Preparations & Ideas for the 50th

[Charles Drago]

Charles, Mark and I were not comparing ourselves with Gandhi or King.

I never said you were. Drop the straw man b.s., Jim.

In my article, there is enough indignation.

I detected NONE of any practical value whatsoever.

And behind the scenes, I have been trying to do something about this.

Please, tell us what you have done?

I'll answer your questions after you've answered mine (as previously posted), Jim:

You don't have a clue about who and what you're up against, do you?

You don't have a clue about the significance of Dealey Plaza, do you?

Why won't you address Linenthal's observations within the context of my references to them?

As for Dr. King: Correct me if I'm wrong, but he is not remembered for writing, "Letter from a Birmingham Office Building in Which I'm Trying to Negotiate with Racists, After Which I'll Go to a Book Signing," is he?

I am anything but expert in the life and teachings of Gandhi. But if memory serves, it was in a place called Dharasana where thousands of nonviolent Salt March protesters stood silently as they were savaged by British troops. And the world took note. And an empire trembled. So who will take note of your negotiations, Jim? Who will you make tremble with your negotiating style?

Are you seriously suggesting that we negotiate with the surrogates -- some witting, some half-witting, some unwitting -- of the assassins?

In re your eagerness to show your throat to the "VIPs only" crowd:

Who, may I ask, is more important than you, or me, or a homeless wretch living in a sewer drain in the Plaza?

Why, may I ask, do you exhibit not the slightest hint of outrage at this abomination?


As for your "What have I [Drago] done?" question: Your ego is showing, Jim. But little else -- especially anything resembling depth of thought or courage of conviction.

Answer my previously posed questions, or forfeit your right to ask any of your own -- at least to me.

Take all the time you need.

[Charles Drago]

While Jim is busy manufacturing rhetorical evasions to help him avoid answering my questions, I'll remind readers of his most recent less-than-artful dodge.

I asked Jim what he knew, if anything, about the role JFK Lancer has played in facilitating the capture of Dealey Playa by hostile forces. His response, as offered on this thread:

"To my knowledge, Lancer has no role in this at all."

I came back with:

"Not even a passive role, such as those who remain silent in the face of tyranny play?"

Jim's working relationship with Debra Conway and Lancer leads me to expect that he can be a tad more forthcoming. But if I'm wrong about this, then I'm pleased to direct everyone's attention to the following DPF thread, which I created on May 12 of this year:

"The Perfidy of Debra Conway: BOYCOTT JFK LANCER"

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...idy+conway

In the opening post, I provided the following link:

From the Dallas Morning News article linked below:

Among those supporting the museum's takeover of the ceremonies perhaps surprisingly is Debra Conway, president of JFK Lancer, the organization that for most of the past two decades has held the speaking permit for the plaza on the anniversary.

"I'm kind of glad," she said of the museum's plans. "I don't think a lot of those things that have happened will happen when the museum takes over. I think they'll have a ceremony that won't get out of hand."

Conway describes her Southlake-based organization as a clearinghouse for information on the JFK assassination and other topics.

She acknowledges that representatives affiliated with her group have used the commemorations to espouse conspiracy theories. But she said the comments were respectful, and she blamed any inappropriate behavior on other participants.

Despite having reserved the plaza, she said, her group has had no power to enforce who speaks. "We've tried to stop them and they ignore us," she said.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/commu...assination.ece

There, Jim. If this refreshes your memory, please expand on your answer to my original question. If possible, please describe, in precise detail, just what you've been doing "behind the scenes" to protect the sanctity of Dealey Plaza and our right to free, fair access to that ground on November 22, 2013.

Take all the time you need.

[Mark Prior]

I think BOTH Charles and Jim D. should retract their respective questions, because truth be told, they are irrelevant. With our limited numbers, the issue is who is willing to step up to the plate since the option of not-doing-anything-because-we-don't-have-anyone-who-is-familiar-with-the-Dallas-authorities is off the table.

So what's with the inquisition? If you only have $5,000 to spend on a used car, you still won't be able to buy a Ferrari just because it is "used." We have to shop within our means. Eg...whoever is willing, because I don't see a lot of hands in the air.

[Charles Drago]

Your characterization of questions posed by Jim and me is, with two exceptions, remarkably naive.

My questions, with one exception, are EXTREMELY RELEVANT to our fight to attain truth and effect justice in the case of JFK's murder. You may not be able to discern the relevance, but that's not my problem.

Further, your perception of our "means" gives every appearance of being stunted and self-defeating.

My goal is to expand our perceptions, not impose unnecessary limitations on them.

[Mark Stapleton]

The 50th anniversary will remind me how old I am.

The only cause I can think of which might have even a slight chance of uniting the research community is a push for an official pardon or apology to LHO and his family. In 1979, the USG basically admitted he was innocent.

It's an idealistic concept, but worth a try I reckon.

[Magda Hassan]

The 50th anniversary will remind me how old I am.

The only cause I can think of which might have even a slight chance of uniting the research community is a push for an official pardon or apology to LHO and his family. In 1979, the USG basically admitted he was innocent.

It's an idealistic concept, but worth a try I reckon.

Innocent? Not quite. He was no lone nut. Perhaps not guilty might be more accurate? Actually they admitted he didn't act alone and that there was a conspiracy. Not that they have lifted a finger to obtain any justice or any thing resembling it since. But I agree it would be a good thing to make an apology to LHO if only because they were extremely negligent in keeping him safe. Ahem....

[Jim DiEugenio]

Charles:

It was you who so modestly brought up the examples of King and Gandhi. Go check. You now do it again.

Fine. Go ahead and stand in the middle of Dealey Plaza on the 22nd at the correct hour. Go ahead and get arrested, and say something about "Salt march", and "Birmingham jail". See how that comes off on TV.

As per my article that you said you detected little indignation in: You know Charles, this is a perfect example of you instinctively bending yourself out of shape to affect moral outrage--over nothing. Why?

Because the article was not up at the time you replied. So yeah, you noted little or nothing since it was not there. Unless you can read into my computer somehow.

OK, I ask again: What have you done about the Dallas plans of Belo Corporation and Peggy Segura?

Please go scurry and find out what those two are, because you are not properly informed of them right now Charles. And then you say I am not informed about who we are up against, right?

That reference to Debra Conway really takes the cake. As Mark Lane once said about A. L. Wirin during a debate at Beverly Hills High: I haven't seen that technique used since the days of the Red Scare. It goes like this: Well, if the communists say such and such and Stevenson says such and such then ipso facto, Adlai is in league with Moscow.

Whew!

In other words, in the world of Charles Drago, anyone who speaks at Lancer, like say Jim Marrs, Larry Hancock, Stu Wexler, Dave Mantik, Casey Quinlan, etc etc is somehow part of the unenlightened useful idiots in on the Dallas Takeover?

And why stop there? Why not wield a wider brush Mr. Drago? How about anyone who attends those conferences on a regular basis?

Please Charles please. Give it a break. If you want to agent bait, then fine, prove it with evidence. We all await it with raised expectations for your remarkable clairvoyant detective skills. You know, those skills that allowed you to read an article that had not been post yet.

(PS Debra amended that comment awhile ago. But like other things, you missed that one also.)

[Mark Stapleton]

But I agree it would be a good thing to make an apology to LHO if only because they were extremely negligent in keeping him safe. Ahem....

That's right. The USG should apologise for that too, come to think of it. That was negligence of the most egregious kind. Wilful negligence maybe.

When I say he was innocent, he was innocent of the charges against him, namely the murders of JFK and Tippet. He wasn't charged with conspiracy to murder, just lone nut murder. Any decent lawyer could convince a jury he was innocent of those charges laid against him.

[Charles Drago]

That reference to Debra Conway really takes the cake. As Mark Lane once said about A. L. Wirin during a debate at Beverly Hills High: I haven't seen that technique used since the days of the Red Scare. It goes like this: Well, if the communists say such and such and Stevenson says such and such then ipso facto, Adlai is in league with Moscow.

Whew!

In other words, in the world of Charles Drago, anyone who speaks at Lancer, like say Jim Marrs, Larry Hancock, Stu Wexler, Dave Mantik, Casey Quinlan, etc etc is somehow part of the unenlightened useful idiots in on the Dallas Takeover?

And why stop there? Why not wield a wider brush Mr. Drago? How about anyone who attends those conferences on a regular basis?

You put words in my mouth at your own peril,Jim.

I neither made nor make any such characterizations of the researchers you reference or of you. Nor do I imply any such opinion. You are wrong -- dead wrong. On this and so many other matters.

My respect for David Mantik is well known. I find Larry Hancock's JFK work to be invaluable. So too the efforts of Stu Wexler. If you say or publish anything to the contrary, you are being disingenuous. Clear?

FYI, I spoke at many Lancer conferences. My dear friend and mentor, George Michael Evica, more than anyone else laid the intellectual and thematic foundations of that organization, and he devoted hundreds if not thousands of hours to its growth. And then his eyes were opened. As were mine.

I know that Conway "amended" her initial statement. Such action commonly is referred to as a "course correction." I see nothing from her since to indicate that her original destination has changed.

As for me reading a cryptically referenced "article" that was not yet published, you should know that perforce I was referring to your comments on this thread and on your most recently published articles -- none of which demonstrated that you possess the insight required to understand the value of Dealey Plaza, let alone the courage to fight for it. All we get are protestations of your "behind the scenes" actions -- details of which we await with baited breath.

And as expected, you refuse to answer the lion's share of my questions and instead rush to deflect attention from them by leveling accusations at me.

So be it.

[Charles Drago]

But I agree it would be a good thing to make an apology to LHO if only because they were extremely negligent in keeping him safe. Ahem....

That's right. The USG should apologise for that too, come to think of it. That was negligence of the most egregious kind. Wilful negligence maybe.

When I say he was innocent, he was innocent of the charges against him, namely the murders of JFK and Tippet. He wasn't charged with conspiracy to murder, just lone nut murder. Any decent lawyer could convince a jury he was innocent of those charges laid against him.

In your opinion, was LHO guilty of conspiracy to murder JFK?