Preponderance of evidence --- jfk

[Tosh Plumlee]

"... Do you believe in a thing called, "preponderance of the evidence". In my opinion; it seems to me that the realm of our political system for decades now, has gone far out of its way to make sure that the Texas Connection will never see the light of day. Some of our so call leaders of today got their start in politics during and after the Kennedy assassination and through the LBJ area. It has taken years to cull most of them out. Today, a few of those old gate keepers are still around and they still remain hidden in their Texas strongholds, vigilant watchdogs as to the legacy of which they have helped create for their masters who helped thrust them to their lofty hights...., of course this is only my opinion....". Tosh Plumlee

[Charles Drago]

"Texas Connection" -- Benefited from the hit. Facilitated the hit. Facilitated the coverup.

"Texas Connection" -- Did NOT sponsor the hit. Did NOT sponsor the coverup.

"Texas Connection" -- False sponsors.

To accept this analysis, you first must define "sponsors" in terms of the JFK hit.

Everyone!

[Phil Dragoo]

Preponderance being the superiority of weight, power, importance or strength.

The Texas Connection including, but not limited to, Johnson, for reason of ambition and animosity, legal and political liability; oilmen such as Hunt and Murchison; an entire network of anti-communist conservatives in whose number may be counted Mayor Cabell (brother of Earl, CIA official fired by Kennedy) as well as Byrd (who provided an important stage prop; DPD, a veritable nest of vipers. Open-ended for addition.

Sponsor, in definition 3, a person or an organization who pays for or plans and carries out a project or activity.

I would nominate the Central Intelligence Agency as the core sponsor per this definition. In the command car rode Dulles, Helms, Angleton with seats for several more.

I suspect significant input from a national security element which would include Lodge, Rusk, Bundy et al; certainly military men. The obligatory nod to Rockefeller ex Machina. The hands on the puppet sticks emanated from Langley, in my view.

Jim Marrs in Crossfire and Craig Zirbel in Texas Connection listed the motives for Johnson: He had worked his entire life to attain the Oval Office, only to be brushed aside by the Yankee he despised--who was widely seen to be dropping him from the ticket, leaving him vulnerable to prison for the Bobby Baker and Billy Sol Estes scandals.

I haven't read the Barr McClellan book, and I do not look at Hunt's deathbed "confession" as anything but deflection from the real agent, the CIA, for whom Hunt was every bit the loyalist that MacArthur was for "the Corps".

The Sixth Floor Museum and the continuous persecution of Groden testifies to the surviving Texan hand.

Mafia, too, serving in operational capacity, but as "the finger pointing to the moon; not the moon," in the Zen expression.

Oswald was a creation of the CIA. Not of Texans, Mafia, FBI, Secret Service, though all these despised Kennedy and wished him ill--here come the Cubans to jump on the wagon.

Finally, I would say that RFK's mob cases, and depletion allowances and all of that figure, what takes preeminence are the serial sins as perceived by the national security structure, embodied in the mailed fist of the CIA (using various gloves, puppets per plausible denial allowed by statute):

Bay of Pigs April 1961; Missile crisis October 1962; American University address June 1963; NSAM 263 September 1963; backchannels to Khruschev and Castro ongoing. For these, I believe, he was made an example.

[Charles Drago]

I would nominate the Central Intelligence Agency as the core sponsor[.]

The CIA is a tool, not a contractor.

I respectfully submit that it makes as much sense to identify the CIA as the sponsor as it does to declare and wage war on a weapon -- terrorism, for instance.

Just as respectfully, I suggest that a sensible, comprehensive model of the CIA that is not informed by the deepest of deep political analysis is neither sensible nor comprehensive.

With apologies to Socrates:

Was/is the CIA a monolithic entity devoid of conflicting factions, agendas, and loyalties?

Who had the authority to sponsor the murder of JFK in the fashion in which it was carried out and covered up, yet remain immune from legal and extra-legal sanction?

Or, if you prefer: Who was/is at the top of the food chain?

[Mark Stapleton]

"Texas Connection" -- Benefited from the hit. Facilitated the hit. Facilitated the coverup.

"Texas Connection" -- Did NOT sponsor the hit. Did NOT sponsor the coverup.

"Texas Connection" -- False sponsors.

I agree on all six counts Charles.

Anyone who doubts the role of the Texas Connection in facilitating the coverup need only look at the footage of Captain Fritz waving Jack Ruby in for the hit on LHO in "Evidence of Revision".


These are the facts:

1. JFK, JD Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald were murdered.

2. All three murders were connected.

3. Only one of the murders can be attributed with certainty--Ruby on Oswald.

4. Ruby was involved in shipping arms to Israel in the 40's and 50's.

5. Ruby read the bible in his prison cell, although understandable under the circumstances.

6. Ruby remarked to Captain Fritz, 'don't you think I'd make a good actor?"

7. Ruby idolised Mickey Cohen and Meyer Lansky, and both were Zionist extremists.


JFK was a Mossad hit, with lots of help from the USG, the armaments industry, corporate America and the mainstream media. Israel reaped a significant military, financial and political reward for their efforts.

imo

[Charles Drago]

Good to see you here again, Mark.

Again, I must remind one and all that we are asking after the Sponsors of JFK's murder.

Like the CIA, the Mossad is a tool.

Like the CIA, the Mossad is wielded by powers that transcend national/spiritual identities.

Like the CIA and the Mossad, the USG and other national governments, "the armaments industry, corporate America and the mainstream media" are tools, not contractors.

They are possessions, not possessors.

[Tosh Plumlee]

Very Good Points: I am glad to see some of us are starting to focus on this thread. On another matter. I was ask by one of the Forum members to post the following. I posted it recently on another forum we all know about:

"... Welcome to the club. Its hard to rise above the twisting and pre conceived ideals and speculations of some. I know, I have been there also. Some have a motive, which one can only guess, others are really sincere in their research and findings and protect it much like a new born baby. However, regardless of individual motives and passions its our duty to rise above the pathetic whimpering of some and continue to forge ahead in the search for truth. I have followed these post these past few days and watched them decay into personal slaps on both sides. I feel we should refocus, extend our hands to each other and together continue the work, which is so badly need at this time in our history. Its our duty to find the truth as to the JFK assassination and the reasons behind it. Some of us have been thrown into this muck, because of our past actions and decisions, good or bad, of many years ago. Circumstances and the grinding wheels of history has at times dictated our actions and our destiny. In most cases it was by choice that we threw ourselves into this fray.

I have made thousands of mistakes over the years. I have let some rub me the wrong way. I have played into the hands of some who had no other motive than to destroy the truth or to push their private speculations upon me in hopes of drawing me into their fold. Perhaps their reasons were only to add stature to their egos at the expense of truth. I walked into the Kennedy assassination research years ago, as a blind man, as a child grouping around trying to find my way in a sea of disinformation. I have been shot at, stabbed, burned out of my house, lost two marriages, put in jail, fought IRS for years, and lost my mind, because of JFK and the operations of our secret, shadow, government. I too, have lost focus many times and reacted in childless ways to those who took issue as to what I have said and had to say about that dreadful day.

So let us get back to the donut and not concentrate on its hole, and together focus on the task of which we choose.., and do it in a respectful manner to each other. Thank you, Tosh Plumlee ...".

[Mark Stapleton]

Good to see you here again, Mark.

Again, I must remind one and all that we are asking after the Sponsors of JFK's murder.

Like the CIA, the Mossad is a tool.

Like the CIA, the Mossad is wielded by powers that transcend national/spiritual identities.

Like the CIA and the Mossad, the USG and other national governments, "the armaments industry, corporate America and the mainstream media" are tools, not contractors.

They are possessions, not possessors.

Charles, I would assume the sponsors came from within the ranks of those who own the tools. I don't think we'll ever know their names.

It was a Mossad hit though. Considering the upside for Israel, it was well worth the (minimal) risk. LBJ was especially grateful, and he showed his gratitude, many times over.

[Charles Drago]

Charles, I would assume the sponsors came from within the ranks of those who own the tools. I don't think we'll ever know their names.

It was a Mossad hit though. Considering the upside for Israel, it was well worth the (minimal) risk. LBJ was especially grateful, and he showed his gratitude, many times over.

We'll agree to disagree.

Truth and justice will not be served absent the identification of Sponsors. So I must continue to try.

And to state with authority -- as opposed to conviction -- that the Kennedy murder "was a Mossad hit" is to misapprehend the nature of the Beast and to assign culpability in far too focused, and thus self-destructive, a manner.

Mossad techniques and/or operatives may have been utilized. And that's as far as I'm prepared to take it.

[Dawn Meredith]

Charles, I would assume the sponsors came from within the ranks of those who own the tools. I don't think we'll ever know their names.

It was a Mossad hit though. Considering the upside for Israel, it was well worth the (minimal) risk. LBJ was especially grateful, and he showed his gratitude, many times over.

We'll agree to disagree.

Truth and justice will not be served absent the identification of Sponsors. So I must continue to try.

And to state with authority -- as opposed to conviction -- that the Kennedy murder "was a Mossad hit" is to misapprehend the nature of the Beast and to assign culpability in far too focused, and thus self-destructive, a manner.

Mossad techniques and/or operatives may have been utilized. And that's as far as I'm prepared to take it.

CD: Whenever this subject is posted on you make a point of stating your opinion of who you believe not to be sponsers. You hint that you also have an opinion of the identity of the sponsers, however it's a tease that never reaches a conclusion. It may be that many of us are simply not aquainted with the titles of the most secret groups which comprise our shadow governement, therefore we say "the CIA did it" when we are really meaning the black ops section of that agency together with whatever entity they are in fact fronting for.

I agree that all the usual suspects are in fact false sponsers.

But, in your opinion, who are the true killers?