The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue

[Charles Drago]

Betrayal in Dallas: LBJ, the Pearl Street Mafia, and the Murder of President Kennedy, due on or about July 11, will be the next book designed to reinforce the FALSE Sponsorship of LBJ in the Kennedy Assassination.

Preliminary reports suggest that a Johnson/Hoover/Mob alliance did the deed will be the central thesis of North's hypothesis.

With each passing day it appears more likely that LBJ will be the False Sponsor of choice to permeate the 50th anniversary observations of JFK's murder. This is a brilliant disinformation strategy -- one that we must fight tooth and nail if we are to establish truth and effect justice in this case.

That being noted, one is hard pressed to determine how to counter simple-minded appeals to the simple-minded.

The 50th anniversary will be our last stand. Fight the LBJ False Sponsor proponents as if your life depended on it.

Because it does.

[Jim DiEugenio]

What is the point of this book?

You would think that Mark North would have retired after his first book. Which proffered a Mafia plot which Hoover ignored. (And which, BTW, Bugliosi liked.)

Now he spices up his Mafia tripe with LBJ?

Geez. You would think that the ARRB had not declassified 2 million pages to these guys. THey want to take us back to pre ARRB days.

Why?

ANd why does Skyhorse publish this crap?

[Seamus Coogan]

What is the point of this book?

You would think that Mark North would have retired after his first book. Which proffered a Mafia plot which Hoover ignored. (And which, BTW, Bugliosi liked.)

Now he spices up his Mafia tripe with LBJ?

Geez. You would think that the ARRB had not declassified 2 million pages to these guys. THey want to take us back to pre ARRB days.

Why?

ANd why does Skyhorse publish this crap?

Well, well, well we are finally on a forum at the same time chief.

I agree with CD's POV completely. This Johnson did it bunk is just getting intense. Anybody who is writing about this subject should go to a forum and check out the ludicrous debates made by the Johnson did it or the Mob-LBJ-CIA-FBI and Strawberry Shortcakes body was altered group. Then they would realise the issue is contentious, dubious, sloppy enema inducing :nurse:and seriously not worth studying.

Well that's basically what anyone with any judgement would do. Sadly their are numerous people who don't see it that way.

I think theres a very real effort afoot here and I suggest CD and Chief that its a faction of conservative assets seeking to pull a 'Dems kill their own' angle on this shite. As well as spread disinformation. I also think that this Johnson did it baloney is designed to crowd out JFK and the Unspeakable and Brothers myself.

I'll leave you two to guess who the biggest conduit of Langleys bull is and who will undoubtedly support this complete and utter :monkeypiss:

[Charles Drago]

Let me make this clear:

Whatever transpired within these cyber-pages over the past six weeks regarding the LBJ business in certain instances went beyond what are acceptable means of discourse on DPF.

Take it from me. No one knows sin better than a sinner.

In creating this thread I am being most careful to eschew ad hominems and other rhetorical devices that muddy rather than purify the waters.

We shall continue to watch for efforts to steer us away from the truth and toward, among other disinformation-based constructs, FALSE Sponsors.

LBJ is hardly alone as a False Sponsor of the JFK assassination.

Let's keep our eyes on the prize, comrades.

[Seamus Coogan]

I'm no saint either but I thought you were positively mild in comparison to certain other people who shall remain nameless.

[Jack White]

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

[Magda Hassan]

Nice clarification there Jack Thanks.

[Jim DiEugenio]

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.

[Seamus Coogan]

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

Jack before you call CD 'convoluted' I'll remind you of what you wrote mate.

"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."

Thats a veritable mouthful sun shine. :vomit:
And lets be Frank Cassano (one of the most upfront cats you'll ever meet) about this. Because as he says to me regularly 'This type of @#$% is not at all encouraging'.

I think that out of all of the researchers who represent the more extreme viewpoints in the case your by far one of the most reasonable and in my opinion more readable and polite of them. Jim Marrs (a good bloke like yourself) is a person whom backs some interesting stuff at times. Enough of this feel good however. The big issue here Jack is that by weilding a grouping as big and as ambiguous as this (the nebulous not 'new' world order for starters companero) is just.....well........silly.

The problem for Jim Marrs is that by making comments like that, all sorts of creepy crawlies come out of the carpet. People like John Hankey get a shot at the title. JVB pulls on the heart strings of every middle aged man she encounters. Our dear 'Ron' becomes deepthroat and fobs off photo copied non CIA documents on highly lit over passes. People let their imaginations run into over time. It gets people to endorse the work of John Hankey. Barr McClellan and Phil Nelson as being the equal of works like Talbot's, Morleys and Jim Douglas.

This is the problem and for every amount of gold we extract from this thing the disinfo influenced crowd dig up a pipeline of shite. Since the defenders of the lone nut line in government and beyond can't really fight Talbot, Morley and JD on the share majority of issues they point out-the next best thing is too try and equate lesser researchers with them and their work. It's almost like leaching off of a legacy. If the kook says 'this guy inspired me' wouldn't you wanna keep your distance? I sure as hell know I would if I didn't know any better.

If John Hanky or Alex Jones said they got all of their information from me CD or Jim Di you don't think we'd look like complete turnips? Unless theres a stunning transformation in content from people like this I wouldn't wanna go near them. As Lisa Pease said there is a hierarchy of truth and their is a hierarchy of researchers I agree with Jim Di even more so here. Jack I have to ask what was the ARRB and what did it outline?

Nothing thats in this new piece of garbage thats going to be ate up and rolled over on by many a useful idiot unfortunately.

[Jim DiEugenio]

If I did not add, let me do so now. Mark North's previous book, is one of VB's faves.