11-05-2011, 10:46 AM
Simon
Lyndon Johnson loathed John Kennedy, opposed him on many policies, and was benefited by the assassination.
I believe he was a conscious participant in the coverup, but that the planning and execution, as well as the overarching shadow government transcends the ambitious politician and the hawkish general, the cunning mobster and the angry oil man.
In short, the CIA has its hand in the mailed fist, played a role which preceded and outlasted the various terra cotta warriors.
Though Johnson avoided prison and being dropped from the ticket, he withdrew from the 1968 election as a beaten man, fearing defeat by Humphrey, and defeat in Vietnam.
His death by heart attack occurred between the same for Hoover, and the resignation of Nixonbrought on by Hunt, a CIA man unto death, acting as Helm's agent.
Ford the stooge of Hoover succeeded Nixon and appointed GHWBush DCI.
Our current president continued the policies in Afghanistan of our previous presidentthough the two gave every superficial appearance of diametric divergence.
Hunt's deathbed deflection of blame from CIA to LBJ fits the series of LBJ proponents including the trio mentioned by Charles Drago above.
Johnson did not control the Oswald file, did not manipulate Oswald into the Depository, did not control the autopsy, and so on through the HSCA and Blakey's lies, the Secret Service's destruction of its records, the CIA's continuing stonewalling on Joannides, the classification of the Lopez Report and a thousand other matters.
Johnson was on the phone with Hoover within 24 hours to insure a coverup. He was dead in 1973. Why does the coverup persist.
He was not involved in the creation of two Oswalds per the work of John Armstrong, nor involved in the Mexico City charade, nor the role of Hunt in destroying Nixon, and so much more.
As Magda has suggested, an excellent crystallization of the entire web surrounding the lone champion of peace and reason exists in the 2008 James Douglass JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it matters.
Lyndon Johnson loathed John Kennedy, opposed him on many policies, and was benefited by the assassination.
I believe he was a conscious participant in the coverup, but that the planning and execution, as well as the overarching shadow government transcends the ambitious politician and the hawkish general, the cunning mobster and the angry oil man.
In short, the CIA has its hand in the mailed fist, played a role which preceded and outlasted the various terra cotta warriors.
Though Johnson avoided prison and being dropped from the ticket, he withdrew from the 1968 election as a beaten man, fearing defeat by Humphrey, and defeat in Vietnam.
His death by heart attack occurred between the same for Hoover, and the resignation of Nixonbrought on by Hunt, a CIA man unto death, acting as Helm's agent.
Ford the stooge of Hoover succeeded Nixon and appointed GHWBush DCI.
Our current president continued the policies in Afghanistan of our previous presidentthough the two gave every superficial appearance of diametric divergence.
Hunt's deathbed deflection of blame from CIA to LBJ fits the series of LBJ proponents including the trio mentioned by Charles Drago above.
Johnson did not control the Oswald file, did not manipulate Oswald into the Depository, did not control the autopsy, and so on through the HSCA and Blakey's lies, the Secret Service's destruction of its records, the CIA's continuing stonewalling on Joannides, the classification of the Lopez Report and a thousand other matters.
Johnson was on the phone with Hoover within 24 hours to insure a coverup. He was dead in 1973. Why does the coverup persist.
He was not involved in the creation of two Oswalds per the work of John Armstrong, nor involved in the Mexico City charade, nor the role of Hunt in destroying Nixon, and so much more.
As Magda has suggested, an excellent crystallization of the entire web surrounding the lone champion of peace and reason exists in the 2008 James Douglass JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it matters.