The Splintering Frame

[Jan Klimkowski]

Sorry Rob but I have to agree with Charles and Jan.

To call this garbage when you can't know if this did happen or not

I think some of us already have a fair idea as to whether it happened or not.

Is it just me or is there an upsurge of needlessly dumb and contrarian posts on the forum this last week or so? I'll give the contributors the benefit of the doubt, but the timing does make me wonder. Interns working at Cass Sunstein's office will probably be earning their pay over the next few months, that's for sure.

Anthony - yup.

The first few pages of this thread include an intelligent and informed exploration of the occult element of deep politics.

Indeed, the founders of DPF and many members have a genuine and long standing interest in this area, and there are numerous threads here on everything from literal alchemy to Jungian alchemy to deep political alchemy.

Rob - your post was garbage and rather than adding to the debate, risked dragging it into the tabloid gutter. If you want to talk black magic at kindergarten level, there are plenty of other websites out there.

[Charles Drago]

Kennedy was hit in the throat, back and head a la Hiram Abif. These wounds are depicted and recreated by new initiates every year into the world of Masonry. He was killed by three "unworthy" craftsmen and some relate the "three hobos" to this part of the Abif story in the JFK murder.

Sorry - but this is garbage and discredits legitimate research into this area of the assassination.

The Mechanics, the Shooters, were tasked with killing Kennedy.

There is no way the Shooters were tasked with hitting Kennedy in the throat, back and head to demonstrate masonic symbolism.

I presented an overview of some of the things that have been cited for years in this regard.

Cited by whom? Fools, charlatans, and disinformation agents, to be sure.

If you don't believe them that is fine, but to discredit it out of hand is not something I am not going to do.

Nothing was discredited "out of hand." Rather, what you wrote was recognized as garbage by individuals who have spent decades in open-minded study of the JFK case and who, in many instances, are recognized internationally for their expertise and published research.

The FACT Masons were on the WC and part of the investigation is simply part of the record.

As were agnostics, Irishmen, fishermen, and wine enthusiasts.

I also did not state this as a fact ...

Sunsteinian bullshit!

You wrote the following, which in word choice and tone is nothing other than a statement of fact:

"Kennedy was hit in the throat, back and head a la Hiram Abif. These wounds are depicted and recreated by new initiates every year into the world of Masonry. He was killed by three "unworthy" craftsmen and some relate the "three hobos" to this part of the Abif story in the JFK murder."

This is a classic maneuver of the agent provocateur -- one we have seen all too often.

In my expert and widely respected opinion as protected by the U.S. Constitution, you have come to DPF on a mission to disrupt, disinform, demonize, and further prep the battlefield in advance of pending 50th anniversary attacks on those who know and proselytize the truth of conspiracy in the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

[Rob Caprio]

Sorry Rob but I have to agree with Charles and Jan.

To call this garbage when you can't know if this did happen or not

I think some of us already have a fair idea as to whether it happened or not.

Is it just me or is there an upsurge of needlessly dumb and contrarian posts on the forum this last week or so? I'll give the contributors the benefit of the doubt, but the timing does make me wonder. Interns working at Cass Sunstein's office will probably be earning their pay over the next few months, that's for sure.

So do I, but that doesn't mean I will just avoid things that don't appeal to me or fit my theory. That is dangerous since NO investigation was ever properly done to find the truth, thus, anything is open for discussion in my mind. What I find interesting is this board is based on "deep politics" and the things that go with that, but to say JFK was killed in a ritual manner (not saying that is why he was killed to start with by the way) is "garbage" to some. I find that quite interesting.

I have read the only way a person can achieve 33rd degree status is by participating in a ritual killing. Again, you can scoff and call it garbage if you want, but this has been uncovered by people who have researched the Masons and other secret societies for years. Are they NOT "legitimate" researchers? I wouldn't say that, but others can have their own opinion.

Now because I post things that don't meet your agenda I am working for some person. I love this. I thought WC defenders were bad, but this is over the top and would fit right in with the WC defender agenda.

I have posted online for years Anthony under the SAME name so go do some research on me (ACJ and JFKAssassination Forum) and get back to me on how I am working for some Cass Sunstein's office supporting the WC theory via disinformation and crazy talk.

By the way, what is your opinion on what happened or did not happen? I'd like to hear it.

[Rob Caprio]

Sorry Rob but I have to agree with Charles and Jan.

To call this garbage when you can't know if this did happen or not

I think some of us already have a fair idea as to whether it happened or not.

Is it just me or is there an upsurge of needlessly dumb and contrarian posts on the forum this last week or so? I'll give the contributors the benefit of the doubt, but the timing does make me wonder. Interns working at Cass Sunstein's office will probably be earning their pay over the next few months, that's for sure.

Anthony - yup.

The first few pages of this thread include an intelligent and informed exploration of the occult element of deep politics.

Indeed, the founders of DPF and many members have a genuine and long standing interest in this area, and there are numerous threads here on everything from literal alchemy to Jungian alchemy to deep political alchemy.

Rob - your post was garbage and rather than adding to the debate, risked dragging it into the tabloid gutter. If you want to talk black magic at kindergarten level, there are plenty of other websites out there.

Wow. This is very insulting and coming from a founding member of the board too. What is "kindergarten" about what I said? Do you not think the obviousness of the occult symbols of DP are relevant? I have a long standing interest in this area too and for you to say these things to me without even knowing this is very rude and condescending. I have about 21 posts here and you claim to know what I know and don't know or what I have an interest in? Please.

JFK was shot in the back, the throat and the head so what I presented by researchers that study the area of the Masons is NOT "tabloid gutter" material or junk just because you disagree with it.

I simply responded to a query by someone else and NOW that equals me destroying the debate? If I was paranoid like some of the people in the conspiracy world I would think you folks have gotten some bad information on me and what I stand for and seem determined to stunt my input.

I mean, I wanted to present WC evidence and that was equated with "spamming." Now I try to answer someone's query and I accused of passing on "tabloid gutter material." LOL.

Perhaps you folks do know a lot about this topic and the JFK assassination, but to think someone else does NOT based on one post is ridiculous IMO.

To each his own I guess.

You sure don't make new members feel welcome here, that is for sure.

Could you tell me what I should post about on this board? I would appreciate the feedback.

In the old days my attacks at least came from WC defenders.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Rob - it's simple.

Professional snipers were not told to create pretty Masonic patterns in the corpse of JFK.

They were tasked with killing a VIP target travelling in a moving car in a public place.

Your Hiram Abif bullshit is a straw man, which delegitimises serious research into, for instance, possible involvement of SMOM elements in the Kennedy hit.

[Albert Doyle]

I'd tend to believe the shots were based on the best vantage points for a covert kill.

[Tracy Riddle]

We are talking about professional shooters here who could do anything they were told to do. The fact they did not wound anyone else like Mrs. Kennedy shows how good they were IMO.

This is not correct, since Connally was almost certainly wounded by a separate bullet (maybe two), and then there's James Tague. A stray bullet certainly hit the pavement near him.

Having said that, I wouldn't totally dismiss the Freemason angle. I'm re-reading "In God's Name" by David Yallop and he describes how Pope John Paul I was virtually surrounded by Freemasons in the Vatican who belonged to the P2 lodge. John Paul I almost seemed to delight in flouting conventions and traditions (not wanting to be carried around in the chair, having the nerve to answer the phone himself or talk to the Swiss guards like a regular person). This really irritated the uptight reactionary clique around him. That irreverence plus his desire to clean up the Vatican Bank and legalize birth control probably led to his death.

[Rob Caprio]

[quote=Rob Caprio]

Kennedy was hit in the throat, back and head a la Hiram Abif. These wounds are depicted and recreated by new initiates every year into the world of Masonry. He was killed by three "unworthy" craftsmen and some relate the "three hobos" to this part of the Abif story in the JFK murder.

Sorry - but this is garbage and discredits legitimate research into this area of the assassination.

The Mechanics, the Shooters, were tasked with killing Kennedy.

There is no way the Shooters were tasked with hitting Kennedy in the throat, back and head to demonstrate masonic symbolism.

I presented an overview of some of the things that have been cited for years in this regard.

Cited by whom? Fools, charlatans, and disinformation agents, to be sure

.

Why not list for me who you think falls into this group? We can claim anyone is a disinfo agent if we don't like what they say. NOT everyone is one though.

If you don't believe them that is fine, but to discredit it out of hand is not something I am not going to do.

Nothing was discredited "out of hand." Rather, what you wrote was recognized as garbage by individuals who have spent decades in open-minded study of the JFK case and who, in many instances, are recognized internationally for their expertise and published research.

Again, who would you rank as "fools, charlatans, and disinformation agents?" I really would like to know this for future reference. I don't agree with every writer/researcher out there in the CT world, but I don't call them this without proof. I just don't accept what they say. It is quite simple really.

I don't allow others to determine for me who is "recognized internationally for their expertise" either as if I did I would be a WC defender. I decide for myself. The occult meaning of DP is not lost on many who study this case and what I posted shows this. Labeling things "garbage" is silly to me. If you don't agree with it, and you obviously don't, so be it, but why do you have to call it garbage? Why not let others decide for themselves? I thought that is one of the qualities that separates us from the WC defenders, but perhaps I am wrong.

The FACT Masons were on the WC and part of the investigation is simply part of the record.

As were agnostics, Irishmen, fishermen, and wine enthusiasts.

I have seem to touch a nerve here. NONE Of the things you mention gather in groups in SECRECY and plan things for us like Masons do. Why are you opposed to this line of thought?

I also did not state this as a fact ...

Sunsteinian bullshit!

I have no idea who this was, but you guys seem to really be suspicious of him.

You wrote the following, which in word choice and tone is nothing other than a statement of fact:

"Kennedy was hit in the throat, back and head a la Hiram Abif. These wounds are depicted and recreated by new initiates every year into the world of Masonry. He was killed by three "unworthy" craftsmen and some relate the "three hobos" to this part of the Abif story in the JFK murder."

Of course I did, but that is NOT the same as saying I said for a FACT he was shot in the throat, the back and the head to mimick the wounds of Hiram Abif. I said researchers have said this is an odd coincidence. IF this came out of left field of course it would NOT be important or relevant, but it does NOT. DP is a masonic shrine practically and if you think that place was NOT chosen for a reason than you are the one that is passing out incorrect information. They could have shot JFK anywhere, but they chose DP.

As for the three tramps that is again opinion by researchers--not a statement of fact.

This is a classic maneuver of the agent provocateur -- one we have seen all too often.

NO, the classic move of the agent provocateur is to accuse someone who has NEVER written one word in support of the WC or other official findings to be an agent provocateur! A good OFFENSE is a good defense if you will.

I will offer the same challenge I have offered others who have claimed this over the years--cite or quote me saying one thing that supports the WC's findings regarding LHO. Just one.

To mention other theories or other peoples' work is NOT the same as I THOUGHT we were here to discuss things and find the truth, but perhaps I am wrong again.

This kind of attack and discussion gives credence to what the WC defenders accuse of us being--paranoid!

In my expert and widely respected opinion as protected by the U.S. Constitution, you have come to DPF on a mission to disrupt, disinform, demonize, and further prep the battlefield in advance of pending 50th anniversary attacks on those who know and proselytize the truth of conspiracy in the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

This is pure nonsense and SLANDER on your part. I wanted to post a series about the WC's evidence and the FACT that it does NOT support a single thing they claim, but was basically told NOT to do this! So I could say the same thing you wrote about YOU and the others that told me I was "preaching to the choir". I would assume you get guests here who do NOT know the evidence well and that would have helped them, but YOU and other founding members did NOT like the idea. Why? I guess I am some weird kind of disinformation person who shows the evidence the government gave us is worthless, huh?

If you believed in the Constitution as you claim then you wouldn't be throwing around slander like you are.

My guess is you listened to Duncan and others and FORMED AN OPINION OF ME before you even know what I am all about. That is what the WC did.

Do you have any evidence or proof I am a disinformation agent? IF not, then what you just did is irresponsible and harmful.

I have less than 25 posts so in the world could you know anything about me? And I thought the WC defenders were bad.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Rob - good researchers do due diligence before opening their moutns.

You have clearly not performed any due diligence about DPF and the philosophy leading to its creation or you would not have written your rant above.

For the record, the reasons your Warren Commission threads were merged include:

1) no DPF member needs to be told that the Warren Commission is a Big Lie;

2) you were posting multiple Warren Commission threads, already numbered up to 172 (or more, I honestly can't be assed to check). This represents spam.

Stan Wilbourne started a fine and thoughtful thread which you have derailed, whilst contributing no insights of value.

[Rob Caprio]

We are talking about professional shooters here who could do anything they were told to do. The fact they did not wound anyone else like Mrs. Kennedy shows how good they were IMO.

This is not correct, since Connally was almost certainly wounded by a separate bullet (maybe two), and then there's James Tague. A stray bullet certainly hit the pavement near him.

Having said that, I wouldn't totally dismiss the Freemason angle. I'm re-reading "In God's Name" by David Yallop and he describes how Pope John Paul I was virtually surrounded by Freemasons in the Vatican who belonged to the P2 lodge. John Paul I almost seemed to delight in flouting conventions and traditions (not wanting to be carried around in the chair, having the nerve to answer the phone himself or talk to the Swiss guards like a regular person). This really irritated the uptight reactionary clique around him. That irreverence plus his desire to clean up the Vatican Bank and legalize birth control probably led to his death.

All I can say about your initial comments is that a ricochet can not be accounted for by any shooter as sometimes you miss. As for Connally, even the WC was NOT sure if JFK was the sole intended target or not as late as January 30, 1964 when they did the following memo.

Quote on

This shows us even the WC didn't BELIEVE the SBT happened!

***************************************************


MEMORANDUM January 30, 1964
TO: J. Lee Rankin
FROM: David W. Belin

SUBJECT: Oswald's knowledge that Connally would be in the Presidential car and his intended target.

According to the Secret Service Report, Document No. 3, page 11, the route of the motorcade was released on the evening of November 18 and appeared in Dallas newspapers on November 19 as shown in Exhibits 6D and 6E (Document No. 3 is the December 18 Secret Service Report).

In examining these exhibits, although the general route of the motorcade is shown, there is nothing that shows that Governor Connally would be riding in the Presidential car.

In determining the accuracy of Oswald, we have three major possibilities: Oswald was shooting at Connally and missed two of the three shots, the two misses striking Kennedy; Oswald was shooting at both Kennedy and Connally and all three shots struck their intended targets; Oswald was shooting only at Kennedy and the second bullet missed its intended target and hit Connally instead.

This clearly shows us that as of 1/30/64 the WC was saying ALL three shots HIT someone! How can that be, when they later claimed one missed and one hit BOTH men? What made them change this analysis above?

If there was no mass media coverage that Connally would be riding in the Presidential car, it would tend to confirm the third alternative that Kennedy was the only intended target. This in turn bears on the motive of the assassination and also on the degree of markmanship [sic] required, which in turn affects the determination that Oswald was the assassin and that it was not too difficult to hit the intended target two out of the three times in this particular situation.

And yet no one was able to duplicate this feat using better conditions and having the ability to try it multiple times!

In any event, I believe it would be most helpful to have the FBI investigate all newspaper, television and radio reports from November 18 to November 22 in Dallas to ascertain whether or not in any of these reports there was a public announcement that Connally would be riding in the Presidential car. If such public announcement was made, we should know specifically over what media and when.

This is interesting and shows us that the order of who was riding with whom was NOT set yet. This gives more credence to the story Mrs. Lincoln told of LBJ and JFK fighting over this the night before and JFK insisting JBC ride with him instead of Yarlborough.

Of course, there is another element of timing: If Connally's position in the motorcade was not released until the afternoon of November 21, then when Oswald went home to get the weapon, he would not have necessarily intended Connally as the target.

The other interesting thing is that as of 1/30/64 they still did NOT even seem sure if JFK was the target or not! Otherwise, why are they so focused on showing Connally was NOT the target. Things would change quickly though as they would conclude JFK was the SOLE target.

Finally, we would like to know whether or not there was any release to the public news media that Connally would ride in any car in the motorcade, regardless of whether or not it was the Presidential car.
Thank you.

I find this illuminating that as of 1/30/64 they did NOT even know for sure if JFK was the sole target or not! What changed? Did they find out if it was announced JBC would be riding with JFK or not? Does anyone know for sure? IF so, please cite/quote the evidence for me.

Thanks!

*****************

I think the fact Connally was hit by at least two separate shots from JFK would at least give some weight to the issue of whether JBC was a target too. I don't know and I am NOT saying he was, but him being shot does necessarily equate with the shooters being sloppy.