The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue

[Peter Lemkin]

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

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.

Not so, in my opinion. This is similar to the argument over Mastermind vs
Essential Participant.

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

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

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

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.

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

Jack

I agree with all that Jack said. I agree with most of what Charles is saying. People have different ways of conceptualizing the same event. They apply different terms [and some, yes, mean one thing to the expert on the subject, and another to those not steeped in all this.]. They use different models; and they have different 'takes' on who did what and to what extent. I hope we can all agree that LBJ [and MANY others] should have stood trial and been convicted re: Dallas and the cover-up. I've said many times I do not believe LBJ was Mr. Big on this. In fact, my own theory is that there were several separate groupings and individuals [in the beginning not conspiring] who wanted for their own [and overlapping] reasons JFK offed. I don't know who got their plan rolling first or better organized, but my sense is that some [not all, by any means!] of these groupings coalesced [using all the intels cut-outs/secrecy/false leads/et al.] and were assigned different portions of the goings on. Many of these groups could have killed JFK, but very, VERY few could have coordinated it as it was, before, during and after!]. It would be those elements who I would look to for the Mr. Big[s] who wound up running the show and the coverup and even creating all the blind alleys, false trails, doublegangers, patsies by the score, many seemingly guilty persons - who were not [at least not of what they were set up to have allegedly done!], etc. Right up to this day they cover it all up...and the 50th they plan to put this to rest with JFK....that anyone and everyone who really didn't participate at the top will be fingered, to bamboozle the Sheeple into the post 911 nightmare, which is the follow on to the 11-22 nightmare [there were several in between, I'll not go into...but these, IMO were biggies - ARE biggies]. Why so much fighting over terms and labels? We've got lots of hard evidence and decades of work that show some high-powered; high-level players who were involved. I don't think there was - or we'll ever find ONE person we can pin the hit on. It was, IMO, a confluence of many who hated JFK [not all who hated him wound up participating - some didn't in any way - others knew it was to happen, and just watched and waited with glee; keeping their silence afterwards]. It is complex, at best and the 'other side' has the advantage of being able to oversimplify [and ignore complex] things to a Public that likes things simple. Somehow if we all don't fight back for the 50th together [even if we don't agree on all or even on many points] we'll loose the match - and perhaps what little remains of our polity this side of a neo-fascist police state.