26-11-2008, 03:49 PM
Hi Everyone,
I would like to comment on just one of Charlie’s excellent questions at this time.
How should we define victory in our struggle with the killers of JFK?
I believe this question would be easier to contemplate if it was split into two parts.
How should we define Victory in our Struggle?
The use of the word struggle is an interesting word because it implies that the circumstance is ongoing - which indeed it is – and fundamentally a struggle is a cause and a cause is born from a belief – We believe in a cause, therefore we struggle.
A struggle is also a fight. So if we are struggling then we are fighting and if we are fighting then we may still attain either victory or succumb to defeat. It can be said that to achieve victory one must first avoid defeat. It can also be said that if one gives up the struggle then one concedes defeat. So our fundamental goal of achieving a victory therefore must be to never give up the struggle.
Never giving up the struggle or cause and refusing to concede defeat in your search for truth is what many of you have been doing for the past forty five years and this in itself is a victory.
How should we define Victory over the killers of JFK?
The first things that spring to mind are the obvious:
·All known factual truths revealed
·Persons ultimately responsible convicted
·The complete historical record amended accordingly
Because I sincerely believe that no one will ever be prosecuted or convicted in a court of law for the assassination of JFK, this goal is not only unattainable but should be removed from our definitions of victory.
We all know that history is supposedly written by the ‘winners’ and in many cases this is true because history is basically a compilation of known facts, truths or events pertaining to the past much of which may well have been moulded by 'winners'. However, history can and is often rewritten when one or more of the known facts, truths or events are superseded by another. So to amend the complete historical record pertaining to the assassination of JFK one must only uncover or reveal relevant known facts and truths that supersede those that created the event.
Therefore it is my opinion that to achieve a victory in the case of the assassination of JFK one must only aspire to a position where all known facts and truths have been revealed and are available for review. However, the facts and truths must be able to supersede the current facts and truths that the current historical records of JFK’s assassination are based on, otherwise we risk inadvertently offering victory to our adversaries – which thankfully is extremely unlikely.
So how do we achieve this? (These are just my ideas, you may have your own)
Well let’s start with the hard part and whether you agree with my thoughts or not I believe this one to be critical if the JFK research community (doesnt that sound much better than conspiricy theorists) is to play any part in this happening.
1.As a research community we would have to collectively agree on what was a realistic and acceptable goal.
Without this all that is ever portrayed to the outside is a community of division, squabbling and petty backstabbing that has no common cause. It is the equivalent of looking through the window of a squalid rat infested restaurant – would you really care how good the food is.
One of the main reasons I believe this is critical is because after forty five years I really find it hard to believe without a death bed confession by someone who is categorically beyond reproach or some universally accepted stunning evidence being manually and unexpectedly uncovered, nothing will change. Any snippet of information that may filter down an official drain pipe such as the freedom of information act, I’m quite sure will have been well vetted before its release and therefore in the great scheme of things probably meaningless.
I also believe that the odds of getting the majority of the JFKRC to agree on one single plausible scenario that could be packaged branded and pitched to the world is remote to say the least. Does anyone even know how many different theories there is out there right now and that's before we even break them down into subcategories. To be honest, I am pretty sure there is a strong possibility that at least one person has probably hit the right story, but it doesn't really make any difference.
I believe the days of analyzing the case in minute detail should no longer be the fundamental strategy. Most people are pretty sure what happened so all we need do now is to fill in the blanks with the available evidence and I am confident that the evidence already collected by the WC/FBI/CIA/DPD would be more than sufficient to do that and this is the reason it is hidden away - there can be no other conclusion.
So in my view for the greater good and indeed before it is too late, the JFKRC should lower its prize and find away to throw its full weight behind a mechanism that will persuade the New US Government (for that is what I hope it will turn out to be in the next four years) to hand over every single piece of information it has on the assassination(s). I used the word persuade the USG to hand over the evidence as opposed to force them to reopen a case. The latter would be a natural progression of the former if the evidence warranted it, would it not, but which is the most likely accomplishment?
2.Set up a strictly bi-partisan base that is designed to attract the vast majority of the public that already have an interest in the case.
There is a large base of people with an existing interest in the JFK assassination, but many are put off for various reasons from participating or even making their interest publicly known (I was one of them). Let’s be honest here, there is a stigma (thanks to the media) of being labeled a ‘Conspiracy Theorist’, much more so than being labeled a ‘Lone Nutter’ which apart from inside CT forums I had never heard before. This is one of the reasons there is not the influx of new members that one would imagine was possible within the whole JFK community (CT’s and LN’s).
To overcome this, a bi-partisan community is needed with the common cause of all members being the release of the facts and evidence of the JFK case (to start with). Therefore membership should be open to anyone with this goal regardless of their opinion as to who murdered the President and their opinions should be respected, In fact not only respected but welcomed.
There is a reason that so called ‘Agent Provocateurs’ have been successful for so long and that is the old divide and conquer policy. They divide our ranks by instigating common provocative arguments against us, knowing that sooner or later the ranks will break and people will either resort to abuse, offer crack pot theories as evidence against their points or just run away to the hills where we create a new false sense of security without really tackling the fundamental problems.
There is but one strategy to combat this age old tactic and that is unity.
Since we are involved in a war of words and not guns, and since our words are the most powerful tool we have in the age of the internet and specifically forums, they should at all times be displayed in a civilised, intelligent and articulate manner. No matter what the provocative action.
This kind of display is exactly what ultimately attracts people to your cause. Deep down we all admire smart people especially if they portray self control that is born out of a strong hidden confidence. I am convinced that the truth is on our side but where’s the confidence?
3.To take every opportunity to publicly market this unity (common cause) in the same intelligent, articulate and civilised manner.
If the first two points can be achieved this one will not be too difficult to set up. It only involves a marketing strategy that is designed to generate support for your cause - Like Obama did and incidentally did you notice the manner in which he did it? - I would think if it was done in the right way, even the ‘LN’ community would not be opposed to having all the information made available. After all why would they, they know there is nothing there that will change anything right?
There are already movements out there with the purpose of trying to make this information available already but to be totally honest, I could not name a single one of them. Not only that but how many of them is bi-partisan? At the very least we may be able to create a large enough community that could lend weight to their cause through various novel and interesting marketing techniques.
What is needed is a movement created on a base of unified information and I am afraid to say that a few forums here and there are not going to cut it ladies and gentleman. It is time to up the ante here, get serious and quit moaning about things like the mainstream media – their days of being 'mainstream' are numbered and they know this. Have you noticed how much they look to the internet for their own news these days: iReports, YouTube and other popular websites?
You do not have to be a rocket scientist to set up websites that are fun, entertaining and informative.
There is much detail and information missing here for two reasons, one I better let you digest what I have already written and two I dont have all the answers. The only way we will obtain them is by sitting down and deciding what they should be.
Thanks - Steve
I would like to comment on just one of Charlie’s excellent questions at this time.
How should we define victory in our struggle with the killers of JFK?
I believe this question would be easier to contemplate if it was split into two parts.
How should we define Victory in our Struggle?
The use of the word struggle is an interesting word because it implies that the circumstance is ongoing - which indeed it is – and fundamentally a struggle is a cause and a cause is born from a belief – We believe in a cause, therefore we struggle.
A struggle is also a fight. So if we are struggling then we are fighting and if we are fighting then we may still attain either victory or succumb to defeat. It can be said that to achieve victory one must first avoid defeat. It can also be said that if one gives up the struggle then one concedes defeat. So our fundamental goal of achieving a victory therefore must be to never give up the struggle.
Never giving up the struggle or cause and refusing to concede defeat in your search for truth is what many of you have been doing for the past forty five years and this in itself is a victory.
How should we define Victory over the killers of JFK?
The first things that spring to mind are the obvious:
·All known factual truths revealed
·Persons ultimately responsible convicted
·The complete historical record amended accordingly
Because I sincerely believe that no one will ever be prosecuted or convicted in a court of law for the assassination of JFK, this goal is not only unattainable but should be removed from our definitions of victory.
We all know that history is supposedly written by the ‘winners’ and in many cases this is true because history is basically a compilation of known facts, truths or events pertaining to the past much of which may well have been moulded by 'winners'. However, history can and is often rewritten when one or more of the known facts, truths or events are superseded by another. So to amend the complete historical record pertaining to the assassination of JFK one must only uncover or reveal relevant known facts and truths that supersede those that created the event.
Therefore it is my opinion that to achieve a victory in the case of the assassination of JFK one must only aspire to a position where all known facts and truths have been revealed and are available for review. However, the facts and truths must be able to supersede the current facts and truths that the current historical records of JFK’s assassination are based on, otherwise we risk inadvertently offering victory to our adversaries – which thankfully is extremely unlikely.
So how do we achieve this? (These are just my ideas, you may have your own)
Well let’s start with the hard part and whether you agree with my thoughts or not I believe this one to be critical if the JFK research community (doesnt that sound much better than conspiricy theorists) is to play any part in this happening.
1.As a research community we would have to collectively agree on what was a realistic and acceptable goal.
Without this all that is ever portrayed to the outside is a community of division, squabbling and petty backstabbing that has no common cause. It is the equivalent of looking through the window of a squalid rat infested restaurant – would you really care how good the food is.
One of the main reasons I believe this is critical is because after forty five years I really find it hard to believe without a death bed confession by someone who is categorically beyond reproach or some universally accepted stunning evidence being manually and unexpectedly uncovered, nothing will change. Any snippet of information that may filter down an official drain pipe such as the freedom of information act, I’m quite sure will have been well vetted before its release and therefore in the great scheme of things probably meaningless.
I also believe that the odds of getting the majority of the JFKRC to agree on one single plausible scenario that could be packaged branded and pitched to the world is remote to say the least. Does anyone even know how many different theories there is out there right now and that's before we even break them down into subcategories. To be honest, I am pretty sure there is a strong possibility that at least one person has probably hit the right story, but it doesn't really make any difference.
I believe the days of analyzing the case in minute detail should no longer be the fundamental strategy. Most people are pretty sure what happened so all we need do now is to fill in the blanks with the available evidence and I am confident that the evidence already collected by the WC/FBI/CIA/DPD would be more than sufficient to do that and this is the reason it is hidden away - there can be no other conclusion.
So in my view for the greater good and indeed before it is too late, the JFKRC should lower its prize and find away to throw its full weight behind a mechanism that will persuade the New US Government (for that is what I hope it will turn out to be in the next four years) to hand over every single piece of information it has on the assassination(s). I used the word persuade the USG to hand over the evidence as opposed to force them to reopen a case. The latter would be a natural progression of the former if the evidence warranted it, would it not, but which is the most likely accomplishment?
2.Set up a strictly bi-partisan base that is designed to attract the vast majority of the public that already have an interest in the case.
There is a large base of people with an existing interest in the JFK assassination, but many are put off for various reasons from participating or even making their interest publicly known (I was one of them). Let’s be honest here, there is a stigma (thanks to the media) of being labeled a ‘Conspiracy Theorist’, much more so than being labeled a ‘Lone Nutter’ which apart from inside CT forums I had never heard before. This is one of the reasons there is not the influx of new members that one would imagine was possible within the whole JFK community (CT’s and LN’s).
To overcome this, a bi-partisan community is needed with the common cause of all members being the release of the facts and evidence of the JFK case (to start with). Therefore membership should be open to anyone with this goal regardless of their opinion as to who murdered the President and their opinions should be respected, In fact not only respected but welcomed.
There is a reason that so called ‘Agent Provocateurs’ have been successful for so long and that is the old divide and conquer policy. They divide our ranks by instigating common provocative arguments against us, knowing that sooner or later the ranks will break and people will either resort to abuse, offer crack pot theories as evidence against their points or just run away to the hills where we create a new false sense of security without really tackling the fundamental problems.
There is but one strategy to combat this age old tactic and that is unity.
Since we are involved in a war of words and not guns, and since our words are the most powerful tool we have in the age of the internet and specifically forums, they should at all times be displayed in a civilised, intelligent and articulate manner. No matter what the provocative action.
This kind of display is exactly what ultimately attracts people to your cause. Deep down we all admire smart people especially if they portray self control that is born out of a strong hidden confidence. I am convinced that the truth is on our side but where’s the confidence?
3.To take every opportunity to publicly market this unity (common cause) in the same intelligent, articulate and civilised manner.
If the first two points can be achieved this one will not be too difficult to set up. It only involves a marketing strategy that is designed to generate support for your cause - Like Obama did and incidentally did you notice the manner in which he did it? - I would think if it was done in the right way, even the ‘LN’ community would not be opposed to having all the information made available. After all why would they, they know there is nothing there that will change anything right?
There are already movements out there with the purpose of trying to make this information available already but to be totally honest, I could not name a single one of them. Not only that but how many of them is bi-partisan? At the very least we may be able to create a large enough community that could lend weight to their cause through various novel and interesting marketing techniques.
What is needed is a movement created on a base of unified information and I am afraid to say that a few forums here and there are not going to cut it ladies and gentleman. It is time to up the ante here, get serious and quit moaning about things like the mainstream media – their days of being 'mainstream' are numbered and they know this. Have you noticed how much they look to the internet for their own news these days: iReports, YouTube and other popular websites?
You do not have to be a rocket scientist to set up websites that are fun, entertaining and informative.
There is much detail and information missing here for two reasons, one I better let you digest what I have already written and two I dont have all the answers. The only way we will obtain them is by sitting down and deciding what they should be.
Thanks - Steve