11-02-2012, 12:36 AM
Resolved: There is a very high probability that Facilitators of the JFK assassination cover-up have altered evidence that neither supports nor refutes the pro-conspiracy argument.
Nothing would please the ghosts of James Jesus Angleton, Allen Dulles, Richard Helms and others more than to see us continuously mired in debate regarding the precise characteristics of the black cat not in the dark closet.
I had occasion to revisit the two-paragraph quote of Vincent Salandria to Gaeton Fonzi from The Last Investigation by way of Spartacus:
(3) Vincent J. Salandria was interviewed by Gaeton Fonzi in 1975. It was quoted by Fonzi in The Last Investigation (1993)
I'm afraid we were misled. All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time and effort microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy. Don't you think that the men who killed Kennedy had the means to do it in the most sophisticated and subtle way? They chose not to. Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: 'We are in control and no one - not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official - no one can do anything about it.' It was a message to the people that their Government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message. Consider what has happened since the Kennedy assassination. People see government today as unresponsive to their needs, yet the budget and power of the military and intelligence establishment have increased tremendously.
The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but to repression. I suggest to you, my friend, that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact - and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet, buddy, that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKsalandria.htm
I find the above two paragraphs on page 29 in Chapter Three: The Right Place, The Right Time, First trade paperback edition, 1994. Thunder's Mouth Press. Fonzi refers to the warning again on the pages 52 and 391.
Anomalies abound. The non-Oswald photo of Oswald. The non-Oswald tape of Oswald. Mark Lane stipulates Oswald was not in Mexico City. Others insist he was.
The 26 volumes of the Warren Commission contain ten million words invariably lies or trivia.
When we have photos and film, the chain of custody suggest it has been washed through official filters. Charles hypothesizes attention need not alter when alteration findeth.
The perennial question meant to underwrite the Zapruder film authenticity is, "if they altered it why did they leave in evidence of a shot from the front."
The answer may be to leave the audience wrangling with a tangle of such knots.
The Fiskars Solution is to cut to the chase: it was a coup; the rest is encyclopedic credits rolling at warp speed.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3619[/ATTACH]
Nothing would please the ghosts of James Jesus Angleton, Allen Dulles, Richard Helms and others more than to see us continuously mired in debate regarding the precise characteristics of the black cat not in the dark closet.
I had occasion to revisit the two-paragraph quote of Vincent Salandria to Gaeton Fonzi from The Last Investigation by way of Spartacus:
(3) Vincent J. Salandria was interviewed by Gaeton Fonzi in 1975. It was quoted by Fonzi in The Last Investigation (1993)
I'm afraid we were misled. All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time and effort microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy. Don't you think that the men who killed Kennedy had the means to do it in the most sophisticated and subtle way? They chose not to. Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: 'We are in control and no one - not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official - no one can do anything about it.' It was a message to the people that their Government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message. Consider what has happened since the Kennedy assassination. People see government today as unresponsive to their needs, yet the budget and power of the military and intelligence establishment have increased tremendously.
The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but to repression. I suggest to you, my friend, that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact - and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet, buddy, that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKsalandria.htm
I find the above two paragraphs on page 29 in Chapter Three: The Right Place, The Right Time, First trade paperback edition, 1994. Thunder's Mouth Press. Fonzi refers to the warning again on the pages 52 and 391.
Anomalies abound. The non-Oswald photo of Oswald. The non-Oswald tape of Oswald. Mark Lane stipulates Oswald was not in Mexico City. Others insist he was.
The 26 volumes of the Warren Commission contain ten million words invariably lies or trivia.
When we have photos and film, the chain of custody suggest it has been washed through official filters. Charles hypothesizes attention need not alter when alteration findeth.
The perennial question meant to underwrite the Zapruder film authenticity is, "if they altered it why did they leave in evidence of a shot from the front."
The answer may be to leave the audience wrangling with a tangle of such knots.
The Fiskars Solution is to cut to the chase: it was a coup; the rest is encyclopedic credits rolling at warp speed.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3619[/ATTACH]