Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book

[Charles Drago]

As I have previously explained, LBJ was the pivotal member of the plot, since it could not have gone forward without him.

Agreed -- but I would be more precise in noting that LBJ's pivotal role was as the guarantor of post-plot security (or, if you prefer, the cover-up).

In the underinformed minds of the vast majority of low-level Facilitators, the power of the presidency was unchallenged. To those who understood deep political realities, the power of the presidency was then, as it is now, a convenient illusion.

Yes, the plot could not have "gone forward" without LBJ. Which means nothing more or less than LBJ was a mega-important tool. Not the carpenter. Not the architect. Only the biggest hammer in the tool belt.

Those who are familiar with the reports of Madeleine Duncan Brown, Billy Sol Estes, Barr McClelland, and E. Howard Hunt should appreciate what I am asserting.

As one who is familiar with Estes and Hunt as prime fonts of disinformation, with McCelland as an unsophisticated source of misconception and exaggeration, and Brown as a lowest level regurgitator of emotion-clouded anecdote, I appreciate what you are asserting as a textbook example of appeal to false authority.

The plan was to take out JFK and that no one would pay a penalty for participating in the assassination. ONLY LBJ COULD CONTROL THAT.

Yes. Which makes him nothing more or less than the biggest hammer in the tool belt.

So far, not a hint of even the flimsiest evidence for LBJ as assassination "mastermind."

Plus Lyndon was a very "hands on" guy, who even sent his chief assistant, Cliff Carter, to Dallas to make sure all of the arrangements were in place.

Now there's a true "mastermind" at work: sending his publicly acknowledged "chief assistant" to the major city in his home state where his "masterful" plot to assume the presidency would manifest.

I respect those who hold different views, but were it not for LBJ, as Jack Ruby observed, JFK would not have been taken out.

Jim, this statement is disingenuous, and you know it. Ruby clearly was indicating NOT that LBJ was any sort of "mastermind," but only that he was sufficiently corrupt and controllable so as to go along with big plan.

I regard this as one of the best books ever published about "The Big Event"[.]

And I regard this as one of the most dangerous-to-the cause, book-length presentations of disinformation ever published about the murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

So what?

am just the least bit distressed to find worthies like Charles Drago being so dismissive of others like Robert Morrow, who, in my opinion, is on the right track.

In other words, you are distressed when "worthies" find fault with your positions.

So what?

Robert Morrow, as evidenced by his sophmoric appreciations of all things deeply political, engages not in informed speculation, but only in linguistically challenged shouting matchs. He buys Nelson's indefensible central thesis hook, line, and sinker. I have not the slightest respect for his intellect or for his command of the subject matter.

And if he did not agree with your positions, neither would you.

I am troubled that ad hominems may now become as prevalent here as they are at the EF, especially since one reason for creating the DPF was to rise above them there.

Don't worry about DPF, Jim. We'll take care of ourselves and maintain our standards. You might be better served by focusing on a very simple question -- one that I've posed over and over again, but which you decline to answer. So let's try one more time:

How do you define "mastermind" as the word is used by Nelson to describe LBJ's role in the assassination?

As I see it, you and I are at loggerheads in two areas: the "mastermind" definition, and the ways in which we view the likes of Estes and Hunt.

But the person who benefited the most from that was LBJ himself.

Please quantify that statement.

And he took steps to insure that it would be successfully executed and successfully covered up. He was the pivot. As Ruby observed, after being granted a new trial,

Jack: Everything pertaining to what's happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred, my motives. The people had, that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I'm in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world.

Reporter : Are these people in very high positions Jack?!

Jack : Yes. . . .

Jack: "When I mentioned about Adlai Stevenson--if he was vice president there would never have been an assassination of our beloved President Kennedy"--[and was] asked if he would explain it again, Ruby continued, "Well, the answer is the man in office now."

I agree that LBJ had much to gain from JFK's murder -- including a "Get Out of Jail Free" card and all the wealth that the (limited) power of the presidency can generate.

But none of this brings us to a logical conclusion that LBJ was the "mastermind" of the assassination. And not even you have dared define the term, let alone defend the premise.

Jim, I reiterate: Nelson's book, informed by selective research and ultimately invalidated by illogical conclusion, is a disinformation textbook.

Here, in a nutshell (nut case?), is the process which, if we are to conclude that Nelson is an otherwise innocent naif, led to his "mastermind" conclusion:

A scientist trains a flea to fly. "Fly, flea," the scientist would say, and the flea would fly. "Fly, flea," and off it would soar.

Then one day the scientist surgically removed the flea's wings.

"Fly, flea," said the scientist. But the flea would not fly.

And so the scientist concluded, "When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."