Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book

[Charles Drago]

Charles,

I am delighted that you have read LBJ: MASTERMIND OF JFK'S ASSASSINATION. Nothing could please me more. It is a huge and sprawling book--rather like its subject--weighing in a 729 pages! Since every book has its strengths and weaknesses, please tell me which parts you found the most interesting and why as well as the parts you found the least persuasive and why. That would be most helpful. Thank you.

I'll consider your request -- even as I let pass the nagging feeling that you're still in the posture of a grade school teacher who doesn't quite buy his student's "I did SO read the book" stipulation.

But don't get your hopes up. I'm auditing your courses.

And since I have explained many times now why I regard LBJ as the "mastermind", when that term is used to refer to "the pivotal player" [...]

BINGO!!!

Nelson clearly is NOT using the terms "mastermind" and "pivotal player" synonymously. He is attempting to ascribe to LBJ the Sponsorship role -- which means Nelson is either an ignoramus or an accessory after the fact.

Why on earth can't you come to grips with the greater implications of this transparent reality?

(And by the by, Johnson was not "the" pivotal player, but rather "a" pivotal player -- nor more or less so than, in my educated opinion, Alan Dulles.)

Back to the all-important point -- one that transcends mere semantics. When Nelson -- either out of ignorance or malignant intent (for me, the jury remains out) -- ascribes to Johnson powers and authority well beyond any he or any other post-JFK president ever came close to possessing, he gives aid and comfort to our shared enemy.

In other words: NELSON REINFORCES THE FALSE SPONSORSHIP OF LBJ -- AN ACT WHICH, BY DEFINITION, PRESERVES AND PROTECTS THE TRUE SPONSORS OF THE ASSASSINATION OF JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY!

Further, in doing so an innocent Nelson would demonstrate a naif's pathetically and fatally underinformed appreciation of deep political reality.

[...] where [LBJ's] crucial role has not only been endorsed by Madeleine, Billy Sol, Barr McClellan, and E. Howard Hunt, but by JFK experts such as Nigel Turner, Jack White, and others I have named[.]

I categorically reject as credible witnesses and/or credible deep political analysts "Madeline, Billy Sol, Barr McClellan, E. Howard Hunt, Nigel Turner." Need I take you to task once more for your ... what's the word that won't offend you ... unimaginable endorsement of E. Howard Hunt, a man who saw you and me and so many of our colleagues as his blood enemies and as targets of opportunity for his disiniformation and propaganda?

As for our dear friend Jack White: Why not let him weigh in on the "mastermind" crux of our argument?

I would also be curious as to where we agree and disagree about my take oln the case.

We are in -- conservatively -- 95% agreement."

We have more than fifteen indications of Secret Service complicity in setting up JFK for the hit. The CIA/military/Mafia/anti-Castro Cubans took him out (with a little help from their friends in Dallas City and County law enforcement) and the FBI was used to cover it up, where Lyndon Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover were the principals (as the crucial players) with financing from Texas oil men.

ABSOLUTELY NONE OF WHICH QUALIFIES LBJ AS THE "MASTERMIND" OF THE JFK ASSASSINATION -- AS ANY SENSIBLE SPEAKER/READER OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WOULD UNDERSTAND THE WORD "MASTERMIND."

EDIT ADDENDUM: Nor, for the record, do I accept as holy writ the notion that "financing" of the assassination came exclusively -- as your construction would have us infer -- from "Texas oil men."

Even in relation to your SPONSOR/FACILITATOR/MECHANICS model, which has many virtues, LBJ is still the one indispensable player without whom the assassination could not have gone forward.

Make that "one of the indispensable players" and "the assassination as it was planned and executed" and we're on the same page again.

The assassination could have been accomplished in many ways. Absent LBJ as a co-conspirator, it could not have been done with the long-term, multi-faceted impacts which resulted from the actual event. But make no mistake: JFK was a goner -- one way or the other.

BESIDES, NONE OF THE ACCURATE POINTS YOU OFFER QUALIFIES LBJ AS THE "MASTERMIND" OF THE JFK ASSASSINATION AS ANY SENSIBLE SPEAKER/READER OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WOULD UNDERSTAND THE WORD "MASTERMIND."

Please be so kind as to reread my quotes from Jack Ruby, who, like Madeleine, Billy Sol, and others, knew something about the man at the center of all this and tell me who, among all your candidates, played a more pivotal role?

Jack Ruby is WORTHLESS as an analyst of deep political structure and motive.

Who played a more pivotal role than that played by LBJ? All of the TRUE sponsors, for starters. And, to my mind, Alan Dulles. In terms of creating the dramatic structure of the plot, I'd offer James Angleton and, to a slightly lesser degree, David Phillips.

We can play with this if you'd like.

I know you favor the Rockefeller banksters as prime movers, even though the Dallas roots of the assassination appear to be clear. ("The CIA and the oil boys decided he had to be taken out", as Lyndon explained to Madeleine.)

Second-hand testimony from a dubious source. You can't argue with the former, we can debate the latter.

What appears to be "clear" to you is, to me, murky (Murkyson?). Define "roots," please.

[H]ow can you offer Rockefeller and the banksters as an alternative? They may have had motive, since JFK was threatening to reform or abolish the FED, but are you suggesting that Nelson sent HIS chief administrative assistant to Dallas to make sure all the plans were in place for the assassination? or helped to cover it up?

If Nelson Rockefeller was a True Sponsor of the assassination, the LAST thing he would have done would be to send "HIS chief administrative assistant to Dallas."

You make my case for LBJ as Facilitator/False Sponsor quite efficiently, Jim.

LBJ -- Facilitator or Patsy?

It's the Third Alternative, Jim.

The answer to the question is YES!