The Last Train from Hiroshima


David Brennan

Member
Feb 24, 2010
1
1
73
My name is David Brennan and, in the wake of the revelations about 'The Last Train from Hiroshima', I'm doing research about Pellegrino's professional work.

I would be tremendously appreciative if anybody who has participated in the numerous threads about 'Ghosts of the Titanic' could please contact me at your earliest convenience.

If anybody could refer me to a professional historian or well-regarded author, I would be hugely grateful, because I'm working on something of a deadline. You can reach me at:

David[at]TactilePortraits[dot]com.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Jun 10, 1999
1,284
21
313
According to the book review for "The Last Train from Hiroshima" of 1 March PEOPLE mag., James Cameron has already bought the film rights!

BTW, Andrew Abrahams gave the book three & 1/2 stars.

Michael Cundiff
NV, USA
 
Jun 4, 2000
1,286
6
313
Cripes. Colour me confused. That books forum does include coverage of the Charles Fuoco controversy through a thread with that title pinned at the top of the Charles Pellegrino section, including a post by Charles Pellegrino - and would seem to predate Paul's post. I'm obviously missing something here, so please be gentle.

Reading the blog and news coverage, I still believe there's a significant difference between an author being mislead by a subject and wilful misrepresentation and deliberate fraud on the author's part.

In this, I'm also thinking of some of the books lauded in Titanic circles that could've done with more fact checking and/or include source material from 'survivors' who weren't on board at all. This includes much loved and popular works by Don Lynch (the incorrect identification of nursemaid Alice Cleaver as a child murderer) and Walter Lord (Walter Belford's account) that are generally regarded as musts for any Titanic library. Both of these examples are drawn from books that I wouldn't do without.
 

Paul Lee

Member
Aug 11, 2003
2,235
31
243
Theres a reproduction of "Her Name, Titanic" on the Cameron blogpage.

Regarding Don Lynch's "Titanic - An Illustrated History" there are at least three errors in it, two of which should have been picked up on at the time. The first is about the so-called 'destruction' of the crows nest which is just plain anti-salvage propaganda, the other is that distress rockets were supposed to have been red (in fact the whole section on "The Third Ship" is nonsense). The third, which Don couldn't have known about until I found out about it last year, was that the Bank of England records do not show a cargo of riches on board the Titanic. Lets hope these errors are corrected in future editions.

Paul
 

Bob Godfrey

Member
Nov 22, 2002
6,043
107
333
UK
Charlie will perhaps be comforted by the words (allegedly) spoken with spot-on period authenticity by teenaged colleen Kathy Gilnagh as she watched the Titanic departing beneath the waves almost as fast as a researcher's credibility: "Don't you just hate when that happens?"
 

Tim Brandsoy

Member
Feb 19, 2002
165
2
183
It looks like Charlie P. is getting his recompense. The New York Times is against him too and now "The publisher 'will issue full credit to wholesalers and retailers who wish to return the book. Consumers who seek a refund should return to the retailer from whom they purchased the book.'"

This can't be good.


He doesn't seem to think too well of this site. He doesn't take criticism well. But his acolytes on his site defend him without question.

Re: Encyclopedia Titanica: *ALERT*
by Charlie P. » Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:26 am

Recent re-examination shows that nothing much has changed over there, and I will not be restoring Encyclopedia Titanica as a link from my website. It is my no stretch of the imagination a discussion group or a research group. When one of their bloggers, while accusing me now of falsifying passenger diaries for Walter Lord (while of course promoting his own book about the Titanic), any evidence backed response from me was blocked from publication. Mr. Titanic and others who came to my defense were also censored. A pity, that what was once a valuable archive has descended to depths lower than rusticlized slime beds.

I have nothing against Mr. Pellegrino, other than having the misfortune of having read his fiction that masquerades as fact.
 
Jun 4, 2000
1,286
6
313
How sad.

To me that paragraph reads as though it's about things other than ET, or a conflation of things other and ET. I had no idea ET had bloggers. That he's claiming to have been 'blocked from publication' is of concern as a number of posts and even articles here contain much that is contested and still open to interpretation depending on your point of view.

And, at the risk of being excommunicated, I have enjoyed reading some of his books.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,661
871
563
Easley South Carolina
>>...any evidence backed response from me was blocked from publication.<<

The problem with that statement is that I've seen no evidence that Dr. Pellegrino was ever a member of ET and if he ever was...(I might have missed it)...I've not seen even so much as a single post from the man.

The other problem with that is that posts made by members appear instantly, and without any vetting or review from the moderators or the Site Admin. Posts in any event are not deleted or barred from publication merely because they are controversial. If they were, the Californian threads as well as the threads which discuss the notorious "Ship Switch" theory simply wouldn't exist.

If Dr. Pellegrino were to subscribe to the forum, I can't think of any reason why he wouldn't be welcome so long as he abides by the rules of the forum. He would have to fight his own battles in any of the debates and deal with both agreements and disagreements, but the same applies to the rest of us.

Make of that what you will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Inger Sheil

Member
Feb 9, 1999
5,343
67
398
During my period as a moderator, I was unaware of any attempt by Pellegrino to join or post any material to this site. Personally, I would have welcomed the opportunity to engage in a discussion with him, as there are many questions I would have liked to have asked him (starting with his source for Lightoller's alleged thoughts as the ship went down, which have their origins neither in Lightoller's memoirs nor in any interview or newspaper article with the 2nd officer that I've ever seen).

I have a feeling I know to whom he refers in statement, but if correct, that ET member isn't a blogger and was never in a position to "block" anything Pelligrino wished to post here.

Given that Phil has posted two sides of a contentious issue before in the research section - even an ongoing debate - I am very skeptical indeed of claims that any attempt was made to censor a response here.

And what of claims that others were "censored"? The only reason for removing posts are if they are abusive or libellous. There are plenty of contentious discussions here, with people taking different positions. If you've got the facts to back it up, bring them to the table. But don't expect an opinion to go unchallenged - it happens to all of us.
 
Jul 9, 2000
58,661
871
563
Easley South Carolina
>>But don't expect an opinion to go unchallenged - it happens to all of us.<<

Exactly right!

Unfortunately, it appears that some individuals conflate and confuse being challanged with being censored, when in fact all that happens is that they've been rebutted by an opposing view. This happens even when the post they claim is being censored is sitting there...untouched...right above the reply which presents the opposing view.

Personally, I've been extremely reluctant to edit or remove posts to the point where I've actually found myself in some hot water for not doing so. I'm not the only moderator past or present who has preferred restraint either. When I do give something the axe, it's never done lightly, and never because I simply disagreed with somebody, but always for a really grotesque forum rules infraction.
 

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,138
489
158
16
Maryland, USA
I didn't find this, but here's a fascinating summary of how the wheels are finally coming off the Pellegrino bandwagon:


The piece is written by David Brennan (see above posts).

E-T even gets a mention!
Again, mistakes happen. He is not responsible for a man lying and fabricating stories, that is solely the trickster’s responsibility. NY Times also originally gave this book an outstanding review
 
Nov 14, 2005
2,248
1,139
308
Again, mistakes happen. He is not responsible for a man lying and fabricating stories, that is solely the trickster’s responsibility. NY Times also originally gave this book an outstanding review
As i said before I've only read excerpts of his works so will reserve judgment on his credibility. I've pointed out what others have said to others when they reference him that they might be cautious and to check something else out further. But I will say some seem to hold him to a standard they don't apply to other authors who have made similar or greater mistakes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,138
489
158
16
Maryland, USA
I've pointed out what others have said to others when they reference him that they might be cautious and to check something else out further. But I will say some seem to hold him to a standard they don't apply to other authors who have made similar or greater mistakes.
Good Steven, always remain thoughtful!
yes, “Pellegrino man bad” is a common theme about him. Maybe because he has made amazing discoveries and some don’t want to like him because his first book was bad (haven’t read it yet)
The Wikipedia page, I was IP banned from editing pages because I fixed the accusations, character assasinations, and slander multiple time yet they kept getting reverted to the old one each time.
the only legit thing on that page is the Hiroshima controversy.
Anyway sorry I got sidetracked. Yes, multiple authors mess up, but yet we zero in one—why??
 
Nov 14, 2005
2,248
1,139
308
Good Steven, always remain thoughtful!
yes, “Pellegrino man bad” is a common theme about him. Maybe because he has made amazing discoveries and some don’t want to like him because his first book was bad (haven’t read it yet)
The Wikipedia page, I was IP banned from editing pages because I fixed the accusations, character assasinations, and slander multiple time yet they kept getting reverted to the old one each time.
the only legit thing on that page is the Hiroshima controversy.
Anyway sorry I got sidetracked. Yes, multiple authors mess up, but yet we zero in one—why??
I can't speak as to the "why" of others. Just noticed there seems to be a certain amount of venom when it concerns him and not others. Maybe he stepped on somebodies favorite puppy. Who knows. As to the Wiki. I've never participated in adding or editing to their site. All I can for sure about them is that many of their articles are biased to the point of being laughable. You have to take almost everything there with a BIG grain of salt. I use it as a starting point to check things out further. IP banned? There's a dozen ways around that. I used to get banned at least once a week on Yahoo's comment sections...*L*.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Cam Houseman

Member
Jul 14, 2020
2,138
489
158
16
Maryland, USA
I didn't find this, but here's a fascinating summary of how the wheels are finally coming off the Pellegrino bandwagon:


The piece is written by David Brennan (see above posts).

E-T even gets a mention!
Last comment, I wish for everyone to be aware that this blog was written by a neo-nazi, fake 9/11 conspirator, and a person who hates Dr. Pellegrino. Personally.

this person has:
-Stalked Dr. Pellegrino
-tried to put CP on Dr. Pellegrino’s computer but was caught
-falsely claimed he was stripped of his PHD

agenda of the smear group, reproduced here from Facebook in a conversation I had with Dr. Pellegrino

“My Wikipedia site has been hijacked by a group of extreme 9/11 conspiracy nutters (and by extreme, I mean the same Brennan group that publically endorsed the giving of nazi salutes to 9/11 family members during memorial observances). They have declared that even my diploma and a record of post-doctral govt. research grants are not acceptable proof of my doctorate (which they call "fake") and no statement from James Cameron is proof that my dives to the Titanic were not "fake." This is all made possible by a horrendous and stubbornly supported act of Congress that gives the platform and its editors blanket immunity from laws of libel.”

what the smearists have done:
“Nothing, via lawsuits. But disgraced NY Times writer Motoko Rich, who quoted from this crap (directly from social media) in 2010 and who, when demoted, went after my then 16-year-old son (in an attempt to get him expelled from Bronx Science): That's another story. After getting demoted again (for going after my kid) and in a self-important act of revenge, Rich tried to tornado my computer with the sort of stuff that could have had me picking out curtains with the ghost of Jeffrey Epstein, had she not gotten CAUGHT. it became a case for the NYC cyber-crimes unit and the FBI. She's sort of unreachable, having promptly fled the country. The lying and failing NY Times has never retracted the filth she wrote - and can be as defiant and retaliatory as they wish because, technically, it was all "book reviews," meaning, sue-proof, even if malice is proved. A clear case of using the letter of the law to subvert the spirit of the law.”

you may be wondering who the “she” is. She is a terrible person, just read this while during my conversation with Charlie

“Leslie Oelsner of the NY Times/Random House was a serial stalker. I was one of 13 people who successfully sued her and her employer for the stalking. in my case, among other things, representing a plagiarist, George Poinar, who was misappropriating credit for my "Jurassic Park" recipe. The weight of evidence forced Poinar to confess the theft to the NYS Supreme Court (he lost his tenured position at berkeley, following an investigation led by Greg Benford). Oelsner stalked many and was the cause of the exodus of authors away from RH to Harper - among us, Michael Crichton. She had also been stalking Carl Sagan and the author of, "All I need to Know I learned in Kindergarten." Two of the lawsuits were settled for sexual harassment (if that was her beef with me, I just never noticed). Giuliani (and I'm so glad he will be remembered by history, for his act on Borat) refused to allow her to be disbarred. She then followed us to Harper, after the NYT and Random House fired her. I then left for Holt, after Oelsner and Braman involved themselves directly in the 9/11 Ladder 4 hoax and began pulling my books from the press because Rhonda Schearer and I blew the whistle on the hoax. After a harper CEO called my agent (Elaine Markson) wanting to know why I and other authors had suddenly left, Braman was fired and told to take her slimy lawyer (Oelsner) with her. In 2009, they both followed me to Holt and in September fired my editor and pulled "The Last Train from Hiroshima" from the press. More court issues (my editor won his case within two weeks, and put my book back on the press). Bradman was busted down in rank. Everything that happened to "The Last Train from Hiroshima" in March 2010 went direct to Braman, who in the process brought Oelbnr back aboard. I moved over to Wiley and became very reclusive. Bradman tried to interfere with publication of "Farewell, Titanic." Not long afterward, Braman and Oelsner got sick and died... but not before Braman convinced at least a few editors along Publisher's Row that she was the real victim and I had ruined her life. Oelsner also died while victim crying. These two woonwastes were like people who go into a crowd stabbing people and then try to convince others that they are the ones really bleeding. Michael Crichton, by the way, based his character in "Disclosure" very much on the behavior of Leslie Oelsner.”

disgusting!
I hope everyone now understands the slander and Wikipedia issue.

ok, enough posting, before Phillip bans me from the site lol (just a joke!!)
 

Similar threads

Similar threads