Bowers - A Hypothesis

[Albert Doyle]

Two Bowers-related points, Albert.

Why, if Bowers were in possession of such vital and incriminating information, was he simply disfigured by the Cleaners rather than "accidented" quickly?

Because it would have been too obvious. The way these people work is they do a personality profile of their target. If they thought Bowers was the "all business" authority-respecting, straight-shooter he was said to be by his acquaintances, they might take the risk that a finger-chopping might be good enough to shut him up. This had to be done very carefully. The modus operandi of the perpetrators was to camp-out at the gate-keeping end. You can tell who they were by their methods. Typically they used legal means by which to prevent evidence. The Warren Commission being the all-encompassing control apparatus.

In my opinion Bowers was doomed from the start. He saw the whole thing and stood to reveal the operation. Like DeMohrenschildt he was too honest and would have eventually been questioned by Assassination researchers. When the tide was in favor enough of being safe to talk - like it is now, Bowers would have most likely talked. Eventually he would have gotten to a forum where he had to account for what he said to Degough and Holland.

I personally think Bowers got on the short list when the highly intelligent 'literary' planners saw his "could not say then nor could I say now" and knew people would figure it out. Especially with a chopped-finger.

Wouldn't the disfigurement amount to compelling evidence for the veracity of a suddenly talkative Bowers's accusations?

Finger-cutting is a strictly mafia form of intimidation. Again, the form of what we are seeing here is indicative of who the players are. Legal gate-keeping and finger-cutting are forms that are speaking loudly a mob/government alliance - which is exactly the culprits that have been isolated by researchers.

Finally, I read your statement, "The Kennedy Assassination was a Coup D'etat by CIA and the military and they killed United States citizens who were witnesses to their crimes therefore overthrowing our Constitutional/legal form of government. This was basically a Nazi action by right-wing elements in positions of power in the US" as a non sequitur within the context of this thread.

I guess if you ignore all the evidence people like Douglass have accrued and come to the exact same conclusion over, OK. I believe Bowers was murdered by CIA. In that case it would not be a 'Non-Sequitur'.

Further, I draw the inference -- and please correct me if I'm being a dunderhead here -- that you place on the Sponsorship level of the assassination "CIA and the military" and "right-wing elements in positions of power in the US".

If so, we profoundly disagree; I see these suspects as False Sponsors. They are properly situated on the Facilitator level: They are architects, carpenters, and tools, but not the clients who own the property and commissioned the project.

While it is important to get the classification of perpetrators correct I think we are well past the point of incriminating evidence here as far as general criminal complicity. No matter who the controllers were the actors are still prone to their legal accountability as far as their actions. No matter what the case, the idea of members of government organizations like CIA having an active participatory role in the assassination of a president has profound implications that have to be related, and assigned their proper significance, accordingly.


In short I think the Egyptians have proven you get more done in the streets than the china shops. Something our founding fathers didn't shy from.