The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue

[Charles Drago]

I feel that Charles is muddying the waters with ill-understood terms.

Good day, Jack.

"Ill-understood" by whom? I've gone out of my way to lay out the Evica-Drago conspiracy model, which by definition is other than simple to understand but hardly the stuff of a proposition by Wittgenstein. I use its terminology with as much precision as I can muster. The distinction between "simple" and "simple-minded" must be observed.

I am talking about Sponsors vs Conspirators. Many readers will look at his saying LBJ is a "false sponsor" as clearing him of conspiratorial participation.

Let me stipulate that I know you're not one of those readers, Jack.

In the now-closed thread and elsewhere I went to great pains to declare my conclusions that LBJ was a Facilitator and FALSE Sponsor, and to define those roles. Continued ignorance in the face of such clear explication is a phenomenon over which I have no control.

This is similar to the argument over Mastermind vs Essential Participant.

You're quite wrong on this point, my friend. And no, it's not a matter of opinion or "semantics" as the term is most often bandied about in popular culture.

In the Evica/Drago conspiracy model, "Sponsor" is used to describe those at the very top of the plot -- the deep political players with the authority to install and remove heads of state ... whose interests transcend East v. West, or at the time Cold War, differences.

"Facilitator" describes a wide range of JFK players -- from plot designers all the way "down" to the likes of damage control types in Dealey Plaza. And it is primarily though not exclusively that group from which FALSE Sponsors were and are drawn -- including Lyndon Johnson, a witting and important Facilitator.

So I must reiterate: you are utterly and empirically wrong in your above-stated conclusion.

In my opinion, LBJ was a conspirator, an essential conspirator, a pivotal conspirator, an eager conspirator.

I'll buy that.

In my opinion, False Sponsors include Castro, Kruschev, Marcello, Giancana, and the like.

Excellent! Here's where I think we can close the gap between us.

LIKE LBJ, Marcello and Giancana inhabit two levels of the Evica/Drago model: Facilitators and False Sponsors. Castro and Khrushchev are but False Sponsors.

To equate Lyndon with people like these is to excuse his culpability.

Come on, Jack. The terms "Facilitator, "Sponsor," and "False Sponsor" were created and applied precisely to avoid the confusion of which you write.

In my opinion, the Sponsors were The New World Order, the International Bankers, the Military-Industrial-Complex, Politicians and Cronies (LBJ), Intelligence Agencies (CIA, FBI, SS), Military Officers, Oil Interests, and
various Right Wing groups.

"Politicians and cronies," "Intelligence Agencies," "Military Officers," "Oil Interests," and "various Right Wing groups" by definition belong on the Facilitator and/or False Sponsor levels. They are not the commissioners of the plot. They are the architects and carpenters who designed, assembled, and activated its components. And every group listed in this paragraph has been elevated, through misunderstanding or malignant design, to the Sponsorship level. Which makes them FALSE Sponsors.

As for consideration of "The New World Order, the International Bankers, [and] the Military-Industrial-Complex" as Sponsors, we find ourselves at the Great Wall. We must be able to penetrate this barrier if we are ever to "solve" the JFK assassination and protect ourselves and our descendents.

Charles intends that the Word Sponsor apply only to the very top person or group which gave the order to kill.

Absolutely correct.

I use the word more broadly like Jim Marrs...meaning a Concert of Interests. LBJ was "a member of" those with a common Concert of Interests, therefore was a sponsor and conspirator. There was no SINGLE SPONSOR, but many with the same idea...get rid of JFK.

For better or worse, the manner in which you and Jim Marrs use the term "Sponsor" violates the Evica/Drago model's usage.

And while I tend to agree that there was no single Sponsor, I'm not yet prepared to stand behind such a conclusion.

One can either adopt or reject the Evica/Drago model. I am by no means suggesting that it is holy writ. But I've yet to see any other effort of comparable persuasiveness. If you know of any, please share.

One more point, and this is crucial: Many of the False Sponsors likely and mistakenly believed that they were true Sponsors.

I'll close this post by noting proudly and for the record that without the service of Jack White, our understanding of what happened to JFK would be pitiful indeed. Please accept my criticism of your position, Jack, as the product of one of your most grateful students.

Charles