Paperback edition of Reclaiming Parkland: Expanded and Revised

[Albert Doyle]

Drago is challenging Jim to prove Evica got his model from Gibson. Personally I wouldn't care if he did. If Evica adopted Gibson and did more with it more power to him. My problem with Charles is he seems to be in it mostly to hear himself talk and, as far as I can tell, is using the Evica model to pose himself as understanding the assassination better than anyone else while offering a viewpoint that is being used by Mr Drago to prevent ever having to do anything. It's clear to me that Mr Drago's elite viewpoint exists in direct proportion to his never coming out of his library to actually do anything out there in the real world of protest lines and police sticks. I think Drago goes too far with the Evica model and has used it to avoid and exclude real culpable actors whether they be at the CIA facilitator level or not. Surely the Evica/Gibson model was not designed to let lesser players go and that's not how normal investigation works. Normal investigation catches and prosecutes those lesser players and then figures out who was above them. Charles tended to use the Evica model as a means of accusing all other researchers of being unworthy and foolishly in disobedience to his master framework. It has led to him being an ignored poster on a small website in a corner of the internet and makes him look quite foolish. In my opinion if Mr Drago reeled in his ego and applied the Evica model more wisely he would gain more from it. The Burnham website has sailed off into the vast Pacific never to be heard of again. Quite foolish and ego-based in my opinion.




I'm pretty sure Chris Davidson has presented credible evidence to prove Prayer Man is a woman. This is important because it solves a major issue that a majority of researchers were spending considerable effort on over the past few years and shows credible evidence that Oswald was most-likely in the lunch-room or break-room during the shooting.

[R.K. Locke]

I know that I'm going to regret engaging on this subject but we've been through all this before:

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...rles-Drago


Charles was correct then and he is still correct now. Why? Because he is adhering to fundamental principles of logical reasoning. If only more people in this community would follow his example.

[R.K. Locke]

By the way, where can I find evidence for the claim that "Evica got his model from Gibson"?

[Jim DiEugenio]

Look, prior to Gibson appearing on the scene, I can recall absolutely no one taking apart the power structure of America into pieces as he did. He made Peter Scott look like an amateur, with his Texas millionaires and Mafia guys.

Evica, in 1991, was a big fan of Scott's. In his book And We Are All Mortal, take a look at who he chalks up the JFK hit to. Its the CIA Mafia plots. And he drags in Hoffa and Lansky also. I mean the last part of that book could have been written by Scott, it owes so much to him. What with its "Caribbean Complex" terminology and the whole Nicaraguan secret police etc etc and onward and downward into utter confusion and obfuscation. This was the vogue thing to do at the time, because of the HSCA and Church Committee, and Scott promoted this in his anthologies. Later, so did Summers. And recall Evica's book was written in 1978.

Having seen just about all of Evica's presentations, and read just about everything he wrote up until the early nineties, its pretty obvious that he was under the influence of Scott for his power structure schematic. Up until that time. Even to the point of the whole Marseille, heroin connection aspect which he talked about at ASK in the early nineties. And he stuck with this paradigm into the early nineties at the early Dallas ASK conferences. For example, in 1991 and 1992 he was talking about the assassination being an intelligence operation with Mafia input, a la Jack Anderson. In fact, Harry Livingstone challenged him in public at ASK about this, specifically querying him if he was cribbing from Anderson. Evica denied it and said this was something he put together himself. Which is an important comment.

What is important here, is that at this time, he was making no references to the higher circles of power when Harry challenged him. No mention of Rockefeller or Morgan or the super rich at all. And, in fact, at this time he was still pledging allegiance to Scott as his doyen on this. He said so specifically in a break out room where he named Scott as his man on the power structure, except he would give way to John Davis on Mob aspects. This was in either 1992 or 1993.

It was not until the mid nineties when Evica came out with his new model at the COPA conference. And this was after the publication of Gibson's book in 1994. Battling Wall Street was a very important milestone in Kenendy research. Up until that time, no one in the critical community had ever excavated the power structure of the USA like Gibson did. And neither had anyone shown how JFK was in opposition to these men as specifically as Gibson did. Donald was a real trail blazer in that respect. And he turned out to be correct as far as I was concerned. It was clear to me when I heard Evica first speak about this model issue that he owed a lot of it to Gibson. And since I knew Don, talked to him for hours on the phone and read an advance galley proof of his book, I was pretty clear on the issue and where Evica had got the stuff. How does one go from Hoffa, Roselli and Scottland, to the higher circles of the CFR so fast? And with Gibson's book right there.

Don't get me wrong. I am glad that GME did what he did. Maybe he thought that since Gibson never elucidated a model like he did that he did not need to credit him. But in my talks with Gibson I specifically mentioned that, with his work, the research community had been shown to be barking up the wrong trees--what with Scott's Dallas Conspiracy of Texas people, and then his mafia stuff. Gibson agreed with me. And he said words to the effect that those power centers were not central, they were peripheral. He said all you had to do was look at the background of McCloy and Dulles, and even Donovan for that matter.

But even with that, Evica still seemed to me a bit under the influence of Scott even when he dropped all this stuff and wrote A Certain Arrogance. I mean what with those bombastic Scottish subheads like "The Sun Oil Company Context" and The Magnolia's Party Connections".

So anyway, there are my conclusions, all from direct dealings with GME, and listening to him talk. I hope that people will now go ahead and read Gibson's stuff, since he is really an unappreciated gem who has never gotten the credit he deserved. While people like Scott and Evica did.

[Anthony Thorne]

Donald Gibson's two JFK-related books are exceptional, and I learned a lot from BATTLING WALL STREET. Chapter 4 of that book, 'Kennedy's Opponents', is very instructive. The book was reprinted a year or two ago and is quite cheap on Amazon at the moment.

BATTLING WALL STREET - The Kennedy Presidency

[Tracy Riddle]

Didn't the film JFK (1991) posit the same sort of very high-level elite conspiracy? Though obviously in a less-detailed, less-documented way.
A lot of that basic research on the elite was done by non-JFK people like George Seldes, Ferdinand Lundberg and others I can't remember right now.

[R.K. Locke]

So if "Gibson never elucidated a model like he did" it means that, at most, he was inspired by the work of other thinkers and researchers. I'm glad we've cleared that up.

No doubt C. Wright Mills, G. William Domhoff, Anthony Sutton and many others would be surprised to learn that the American and global power structures remained unexamined until Donald Gibson came along.

[Tracy Riddle]

As I've said before, I think that the people who killed JFK - certain military & intelligence people, with the aid of some Cuban exiles and mobsters - wanted a dramatic, shocking public execution, with the blame placed on Cuba and the KGB, to trigger a preemptive nuclear strike. This would force the public and the elite to accept a huge shift in US foreign policy (ala Pearl Harbor, 9/11)

Around the time Oswald was arrested, wrote FBI Agent James Hosty, "I learned after the assassination from two independent sources fully armed warplanes were sent screaming toward Cuba. Just before they entered Cuban airspace, they were hastily called back...the entire US military went on alert. The Pentagon ordered us to Defense Condition 3...Def Con 3..." (Hosty, Assignment Oswald p219)

Somebody in the Pentagon was certainly ready to get the war started before LBJ could even do anything about it, but apparently someone else was able to order the planes back.

7/20/1961 At a National Security Council Meeting, the Joint Chiefs of Staff's Gen. Lemnitzer and CIA director Allen Dulles present a plan for a preemptive nuclear attack on the Soviet Union "in late 1963, preceded by a period of heightened tensions." President Kennedy walks out of the meeting, saying to Secretary of State Dean Rusk, "And we call ourselves the human race."

There was a concern among hawks that by 1964-65, the US would lose its overwhelming nuclear superiority, and its ability to launch a preemptive strike and win a nuclear war.

But it was the high-level elites who put the lid on all of that Seven Days in May plotting, and recast the patsy as a demented loner and covered the whole thing up to prevent a war and keep the US from looking like a banana republic.

[Jim DiEugenio]

Mr. Locke:

Obviously, you have never read Gibson's books. Therefore you are trying to make a comparison in at least a half blind manner.

If you read Domhoff, or Mills, the thing that will strike most of us quickest is that they do not separate out Kennedy from the eastern establishment. In fact, Domhoff actually includes him as part of that paradigm. This is why, after having read those books, Don decided to write his book. Because he knew just how wrong they were.

So Don used his book, beginning brilliantly with the steel crisis, to show why and how Kennedy acted, and who he was acting against. That opening chapter is, for me, the single best analysis of that slighted event. And it shows beautifully how all the major directors of the steel companies were interrelated and close to the Rockefellers and Morgans. And he shows that this was not really about steel prices. It was an early face off between two views of the economy: Kennedy's and the Power Elite's.

As per the comment about the "model", Don did not need to work through a model like Evica. He was firmly of the conviction right from the start that the Power Elite had killed Kennedy. It was Evica who worked through all of these Scottian stages, as shown above, until he finally realized he was wandering around without a Big Picture.

If you don't like the answer to your question, don't blame the messenger.

[Albert Doyle]

Drago answered Jim's response. His response struck me as haughty bombast that repeated and protested Jim's contentions but didn't really answer what Jim was saying.

I think this site needs to have a good debate and would be for Drago being allowed a truce and posting ability. Though I'm sure this would be temporary since he will probably inevitably get himself moderated.


Right now I kind of side with Jim because Charles has huffed and puffed but he really hasn't disproven what Jim said. And if Evica was influenced by Gibson, what's the big deal? Why the call to dueling for such a trivial matter?