The LBJ-Did-It Operation Continues to Unfold

[Charles Drago]

Talk about an impossible mission!

Yet it may be all too possible ...

Over at the Disinformation Bazaar known as the Education Forum, a certain "Jim Phelps" (what, "Dan Briggs" was taken?) appears as the latest tout to be assigned to the LBJ-as-Prime-Mover operation.

The title of "Phelps'" newest thread there:

"A Zionist Shoots his way into the Cat Bird Seat: Just about everyone knows LBJ was the top Conspirator"

To buttress "his" argument, "Phelps" drags out the wholly discredited Regicide, by the wholly discredited Gregory Douglas.

"Phelps" also is prone to lengthy, multiple part posts -- another tactic used by disinformers to confuse and misdirect.

And it gets better. Currently "he's" engaged in a three-way with Robert Morrow and "Len Colby."

They take each other so seriously and treat each other with such respect ... paradigms of academic discourse, one and all.

And we are left to marvel at the fatal naïveté displayed by those who, ostensibly in deference to a standard of decorum, allow the disinformation and other forms of enemy action to continue unabated and unrecognized for what they truly are.

[Jan Klimkowski]

"Phelps" also is prone to lengthy, multiple part posts -- another tactic used by disinformers to confuse and misdirect.

And it gets better. Currently "he's" engaged in a three-way with Robert Morrow and "Len Colby."

"Phelps" and "Morrow" and "Colby" engaged in an entirely faux fight in a blind alley....

To adapt the codshit tag line: serious disinformation with a core of banality.

[Simon McConnell]

Hello everyone, I came across this fascinating forum the other day after re-igniting my interest in the JFK assassination, mainly by watching the 'Evidence of Revision' films.

I've been immensely impressed by the level of knowledge contained in these threads and just wanted to ask a question.

I've seen alot of comment about the LBJ role, its centrality to the plot, or lack thereof. Can any of the posters who believe that LBJ was not directly responsible or centrally involved in the plot outline briefly why they believe this to be so?

I can't give a great argument for him being involved aside from the apparent motives that someone in his position would have and his personal history. That said, I've been unable to locate a concise argument on this forum from the detractors of the 'LBJ didn't do it' contingent.

I'm sorry if I'm treading over old ground here and I'm not trying to antagonize anybody. I'm just genuinely interested to hear both sides of the story.

[Magda Hassan]

Welcome Simon! I too am a fan of the 'Evidence of Revision' films. They speak for themselves as far as a conspiracy goes. We welcome genuine enquiry here so feel free to ask and explore. While LBJ played a pivotal role in the assassination it seems clear that JFK was going down with or with out LBJ. He was, in the end, a dispensible participant in the event. He played his role well and helped in the cover up but was at the end of the string and not pulling them. Other here will have more to say about this.

[Jack White]

Hello everyone, I came across this fascinating forum the other day after re-igniting my interest in the JFK assassination, mainly by watching the 'Evidence of Revision' films.

I've been immensely impressed by the level of knowledge contained in these threads and just wanted to ask a question.

I've seen alot of comment about the LBJ role, its centrality to the plot, or lack thereof. Can any of the posters who believe that LBJ was not directly responsible or centrally involved in the plot outline briefly why they believe this to be so?

I can't give a great argument for him being involved aside from the apparent motives that someone in his position would have and his personal history. That said, I've been unable to locate a concise argument on this forum from the detractors of the 'LBJ didn't do it' contingent.

I'm sorry if I'm treading over old ground here and I'm not trying to antagonize anybody. I'm just genuinely interested to hear both sides of the story.

LBJ was "THE vital participant" in the plot, but was not at the top of the pyramid.
He took his orders from "higher-ups".

Jack

[Simon McConnell]

So I'm sitting there watching 'The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald' and I get a reply from Jack White... :flypig: No really, I was!

Thanks for your replies Jack and Magda.

So if LBJ wasn't at 'the top of the pyramid' or was a 'dispensable participant,' then who or what was?

Does the 'Higher-Ups' refer to forces within the CIA or other government agencies?

I'm sorry if this is a horribly crude question but my main reason for asking it is to gain some insight that might guide me in my further reading on the assassination.

Thanks in advance,

Simon

[Magda Hassan]

That's the $64,000 question, isn't it? We love to have a name to pin it on. And there certainly are names but perhaps more importantly it is the forces at work. People come and go but the power structure of the state, secret or other wise, continues. Simon have you read 'JFK and the Unspeakable' by James Douglass? If not, I'd highly recommend you do.

[Phil Dragoo]

Simon


Lyndon Johnson loathed John Kennedy, opposed him on many policies, and was benefited by the assassination.


I believe he was a conscious participant in the coverup, but that the planning and execution, as well as the overarching shadow government transcends the ambitious politician and the hawkish general, the cunning mobster and the angry oil man.


In short, the CIA has its hand in the mailed fist, played a role which preceded and outlasted the various terra cotta warriors.


Though Johnson avoided prison and being dropped from the ticket, he withdrew from the 1968 election as a beaten man, fearing defeat by Humphrey, and defeat in Vietnam.


His death by heart attack occurred between the same for Hoover, and the resignation of Nixonbrought on by Hunt, a CIA man unto death, acting as Helm's agent.


Ford the stooge of Hoover succeeded Nixon and appointed GHWBush DCI.


Our current president continued the policies in Afghanistan of our previous presidentthough the two gave every superficial appearance of diametric divergence.


Hunt's deathbed deflection of blame from CIA to LBJ fits the series of LBJ proponents including the trio mentioned by Charles Drago above.


Johnson did not control the Oswald file, did not manipulate Oswald into the Depository, did not control the autopsy, and so on through the HSCA and Blakey's lies, the Secret Service's destruction of its records, the CIA's continuing stonewalling on Joannides, the classification of the Lopez Report and a thousand other matters.


Johnson was on the phone with Hoover within 24 hours to insure a coverup. He was dead in 1973. Why does the coverup persist.


He was not involved in the creation of two Oswalds per the work of John Armstrong, nor involved in the Mexico City charade, nor the role of Hunt in destroying Nixon, and so much more.


As Magda has suggested, an excellent crystallization of the entire web surrounding the lone champion of peace and reason exists in the 2008 James Douglass JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it matters.

[Jack White]

So I'm sitting there watching 'The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald' and I get a reply from Jack White... :flypig: No really, I was!

Thanks for your replies Jack and Magda.

So if LBJ wasn't at 'the top of the pyramid' or was a 'dispensable participant,' then who or what was?

Does the 'Higher-Ups' refer to forces within the CIA or other government agencies?

I'm sorry if this is a horribly crude question but my main reason for asking it is to gain some insight that might guide me in my further reading on the assassination.

Thanks in advance,

Simon

Simon...

The "higher ups" have various names...international bankers, Bilderbergers,
Trilateral Commission, big oil, Seven Sisters, Council on Foreign Relations,
Bohemian Grove, secret societies, Skull and Bones, think tanks, masonic
orders, intelligence groups, foundations, Rockefeller group, Texas oilmen,
political parties, right wing groups, etc.

Individuals come and go, but the "higher up" groups are perpetual. Many of
them overlap. For instance Hoover, LBJ, Zapruder, and dozens of others
belonged to Masonic orders.

Thanks for your comments.

Jack

[Ed Jewett]

The "higher ups" have various names...international bankers, Bilderbergers,
Trilateral Commission, big oil, Seven Sisters, Council on Foreign Relations,
Bohemian Grove, secret societies, Skull and Bones, think tanks, masonic
orders, intelligence groups, foundations, Rockefeller group, Texas oilmen,
political parties, right wing groups, etc.

Individuals come and go, but the "higher up" groups are perpetual. Many of
them overlap. For instance Hoover, LBJ, Zapruder, and dozens of others
belonged to Masonic orders.

I keep it simple by reducing it to the lowest common denominator and using the term "the evilarchy".