30-04-2011, 05:40 PM
My latest responses in red'
In terms of patsy value, Vallee's "nut" defense isn't even in the same sport as LHO's connections to deep political structures. In other words, those very factors that you interpret as LHO's get-out-of-jail-free blackmail cards in the aggregate made him the ideal LN -- a man so deeply enmeshed in the secret world that all would-be honest investigators could be easily convinced to back off and go with the official story unless they wanted to uncover operations that, if made public, could threaten national security.
[COLOR="red"]Yes, Jim, there were errors in Dallas -- but NONE were fatal to the plot, ALL were managed, and SOME, I submit, were not "errors" at all, but rather provocations staged to confuse and misdirect honest observers and investigators.
And while I respect your hypotheses that the murder of LHO, the creation of the WC, and first generation critics' books were the unavoidable consequences of those "errors," I do not endorse them.
I'm especially distressed by the implication of the latter: Not only would the honorable, brilliant, courageous critics have arisen even after a flawless Dallas operation, they would have been encouraged by assassination sponsors who had two main goals: Kill JFK and MAINTAIN THE PEOPLE'S SENSE OF POWERLESSNESS BORN OF THE (FLAWED) REALIZATION THAT WE CAN NEVER REALLY [B]KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE POWERS-THAT-BE[/B].[/COLOR]
But Jim, is it not equally reasonable -- at least -- to conclude that Echeverria may have been duped to believe that Chicago was real, and that, decades later, the confusion would be allowed to continue as part of the larger effort to mislead and misdirect investigators?[/COLOR]
[COLOR="red"]Can we be certain that all of "Oswald's" warnings originated with him?
But let's assume that they did. LHO's warnings would have described a plot which. in its superficial contours, described Dallas AND Chicago!
OK, let's continue to assume that LHO was reporting on Dallas -- but once Chicago was intentionally blown, all of those reports could have been written off as pertaining to the foiled Chicago effort. Get it?[/COLOR]
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:How you can say that Vallee was an ineffectual patsy truly escapes me. In one sense, he is even better than Oswald, because he really did have a recurring mental problem to his psyche that Oswald did not. Further, Oswald had his double agent aspect that he could always try to expose as his ace card. Which would have fouled up any trial. Vallee did not.
In terms of patsy value, Vallee's "nut" defense isn't even in the same sport as LHO's connections to deep political structures. In other words, those very factors that you interpret as LHO's get-out-of-jail-free blackmail cards in the aggregate made him the ideal LN -- a man so deeply enmeshed in the secret world that all would-be honest investigators could be easily convinced to back off and go with the official story unless they wanted to uncover operations that, if made public, could threaten national security.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:I don't know what you mean about stupid errors. Are you going to say there were no stupid errors in Dallas? There were many of them. Which is why 1.) Oswald had to be killed 2.) There had to be a WC and 3.) THere were books by Lane, Meagher etc.
[COLOR="red"]Yes, Jim, there were errors in Dallas -- but NONE were fatal to the plot, ALL were managed, and SOME, I submit, were not "errors" at all, but rather provocations staged to confuse and misdirect honest observers and investigators.
And while I respect your hypotheses that the murder of LHO, the creation of the WC, and first generation critics' books were the unavoidable consequences of those "errors," I do not endorse them.
I'm especially distressed by the implication of the latter: Not only would the honorable, brilliant, courageous critics have arisen even after a flawless Dallas operation, they would have been encouraged by assassination sponsors who had two main goals: Kill JFK and MAINTAIN THE PEOPLE'S SENSE OF POWERLESSNESS BORN OF THE (FLAWED) REALIZATION THAT WE CAN NEVER REALLY [B]KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE POWERS-THAT-BE[/B].[/COLOR]
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:I also do not agree about Echeverria being just a "location asset". There is evidence that he was part of an assassination plot. It was in the HSCA and the ARRB declassified some of it. The FBi clearly let him off the hook.
But Jim, is it not equally reasonable -- at least -- to conclude that Echeverria may have been duped to believe that Chicago was real, and that, decades later, the confusion would be allowed to continue as part of the larger effort to mislead and misdirect investigators?[/COLOR]
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:And no I did not "spin" anything about the Oswald warnings. That is the way they happened. Do you have further info that alters that?
[COLOR="red"]Can we be certain that all of "Oswald's" warnings originated with him?
But let's assume that they did. LHO's warnings would have described a plot which. in its superficial contours, described Dallas AND Chicago!
OK, let's continue to assume that LHO was reporting on Dallas -- but once Chicago was intentionally blown, all of those reports could have been written off as pertaining to the foiled Chicago effort. Get it?[/COLOR]