The lbj false sponsorship operation to continue

[Jack White]

Charles, I want to be FAIR. I have named a name as Mr. BIG (Sponsor).
It may or may not be correct...but is as good as evidence allows.

Please be fair by naming YOUR Mr. BIG (Sponsor). (However, as I noted,
I do not believe there was an organizational chart).

Thanks.

Jack

Good Morning,

I'm afraid I can't do that simply because I don't know. And I'm not ashamed to admit it. I'm still working via the process of elimination.

I feel confident to state for the record that there was no "Mr. Big" in the cartoon sense. There was, however, a very small assemblage of ... forgive the vague terminology ... Earth Movers who, having conducted a de facto risk/reward analysis, made the decision to engage the most gifted and powerful of Facilitators under their control and thus set the plot in motion.

I think it far more likely that if there were a single individual in command of any major element of the plot, he or she would have sat atop the Facilitator level. Angleton is a candidate, but I'm hesitant to be definitive.

Whoever designed the plot understood theatrics and had a grasp of historical precedent (the literary pursuits of Angleton, Phillips, and, to a lesser degree, Hunt track back to the former, as do Lansdale's creative impulses; Bill Kelly's work on what he terms "Valkyrie in Dealey Plaza" resonates with me in terms of the latter).

Further, we must understand the likely non-denominational character of some of the Sponsors, Facilitators, and Mechanics. Remember, I and others believe that for the most powerful forces on the planet, the Cold War was a fictive construct -- a theatrical production. All of my work in the deep political arena is predicated on this conclusion/hypothesis.

Accordingly, I see a very strong link -- beyond timing -- between the removals of JFK and Khrushchev.

(Not to mention the irony of the removals' respective methodologies: the leader of God's Free World is blown apart, the leader of the evil, totalitarian system is peacefully replaced.)

Finally, I'll step over a few lines and declare that I (and others) sense a spiritual dimension within the motives of certain Sponsors.

Jack, I wish I could be more specific. In the past you've characterized me as being overly cautious in certain aspects of my JFK work. And you may be right.

Best,

Charles

Caution is the best policy. These Deep Political guys are not fools.
They cover their tracks well, leaving few clues for us to sniff.

I will agree with you that they make GREAT USE of FALSE SPONSORS.
I call them patsies or fall guys...something to lead us on false trails.
Oswald was one. Castro was one. Kruschev was one, etc.

I disagree that LBJ was one. He was one of THEM, not a patsy.
However, ANY dead guy can safely be named as a patsy...since he is
no longer around to dispute his patsyhood. So, in a sense, it is SAFE
to make a dead guy a false sponsor. Just not during his lifetime.

Jack

Jack