly way you don't use a 20 year later source that is self-reinforcing. Especially when the guy has credibility problems to begin with. This is like Tony Summers buying into Slatzer on his alleged affair and three day marriage with Marilyn Monroe. That blew up in his face. But it was a part of the industry.
As Leary's biographer wrote, Leary was going to use anything to punch up his book--Mary M, Marilyn Monroe etc. And he succeeded. Because he got the gig with Liddy. And they went on their clown tour after.
What you want is something independent that occurred in the meantime. I couldn't find anything. As an historian, the last source I would use is Flashbacks.
As per the paper, my God did you not read what I wrote about Russo?
This is why I don't like arguing with Doyle about this subject. Because he has so little respect for rules of evidence--or even commons sense. As others have pointed out here, like Lauren, like Walter Bowart, its strongly suspected that Leary was a CIA asset. He was then cut loose. And he then became a complete and total opportunist. What with JFK making his turn toward peace because of his drugs via Mary. When, in fact, Kennedy had already been on this angle since 1951 and his meeting with Gullion.
And he then started asserting it in the White House, not in 1963, but immediately in 1961 with the Congo crisis. (Geez was Leary there at those meetings four days after Kennedy was inaugurated passing around his pills? Can't you just see Dean Rusk on acid?)
The enemy of a pernicious mythology is knowledge and skepticism. Janney had neither.