Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
JFK: What we know now that we didn't know then
#14
James H. Fetzer Wrote:Phil,

Lyndon was not photogenic and, in the age of television, would have had a hard time reaching the top. He forced his way onto the ticket, later explaining that he was "a gambling man" and had discovered one in four occupants of the office did not live to the end of their terms. LBJ was ANYTHING BUT a "gambling man" who only acted on certainties. Have you read Phil's book? I have nothing but scorn for those who denigrate his research, which is thorough, meticulous, and compelling. During our two hour interview, by the way, I specifically invited him to explain his use of the term, "mastermind". In my opinion, he has it exactly right--and we have abundant corroborating evidence from Madeleine, Billy Sol, Barr and E. Howard Hunt. How anyone can casually dismiss the incriminating testimony of those who knew him best--"up close and personal"--is simply beyond me. Check out two interviews.

An Open Letter to All For Whom the Truth Matters

In accepting at face value JFK "evidence" proffered by E. Howard Hunt, professional intelligence operative, master propagandist, known liar, and accessory to the murder of JFK, convicted criminal and LBJ associate Billy Sol Estes, and Madeline Brown, queen of the unsubstantiated, the esteemed Jim Fetzer presents us with a terrible choice: Is he cognitively impaired, complicit in the cover-up of JFK's murder, or both?

Further, Jim Fetzer equates proximity to a subject with ... what? ... insight? Truthfulness?

Utter balderdash!

Nelson's "research" is nothing more than the rehashing, regurgitation, and/or disfigurement of previously presented material. His conclusions reveal not a scintilla of deep political insight.

Other than simplemindedness, there is no innocent explanation for Nelson's witting use of the term "mastermind" to describe LBJ's role in the JFK assassination. He's either an idiot or an enemy agent. And no one -- not Jim Fetzer or any other alleged JFK assassination "authority" -- can defend said usage other than by the application of cheap rhetorical tricks, ad hominems, and/or logical fallacies. More on the latter in a moment.

But Nelson's worst offense -- by far -- is the manner in which, wittingly or otherwise, he aids and abets the cover-up of the truth in the JFK assassination by reinforcing the position of LBJ as a Sponsor of the crime.

The creation of False Sponsors -- as opposed to the proper identification of true Facilitators, a category into which LBJ surely falls -- remains one of the most effective, difficult to counter tactics in the overall cover-up strategy. An individual of Jim Fetzer's qualifications and accomplishments should be expected to A) understand this long-established truth, and B) fight tooth and nail against the agent provocateurs who engage in the False Sponsor gambit.

Yet Jim Fetzer embraces Nelson's depraved fantasies as holy writ. And again, we are forced to make a choice between equally distressing explanations of this behavior.

The best Jim Fetzer can do in defense of the indefensible Nelson is to make arguments from authority. It saddens me beyond measure to note that, because of the myriad frailties he exhibits throughout this sordid Nelson affair, it is now clear that Jim Fetzer's authority has been consumed by the fires of his own ego and enfeeblement.

Phillip Nelson adds his intellectual pop-gun to the weaponry being employed in the post mortem assassination of JFK. Jim Fetzer stands by his side, delivering escape-and-evade services.

Another shooting team has been identified.
Charles Drago
Co-Founder, Deep Politics Forum

If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence: He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave.
-- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

You can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless.  All you can do is control them or eliminate them.  Innocence is a kind of insanity.
-- Graham Greene
Reply


Messages In This Thread
JFK: What we know now that we didn't know then - by Charles Drago - 02-12-2011, 04:57 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why didn't they just assassinate Kennedy at the Orange Bowl? Scott Kaiser 0 2,842 13-10-2016, 04:54 PM
Last Post: Scott Kaiser
  Why didn't Sherriff Decker testiy about being in the lead car? Betty Chruscielski 1 4,624 06-01-2016, 11:53 PM
Last Post: Drew Phipps
  More Proof That Sen. Russell Didn't Buy What Warren Was Selling. Peter Lemkin 1 3,493 17-11-2013, 03:04 PM
Last Post: Tracy Riddle
  Why didn't the hippies get into the jfk assassination ? Steve Minnerly 116 52,481 23-08-2013, 06:47 PM
Last Post: Cliff Varnell
  They didn't believe Oswald shot anyone - lots of background on Oswald's "pals" (done in 1986) Adele Edisen 1 3,484 15-01-2013, 08:35 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  JFK and RFK: The Plots that Killed Them, The Patsies that Didn't James H. Fetzer 8 9,908 05-07-2010, 02:47 PM
Last Post: Dawn Meredith
  Smathers says JFK didn't want to go to Texas Gil Jesus 1 4,249 31-07-2009, 10:34 PM
Last Post: Dawn Meredith
  JFK and RFK: The Plots that Killed Them, The Patsies that Didn't 0 981 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)