+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement (/thread-12258.html)
Pages:
1
2
Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement - Marc Ellis - 08-03-2014
David Josephs Wrote:Quote:Since I'm a novice and not a researcher, it is easier for me to avoid getting bogged down in minutiae.
I don't know enough minutiae to get bogged down in. So I'll give ths a try.
A: So why don't you think Oswald did it...and who did?
B: (1) He had no motive. He never said a bad thing about Kennedy. And I don't think he was a good enough shot, especially with that terrible rifle.
(2) *If he did do it, he had help. There are a lot of suspects. The mob, anti-Castro Cubans, disaffected US officials.
(3) Where is JFK's brain anyway? Did you know that went missing after the autopsy?
---
Those are reasonable, bite-sized answers people can understand.
Then if the conversation goes on, I'd want to mention 544 Camp Street.
If it goes on a little longer - Mexico City.
Why did LHO stamp the address of anti-Castro Cubans and an ex-FBI agent on his pro-Castro literature?
That's one people always get. And it's good too, because everyone who's looked at it - WC, HSCA & LN'ers all agree on that fact.
-----
In terms of PR, I think it's the LN'ers who have a problem. That's lasted for decades, despite a deluge of media bias.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/165893/ma...onspiracy.aspx
__________
*#2 is a 'for the sake of argument' statement. I'm personally convinced LHO wasn't even a shooter. But I wouldn't go there at the beginning of a casual conversation like the one we're given.
Hey there Marc... thanks so much for your input... I will play devils advocate here simply because I have friends who do the same for me to keep my personal feelings in check... keeping me on track to support and defend my bite sized reply in line with the evidence available.
B1... Spot on, as they say, the WCR itself states this conclusion exactly in those words....
Ch 1/p.22: The Commission could not make any definitive determination of Oswald's motives.
Yet would we agree that a determination of no motive does not equate to innocence... or refute the supposed evidence against him ?
While we know this evidence to be ultimately refuteable and inauthentic... we are back into the minutia if we are to address each's deficiencies.
B2... Completely agree... once you start with "the mob, the CIA, Cubans, etc..." we are back in the weeds.
and even worse, "IF he did it" is not a possibility at all... if we are to be untied behind a single message... we cannot include that option... and for very good reason, there is no authenticated evidence to support it.
B3... Sadly, we begin to enter the very place the plotting envisioned... fruitcake-land... It is my opinion that any Counter-intelligence operation of the security services - which is exactly what the cover-up as well as the actual activities themselves were - is simply not understandable or absorbable by those outside those services without SERIOUS research and understanding... Reading Hancock's NEXUS for example or Prouty's Secret Team... just name a couple, is absolutley necessary for anyone to grasp the levels of depravity necessary to create and carry out these plans.
If you've read about the Lansdale and Phillips programs in order to make a targeted population believe one thing or another.. and the unearthed realities of plans that we actually carried out like Artichoke, ZR-Rifle, Paperclip, and Mockingbird to name a few (and some that were not ala Northwoods)... we enter a real Alice in Wonderland world of double and triple agents where logic and reason cannot explain these activities. Gladio is another example, or that we actually armed North Vietnam and moved over a million of the northern peasants out of the ancestrial villages to South Vietnam and CREATED the conflict... is to my POV, beyond the understanding of the every day person.
That is not to say they did not remove the brain, did not perform the pre-autopsy surgery to obliterate the evidence... they did.
but we need to counter "Oswald did it", even while supported with polls saying there is a majority BELIEF of a conspiracy, there is little comprehension of what that means.
I posted that excerpt from Redlich in an attempt to focus on a plan of action... and to anser the question
"Were there peple in the know, on the inside of the investigation that questioned the evidence, that challenged the conclusions? Not just doubts but documentation that puts the entire WCR at risk?"
I am working on an extensive series of images which in one look can tell a thousand word story... When I have a few more completed I will post them here for review and critique...
One of the first I did is below...
On Dec 12, 3 days after the FBI delivered the report Redlich calls "totally incorrect" Hoover sends a memo to his Sr Staff stating:
I said I personally believe Oswald was the assassin; that the secondaspect as to whether he was the only man gives me great concern; that we have several letters, not in the report because we were not able to prove it,written to him from Cuba referring to the job he was going to do, his good marksmanship, and stating when it was all over he would be brought back to Cuba and presented to the chief; but we do not know if the chief was Castro and cannot make an investigation because we have no intelligence operation in Cuba; that I did not put this into the report because we did not have proof of it and didn't want to put speculation in the report; that this was the reason I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man
While the FBI report concluded differently:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5763[/ATTACH]
When I wrote the "if he did it, he had help" part, I was just trying to keep the conversation light & simple for someone who asked me your two questions. Why don't I think LHO did it and who did? I am persuaded LHO was not a shooter and was not on the 6th floor. But I don't go there in casual conversation.
The cast of usual suspects part was in answer to the 'who did' part of your questions. I keep it light & easy. I have my own conclusions about which groups are responsible. But I don't go there either in casual conversation. I'd just say there is a whole list of suspects with better motives than LHO.
I've been pleasantly surprised that people who have not paid a lot of attention to the assassination, seem to understand the 544 Camp Street enigma right off the bat. In the simple conversations I sometimes have about this -- they get it. And they get it fast.
If LHO was a communist, why did the use the address of an anti-Castro group and a retired FBI agent? I always point out that this is not a controversial fact. Everyone who has looked at it pro or con, agrees LHO stamped that address on those leaflets. Why?
In fact - I think it's helpful to start with facts all sides agree on. No motive & 544 Camp Street are two. His brain is missing is a third one. I don't know how many more of them are out there. But they are useful.
I have not met many people who are instinctively LN'ers. Most people seem intuitively suspicious about the official story.
In the casual conversation scenario you describe, I think the danger of going off into the weeds arises from follow-up questions. One does not want to appear obsessive. But you have to answer the questions asked.
In the situations you describe, I try to avoid endorsing any conclusion. Jim diEugenio in his two books, is very good at that. He demolishes the evidence or story-line and then merely suggests alternative scenarios that make more sense, without necessarily endorsing them. He has a light touch and a humorous touch too. "Reclaiming Parkland" really shines in that respect.
When you have them laughing at your opponent - you've won.
Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement - LR Trotter - 09-03-2014
Over time while studying JFK Assassination Research, there has been some indication that the Lee Harvey Oswald character was a paid government agent. Either he was, or he wasn't. If he wasn't, his activities, those research studies at least to me, appear to indicate that he thought he was. If he was in fact receiving an agent's stipend of $200 monthly, the money could have came from a slush fund from another group, or individual. In 1963, $200 was a fair amount of money, especially when added to his approximate monthly gross earnings of $216.63 at the TSBD. Having various low wage jobs, and being unemployed at times, he was still able to do a lot of expensive traveling. After arriving back to the US in 1962 from Russia, along with his wife Marina and daughter June, he lived awhile in Fort Worth, TX before moving to Dallas, TX. And, in 1963, moved from Dallas to New Orleans, LA for a short time, before moving back to Dallas in late September or early October of '63. So, to me it appears as though he at least thought he was a paid government agent, maybe as an informant. In any event, either he was, or he wasn't. JMO.
:
:
Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement - Dawn Meredith - 09-03-2014
Magda Hassan Wrote:Good points David. I think it has to move away from focusing on Oswald and put it onto JFK. Why he was killed and why it matters.Exactly. Otherwise people just say it's ancient history. You need a very short summary of the why- taking from Newman, Douglass etc and connect the dots to what came after. What resulted.
Who became our leaders and why. People do instinctively suspect the lie but few are going to spend a lot of time, certainly not read BOOKS. I still tell people to just spend three hours and watch JFK. Most won't even commit to that. Garrison was right from the beginning and documents unearthed by ARRB added to just HOW right he was.
To get people to care you have to be able to show them the what and why of the police state we are in now. That only one president resisted. And why no one ever will again.
Dawn
Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement - Don Jeffries - 09-03-2014
I tried to get people to commit to just this kind of consensus statement not that long ago on the Education Forum. A few did, but there was also the usual bickering and nitpicking about minutiae. Of course, this has been the problem with the research community since the mid-1960s. It's why so many threads on forums devoted to this subject devolve into personal attacks and name calling.
I doubt you could get the majority of assassination researchers to agree wholeheartedly to something as innocuous as "JFK's assassination was the result of a conspiracy."
Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement - Peter Lemkin - 09-03-2014
LR Trotter Wrote:Over time while studying JFK Assassination Research, there has been some indication that the Lee Harvey Oswald character was a paid government agent. Either he was, or he wasn't. If he wasn't, his activities, those research studies at least to me, appear to indicate that he thought he was. If he was in fact receiving an agent's stipend of $200 monthly, the money could have came from a slush fund from another group, or individual. In 1963, $200 was a fair amount of money, especially when added to his approximate monthly gross earnings of $216.63 at the TSBD. Having various low wage jobs, and being unemployed at times, he was still able to do a lot of expensive traveling. After arriving back to the US in 1962 from Russia, along with his wife Marina and daughter June, he lived awhile in Fort Worth, TX before moving to Dallas, TX. And, in 1963, moved from Dallas to New Orleans, LA for a short time, before moving back to Dallas in late September or early October of '63. So, to me it appears as though he at least thought he was a paid government agent, maybe as an informant. In any event, either he was, or he wasn't. JMO.
:
All evidence I've seen supports that he was...and perhaps of more than one agency over time and maybe with some overlapping times. And all the agencies involved MUST have known before and known to the nth power afterwards that they had to keep the 'lid' on it [for a variety of reasons]. Aside from the money you mention Oswald [or one of them] had for moving around, don't forget his being able to afford expensive [even non-commercial] flights to Helsinki and then stay at a very expensive hotel there on his way to the poverty of the Soviet Proletariat - and when he returned he had spent more money than he'd been granted as a loan in his moving himself, his wife and daughter, and lots of luggage [some of which went astray - without his shedding a tear]. Minox cameras and such were not cheap either in the early 60's. One could go on. He was an agent or asset or informer or combinations of these - but he more importantly was hung out to dry, and built up to be and to be used as the Grand Patsy.....so that the REAL murdering CABAL who killed JFK and the fragile democracy he was gingerly but steadily strengthening - and growing stronger in his own determination that that was the only correct (if dangerous), constitutional, humane, and decent path to follow - could hide in the false shadows and perpetuate their hate, greed, classism, rascism, power machinations, war, death, destruction, control, and hubris....which leads us to where we are today! Uncloak the evil Truth of Dallas [or 911, IMO] and you can move a mountain or society.
I didn't say it was easy...only possible.::bowtie::
What 'gets me' is how many only want to engage in parlor games of clever detective and investigative work - how few want to put their conclusions to the acid test and try to move the society. You're damn right it can be dangerous - but not doing so is even more dangerous....just look around you and see where we've come from 1963. In another 50 years [much less, in fact by a factor of ten] there won't be anything resembling personal freedoms, privacy, property, rights.....all living not in the Oligarchy/Plutocracy will be serfs - neo-Feudal serfs. This is not a parlor game. It isn't a who-done-it mystery.
This is real - is not was!
IMO.
Missions Statements for the JFK Truth movement - David Josephs - 20-03-2014
Can anyone use as illustration a social cause of injustice that has been effective in communicating its message and producing results?
Other than the Koch et al backed Tea Party which continues to wedge its way between Us and THEM... I will have to start digging... yet I am sure there are those here who can offer something from which to pattern our approach.
Or at least I hope we do....
:
:We don't have $25 Billion. So given that the middle class is all but gone and the poor are being even further disenfranchised in the name of "Freedom from Government/Freedom for Properity"... (which is eerily similar to the processes which brought us the Fed Reserve Act and Income Tax)...
it would appear to me that the best place to start....
are the books used to teach our children about History...
http://www.historytextbooks.org/adopted.htm
to please put an end to:
http://www.minbcnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=975165
NEW LOTHROP -- Mid-Michigan joins the country in reflecting on the life of President John F. Kennedy assassinated 50 years ago Friday in Dallas, Texas.
To many, November 22, 1963 is a memory.
To others who are too young, it's a history lesson.
Books are open, eyes are wide in Mr.. Henige's 7th grade history class.
7th grader, Jeff Lepow recites what he's learned.
"John Fitzgerald Kennedy shot in Dallas, Texas from a library window by Lee Harvey Oswald," he said Friday