"Sorry" if I feel what way, David? Lacking in strength following surgery? Or were you referring to something of substance that you have yet to name?
I suppose I should just stay out of these quibbles for the time being. Perhaps I missed something, too.
As I said, I haven't the strength for this right now. But I wish I did. I got out for a walk yesterday. It was nice. Our city purchased a new statue that
is dedicated to those who served in WWII to replace the original that was beginning to show signs of age...as I am. My wife snapped a picture of me
standing below it--even while I wore my hard neck brace/collar. The statue is about 1/2 mile from home. When I got home I collapsed. A little too
far a little too soon. The statue is called: Unconditional Surrender
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
Greg Burnham Wrote:"Sorry" if I feel what way, David? Lacking in strength following surgery? Or were you referring to something of substance that you have yet to name?
I suppose I should just stay out of these quibbles for the time being. Perhaps I missed something, too.
As I said, I haven't the strength for this right now. But I wish I did. I got out for a walk yesterday. It was nice. Our city purchased a new statue that
is dedicated to those who served in WWII to replace the original that was beginning to show signs of age...as I am. My wife snapped a picture of me
standing below it--even while I wore my hard neck brace/collar. The statue is about 1/2 mile from home. When I got home I collapsed. A little too
far a little too soon. The statue is called: Unconditional Surrender
"Sorry", related to your comments about CD... not your physical situation.
I had MAJOR back surgery L4/5 just over 15 years ago... I understand your pain and recovery process....
Very slow and steady, but it does eventually get much better... I currently have 4 degenerative discs and find that very little helps when the pain is bad...
I appreciate your effort here... more often than not you bring a fresh POV and a calming effect.
But take a second and read back on this thread... does ANYONE agree with CD's premise and respond accordingly...
or is EVERYONE asking for clarification while disagreeing with the premise?
Keep on Truckin' buddy... the body has amazing healing powers...
Much luck and a continued and quick recovery
DJ
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
One thing I learned in College at the University of Chicago when Robert Hutchins was Chancellor, and classes were conducted by the Socratic discussion method of teaching, was that DEFINITIONS were very important to be understood and agreed upon. It clarifies thinking for members and allows for more calm and orderly discussions, understanding, agreement, and even disagreement. It does not impede the expression of ideas, it may actually broaden and expand understanding and knowledge.
So, please, define your terms. We are not mind readers, and we all need to know what it is that is being discussed or questioned. That may be why these melees occur when this is not happening. When someone does not understand something, a definition (or description or name) may be essential.
Greg Burnham Wrote:"Sorry" if I feel what way, David? Lacking in strength following surgery? Or were you referring to something of substance that you have yet to name?
I suppose I should just stay out of these quibbles for the time being. Perhaps I missed something, too.
As I said, I haven't the strength for this right now. But I wish I did. I got out for a walk yesterday. It was nice. Our city purchased a new statue that
is dedicated to those who served in WWII to replace the original that was beginning to show signs of age...as I am. My wife snapped a picture of me
standing below it--even while I wore my hard neck brace/collar. The statue is about 1/2 mile from home. When I got home I collapsed. A little too
far a little too soon. The statue is called: Unconditional Surrender
Hi, Greg,
That is a huge statue of the nurse and the sailor in NYC as a tribute to the military and the civilians who served in WWII. It is based on a very famous photgraph.
It's wonderful news that you were able to go for a walk, and such a long one - 1/2 mile. The next time you do it, you will feel less tired, and you'll build up your stamina, little by little.
One thing I learned in College at the University of Chicago when Robert Hutchins was Chancellor, and classes were conducted by the Socratic discussion method of teaching, was that DEFINITIONS were very important to be understood and agreed upon. It clarifies thinking for members and allows for more calm and orderly discussions, understanding, agreement, and even disagreement. It does not impede the expression of ideas, it may actually broaden and expand understanding and knowledge.
So, please, define your terms. We are not mind readers, and we all need to know what it is that is being discussed or questioned. That may be why these melees occur when this is not happening. When someone does not understand something, a definition (or description or name) may be essential.
My two cents. Thanks for reading.
Adele
Thank you for this, Adele. I truly respect your work, your mind, and your intentions in this exchange.
Please be aware that I have defined my terms at least THREE TIMES on this thread, which I originated. If you read from the opening post, you will see how I have attempted to reword/clarify the expression of my initial, relatively complex hypothesis.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to provide further clarification -- which at this point would amount to dumbing down the material and patronizing the majority of DPF correspondents. And to be blunt, I do not believe that further clarification is necessary in order to make my work accessible to bright readers who have a moderately sophisticated grasp of this case in particular and deep politics in general.
I shall not cross the border from simple to simple-minded.
As previously stated, I am not particularly proud of the fact that I lose patience with individuals who do not bring the requisite intelligence and/or learning to our discussions.
And then there are a select few whose repeated misreadings and misrepresentations of fact are, in my informed opinion, ego-driven and/or offered in service to dark agendas.
I have created many DPF threads on which I state a hypothesis and invite honorable argument. In doing so I am not seeking obeisance, but only honest debate.
My prose is not always as artful as I might wish it to be. But it is always the best of which I am capable at the moment I create it.
Hang tough Bro,
I know you are.
Healing takes time and seems so damnably slow at the time.
Do as you can and when you can. The strength will come back.
All this I am sure you already know.
Best to all there Greg,
Sincerely
Jim
Looking forward to the day when Monk can re-engage the enemies.
Read not to contradict and confute;
nor to believe and take for granted;
nor to find talk and discourse;
but to weigh and consider.
FRANCIS BACON
You;ve been asked repeatedly by every poster on this thread to explain yourself...
and each time you simply BOLD the same ole crap and call it new and improved....
Your premise is incorrect Charles. There is not a single person you can name who felt the way your premise assumes:
YOU believe "many of them did" yet you cannot name a single one... cannot point to a reason WHY they would feel that way and stomp around with insults to anyone who questions you...
Adele asks the same question as Cliff, Bill, Phil and me
Quote:How were the most powerful people in and around government who, innocent of any involvement in the conspiracy, were told and accepted as being true what today we call the Phase I story, mollified when they asked (and I believe many of them did), "If we go along with this cover-up of Cuban and Soviet complicity for the greater good, how and when will the guilty Cuban and Soviet parties be punished?"
Quote:That's not what I'm asking at all, Bill, so allow me to pose the question again -- this time a bit more artfully.
Quote:Don't over-complicate my question.
I'll try to ask it one more time:
How were the most powerful people in and around government who, innocent of any involvement in the conspiracy, were told and accepted as being true what today we call the Phase I story, mollified when they asked (and I believe many of them did), "If we go along with this cover-up of Cuban and Soviet complicity for the greater good, how and when will the guilty Cuban and Soviet parties be punished?"
and yet again
Quote:How could non-conspiratorial Cold Warriors who accepted as true the Phase I argument that Cubans/Soviets did it AND agreed to go along with the patsying of LHO in order to stave off nuclear war be expected to let the "real" killers of JFK off the hook forever?
Quote:Get back to me when you can offer more than your opinion.
Since when does "I BELIEVE" not constitute an opinion when nothing to support it is offered?
Quote:CD: The WW III scare that is the Phase I scenario was created for a reason: To force powerful figures not involved in the conspiracy to go along with what to them would be immediately recognizable as the patently false LHO-alone Phase of the cover-up.
Jim D:Not so sure I agree with this. And I am familiar with Scott's work on it and Newman's riff on that tune.
Oh look, another that doesn't buy your premise.... all this in the first 4 pages of the thread.
Quote:I created this thread to solicit answers to the following question:
How were the most powerful people in and around government who, innocent of any involvement in the conspiracy, were told and accepted as being true what today we call the Phase I story, mollified when they asked (and I believe many of them did), "If we go along with this cover-up of Cuban and Soviet complicity for the greater good, how and when will the guilty Cuban and Soviet parties be punished?"
David Josephs responds by posing a question I didn't ask:
"Who was aware of this Phase 1 story?"
Don't get me wrong: David's is an interesting question -- one worthy of its own thread. But like so many other responses this thread has generated to date, it contributes nothing of value to the effort to answer my original query.
So asking WHO Charles is referring to contributes NOTHING OF VALUE to the query.... IOW when the premise is wrong, blatantly and completely unsupported and wrong... it doesn't matter, just answer the question or STFU and go home....
as if THEY fit the WHO he asked about in his question...
and STILL Adele has to ask yet again - after THREE attempts at clarifying his position and naming Katz and Russell as the "most powerful people in government who were told and accepted as true... blah blah blah
and he goes on to insult Adele and me once again....
=====
So let's go to the link CD posted in post #1 - the basis for his questions...
In Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, I called these "Phase-One" reports, part of
a two-fold process. Phase One put forward the phantom of an international plot, linking Oswald to the USSR, to Cuba, or to both countries together. This phantom was used to invoke the danger of a possible nuclear confrontation, which induced Chief Justice Earl Warren and other political notables to accept Phase Two, the equally false (but less dangerous) hypothesis that Oswald killed the President all by himself. …. [T]he Phase-One story… was first promoted and then defused by the CIA. Michael Beschloss has revealed that, at 9:20 AM on the morning of November 23, CIA Director John McCone briefed the new President. In Beschloss' words: "The CIA had information on foreign connections to the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, which suggested to LBJ that Kennedy may have been murdered by an international conspiracy."[SUP][SUP]28[/SUP][/SUP]
So I will ask one last time... Who, CD, are you saying asked or even WOULD HAVE ASKED the question: "If we go along with this cover-up of Cuban and Soviet complicity for the greater good, how and when will the guilty Cuban and Soviet parties be punished?"
Warren? Russell? RFK? McCone? LBJ? Hoover?
You can't name anyone since no one cared about punishing Cuban/Soviet parties... they only CARED about deflecting the attention from those actually involved and not getting themselves killed in the process.... Phase 1 and Phase 2 were both bullsh!t Charles.... and if you read Schweiker you'd know it was the "fingerprints of Intelligence" that made them go along with the cover-up... NOT an international conspiracy...
One thing I learned in College at the University of Chicago when Robert Hutchins was Chancellor, and classes were conducted by the Socratic discussion method of teaching, was that DEFINITIONS were very important to be understood and agreed upon. It clarifies thinking for members and allows for more calm and orderly discussions, understanding, agreement, and even disagreement. It does not impede the expression of ideas, it may actually broaden and expand understanding and knowledge.
So, please, define your terms. We are not mind readers, and we all need to know what it is that is being discussed or questioned. That may be why these melees occur when this is not happening. When someone does not understand something, a definition (or description or name) may be essential.
My two cents. Thanks for reading.
Adele
Thank you for this, Adele. I truly respect your work, your mind, and your intentions in this exchange.
Please be aware that I have defined my terms at least THREE TIMES on this thread, which I originated. If you read from the opening post, you will see how I have attempted to reword/clarify the expression of my initial, relatively complex hypothesis.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to provide further clarification -- which at this point would amount to dumbing down the material and patronizing the majority of DPF correspondents. And to be blunt, I do not believe that further clarification is necessary in order to make my work accessible to bright readers who have a moderately sophisticated grasp of this case in particular and deep politics in general.
I shall not cross the border from simple to simple-minded.
As previously stated, I am not particularly proud of the fact that I lose patience with individuals who do not bring the requisite intelligence and/or learning to our discussions.
And then there are a select few whose repeated misreadings and misrepresentations of fact are, in my informed opinion, ego-driven and/or offered in service to dark agendas.
I have created many DPF threads on which I state a hypothesis and invite honorable argument. In doing so I am not seeking obeisance, but only honest debate.
My prose is not always as artful as I might wish it to be. But it is always the best of which I am capable at the moment I create it.
Warm regards.
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Everyone - this scenario can only be understood and explored within the perameters of Peter Dale Scott's Phases, as articulated in Charles' posts #1 & 11.
For myself, I think Prof Dale Scott's analysis is insightful and has a significant degree of historical corroboration.
Charles' questions exist primarily within this analytical framework.
"An example: It is impossible for me and others not to see ritual and magic(k) driving the brutal subjugations of indigenous aboriginal/tribal peoples by their imperialist conquerors long after military and material objectives of conquest have been met."
The replacement by violence of one controlling spiritual/scientific/political system by another may be understood as magical ritual in the sense that Giordano Bruno might have used the term.
Mt. Rushmore was carved into the summit a natural "temple" within the Black Hills, territory of immense spiritual significance for the vanquished Lakota [Sioux] peoples.
It is as if Barbarians had sacked post-Renaissance Rome and painted over the Sistine Chapel ceiling portraits of their bloodthirsty deities and leaders.)
What Bruno represented to the controlling spiritual/scientific/political system of his time was mortally threatening heresy: He combined an embrace of Copernicus's heliocentrism with understanding and promotion of the ancient Hermetic tradition.
Bruno also spoke openly of the Church's hellish condition, conjuring descriptions that might have been written about today's Church:
From The Torch-Bearer: "You will see, in mixed confusion, snatches of cutpurses, wiles of cheats, enterprises of rogues; also delicious repulsiveness, bitter sweets, foolish decisions, mistaken faith and crippled hopes, niggard charities, judges noble and serious for other men's affairs with little truth in their own; virile women, effeminate men and voices of craft and not of mercy so that he who believes most is most fooled, and everywhere the love of gold."
I do not even remotely approach the status of Bruno scholar, so I'm treading very carefully so as not to cross the dilettante line.
What I cannot help but note, however, is that JFK represented a Bruno-like threat to the controlling spiritual/scientific/political system of his/our time.
And what I cannot help but conclude is that those at the pinnacle of the Sponsorship level secretly included spiritual -- or magical -- ritual within the larger conspiracy they set in motion.
John Fitzgerald Kennedy was a heretic.
The executions of heretics are presented as magical rituals. And the heretics know it.
As Jan reminds us in his signature, another victim of the Conquistadors, the last Inka Tupac Amaru, invoked his greatest deity as he spoke his last words: "Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
"Mother Earth, witness how my enemies shed my blood."
Upon hearing his death sentence, Giordano Bruno said, "Maiori forsan cum timore sententiam in me fertis quam ego accipiam."
"Perhaps you pronounce this sentence against me with greater fear than I receive it."
Bruno was roasted by the friars in 1600.
Some 363 years later, Kennedy's mind was blown out in a car.
We are told that his last word's were, "I'm hit."
An unknown comedian suggested that they might have been, "I need a hardtop like I need a hole in the head."
I prefer to think of them as, "And we are all mortal."
The guidance on DPF is not to quote entire posts when replying to them, as it wastes bandwidth.
But no bandwidth is wasted by repeating these fine phrases.
I'm interested in the assassination of JFK as an act of ritual public sacrifice.
The slaughter of the heretic performed by hired serfs who did not know their Master, nor their Master's motivation.
Eugenics is about the purification of the stock, and the casting out of the unclean.
In occult terms. In Levenda's sense.
Tenochtitlan and Jasenovac are ritual sacrifice on a mass scale.
The essence of the occult meaning of King lies in the famous French phrase:
Le Roi est mort, vive le Roi!
In occult terms, JFK could not be shamed into retirement, or assassinated behind closed doors.
David Josephs Wrote:and he goes on to insult Adele and me once again....
I shall not allow Josephs to characterize falsely my words to Adele or anyone else. I responded to her with compliments and an expression of gratitude for her post:
"Thank you for this, Adele. I truly respect your work, your mind, and your intentions in this exchange."
I have nothing further to discuss with David Josephs. I shall not read his PMs, and I shall not suffer his obsession with me any longer.
