The Chicago Plot: A Hypothesis

[Charles Drago]

That should be obvious master Charles. Nagell was an unexpected wild card and loose cannon. He came out of nowhere and was willing to shoot a gun in a bank according to his outrage over the planned treasonous assassination of a US president. A little more outrage and he could have shot Oswald in order to defeat their plot.

"Outrage"??? You know nothing about Nagell's motivations as he himself described them. "More" outrage? Does the admonition, "You cannot modify an absolute"* ring any bells?

You seem to assume an absolutist position that Dallas was guaranteed to happen, but both reality and CIA don't work that way.

STOP with this CIA nonsense! It was and is a tool -- an agenda facilitator. It is NOT a monolithic entity and it was NOT a Sponsor of the assassination.

And if you're going to make the claim that you know how "the CIA" works, I'm very interested to know when you plan on backing it up.

The "guaranteed" part is your misinterpretation.

It is possible Oswald might have been exposed prior to Dallas. The Chicago Police could have busted Vallee earlier. The reason they didn't was because they needed to keep Vallee a live asset for CIA up to the last moment, just in case.

Pure speculation -- which is precisely what I invited when I started this thread. But it is so undernourished by in-depth, sophisticated appreciations of how things work that it simply cannot pass the laugh test. Sorry, Albert. I don't like how these exchanges are developing, but I'm at wit's end trying to get you to think more deeply about matters at hand.

There's no doubt Dallas was the better city. CIA used Dallas because the political climate gave them a feeling of justification. They repeated this process in this century by using a Texan president for the worst fascist American administration. Dallas was ideal because Texas rednecks availed themselves to CIA fascist military control. These personality types tend to not let a minor thing like democracy get in the way of their willingness to take orders unquestioningly.

"Better" city. No.

And again, for the love of God, the CIA "controlled" NOTHING exept facilitation-related matters! Not then. Not now.

And now you've got me doing it -- referring to "the CIA" as if it were a monolithic entity.

Was Vallee part of the false defector program? Touched by HTLINGUAL? An applicant to Albert Schweitzer College? Did he marry a blood relative of a GRU officer? Was he rubbing elbows with LCN-connected "types"? Pro-Castro Cubans? Anti-Castro cubans? Was he an FBI informant?

No, but that's not the point. If Oswald was compromised CIA had another iron in the fire with Vallee. You can't say for certain that Oswald would not have been exposed. What you have to understand is what CIA needed the most is JFK dead.

It is PRECISELY the point. Vallee was not an iron in any fire. He was a straw -- as in STRAW MAN. No depth. No heft. A chimera. A ruse.

And stop telling me what I have to understand. Until you cease and desist from writing about the CIA as a prime mover of anything, you have zero to say to me about this case and deep politics in general.

The only thing "the CIA" needed was to do the job assigned to "it." And that job was not to kill JFK, but to facilitate an operation that would include the murder of JFK in a very specific fashion -- in Dallas, with LHO as the patsy.

Vallee's brain damage is much more valuable to CIA than any Oswald red-dipping because they can mold anything they wish out of it and would have.

This paragraph has helped me to decide that there is no reasoning with you. It reflects layers of ignorance and, I must say, arrogance that are all but impenetrable. You will think what you think. My honest wish for you is that, in time, you will come to realize just how sophmoric and personally undermining these sorts of conclusions were/are to you.

Then stop trotting him out to bolster the unbolsterable.

Careful Drago, you are close to speaking in open contempt of one of the best conspiracy book authors.

This is the last straw. My respect for Mr. Douglass is nearly boundless. I repeat, with emphasis: My respect for Mr. Douglass is NEARLY boundless.

I shall not attempt to speak for him; my educated guess is that he would agree wholeheartedly with this warning: The Douglass conception of the JFK conspiracy is a human conception, and thus imperfect.

Otherwise, I choose to accept your "Careful Drago" [sic] construction as a tongue-in-cheek offering. Because if you were serious, I would respond by directing you to engage in onanistic copulation.

Honestly Charles, I think you are traipsing around your baroque chandelier-decorated conspiracy dining room and sipping the champagne of the high class conspirators while missing the fact the conspiracy would have been just as effective if done in the concrete basement.

As wrong as wrong could be -- about the effectiveness business. Shallow and, in a disturbing way, laughable.

And again, I'll choose to ascribe your identification of my drinking partners to ignorance and inartful literary construction.

No offense taken.

Goodbye.
__________________

With the exceptions of ice, lime, tonic, soda, dry vermouth, and Lillet.