My new book, "Into the Nightmare"

[Joseph McBride]

I apologize for posting the material below yet again. It's just that the soon-to-be-eliminated delay between the times of my posts and the times of their appearances on-line often lead to them being buried.

So, Mr. McBride, once more I offer the following:


I add my voice to those raised in welcome, Joseph McBride. You appear to bring to these pages the all-too-rare investigative technique that answers the question, "Must our work be driven by rationality or intuition?" with a resounding "Yes!"

It was the late radical historian and JFK author George Michael Evica (And We are All Mortal; A Certain Arrogance) who first appreciated the JFK conspiracy as dramaturgy -- one vulnerable to studies by criminalists and literary scholars, but deeply understood only when both perspectives are equally valued and applied.

Given the literary inclinations and/or talents of three uber-suspects within the Facilitator level of the plot (James Jesus Angleton, David Atlee Phillips, and E. Howard Hunt) and one in the doggerel-eat-doggerel cheap seats (Clay Shaw), we should not be surprised.

I give a nod to all this in my Introduction to A Certain Arrogance. And I share a small excerpt from Evica's c.v. on this thread -- he taught Myth and Ritual in Literature, Genre Studies in Literature, Literary Criticism, Consciousness Development and the Symbolic Process, Linguistics, Film Studies, Creative Writing, Investigative Reporting, and Investigative History. He also studied Advanced Studies in Linguistics and Anthropology at Columbia University and Advanced Studies in Myth and Literature at Hartford Seminary Foundation -- to underscore my contention that the depth of one's investigation into the JFK assassination may be measured in direct proportion to the breadth of the mind conducting it.

We would benefit, I'm certain, from your thoughts on all this.

Also, you'll note above that I reference the "Facilitator" level of the JFK plot. At a certain point in any serious investigation of the assassination, the investigator must arrive at a working model for the conspiracy -- one based on fact and insight gathered to date, open to development and de-construction, and useful in the reverse-engineering of what we know to have taken place.

So as not to overload a single post, I'll go into detail a bit later.

Thanks so much for your attention.

AND ...

When I use the terms Sponsors, False Sponsors, Facilitators, and Mechanics, I do so within the context of what has come to be known as the Evica-Drago Model for the JFK conspiracy:

SPONSORS -- Those with the authority and motive to sanction the assassination and the connections to engage facilitating agents and systems. Among them in my opinion: the most powerful supra-national entities who were -- and are -- above Cold War and Clash of Civilization cosmetic differences.

FALSE SPONSORS -- Selected primarily from involved high-level FACILITATORS and otherwise uninvolved entities who logically might have come under suspicion. Among them in my opinion: LBJ, the CIA, the Mob, anti-Castro Cubans, Big Business, Big Oil, Castro, Khrushchev, etc.

FACILITATORS -- From the "princes" who directly and/or through buffers routinely interacted with and carried out the agendas of the SPONSORS and who created the plot in all its complexities, through high-level members of facilitating organizations, to mid- to low-level functionaries who performed the heavy lifting. Among them in my opinion: LBJ, James Angleton, Edward Lansdale, David Atlee Phillips, David Sanchez Morales, Lucien Conein, Gerald Patrick Hemming, "William Bishop" and other CIA officers and agents, Santos Trafficante, Johnny Rosselli, Jimmy Hoffa, certain Secret Service, FBI and military intelligence officers and agents, individuals intimately linked to Big Business and Big Oil, certain Dallas elected officials and members of the DPD, certain members of the print and broadcast media, certain heads of state, etc. etc. etc.

MECHANICS -- The gunmen and support personnel on-site who carried out the attack and escape-evade procedures. Among them in my opinion: possibly a team from Pakse Base, former Wermacht/SS sniper(s), etc. Think the most skilled hunters of humans on the planet.

Your thoughts, if you please.

Charles,

Good thoughts. I try in INTO THE NIGHTMARE to link a ground-level investigation of the
complex facts of the case -- which is essential -- with a macro-level investigation of
the political context and the roles of those you aptly call the Sponsors and people in the other categories. It is
difficult to do both in tandem but I believe essential. And it is one reason it took
me a long time to write the book, both assembling the research materials and putting them into context.

Bringing a critical/analytical sensibility to bear is key to understanding events such as these. My
research turned up previously unknown events and information. And even when you reinterpret
familiar events through a new lens and with the benefit of fresh information
found in your own research and in document releases, new patterns emerge. I continually
found revealing insights that way. It was an exciting process. The case is a large mosaic, with
patterns that take a while to discern and some missing pieces; our job is partly to fill those
in, partly to bring a sharper focus to the mosaic.

I admire Peter Dale Scott and others for studying the assassination in its broad
sociopolitical context while using finely detailed data, carefully mined, to draw their conclusions. Dr. E. Martin Schotz
has done important work in analyzing the psychology of coverup and denial that
permeates the case and misleads people. The cultural and social context (including
media criticism and the reflections of the assassination in films, TV, and literature
before and after the events) is part of the story as well, since it's part of
how we tell the story to ourselves. I try to look at the Dallas events through all these lenses.

My work as a film historian has taught me to approach our culture in conjunction with sociopolitical
themes -- I have focused on filmmakers who deal with important social issues. That makes the
research fascinating and challenging. I hope you and others appreciate the
search I have made into why my candidate was killed (a shattering event
that made me recreate myself and change my aspirations from politics to writing) and the many discoveries I have made along the way.