+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-Deep-Politics-Forum)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-JFK-Assassination)
+--- Thread: The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue (/Thread-The-lbj-false-sponsorship-operation-to-continue)
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Seamus Coogan - 20-01-2011
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:If I did not add, let me do so now. Mark North's previous book, is one of VB's faves.
Well thats bloody fascinating but I have to say chief its also unsuprising lol.
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Jack White - 20-01-2011
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Jack, you are detracting from the subject at large.
Marcello did not kill Kennedy, whether he had help from LBJ or not.
THis book does not look promising. And that is very disappointing in this day and age.
Jim...you cannot mean what you wrote. You have not awakened yet! I said
NOTHING about Marcello having help from LBJ. Reread what I said.
I said Marcello is a "false sponsor". So is Castro. So is Kruschev.
That means they did NOT sponsor the assassination.
I listed the people and groups that I thought WERE sponsors. I did NOT link
Marcello and LBJ. To the contrary.
???????
Jack
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Charles Drago - 20-01-2011
Jack White Wrote:I feel that Charles is muddying the waters with ill-understood terms.
Good day, Jack.
"Ill-understood" by whom? I've gone out of my way to lay out the Evica-Drago conspiracy model, which by definition is other than simple to understand but hardly the stuff of a proposition by Wittgenstein. I use its terminology with as much precision as I can muster. The distinction between "simple" and "simple-minded" must be observed.
Jack White Wrote:I am talking about Sponsors vs Conspirators. Many readers will look at his saying LBJ is a "false sponsor" as clearing him of conspiratorial participation.
Let me stipulate that I know you're not one of those readers, Jack.
In the now-closed thread and elsewhere I went to great pains to declare my conclusions that LBJ was a Facilitator and FALSE Sponsor, and to define those roles. Continued ignorance in the face of such clear explication is a phenomenon over which I have no control.
Jack White Wrote:This is similar to the argument over Mastermind vs Essential Participant.
You're quite wrong on this point, my friend. And no, it's not a matter of opinion or "semantics" as the term is most often bandied about in popular culture.
In the Evica/Drago conspiracy model, "Sponsor" is used to describe those at the very top of the plot -- the deep political players with the authority to install and remove heads of state ... whose interests transcend East v. West, or at the time Cold War, differences.
"Facilitator" describes a wide range of JFK players -- from plot designers all the way "down" to the likes of damage control types in Dealey Plaza. And it is primarily though not exclusively that group from which FALSE Sponsors were and are drawn -- including Lyndon Johnson, a witting and important Facilitator.
So I must reiterate: you are utterly and empirically wrong in your above-stated conclusion.
Jack White Wrote:In my opinion, LBJ was a conspirator, an essential conspirator, a pivotal conspirator, an eager conspirator.
I'll buy that.
Jack White Wrote:In my opinion, False Sponsors include Castro, Kruschev, Marcello, Giancana, and the like.
Excellent! Here's where I think we can close the gap between us.
LIKE LBJ, Marcello and Giancana inhabit two levels of the Evica/Drago model: Facilitators and False Sponsors. Castro and Khrushchev are but False Sponsors.
Jack White Wrote:To equate Lyndon with people like these is to excuse his culpability.
Come on, Jack. The terms "Facilitator, "Sponsor," and "False Sponsor" were created and applied precisely to avoid the confusion of which you write.
Jack White Wrote:In my opinion, the Sponsors were The New World Order, the International Bankers, the Military-Industrial-Complex, Politicians and Cronies (LBJ), Intelligence Agencies (CIA, FBI, SS), Military Officers, Oil Interests, and
various Right Wing groups.
"Politicians and cronies," "Intelligence Agencies," "Military Officers," "Oil Interests," and "various Right Wing groups" by definition belong on the Facilitator and/or False Sponsor levels. They are not the commissioners of the plot. They are the architects and carpenters who designed, assembled, and activated its components. And every group listed in this paragraph has been elevated, through misunderstanding or malignant design, to the Sponsorship level. Which makes them FALSE Sponsors.
As for consideration of "The New World Order, the International Bankers, [and] the Military-Industrial-Complex" as Sponsors, we find ourselves at the Great Wall. We must be able to penetrate this barrier if we are ever to "solve" the JFK assassination and protect ourselves and our descendents.
Jack White Wrote:Charles intends that the Word Sponsor apply only to the very top person or group which gave the order to kill.
Absolutely correct.
Jack White Wrote:I use the word more broadly like Jim Marrs...meaning a Concert of Interests. LBJ was "a member of" those with a common Concert of Interests, therefore was a sponsor and conspirator. There was no SINGLE SPONSOR, but many with the same idea...get rid of JFK.
For better or worse, the manner in which you and Jim Marrs use the term "Sponsor" violates the Evica/Drago model's usage.
And while I tend to agree that there was no single Sponsor, I'm not yet prepared to stand behind such a conclusion.
One can either adopt or reject the Evica/Drago model. I am by no means suggesting that it is holy writ. But I've yet to see any other effort of comparable persuasiveness. If you know of any, please share.
One more point, and this is crucial: Many of the False Sponsors likely and mistakenly believed that they were true Sponsors.
I'll close this post by noting proudly and for the record that without the service of Jack White, our understanding of what happened to JFK would be pitiful indeed. Please accept my criticism of your position, Jack, as the product of one of your most grateful students.
Charles
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Dawn Meredith - 20-01-2011
I both understood Jack's post and agree with it.
Jack I believe JIm was referring to the North book, the sequel to Act of Treason.
Dawn
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - The Moderators - 20-01-2011
Members please honour our forum rules of decorum and make this a discussion on the merits of the argument and not the people making the argument.
Breaches will cut and pasted to the Bear Pit, followed by moderation in repeat cases.
Thank you.
The Moderators
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Peter Lemkin - 20-01-2011
Jack White Wrote:I feel that Charles is muddying the waters with ill-understood terms.
I am talking about Sponsors vs Conspirators. Many readers will look at
his saying LBJ is a "false sponsor" as clearing him of conspiratorial participation.
Not so, in my opinion. This is similar to the argument over Mastermind vs
Essential Participant.
In my opinion, LBJ was a conspirator, an essential conspirator, a pivotal
conspirator, an eager conspirator.
In my opinion, False Sponsors include Castro, Kruschev, Marcello,
Giancana, and the like.
To equate Lyndon with people like these is to excuse his culpability.
In my opinion, the Sponsors were The New World Order, the International
Bankers, the Military-Industrial-Complex, Politicians and Cronies (LBJ),
Intelligence Agencies (CIA, FBI, SS), Military Officers, Oil Interests, and
various Right Wing groups.
Charles intends that the Word Sponsor apply only to the very top person
or group which gave the order to kill. I use the word more broadly like
Jim Marrs...meaning a Concert of Interests. LBJ was "a member of" those
with a common Concert of Interests, therefore was a sponsor and conspirator.
There was no SINGLE SPONSOR, but many with the same idea...get rid of JFK.
Jack
I agree with all that Jack said. I agree with most of what Charles is saying. People have different ways of conceptualizing the same event. They apply different terms [and some, yes, mean one thing to the expert on the subject, and another to those not steeped in all this.]. They use different models; and they have different 'takes' on who did what and to what extent. I hope we can all agree that LBJ [and MANY others] should have stood trial and been convicted re: Dallas and the cover-up. I've said many times I do not believe LBJ was Mr. Big on this. In fact, my own theory is that there were several separate groupings and individuals [in the beginning not conspiring] who wanted for their own [and overlapping] reasons JFK offed. I don't know who got their plan rolling first or better organized, but my sense is that some [not all, by any means!] of these groupings coalesced [using all the intels cut-outs/secrecy/false leads/et al.] and were assigned different portions of the goings on. Many of these groups could have killed JFK, but very, VERY few could have coordinated it as it was, before, during and after!]. It would be those elements who I would look to for the Mr. Big[s] who wound up running the show and the coverup and even creating all the blind alleys, false trails, doublegangers, patsies by the score, many seemingly guilty persons - who were not [at least not of what they were set up to have allegedly done!], etc. Right up to this day they cover it all up...and the 50th they plan to put this to rest with JFK....that anyone and everyone who really didn't participate at the top will be fingered, to bamboozle the Sheeple into the post 911 nightmare, which is the follow on to the 11-22 nightmare [there were several in between, I'll not go into...but these, IMO were biggies - ARE biggies]. Why so much fighting over terms and labels? We've got lots of hard evidence and decades of work that show some high-powered; high-level players who were involved. I don't think there was - or we'll ever find ONE person we can pin the hit on. It was, IMO, a confluence of many who hated JFK [not all who hated him wound up participating - some didn't in any way - others knew it was to happen, and just watched and waited with glee; keeping their silence afterwards]. It is complex, at best and the 'other side' has the advantage of being able to oversimplify [and ignore complex] things to a Public that likes things simple. Somehow if we all don't fight back for the 50th together [even if we don't agree on all or even on many points] we'll loose the match - and perhaps what little remains of our polity this side of a neo-fascist police state.
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Jack White - 20-01-2011
Peter Lemkin Wrote:Jack White Wrote:I feel that Charles is muddying the waters with ill-understood terms.
I am talking about Sponsors vs Conspirators. Many readers will look at
his saying LBJ is a "false sponsor" as clearing him of conspiratorial participation.
Not so, in my opinion. This is similar to the argument over Mastermind vs
Essential Participant.
In my opinion, LBJ was a conspirator, an essential conspirator, a pivotal
conspirator, an eager conspirator.
In my opinion, False Sponsors include Castro, Kruschev, Marcello,
Giancana, and the like.
To equate Lyndon with people like these is to excuse his culpability.
In my opinion, the Sponsors were The New World Order, the International
Bankers, the Military-Industrial-Complex, Politicians and Cronies (LBJ),
Intelligence Agencies (CIA, FBI, SS), Military Officers, Oil Interests, and
various Right Wing groups.
Charles intends that the Word Sponsor apply only to the very top person
or group which gave the order to kill. I use the word more broadly like
Jim Marrs...meaning a Concert of Interests. LBJ was "a member of" those
with a common Concert of Interests, therefore was a sponsor and conspirator.
There was no SINGLE SPONSOR, but many with the same idea...get rid of JFK.
Jack
I agree with all that Jack said. I agree with most of what Charles is saying. People have different ways of conceptualizing the same event. They apply different terms [and some, yes, mean one thing to the expert on the subject, and another to those not steeped in all this.]. They use different models; and they have different 'takes' on who did what and to what extent. I hope we can all agree that LBJ [and MANY others] should have stood trial and been convicted re: Dallas and the cover-up. I've said many times I do not believe LBJ was Mr. Big on this. In fact, my own theory is that there were several separate groupings and individuals [in the beginning not conspiring] who wanted for their own [and overlapping] reasons JFK offed. I don't know who got their plan rolling first or better organized, but my sense is that some [not all, by any means!] of these groupings coalesced [using all the intels cut-outs/secrecy/false leads/et al.] and were assigned different portions of the goings on. Many of these groups could have killed JFK, but very, VERY few could have coordinated it as it was, before, during and after!]. It would be those elements who I would look to for the Mr. Big[s] who wound up running the show and the coverup and even creating all the blind alleys, false trails, doublegangers, patsies by the score, many seemingly guilty persons - who were not [at least not of what they were set up to have allegedly done!], etc. Right up to this day they cover it all up...and the 50th they plan to put this to rest with JFK....that anyone and everyone who really didn't participate at the top will be fingered, to bamboozle the Sheeple into the post 911 nightmare, which is the follow on to the 11-22 nightmare [there were several in between, I'll not go into...but these, IMO were biggies - ARE biggies]. Why so much fighting over terms and labels? We've got lots of hard evidence and decades of work that show some high-powered; high-level players who were involved. I don't think there was - or we'll ever find ONE person we can pin the hit on. It was, IMO, a confluence of many who hated JFK [not all who hated him wound up participating - some didn't in any way - others knew it was to happen, and just watched and waited with glee; keeping their silence afterwards]. It is complex, at best and the 'other side' has the advantage of being able to oversimplify [and ignore complex] things to a Public that likes things simple. Somehow if we all don't fight back for the 50th together [even if we don't agree on all or even on many points] we'll loose the match - and perhaps what little remains of our polity this side of a neo-fascist police state.
Peter and I are on the same page. There was no CEO. There was no
table of organization or chain of command. There were many implications
and inferences, but nothing traceable. Plausible deniability topped the
agenda. There were no meetings, no notes, no payrolls. It was just
a network of BIG GUYS who all hated JFK for varied reasons...Oil depletion
allowance, defense contracts, labor unrest, civil rights, politicians, you
name it.
The consensus grew gradually on the golf courses, at private lunches
with friends, social gatherings, phone conversations, casual talk. In
boardrooms, in social clubs, around the poker table...all disguised as
private opinions.
But let's say there WAS a Mr. BIG Banker, and during a talk with a
BIG Oil billionaire, mention was made of the pending loss of the oil
depletion allowance, and mention was made that SOMETHING NEEDS
TO BE DONE ABOUT THAT GODDAM KENNEDY KID. And suppose
that Mr. BIG Banker says, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. I'LL ASK ALLEN
TO LOOK INTO IT. Just a vague thought.
There you have it. The MASTERMIND PLOT wherein this CEO "sponsors"
the assassination. That was all it took to get the ball rolling. He asked
Allen to look into it. Allen mentioned it to a few close associates, who
said HEY, THAT IS A GOOD IDEA. I'LL TALK TO TOM, DICK AND HARRY
AND SEE WHAT THEY CAN COME UP WITH. Tom, Dick and Harry had
expertise in such things. They planned various scenarios. Whatever
course was chosen, any investigation had to be controlled. Patsies
were framed and mechanics recruited.
The mechanics had no idea who started the ball rolling. Others knew
only what they needed to know. The mechanics didn't care. They
were well paid.
Many or most of the MR. BIGs did not know what would happen, or
when or where. But they felt confident that Allen would "come up
with something" which would rid them of the kid in the White House.
Nobody ever suspected that THE SPONSOR had only asked that
Allen look into it.
Jack
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Greg Burnham - 20-01-2011
Jack,
I couldn't agree with you more! Excellent and concise is your summary.
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Charles Drago - 20-01-2011
Jack,
I couldn't agree with you less.
Of such differences are allies made!
The precarious Cold War nuclear balancing act -- accent on "act" -- could not be risked by permitting a relatively low level assassination conspiracy against a major head of state to proceed.
The true Sponsors of JFK's murder, I submit, were those international powers who were, in George Michael Evica's phrase, "above Cold War differences."
The failure to retaliate against False Sponsor Fidel speaks to the control required to keep the conspiracy's consequences in check.
The breadth and depth of the conspiracy -- its design -- point to a controlling human initiator -- one or more, I'd concede.
What happened in Dallas was not the equivalent of "Hey, I've got some boards, you've got some curtains, let's put on a play."
It was a major production, with backers, a director (or two), a playwrite, and a cast.
Charles
The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue - Zach Robertson - 20-01-2011
Quote:Peter and I are on the same page. There was no CEO. There was noWell said, Great post Jack!
table of organization or chain of command. There were many implications
and inferences, but nothing traceable. Plausible deniability topped the
agenda. There were no meetings, no notes, no payrolls. It was just
a network of BIG GUYS who all hated JFK for varied reasons...Oil depletion
allowance, defense contracts, labor unrest, civil rights, politicians, you
name it.
The consensus grew gradually on the golf courses, at private lunches
with friends, social gatherings, phone conversations, casual talk. In
boardrooms, in social clubs, around the poker table...all disguised as
private opinions.
But let's say there WAS a Mr. BIG Banker, and during a talk with a
BIG Oil billionaire, mention was made of the pending loss of the oil
depletion allowance, and mention was made that SOMETHING NEEDS
TO BE DONE ABOUT THAT GODDAM KENNEDY KID. And suppose
that Mr. BIG Banker says, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. I'LL ASK ALLEN
TO LOOK INTO IT. Just a vague thought.
There you have it. The MASTERMIND PLOT wherein this CEO "sponsors"
the assassination. That was all it took to get the ball rolling. He asked
Allen to look into it. Allen mentioned it to a few close associates, who
said HEY, THAT IS A GOOD IDEA. I'LL TALK TO TOM, DICK AND HARRY
AND SEE WHAT THEY CAN COME UP WITH. Tom, Dick and Harry had
expertise in such things. They planned various scenarios. Whatever
course was chosen, any investigation had to be controlled. Patsies
were framed and mechanics recruited.
The mechanics had no idea who started the ball rolling. Others knew
only what they needed to know. The mechanics didn't care. They
were well paid.
Many or most of the MR. BIGs did not know what would happen, or
when or where. But they felt confident that Allen would "come up
with something" which would rid them of the kid in the White House.
Nobody ever suspected that THE SPONSOR had only asked that
Allen look into it.
Jack