Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book

[Charles Drago]

My dictionary says a mastermind is "A highly intelligent person; especially, one who plans and directs a project."

As I've previously noted, "my" dictionary, Merriam-Webster, defines "mastermind" as "a person who supplies the directing or creative intelligence for a project."

Such is your extraordinary claim for LBJ. Provide your extraordinary evidence. Show us your model for the "project." I have shown my model for the assassination conspiracy, a model jointly developed by myself and George Michael Evica. In it we define "False Sponsor." Please find it on DPF, study it, and respond with your analysis.

I explained why LBJ had the capability, history and intense motivation to be Macbeth in this regicide, granted, a few layers removed.

Now we may be on to something. Define "a few layers removed" from the Macbeth role.

And while you're at it, demonstrate to us how LBJ had the "capability" to detect and select and manipulate LHO, the perfect patsy. For starters. After all, the "mastermind" of the JFK conspiracy must have had sufficient savvy to appreciate the overarching significance of selecting a patsy whose c.v. would taint so many agencies and operations so as to deflect post-assassination investigations. Said operations would include, but not be limited to, HTLINGUAL and the false defector provocations.

Of course, you may argue, LBJ needn't know about such things. All he had to bring to the task was the authority to command those who did.

So prove such an extraordinary claim.

LBJ was the Political Operator Supreme, was he not? For example, he made his big money by accepting bribes for "services rendered," fixing this, that and the other in service of big bucks, etc. Operator Supreme.

Make the leap to JFK assassination "mastermind." "Political Operators" were a dime a dozen. Still are. So too those who "accept bribes for 'services rendered."

Then we have ruthless, ambitious, bitter, humiliated, cornered, all that stuff.

Granted.

There is no doubt in my mind that LBJ had the motivation, intelligence and other attributes to "get the job done," assisted by many others at the hub and spoke. Yet this apparently is an impossibility to you.

This is weak. Very weak. Define "other attributes." The devil is in this very detail. You're making the claim, the onus is on you to demonstrate precisely how the "humiliated, cornered" LBJ had the authority to command the deep political state to do his bidding.

More on your "intelligence" gambit at post's end.

It certainly is "anathema" to you, yet WHY? Look at all the skullduggery LBJ committed throughout his life. What is your argument and evidence to back up your opinion that LBJ was a bit player pre-assassination, if that is a proper inference about your theory?

So you equate the "skullduggery" commited by a no-holds-barred political fixer like Landslide Lyndon to the knowledge, skills, and authority necessary to construct and execute the JFK assassination conspiracy?

By all means, thrill us with the finer points of this argument.

False sponsor? You define that and maybe I'll have an answer.

I already have. On many occasions. Please do your homework and get back to us.

Crimes are committed by specific criminals for specific motives, not structure or some other abstraction.

Not just "motives," I'm afraid. You've left out "means" and "opportunity." Please elaborate on these areas vis a vis LBJ.

And what does "the power of the presidency was the sine qua non" mean? All I get from that is that gigantic means would not be applied to acquire it if the office were powerless and/or worthless.

Ahh, just what I was waiting for. No offense intended, Morgan, but here you are demonstrating a rather pedestrian appreciation of deep politics.

By "the power of the presidency," I am referencing the chief executive's ability to intimidate, direct, and otherwise run roughshod over certain government agencies and the media. This power is vested in the for-public-consumption notion of the presidency -- a sleight-of-hand trick. Ask Richard Nixon just how much power his presidency had when he demanded information from the CIA. Ask John Kennedy how much power his presidency had in April, 1961.

LBJ's pivotal role in the coverup was dependent upon the limited but useful traditional power of his office to command those elements of the government and the media to do his bidding.

Do you deny that LBJ was and had to be in on it in advance?

No.

Speaking of disinfo, what lie(s) did Nelson tell?

In summation? One word will suffice.

EDIT: ADDITION -- Your understanding of disinformation seems rather superficial, if I may say. "Disinformation" and "lies" are not synonymous. The spreading of false information is but one component of a disinformation operation -- the key element of which is the selective presentation of verifiable fact. Nelson tells us nothing we did not already know. A great deal of what he professes to be true is true. Like all disinformationalists he uses such statements of fact to establish his bona fides, and then goes on to present, for example, the Hersh abominations as fact with the expectation that his readers will accept these arguments from authority.

Previously on this thread I have demonstrated how Nelson has attempted to back away from his now crumbling "mastermind" deception even though in his book he steadfastly maintains, in no uncertain terms, that LBJ did indeed supply the directing or creative intelligence for the assassination conspiracy. You tell me the proper word to describe Nelson's action.

Finally, Morgan, I am disappointed in your effort to conflate LBJ's intelligence with the authority, skills, and knowledge necessary to be the "mastermind" of the JFK assassination.

You're creating a strawman with all of this posturing, and I'm not buying it for a minute. Nowhere has it been argued -- at least by me -- that LBJ was a dolt. Far from it.

So while Jim Fetzer -- your tag-team partner here -- may be thrilled by this diversionary exercise, I suggest that you drop it. It's embarrassing. And not to me.