Lifton on DiEugenio on JFK offering the Vice Presidential nomination to LBJ . . .

[Dawn Meredith]

Oh Great!

Maybe Mr.Lifton would like to come over here and fight this one for himself.......

:zzzz:

Kindly keep the arguments at the EF there.
I can't believe you began a thread for this.
Dawn

Dawn:

Why did you quote me?I didn't start this thread.I did give a cynical opinion about what I see as another pissing match being foisted upon us by our beloved JFK brain trust. :monkeypiss:

Sorry Keith, I see that it looks like I was blaming you for the thread. That was not my intent.

[Dawn Meredith]

No one is saying that LBJ was not involved. Anyone who has studied this case for even a few months comes away knowing that LBJ was complicit. Why do people keep arguing this point? Over a word, a concept? How many threads will be started over the word "mastermind?" How come I don't see any of you posting in the Grand Jury thread? Makes me wonder if some are not simply content to argue rather than try to put some energy into something constructive.

Dawn

[James H. Fetzer]

Lyndon was is desperate straits with a vote on the Bobby Baker scandal scheduled for the Senate the afternoon of 22 November 1963. Nixon was quoted in the Dallas Morning News that day saying that he did not think JFK would run with him again in 1964. The TFX and Henry Marshall scandals were developing in the wings. He even sent Cliff Carter, his chief administrative assistant, to Dallas to make sure all of the arrangements for the assassination were in place. He had a huge argument with JFK that morning trying to get Big John out of limo and Ralph Yarborough in, where JFK overrode him on the ground that the chief executive of the state should ride with the chief executive of the United States. The change in the location where JFK would speak from the Women's Forum to the Trade Mart was arranged by John Connally on 18 November 1963, just three days before the event, who called Kenny O'Donnell at the White House, which was used to justify a change in the motorcade route to bring the target to the kill zone. If you want to make a game out of the use of the word "mastermind", be my guest. But there is no basis in the evidence for denying that Lyndon was the pivotal player who made it happen, where the CIA, the Joint Chiefs, the FBI, the anti-Castro Cubans, and the law enforcement authorities in Dallas were accomplices. Of that, there can be no serious doubt. If you can't figure it out now, given the evidence that I have provided (and vastly more that Phil and others have advanced), then the problem lies within you, Charles, in your stubborn refusal to acknowledge the central figure in the death of our 35th president, who had more to gain personally than anyone else in the world. Lyndon was the pivotal player without whom it would not have occurred.

Charles,

We've "been there, done that"! I am disappointed that you are continuing this
... assault on [a] man who has done more research on this topic (LBJ) than has anyone else in the world.

Don't worry, Jim. I for one will not sing another chorus of "It's the Same Old Song and Dance" (Sinatra, from the Capitol years). Instead I'll do nothing in this post but find points of agreement with you. To begin:

1. Nelson likely has done more research on LBJ within the JFK assassination context than almost anyone else in the world. More is more.

He confirms and reinforces what I have learned from Jack Ruby, Madeleine Duncan Brown (personally), Billy SolvEstes, Barr McClellan, and E. Howard Hunt[.]

2. I'm sure Nelson does confirm everything you've learned from the likes of Ruby, Duncan Brown, Estes, McClellan, and E. Howard Hunt. No argument from me. Everything he writes smacks of their respective enlightenment, sophistication, moral character, emotional well-being, and truthfulness.

I'd even go so far as to say that Hunt is Nelson's spiritual father and role model. The old spook would be proud of Sinjin's blood brother.

Those who discount or otherwise disregard the essential evidence they provide with regard to the character and conduct of Lyndon Baines Johnson are consigned to ignorance.

3. AGREED -- beyond all doubt and to the degree of metaphysical certitude. What they've taught me about the true role of LBJ in the SPONSOR/FACILITATOR-FALSE SPONSOR/MECHANIC assassination model cannot be overvalued.

Believe what you will, but it you are looking for the truth, Nelson provides it.

4. AGREED! And I would be remiss if I did not credit Professor Peter Dale Scott for all he has taught me about how to recognize the appropriate opportunities to apply negative templates and the methods and values of their applications.


And from one of your earlier posts:

Only someone of the warped character and consuming ambition of Lyndon Johnson, who was in the ideal position to make it happen ... would have allowed this to happen.

5. SPOT-ON! Sorta like how Allen Glick allowed the Mob to skim the Stardust.

[Charles Drago]

Edited by cd: Double post.

[Charles Drago]

the problem lies within you, Charles, in your stubborn refusal to acknowledge the central figure in the death of our 35th president, who had more to gain personally than anyone else in the world. Lyndon was the pivotal player without whom it would not have occurred.

Again in the spirit of respectful detente, I offer not criticism but only praise.

I cannot speak for anyone but myself, but I am humbled by the sheer volume of Jim's analyses of this case. Proof?

1. He has studied every person alive in the entire world at the time of JFK's death in order to determine that it was LBJ who had more to gain than any of them by the president's elimination.

2. He has studied every possible assassination scenario and determined that there was one way ONLY to kill JFK.

I stand in awe of such labor and logic.

[James H. Fetzer]

Except, of course, only one man in the world was the Vice President of the United States at the time and, should some ill-fate befall his predecessor, be in a position to insure that no one would ever be prosecuted for the crime. While my friend Charles makes an impeccable point of logic, its value is constrained by history. One and only one man was in the position to make sure it happened and guarantee that it would be covered up (with a little help from his friends among the Joint Chiefs and the Secret Service, on the one hand, and his dear, lifelong "brother", J. Edgar and the FBI, on the other). There were many ways to kill him, as JFK himself had observed. But if it had not been done in broad daylight before hundreds of witnesses, no one would have had any doubt that a conspiracy had been in place. The whole purpose of executing him in a public plaza and then stealing the body to manipulate the evidence, including altering the X-rays and photographs, substituting another brain, and recreating the film--not to mention having the "crime scene on wheels" send back to Ford to be rebuilt already on Monday, the 25th, the day of the formal state funeral--was to deceive the public about the true causes of his death. There is a point when appealing to abstract possibilities, as Charles does here, no longer cuts it because the accumulation of evidence is simply overwhelming. I am a huge fan of him, but his account is overdrawn in this regard and a decent respect for logic and evidence should tell him that the time has come to cut his losses and turn his attention to more promising issues. I prefer it when we battle side-by-side rather than head-to-head!

the problem lies within you, Charles, in your stubborn refusal to acknowledge the central figure in the death of our 35th president, who had more to gain personally than anyone else in the world. Lyndon was the pivotal player without whom it would not have occurred.

Again in the spirit of respectful detente, I offer not criticism but only praise.

I cannot speak for anyone but myself, but I am humbled by the sheer volume of Jim's analyses of this case. Proof?

1. He has studied every person alive in the entire world at the time of JFK's death in order to determine that it was LBJ who had more to gain than any of them by the president's elimination.

2. He has studied every possible assassination scenario and determined that there was one way ONLY to kill JFK.

I stand in awe of such labor and logic.

[Charles Drago]

I prefer it when we battle side-by-side rather than head-to-head!

So do I, Jim. So do I.

Accordingly, I'll abandon sarcasm and stand beside you (I'm to your left) as I make my final (God willing) comments on this subject:

Except, of course, only one man in the world was the Vice President of the United States at the time and, should some ill-fate befall his predecessor, be in a position to insure that no one would ever be prosecuted for the crime.

Remember, I'm not being sarcastic. In the paragraph above you neatly summarize the importance of LBJ to the conspirators' grand design. His cooperation was the sine qua non for the coverup's success.

While my friend Charles makes an impeccable point of logic, its value is constrained by history. One and only one man was in the position to make sure it happened[.]

And here's where I must note one of the fatal flaws in your argument. You fail to follow the word "happened" with the words "as it happened."

[...] and guarantee that it would be covered up (with a little help from his friends among the Joint Chiefs and the Secret Service, on the one hand, and his dear, lifelong "brother", J. Edgar and the FBI, on the other).

I might have used "sister" instead of "brother," but why quibble?

There were many ways to kill him, as JFK himself had observed. But if it had not been done in broad daylight before hundreds of witnesses, no one would have had any doubt that a conspiracy had been in place. The whole purpose of executing him in a public plaza and then stealing the body to manipulate the evidence ... was to deceive the public about the true causes of his death.

Or he could have been poisoned to appear that he died in his sleep of an embolism.

The complex drama that was written for and performed in Dealey Plaza boasted many themes, sub-plots, and sub-texts. The motives of those who commissioned its authors were many and varied. Among their goals, I submit the following pair:

-- Demonstrate their true power to all of JFK's successors, allies and enemies (domestic and foreign), and to all others with delusions of power.

-- Create a mind-numbing event that would usher in an age of uncertainty for all with the temerity to think that history can be known and that enlightenment can follow from such knowledge.

In other words: Stage an event clearly conspiratorial in nature, then have the parent state conclude that it was the work of a lone nut.

So no, Jim, the point was not to deceive the public. It was to CONFUSE and FRIGHTEN and COW the public. It is the very UNCERTAINTY provoked by a public execution that to even the most casual observer was the work of conspirators yet was explained by the parent state as the work of a lone nut that best served the Sponsors' immediate and long-term interests.

The public was not deceived then and is not deceived now. Deception was not the point.

Once LBJ and his co-conspirators secured a parent-state endorsement of the LNT, the deed was effectively done. Perpetual doubt was guaranteed.

DOUBT, not DECEPTION.

[T]he time has come to cut his losses and turn his attention to more promising issues.

To paraphrase myself from an earlier post, I ask you: Are you satisfied that the search for the TRUE Sponsors of JFK's murder is over? Are you ready to close up shop? Are you truly prepared to state for the record that in LBJ we have identified the Sponsor -- the Prime Mover -- of the JFK assassination, and that no further inquiry along these lines is warranted?

Truly?

Because I'm not. And I cannot imagine more "promising" or important "issues" than identifying the individuals and systems responsible for the sponsorship and facilitation of JFK's murder as the first step in our campaign to denude them of their power.

In the grand scheme of things, Lyndon Baines Johnson was, as Hyman Roth might put it, small potatoes.

VERY small potatoes.

Your true comrade,

Charles

[Jan Klimkowski]

The complex drama that was written for and performed in Dealey Plaza boasted many themes, sub-plots, and sub-texts. The motives of those who commissioned its authors were many and varied. Among their goals, I submit the following pair:

-- Demonstrate their true power to all of JFK's successors, allies and enemies (domestic and foreign), and to all others with delusions of power.

-- Create a mind-numbing event that would usher in an age of uncertainty for all with the temerity to think that history can be known and that enlightenment can follow from such knowledge.

In other words: Stage an event clearly conspiratorial in nature, then have the parent state conclude that it was the work of a lone nut.

So no, Jim, the point was not to deceive the public. It was to CONFUSE and FRIGHTEN and COW the public. It is the very UNCERTAINTY provoked by a public execution that to even the most casual observer was the work of conspirators yet was explained by the parent state as the work of a lone nut that best served the Sponsors' immediate and long-term interests.

The public was not deceived then and is not deceived now. Deception was not the point.

Once LBJ and his co-conspirators secured a parent-state endorsement of the LNT, the deed was effectively done. Perpetual doubt was guaranteed.

DOUBT, not DECEPTION.

[T]he time has come to cut his losses and turn his attention to more promising issues.

To paraphrase myself from an earlier post, I ask you: Are you satisfied that the search for the TRUE Sponsors of JFK's murder is over? Are you ready to close up shop? Are you truly prepared to state for the record that in LBJ we have identified the Sponsor -- the Prime Mover -- of the JFK assassination, and that no further inquiry along these lines is warranted?

Truly?

Because I'm not. And I cannot imagine more "promising" or important "issues" than identifying the individuals and systems responsible for the sponsorship and facilitation of JFK's murder as the first step in our campaign to denude them of their power.

In the grand scheme of things, Lyndon Baines Johnson was, as Hyman Roth might put it, small potatoes.

VERY small potatoes.

Your true comrade,

Charles

Carve it into parchment using the finest calligraphy, frame it, and hang it on the wall.

[Stan Wilbourne]

When is David Rockefeller and the Rockefeller Empire going to get the LBJ (did it) treatment from the JFK Assassination Research Community?

That I want to see.

[Charles Drago]

There's a reception scheduled for later this year.

At Megan Marshack's Mayfair manse.