James H. Fetzer Wrote:Since Phil posted this yesterday and your post went up this morning, I think he not only beat you to the punch but has it right: this book does not look like an honest investigation devoted to exposing the truth about Lyndon's role as the MASTERMIND of the assassination of JFK. It is certainly unfortunate that your cognitive incapacities have kept you from endorsing one of the best books ever on the death of our 35th president. For those who understand the case, it is not a debatable proposition. I guess I will simply have to appreciate your other fine qualities and do my best to overlook your limitations, as you so kindly do with mine.

Charles Drago Wrote:

James H. Fetzer Wrote:Since Phil posted this yesterday and your post went up this morning, I think he not only beat you to the punch but has it right: this book does not look like an honest investigation devoted to exposing the truth about Lyndon's role as the MASTERMIND of the assassination of JFK. It is certainly unfortunate that your cognitive incapacities have kept you from endorsing one of the best books ever on the death of our 35th president. For those who understand the case, it is not a debatable proposition. I guess I will simply have to appreciate your other fine qualities and do my best to overlook your limitations, as you so kindly do with mine.

Jim,

What are we, seven years old?

"Nyah nyah, he beat you to it! He beat you to it!"

On a serious note: Apparently you had not read Farrell before judging his work thusly: "[T]his book does not look like an honest investigation devoted to exposing the truth about Lyndon's role as the MASTERMIND of the assassination of JFK."

(Of course if you did read the entire book before so commenting, then make that fact known. I will not hesitate to take you at your word. And capitalizing "mastermind" does not somehow make the characterization an accurate one. Nyah nyah!)

Where to begin?

You reference a "truth" that has not been established, that exists solely in your head and those of a few others, and in fact is unsupportable by the evidence. But then all with deep understandings of how the deep political world operates already know this.

You indict Farrell because he doesn't buy into Nelson' disinformation ... which is as dizzying an example of circular reasoning as any that I've read of late.

I think we'd be wise to revise our plans. How about SIX bottles of wine?

Charles

James H. Fetzer Wrote:Charles,

The book should reach me in a day or two. No, I was taking your description and what Phil has said about it as the basis for my inference, which I shall be glad to revised if it turns out to be wrong. Otherwise, I was just tweaking your nose a bit, my friend. Yes, I agree, we have both gone over the top about all of this. So indeed let's make it as many bottles of wine as it takes! Thanks for "being there"!

Jim

Vasilios Vazakas Wrote:The problem with this book is that Farrell uses the Torbitt document as a legitimate and serious source to reach his conclusions. I wonder why he would do a thing like that, when he would have known that his work will be discredited by association with that document. He puts too much emphasis on the LBJ thing. Then he adds an aura of mystery with masonry, a subject that fascinates a lot of English writers, a culture of masons, night templars and the holly grail.
Should i dare to say that Torbitt+LBJ+masonry=disinformation to discredit truthful parts of his book?

Trowbridge H. Ford Wrote:Farrell starts with a most dubious assumption - i. e., there was a Texas machine, and LBJ controlled it.

Actually, Texas politically was divided in many different ways, and when it came to getting Texas to vote for a JFK-LBJ ticket in the '64 election, Governor John Connally was essential to get on board if it was to happen. Connally had resigned as Navy Secretary from the Kennedy administration because of its alleged softness on communism, especially Castro's Cuba right next door.

It was Connally who pressured JFK to come to Texas on November 20, 1963 if he ever hoped to carry the state in the election, and helped persuade the President to ride through Dallas in an open limosine when Richard Nixon's antics about being under threat - apparently by LHO as Robert Baskin had implied in the DMN when the alleged Missile Crisis was resuming a month earlier - the day before the assassination at the Bottlers' Convention, just across from the Trade Mart where Kennedy would be speaking the fatal day, proved to be untrue. This resulted in the President's SS detail being most relieved about the threats to him, and celebrating a bit during the early hours at Fort Worth.

For good measure, the DMN had a story about "Guard Not For Nixon" on the morning of the assassination, and advertised it on the upper right hand corner of the front page.

With this set-up of the President - and LBJ's SS people were not taken in by the ruse - it was hardly surprising that it went off like clockwork except for Connally being apparently killed too in the process. Remember his belated reaction to being hit: "Oh, no, no, no. They are going to kill us all."

On the fatal day, it was Nixon, Connally and their cronies who controlled the Texas machine.