Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book

[James H. Fetzer]

The astounding varieties of fallacies--mostly straw men, ad hominems, and special pleading--being committed here simply astonishes me. When I have the time and the game is not looming, I will inventory some of them. DiEugenio has exaggerated my position at least a half dozen times in these exchanges, which suggests scant regard for the truth and a willingness to engage in unscrupulous tactics when the evidence is against him. And to discount what Billy Sol or E. Howard Hunt has to tell us on the grounds that they are criminals or crooks is as blatant a form of the ad hominem as it gets. We have to consider what they have to tell separate from our preconceptions of the source in relation to what else we know about the case. That handicaps the DiEugenios, who know neither the medical, the ballistic, or the photographic and film evidence. Has none of you bothered to consider my arguments about what the cover-up tells us about the case? Who could have had the limo sent back to Ford and be completely rebuilt? The Mafia could not have extended its reach into the Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter X-rays under the control of agents of the Secret Service, medical officers of the US Navy, and the president's personal physician. Neither pro nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted another brain for that of JFK. And even if the KGB had the ability to recreate films comparable to the CIA and Hollywood, it could not have got a hold of a copy of the Zapruder. These aspects of the cover-up had to involve complicity of officials at the highest level of the American government, surely either J. Edgar Hoover or Lyndon Johnson himself. Drago and DiEugenio do not seem to me to have thought all of this through.

Madeleine, Billy Sol, Barr and E. Howard Hunt knew the man "up close and personal". Discounting their reports because you don't trust them or don't like them or whatever is to abandon serious research for the disreputable tactics of con-men, not scholars. As Robert Morrow has observed, what kind of people do you think LBJ was associating with? EGAD! HE HAD HIS OWN PERSONAL HITMAN. From persons like Drago and DiEugenio, this is not simply disappointing but seriously disconcerting. Not too put too fine a point on it, but I have asked Charles several times in the past whether he had read Phil's book, which he studiously avoided answering. Having you answer it instead is not very reassuring. I therefore ask Charles, when did you obtain Phil's book and when did you read it? Because I have seen no indication that you know any more about this book than it's title, where you have beaten the solitary word "mastermind" repeatedly and mindlessly, even though I have explained exactly what I mean by LBJ as "the pivotal player" many times now. That did not require reading the book, and I doubt that you have even now. I am troubled that others who appear to know no more about LBJ would pick up the banner that Charles is pushing and wave it over and over and over again. IT IS ABSURD TO DISCOUNT LBJ'S PIVOTAL ROLE on the grounds that he wasn't taking pesonal control of every minute detail! That is about as pathetic an appeal to the straw man as I have ever encountered in (what is supposed to pass for) serious discourse. I really expected more serious research here than has been displayed on this thread. If I have to go through all of this to sort out the rubbish, then I will. But you are going to have to forgive me if I only offer a random sample. So much is being dumped here that I am simply overwhelmed.

Enjoy the game. I look forward to your response to CD's points. And he has read the book. Which makes him the perfect person to critique it here.
Dawn

[Charles Drago]

And to discount what Billy Sol or E. Howard Hunt has to tell us on the grounds that they are criminals or crooks is as blatant a form of the ad hominem as it gets.

I discount Hunt not because he is telling me things I don't believe (I am of the highly informed opinion that, for instance, Hunt is telling the truth when he identifies David Sanchez Morales as a key Facilitator [my word, not his; and in the Evica/Drago definition]). Rather, I discount Hunt because A) he is not telling me anything I didn't already know; and B) his profession -- at which he excelled -- was propagandist/disinformationalist, and there is not a scintilla of evidence to suggest that he got religion at the very end. Unless, of course, you are moved to abandon your critical faculties and shed a tear for the poor, emaciated man on his deathbed.

Hunt presents us with a classic limited hangout. And in the process, he pulls down your drawers so that you can do likewise.

Who could have had the limo sent back to Ford and be completely rebuilt? The Mafia could not have extended its reach into the Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter X-rays under the control of agents of the Secret Service, medical officers of the US Navy, and the president's personal physician. Neither pro nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted another brain for that of JFK. And even if the KGB had the ability to recreate films comparable to the CIA and Hollywood, it could not have got a hold of a copy of the Zapruder. These aspects of the cover-up had to involve complicity of officials at the highest level of the American government, surely either J. Edgar Hoover or Lyndon Johnson himself. Drago and DiEugenio do not seem to me to have thought all of this through.

So let's be clear, Jim: Anyone who does not agree with your analyses has simply "failed to have thought all of this through"?

I've had just about enough of your personal disparagments, and I'll go into detail below.

OF COURSE there is every reason to conclude that some of the highest officials of the over-government were complicit in the assassination -- including Messrs. Hoover and Johnson. But how do you travel from this realization to the Johnson-as-"mastermind" construction?

Madeleine, Billy Sol, Barr and E. Howard Hunt knew the man "up close and personal". Discounting their reports because you don't trust them or don't like them or whatever is to abandon serious research for the disreputable tactics of con-men, not scholars.

Will you PLEASE stop making a fool of yourself by embracing Hunt and his disinformation? Where is the scholarship evident in your seeming dismissal of all that Hunt proved himself to be in life and your subsequent endorsement of what should be to all savvy, thinking deep political analysts Hunt's final masterpiece of disinformation?

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. Prove to me that the forger of the JFK Diem assassination cables saw the error of his ways and came clean on his deathbed.

Until you can, your embrace of Hunt is a stain on your remarkable, valuable, respectable record as a seeker and defender of truth.

I have asked Charles several times in the past whether he had read Phil's book, which he studiously avoided answering. Having you answer it instead is not very reassuring. I therefore ask Charles, when did you obtain Phil's book and when did you read it? Because I have seen no indication that you know any more about this book than it's title, where you have beaten the solitary word "mastermind" repeatedly and mindlessly, even though I have explained exactly what I mean by LBJ as "the pivotal player" many times now. That did not require reading the book, and I doubt that you have even now.

Jim, this time you've gone too far. I have written on this thread that I have read Nelson's book. You will either take me at my word or call me a liar. Which is it?

Until you answer this question directly, I shall interpret your "I doubt that you have [read the book] even now" as an accusation that I am lying.

Absent a direct answer, I am done with you.

I am troubled that others who appear to know no more about LBJ would pick up the banner that Charles is pushing and wave it over and over and over again. IT IS ABSURD TO DISCOUNT LBJ'S PIVOTAL ROLE on the grounds that he wasn't taking pesonal control of every minute detail! That is about as pathetic an appeal to the straw man as I have ever encountered in (what is supposed to pass for) serious discourse.

Well, perhaps not quite done.

I NEVER DISCOUNTED LBJ'S PIVOTAL ROLE on ANY grounds. For you to claim otherwise is to offer a classic example of strawman creation.

You will not answer the questions I have posed repeatedly:

How do you define "mastermind" as used by Nelson?

Do you conclude that LBJ had the authority to order the assassination, the skills to plan it in detail, and the power to command the deep political state to do his bidding? All of which would be expected of the plot's "mastermind."

Do you, Jim? Put up or shut up.

The title of the book you champion -- and that I have read -- is NOT LBJ: The Pivotal Player in JFK's Assassination. If it were, we would not be enjoying this lovely exchange.

Within that single word -- "mastermind" -- Nelson gives away the shallowness of his intellectual grasp of the English language, let alone of the deep political milieu. And he just may be giving away a hole lot more.

There. I'm done with you until you answer my main question:

Are you calling me a liar?

Charles

[Phil Dragoo]

With the right welding rod, and the dial adjusted correctly, the pieces cleaned, aligned and clamped, the river of molten metal applies itself, drawing the mechanic into the process.


Briefly, I noted that I early marked the Hunt Deathbed Deflection, that it deflects blame from the true sponsors, as do Zirbel, McClellan, Nelson et al.


Johnson was a bad man, but not any mastermind, for he was expendable.


He was dropped from the rod clamp in March 1968 and tossed in the dumpster 1973.


He took his place on the Great Mandala.


Along come the true sponsors with their leaf blower.


The End.

[Charles Drago]

Jim,

I apologize.

I will NOT let Nelson and his short bus Sancho Panza alienate us.

That is, after all, their game. Whether or not you know it yet.

Let's you and I fight this out. We don't have to like each other all the time, just so long as we emerge from this with our overall alliance intact.

But I for one refuse to let the bastards win.

So go ahead ... call me a liar. I've been called worse.

At the end of the day, I'll fly to Minnesota, we'll break bread, and we'll mutually agree that that which unites us is vastly stronger than all that would divide us.

Until then: Nice try, Nelson. You lose.

Charles

[Peter Lemkin]

Can everyone take a few minutes of deep breathing/meditation hutup: and/or a long walk before continuing with or stoking these rather angry responses. mallprint:

This subject is not trivial, but the arguments, IMHO, are getting lost in the growing [and mildly upsetting] vitriol.

Decorum Befitting This Forum would be nice, 'lest we self-destruct. Civility?


mileymad:angryfire:angeldevil:

[Jim DiEugenio]

Let me be short and to the point:

Anyone who buys the so-called "Hunt confession" has not studied the circumstances that surrounded it.

This includes Jesse and his cohorts, and ALex Jones and his gang.

And now Fetzer. The difference being the latter has a Ph. D.

[Dawn Meredith]

Jim,

I apologize.

I will NOT let Nelson and his short bus Sancho Panza alienate us.

That is, after all, their game. Whether or not you know it yet.

Let's you and I fight this out. We don't have to like each other all the time, just so long as we emerge from this with our overall alliance intact.

But I for one refuse to let the bastards win.

So go ahead ... call me a liar. I've been called worse.

At the end of the day, I'll fly to Minnesota, we'll break bread, and we'll mutually agree that that which unites us is vastly stronger than all that would divide us.

Until then: Nice try, Nelson. You lose.

Charles

Bravo, CD.:thumbsup:

[Bernice Moore]

SLOW DOWN ; DITTO...DAWN...:thumbsup:B

[James H. Fetzer]

CORRECTED FOR THE RECORD! 13-0 deserves respect. TCU won this fair and square. I am VERY impressed.

Congratulations, Jack! You and the Las Vegas line had it right (within a point). I certainly underestimated the Horned Frogs, who now have a 13-0 record. That is a most impressive achievement. You were right all along! WELL DONE, MY FRIEND! WELL DONE. YOU AND TCU DESERVED IT. YOU ARE OFF TO A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR!

[Jack White]

Congratulations, Jack! You and the Las Vegas line had it right (within a point). I certainly underestimated the Horned Frogs, who now have a 13-1 record. That is a most impressive achievement. You were right all along! WELL DONE, MY FRIEND! WELL DONE. YOU AND TCU DESERVED IT. YOU ARE OFF TO A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Thanks, Jim. But you have our record wrong. We are still undefeated
and should be #2 in BCS final standings behind winner of "championship"
game.

Jack