Lifton on DiEugenio on JFK offering the Vice Presidential nomination to LBJ . . .

[James H. Fetzer]

Charles,

We've "been there, done that"! I am disappointed that you are continuing this
unwarranted assault on an honorable man who has done more research on this
topic (LBJ) than has anyone else in the world. He confirms and reinforces what
I have learned from Jack Ruby, Madeleine Duncan Brown (personally), Billy Sol
Estes, Barr McClellan, and E. Howard Hunt, among others. Those who discount
or otherwise disregard the essential evidence they provide with regard to the
character and conduct of Lyndon Baines Johnson are consigned to ignorance.
Believe what you will, but it you are looking for the truth, Nelson provides it.

Jim

[quote=Charles Drago]
Further: We are at war with the killers of JFK, and it is my Constitutionally protected contention that Nelson is their witting agent.

With respect to the call for neutrality on this subject I wanted to add that after pondering why major researchers would deliberately skew LBJ as the "Mastermind" of the Kennedy Assassination it dawned on me that the reason was more simply explained than I considered. A book with a title claiming LBJ to be an accomplice used as a useful inside tool but wasn't the actual plotter would not be as good a sell as one claiming he was the organizing "Mastermind".

Albert,

It's not that I discount your scenario out-of-hand. But even if this best-case interpretation is on the money, what does it tell us about the ethics of a writer who would obscure the truth and, in the process, contribute to the cover-up just to increase book sales?

What does it tell us about the deep political sophistication of a writer who cannot understand the threats to truth and justice inherent in making such a move?




"Exploiting" -- I couldn't have written it better.

I'd add that it's exploitation at a terrible cost to history.




As in somewhat pregnant?

but functional in drawing maximum attention to a valid member or layer of the actual conspiracy that had been previously shielded from exposure by the need to protect the honor of a US office.

Perhaps, but only if there were no better ways.

Myself I find it somewhat distasteful because it creates a carnival-like aspect to the Assassination landscape were researchers are trying to draw readers into their particular conspiracy theory sideshow. While patrons will learn real things in the Lyndon Baines wax museum they won't be clued or necessarily inspired to investigate the off-limits tents and their contents.

As in somewhat dead?

The misidentification of LBJ as a Sponsor ... no, make that THE Sponsor ... of JFK's murder accomplishes nothing of value to the extended victims of the Dealey Plaza crossfire, even as it delivers immense value to the victimizers.

The LBJ as "mastermind" disinformation tells us, "Here end the searches for truth and justice for JFK."

Is that message acceptable to you under any circumstances?

Acceptable to any of us?

Yes or no?