Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book

[Robert Morrow]

First of all, I want to say I have no problem with any of the researchers into the 1963 Coup d'Etat who disagree with my theories such as Lyndon Johnson being the Mastermind of the JFK assassination ... I agree with them on some things and disagree with them on others.

I think the CIA did the killing, but the hierachy was Lyndon Johnson, Texas oil barons Murchison and Hunt, and the Rockefellers (CIA/OSS) and Allen Dulles (CIA/OSS). That is your peak of the pyramid.

There is an extremely important passage in Noel Twymann's Bloody Treason; it is on pages 792 to 803 of the hardback version. Twymann details and confirms Lyndon Johnson PERSONALLY calling Will Fritz late on Saturday 11/32/63 and telling him to QUIT investigating the JFK assassination.

Author Noel Twymann spoke to 2 people: Frank B. Harrell and Jim Leavelle. Here is what Twymann says about his meeting with Harrell:

"He was very cooperative. He remembered the lunch and confirmed that Captain Fritz told that story, that Lyndon Johnson had called and ordered Captain Fritz to pull off questioning Oswald." (p. 794, Bloody Treason).

"Harrell says that Fritz was 'pulled off because he was getting too close.' He said that in 'a couple of more hours he'd have broken Oswald, but they pulled Oswald out.'" (p. 794 Bloody Treason)

It is just another example of Lyndon Johnson being so swift and furious with the cover up of the JFK assassination; remember the day before he was telling 2 people a Dallas cop and Gen. Godfrey McHugh that there was an "international conspiracy."

Yes, there was a conspiracy all right - an LBJ/CIA domestic conspiracy to murder JFK!

[James H. Fetzer]

This is a stunningly inadequate response. Having had his bluff called about his
exaggeration of what Lyndon had to control to qualify as the "mastermind", he
sails blithely ahead as though there were no dangers lurking there. For him to
argue at this stage of the debate that there is no evidence that LBJ was handling
Oswald in New Orleans has to establish a new level of absurdity, even for Jimmy
D. If he still has any fans, they might want to reconsider their support for a guy
who doesn't even reply to devastating critiques of his positions across the board.
I will leave Seymour Hersh to Phil, if he chooses to respond. As for myself, I find
these continued displays of incompetence compelling. I am completely convinced!

Well, Nelson apparently does not read dates or footnotes well. Instead he likes calling me a liar. FIrst, its buffoon by Fetzer, and now this.

Hersh wrote two books about My Lai. One in 1970, and one two years later.

I read them both. If you read the first one, it is called My Lai 4. I ask anyone to read it and tell me Hersh is describing a CIA secret op sanctioned by the government.

Now, the second book appeared after the Peers Commission let off everyone but Calley. And then Nixon reduced Calley's term to a three year house arrest. This after over 500 people were slaughtered. Therefore, anyone could surmise, something was wrong someplace. By this time, bits and pieces of the Phoenix Program were being circulated.

So in 1972, Hersh wrote a second book. This was called Cover Up. Now, Nelson insinuates that in footnotes to the Valentine book--which he previously tried to discredit--Doug uses articles written by Hersh in the Ny Times to mention Phoenix. Not so. Doug uses excerpts from the second book. At this time, for reasons previously stated, Hersh could no longer really maintain that My Lai was a spontaneous outburst by combat troops run amok. He had to at least mention Phoenix, since others had also. And this made much more sense as an explanation.

But the incredible thing about the second book is that Hersh still tried to have it both ways. Because although he mentions Phoenix, he also adds this on pages 97-98:

"There was no conspiracy to destroy the village of My Lai 4; what took place there had happened before and would hapen again in Quang Ngai province--although with less than drastic results. The desire of Lt. Colonel Barker to mount another successful, high enemy body count operation in the area. The desire of Ramsdell to demonstrate the effectiveness of his operations, the belief shared by all the principals that everyone living in Son My was staying there by choice because of communists....And the basic incompetence of many intelligence personnel in the Army--all those factors combined to enable a group of ambitious men to mount an unnecessary mission against a nonexistent enemy force, and somehow to find the evidence to justify it all."

Recall, this is 1972. How anyone could write such drivel by that time is just amazing. Apparently Nelson read neither book and he just cherry picked Valentine's. This is a hallmark of his research. He then ignores what Hersh has done with Watergate, his association with Bill Colby in his dispute with Angelton, his work on KAL 007, and most of all his association with Bob Loomis, Mr. JFK Cover up at Random House and sponsor of Jerry Posner. He also ignores the fact that CIA asset Hersh started his book in 1992, right after Stone's film came out.

THat is a lot of stuff to ignore about Nelson's great American Hero.

As per his qualifications now about LBJ as a mastermind, well does this not show the book was mistitled? And I would even argue that point number seven in my list did not at all necessitate Johnson. The military could have curtailed the autopsy itself. But Phil is being less than candid. As Green notes, Nelson goes the whole David Lifton route here. He has LBJ in on the autopsy hijinks right in Dallas. That is how much of a mastermind LBJ really was.

Further, he mentions Harvey and Morales as being enlisted in my previous six points. Harvey has nothing to do with Mexico City or the Paines. Same for Morales. Where was Harvey in New Orleans?

The likely suspects squiring Oswald around as mid level managers from New Orleans to Mexico City to Dallas were Phillips and Hunt. For that we have evidence. For Morales and Harvey we don't.

PS Now that i destroyed Hunt's "confession" and his less than reliable son, Fetzer falls back on Brown, Estes etc. Its his endless shell game.

But like any shell game, there is nothing under the shell.

[Robert Morrow]

Somebody mentioned William Colby, the man who ran the Phoenix operation. Here is a quote from him.

CIA director William Colby to NY Times editor Abe Rosenthal in 1975

New York Times editor Rosenthal asked CIA Director William Colby if the CIA ever killed anybody in this country. Colby replied, "Not in this country." When asked who the CIA had killed Colby said, "I can't talk about it." Colby said, "Sometimes intelligence operations are high-risk, and sometimes they fail. Then, the question is not whether the CIA is some rogue elephant, which it never has been, but rather that we Americans made a mistake through out constitutional system."
[John Armstrong, Harvey and Lee, p. 968]

William Colby is also the man who debriefed Chip Tatum when he came back from his Operation Red Rock into Cambodia; trying to provoke the Cambodians into a war with North Vietnam. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POL...tatum.html

One more key point - Democratic congressman Larry McDonald was like the Ron Paul of his day in the 1970's. He was VERY much opposed to the Rockefellers, the Establishment and the agenda of the Council on Foreign Relations. Google Larry McDonald and you will learn a lot about him: http://targetfreedom.com/cfr/larry-mcdon...rld-order/ Key point: Larry McDonald was anti CFR , anti New World Order, and anti-Rockefeller.



I have a friend (unnamed) who has intelligence contacts and he told me that the tapes that Trenton Parker had were real and that Larry McDonald kept them on his person at all times. Larry McDonald DIED in the KAL 007 plane crash in fall, 1983.

From Defrauding America, Rodney Stich, 3rd edition 1998 p. 638-639]:

"The Role of deep-cover CIA officer, Trenton Parker, has been described in earlier pages, and his function in the CIA's counter-intelligence unit, Pegasus. Parker had stated to me earlier that a CIA faction was responsible for the murder of JFK … During an August 21, 1993, conversation, in response to my questions, Parker said that his Pegasus group had tape recordings of plans to assassinate Kennedy. I asked him, "What group were these tapes identifying?" Parker replied: "Rockefeller, Allen Dulles, Johnson of Texas, George Bush, and J. Edgar Hoover." I asked, "What was the nature of the conversation on these tapes?"

I don't have the tapes now, because all the tape recordings were turned over to [Congressman] Larry McDonald. But I listened to the tape recordings and there were conversations between Rockefeller, [J. Edgar] Hoover, where [Nelson] Rockefeller asks, "Are we going to have any problems?" And he said, "No, we aren't going to have any problems. I checked with Dulles. If they do their job we'll do our job." There are a whole bunch of tapes, because Hoover didn't realize that his phone has been tapped. Defrauding America, Rodney Stich, 3rd edition p. 638-639]:

[Jim DiEugenio]

JF: This is a stunningly inadequate response. Having had his bluff called about his
exaggeration of what Lyndon had to control to qualify as the "mastermind", he
sails blithely ahead as though there were no dangers lurking there. For him to
argue at this stage of the debate that there is no evidence that LBJ was handling
Oswald in New Orleans has to establish a new level of absurdity, even for Jimmy
D. If he still has any fans, they might want to reconsider their support for a guy
who doesn't even reply to devastating critiques of his positions across the board.
I will leave Seymour Hersh to Phil, if he chooses to respond. As for myself, I find
these continued displays of incompetence compelling. I am completely convinced!

Jim, your endless displays of empty bombast are getting up there with the likes of Von Pein. He is a main reason why I am here today and not at Spartacus. I got tired of replying to his nuttiness.

But you try and assume his mantle by ridiculing evidence and then assuming by naked presumption that you proved your argument.

I was very clear in the above as to why Nelson is wrong about Hersh. I provided titles, dates of the books, straightened out his mis citations, and actually quoted from the second book. I have done my homework on this since I wrote about CIA slut Hersh in The Assassinations. On pages 366-69. Evidently, Nelson did not read that book.

Now, I know something about Oswald in New Orleans. I actually wrote a book about it. I then visited the city twice to do on the ground research--the kind you don't do on this case. So please, tell us all: What is the direct evidence for LBJ handling Oswald in New Orleans? And please do not give us something like LBJ knew this guy and this guy knew this guy and this guy knew Banister. That is not evidence. It is an admission you have no evidence with which to make your case.

[Charles Drago]

For him to argue at this stage of the debate that there is no evidence that LBJ was handling Oswald in New Orleans has to establish a new level of absurdity, even for Jimmy D.

I am convinced.

It is so because James Fetzer says it is so.

Johnson was all over New Orleans in the months leading up to the assassination. He had beignets with Bannister, sex with Shaw, ratatouille with Russo, fried fish with Ferrie, bratwurst with Bringuierr, and all the while hand-held the patsy-to-be through every stage of the sheep-dipping which he had planned, between psychotic episodes, over the previous four years.

LBJ, the Big Sleazy, ran the show in the Big Easy! And don't give me any "There isn't a shard of evidence to support such a ludicrous claim!" bullshit.

It is so because James Fetzer says it is so.

[James H. Fetzer]

The very idea that Lyndon had to be controlling Oswald in New Orleans, Mexico
City (if he went there), or even in Dallas to qualify as the "mastermind" boggles
the mind. I have already exposed this shallow form of chicanery. That CHARLES
DRAGO would side with JIM DIEUGENIO in a stunning example of flawed reasoning
is beyond belief. I used to hold at least one of them in high esteem. But persevering
in defense of the indefensible is taking a heavy toll upon my enthusiasm. If there
has ever been a more feeble argument against Lyndon's pivotal role, I can't imagine
what it would be. That Charles aligns himself with such obvious rubbish is pathetic.

I am convinced.

It is so because James Fetzer says it is so.

Johnson was all over New Orleans in the months leading up to the assassination. He had beignets with Bannister, sex with Shaw, ratatouille with Russo, fried fish with Ferrie, bratwurst with Bringuierr, and all the while hand-held the patsy-to-be through every stage of the sheep-dipping which he had planned, between psychotic episodes, over the previous four years.

LBJ, the Big Sleazy, ran the show in the Big Easy! And don't give me any "There isn't a shard of evidence to support such a ludicrous claim!" bullshit.

It is so because James Fetzer says it is so.

[Charles Drago]

Webster definition of "Mastermind": "a person who supplies the directing or creative intelligence for a project" Can you say "ambiguous"? Nothing there about "controlling every single detail" of the "project" that I can see. Hell, given that definition, a person who only had the original germ of an ideaand then had nothing whatsoever to do with its executioncould still qualify.

AND

It has been asserted here that Johnson was not equipped or empowered to have been the "Mastermind". The problem seems to have more to do with semantics than anything substantive with the plot I have advanced. Why is it so difficult for so many to be unable to comprehend that the term is inherently ambiguous and subject to the interpretation of every individual who considers it. At Deep Politics, there seems to be an unwillingness to even acknowledge any definition other than their own, which is "by definition" (see above) misguided. And incorrect. And simply wrong, not to put too fine a point on it.

You can run, but you can't hide, Nelson. I reiterate what I posted earlier today on a related thread:

Phillip F. Nelson, author of LBJ: The Mastermind of JFK's Assassination, unmistakably confirms his acceptance of [the Merriam Webster definition of "mastermind"] as it applies to LBJ when he writes:

"But it was all according to the grand play -- a masterpiece of design and execution -- which had been developed over a period of nearly four years by the most brilliant, and evil, political force the country had ever seen: Lyndon Baines ('Bull') Johnson[.]" [emphasis in original] [p. 576]

Then there's this:

"More than any other person, [LBJ] had the means, motive, and opportunity to have been the singular key conspirator-instigator and the mastermind of the operation." [emphasis added] [p. 668]

These clear, unambiguous, wholly-at-variance-with-the-facts statements by Nelson render inoperative the frantic efforts by his champion, Jim Fetzer, and others to replace "mastermind" with what they beg us to believe is the synonymous "pivotal player."

MW defines "pivotal" as "vitally important."

I submit that anyone who accepts "mastermind" and "pivotal" as being synonymous within the larger context of JFK assassination roles attributed to LBJ is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

Nelson writing above, displays the audacity to try to spin the focus onto a dictionary defintion and away from his own fetid words: "Nothing there about 'controlling every single detail' of the 'project' that I can see."

How dare you?

I reiterate for clarity and emphasis: Nelson today writes, "Why is it so difficult for so many to be unable to comprehend that the term is inherently ambiguous and subject to the interpretation of every individual who considers it.[sic]"

Nelson in his book wrote, ""But it was all according to the grand play -- a masterpiece of design and execution -- which had been developed over a period of nearly four years by the most brilliant, and evil, political force the country had ever seen: Lyndon Baines ('Bull') Johnson[.]" [emphasis in original] [p. 576]

And

"More than any other person, [LBJ] had the means, motive, and opportunity to have been the singular key conspirator-instigator and the mastermind of the operation." [emphasis added] [p. 668]

You will not be allowed to run and hide from your words and your mission, Nelson.

YOU chose the word for your title, Nelson.

YOU unambiguously confirmed your understanding of the unambiguous definition of word in the within-context excerpts quoted above, Nelson.

Now YOU backpeddle, in the company of Jim Fetzer, by claiming that the entire mess is attributable to "semantics."

For the last time: YOU argue, Nelson, that Lyndon Baines Johnson conceived, constructed, instigated, controlled in every significant way, and protected the conspiracy that took the life of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. "Who else" could have done it? you ask in your disingenuous book.

In doing so, you falsely elevate to Sponsor status a man who, at the height of his power and influence, was nothing more than an important but ultimately controlled Facilitator for the true planners and initiators.

That act, of which you are unambiguously guilty, Nelson, by its very nature helps prolong the coverup, invite ridicule to be visited upon the work of those who have labored so gallantly in the quests for truth and justice for JFK, and protect the true Sponsors of the president's murder.

Peddle your disinformation where it's likely to be believed.

Charles R. Drago

[Jim DiEugenio]

Ok, now Fetzer seems to be backtracking even further.

For now he has dropped any pretense of LBJ handling Oswald in New Orleans, and in fact Mexico City.

So that narrows down the mastermind rubric quite a bit.

So if LBJ was not in on the setting up of Oswald, then what are you now saying?

That he only controlled things in Dallas?

Ok, then what did he control and how did he control it?

Did LBJ arrange the shooting of Officer Tippit? How?

Did Mac Wallace kill Kennedy? THen who were the other assassins?

Did LBJ send Ruby to kill Oswald? What is the evidence for this?

[James H. Fetzer]

Nice to see that Phil has finally gotten a hold of a copy of the book. DiEugenio
continues to astonish and bewilder! I HAVE NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LBJ
WAS CONTROLLING OSWALD ANYWHERE. He did reach out to DA Wade
and to Will Fritz to control the investigation. But he also played a key role
in setting it up, including sending Cliff Carter, his chief administrative aide,
to Dallas to make sure all of the arrangements were in place for the murder.
With the CIA and the Joint Chiefs on his side, he didn't have to "do it all"!

This has to be another example where Jim is so careless and incapable of
serious thought that he attacks me with baseless drivel. I can't believe--will,
I guess NOW I can!--that after I have exposed his shoddy tactics by relying
upon exaggerated versions of my position THAT HE WOULD DO IT AGAIN.
Your learning curve must have a downward slope, Jim. And that Charles, who
has finally begun to read the book--where this post provides conclusive proof
he hadn't read it before!--tells me that he is going to have to reread the thread.

For Charles to be recycling ridiculous canards about DISINFORMATION and
all that when they have already been blown out of the water is stunning and
tells me that, alas, Jim is not the only one here who is capable of shoddy
reasoning. DRAGO EVEN SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN BY JIM'S TRIPE
AS TO WHAT DEGREE OF CONTROL LBJ HAD TO HAVE IN THIS CASE. He,
too, is operation on assumptions proven false. If Charles is not completely
blowing his capital on this exchange, then I can't imagine what it would take.

Ok, now Fetzer seems to be backtracking even further.

For now he has dropped any pretense of LBJ handling Oswald in New Orleans, and in fact Mexico City.

So that narrows down the mastermind rubric quite a bit.

So if LBJ was not in on the setting up of Oswald, then what are you now saying?

That he only controlled things in Dallas?

Ok, then what did he control and how did he control it?

Did LBJ arrange the shooting of Officer Tippit? How?

Did Mac Wallace kill Kennedy? THen who were the other assassins?

Did LBJ send Ruby to kill Oswald? What is the evidence for this?

[Charles Drago]

And that Charles, who
has finally begun to read the book--where this post provides conclusive proof
he hadn't read it before!--tells me that he is going to have to reread the thread.

And so it ends.

Let this last claim of "conclusive proof" of something that is patently false tell us all we need to know about the tragedy that is Jim Fetzer's fall.

It is of a kind with Jim's conclusive proof that Hunt was telling the truth, that Nelson is guilty at most poor word choice ...

But why go on?

Jim, you've called me a liar on at least three occasions. You were and are wrong, although I believe you suspended all critical judgement in the rush to defend your indefensible positions and thus convinced yourself that your accusations about me were true.

They were not.

I forgive you. I seek no apology. Life goes on.

Time will heal whatever wounds linger.

And the truth will set us free.

In the meantime, I shall consider my capital spent as far as you're concerned. I wish you well with your investments in the disinformationalist Nelson and the idiot son, Morrow.

Charles