Jesse Ventura's JFK Conspiracy Program

[James H. Fetzer]

When you have read the book, then post more about it. I can't believe how many--including excellent students like yourselves--draw inferences without bothering to study the available relevant evidence. In this case, that not only includes Phillip Nelson's LBJ: MASTERMIND OF JFK'S ASSASSINATION but also Russ Baker's FAMILY OF SECRETS. I am going to take a break from answering these posts until their authors become familiar with the evidence. Then we can discuss these things when you know a bit better what you are talking about. I regard you both highly, but you are acting irresponsibly.

[James H. Fetzer]

Not quite right, Dawn. Jesse said he looked her in the eye and she said she had taken the backyard photographs--which, he said, settled it for him. He is wrong and Marina is not right. They were faked, which can be proven a dozen or more ways. Even Lee said somebody had pasted his face on someone else's body. We have proven he was telling the truth. Read my article co-authored with Jim Marrs, "The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco", for proof abundant.

I thought the show was really great last night. I agree with Jim's errors. Note that Ventura is not saying the backyard pics are real he said that Marina told him she took them. Now why after all these years she would say such an abusrd thing is anyone's guess.

I hope people will cease arguing about who did it as we will never know exactly "who". The why is what is relevent and what resulted as a consequence. Arguements over the Z film, the id of the tramps, and other side issues is all minor , imho. The big issue is that our goverment and media lied and continues to do so.

Part of the show is up on facebook, only 14 minutes. I hope they get the entire show up soon.

COPA is also being shown online for anyone interested.

Dawn

[Jack White]

To some extent it seems an argument over semantics [such as 'mastermind], but to a large extent it is as Charles puts it: LBJ was, IMO definitely in the plot by the day OF [and likely in the plot some weeks before - or in the 'know]....and was visible leader, mover and shaker of the cover-up after, But he was NOT the ONLY person involved on a high level and I agree with Charles, LBJ was takin' orders from others......or not missing an opportunity too good to miss [as he likely rationalized it]. He chose no shooters; organized no teams; paid no money for it; he was just ready, willing, well-placed and able to let it happen and cover it up afterwards. Hoover is another who likely knew some weeks to months before and did a LIHOP [and grand cover-up] for similar reasons of his own. Neither were masterminds in this....they took orders, IMO more than made them [except to some of their immediate flunkies] and in their own limited [!] agencies/offices. The office of President is not supreme and that was made abundantly clear too all [including LBJ] on 11/22/63. Even his 'they're gonna kill us all' remark may well have been that there was more fire and closer fire to HIM than he had been told or hinted about - even the location might not have been revealed to him.....likely not.

Dawn, I think Marina was instructed [by persons unknown, perhaps even Lee?] to take some photos in the backyard (part of the pre-set-up set-up)- BUT the photos we see are NOT and provably not the ones she took - not any parts of them - they were done by others as composits. That said, Marina, though I like to be sympathetic to her, still keeps many secrets about her past in Russia and her knowledge of events up to and shortly after the assassination. That she has come over to 'our side' now is lovely; more lovely would be if she told the whole truth she knows.....but is both likely afraid and not wanting to show how she lied by commission and omission so many times - whatever the motive, and however much the motive might ameliorate or
mitigate.....We can only hope she will or will leave it in some form after her death.She was used and abused, as well; but she is also tricking history of some very important truths!!!

I agree with Peter in large part.

Jack

[James H. Fetzer]

Let me parallel your Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic model with a Deep
Politics/Politics/Executioner model, which is primarily an alternative
language for saying the same thing. To bring the public from concern
about the Executioners to the Politicians, such as LBJ, Nixon, Ford and
Bush, is, in my opinion, a great advance. It would be wonderful if the
public could ultimately become informed of the Deep Political aspects
as well, but focusing attention on the Political aspects is a tremendous
advance. I therefore find it offensive when you suggest there is some
massively negative aspect about it. The public could never be brought
to understand the Deep Political aspects without initially understanding
the Political specs. And Lyndon was the "pivotal player" because he was
the one who had the driving ambition to become president, knew all of
the players, and was instrumental in bringing "The Big Event" about, as
Madeleine has explained and Billy Sol has confirmed. LBJ even sent his
chief administrative assistant, Cliff Carter, to Dallas to make sure that all
of the arrangements for the assassination were in place and where "Mac"
Wallace, his personal hit-man, appears to have been involved as one of
the shooters. I regard this as a major advance--when have you heard
any of them identified as key players, apart from Part 9, "The Men Who
Killed Kennedy", where Nigel Turner fingered LBJ and the world broke
out in panic, the segment was banned, and the cover-up continued? I
expect more of those of greater intellect and deeper understanding, if
I may; and for that reason I am profoundly bothered by your reception.

What would be most helpful to me as I read the "mastermind" book are your responses to my previous questions, Jim.

And to these:

What is your model for the JFK conspiracy?

Are you familiar with the Evica/Drago three-tiered (Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic) model?

Was LBJ at the very top of the Sponsorship level of the JFK conspiracy?

Did LBJ have the ultimate authority to order the hit on JFK?

Did LBJ have the ultimate authority to take this world-historic action even if the financial, industrial, and military interests who were above Cold War differences objected?

Was LBJ the "mastermind" of the anti-FDR plot broken up by Smedley Butler?

Did LBJ rule the world?

By the way, I define "Sponsor" as, in this case, a master to whom presidents and other grand puppets answer.

[James H. Fetzer]

Within the framework provided by this program, Bush's eulogy for Ford assumes a different -- and far more self-serving -- meaning.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/washin...ref=slogin

George H.W. Bush’s Eulogy for Gerald R. Ford

Published: January 2, 2007

Following is the transcript of the eulogy for former President Gerald R. Ford delivered today by former President George H.W. Bush in Washington, as recorded by The New York Times.

Well, as the story goes, Gerald Ford was a newly minted candidate for the United States House of Representatives in June of 1948 when he made plans with a reporter to visit the dairy farmers in western Michigan’s Fifth Congressional District. It was pouring rain that particular day and neither the journalist nor the farmers had expected the upstart candidate to keep his appointment. And yet he showed up on time because, as he explained to the journalist, “they milk cows every day and, besides that, I promised.”

Long before he arrived in Washington, Gerald Ford’s word was good. During the three decades of public service that followed his arrival in our nation’s capital, time and again he would step forward and keep his promise even when the dark clouds of political crisis gathered over America.

After a deluded gunman assassinated President Kennedy, our nation turned to Gerald Ford and a select handful of others to make sense of that madness. And the conspiracy theorists can say what they will, but the Warren Commission report will always have the final definitive say on this tragic matter. Why? Because Jerry Ford put his name on it and Jerry Ford’s word was always good.

A decade later, when scandal forced a vice president from office, President Nixon turned to the minority leader in the House to stabilize his administration because of Jerry Ford’s sterling reputation for integrity within the Congress. To political ally and adversary alike, Jerry Ford’s word was always good.

And, of course, when the lie that was Watergate was finally laid bare, once again we entrusted our future and our hopes to this good man. The very sight of Chief Justice Berger administering the oath of office to our 38th president instantly restored the honor of the Oval Office and helped America begin to turn the page on one of our saddest chapters.

As Americans we generally eschew notions of the indispensable man, and yet during those traumatic times, few if any of our public leaders could have stepped into the breach and rekindled our national faith as did President Gerald R. Ford.

History has a way of matching man and moment. And just as President Lincoln’s stubborn devotion to our Constitution kept the Union together during the Civil War, and just as F.D.R.’s optimism was the perfect antidote to the despair of the Great Depression, so too can we say that Jerry Ford’s decency was the ideal remedy for the deception of Watergate.

For this and for so much more, his presidency will be remembered as a time of healing in our land. In fact, when President Ford was choosing a title for his memoirs, he chose words from the book of Ecclesiastes.

Here was the verse:

“To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.

“A time to be born, a time to die.

“A time to kill, and a time to heal.

“A time to weep, and a time to laugh.

“A time to mourn, and a time to dance.”

He acknowledged that he was no saint. To know Jerry was to know a Norman Rockwell painting come to life. An avuncular figure, quick to smile, frequently with his pipe in his mouth. He could be tough. He could be tough as nails when the situation warranted. But he also had a heart as big and as open as the Midwest plains on which he was born. And he imbued every life he touched with his understated gentility.

When we served together in the House of Representatives years ago, I watched from the back bench — I watched this good man — and even from way back there I could see the sterling leadership qualities of Jerry Ford. And later, after I followed his footsteps into the Oval Office, he was always supportive.

On the lighter side, Jerry and I shared a common love of golf and also a reputation for suspect play before large crowds.

“I know I’m playing better golf,” President Ford once reported to friends, “because I’m hitting fewer spectators.”

He had a wonderful sense of humor and even took it in stride when Chevy Chase had to make the entire world think that this terrific, beautifully coordinated athlete was actually a stumbler. Ford said it was funny. He wrote it in his memoir.

I remember that lesson well, since being able to laugh at yourself is essential in public life. I’d tell you more about that, but as Dana Carvey would say: “Not gonna do it. Wouldn’t be prudent.”

In the end, we are all God’s children. And on this bittersweet day we can take solace that the Lord has come and taken this good man by the hand and led him home to heaven.

It is plain to see how the hand of providence spared Jerry in World War II and later against two assassination attempts. And for that we give thanks. It is just as plain to see how the same hand directed this good man to lead a life of noble purpose, a life filled with challenge and accomplishment, a life indelibly marked by honor and integrity. And today we give thanks for that, too.

May Almighty God bless the memory of Gerald R. Ford, keep him firm in the hearts of his countrymen. And may God bless his wonderful family.

[James H. Fetzer]

Reviewing the program with those issues in mind, I have written to Jesse again:

Tyrel,

Tell Jesse I have watched the program again with special interest in these
three issues. He says "supposedly" when embarking on the route that Oswald
is alleged to have taken and points out that it would have been odd for him
to have removed cartridge casings from his revolver at the scene of Tippit's
shooting. So that is no problem. In talking about the photo of the third
tramp, he says "Many experts believe that this was E. Howard Hunt" or
words to that effect, which is true, including my friend, Jack White. So that is
no problem either. Marina's claim that she took the backyard photos cannot
be true, yet she seems to believe it. The only hypothesis that comes to my
mind is that she may have been induced to believe that, possibly by means
of hypnotic suggestion. Either way, she believes something that is untrue.
But the program is simply terrific and also appears to be having an impact.

Warm regards,

Jim

All,

Here is the note I sent to Jesse via his son, Tyrel, who produces his show. I did not mention that he takes for granted that the Zapruder is authentic. If any of you were unable to watch last night, it will undoubtedly be repeated a number of times on TruTV.

Jim

Jim Fetzer wrote:

Tyrel,

You can tell Jesse this was the best television program ever produced about JFK. In one hour, more people learned more about JFK than ever before. My admiration for having fingered Nixon, Ford, Bush, and LBJ knows no bounds. I noticed three factual errors, two of which were insignificant in relation to the program and the other actually advanced it. Oswald did not shoot J.D. Tippit, where the best discussion may be found in THE SEARCH FOR LEE HARVEY OSWALD by Robert Groden. The second is that Marina did not take the backyard photographs: no one did! They were faked. For proof, see an article by Jim Marrs and me, "The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco". The third is that the old tramp was not E. Howard by Chauncey Holt. The ears, the eyebrows, and the mouth are wrong for Hunt. I organized a symposium in Dallas a few years back featuring his daughter, Karyn, his wife, Mary, and photos from the family album, which Karyn superimposed on the tramp. It was Chauncey. But your identification of him as E. Howard worked beautifully for making the transition to the confession. I have no complaints. It was brilliant!

Warm regards,

Jim

[Charles Drago]

Thank you, Peter, for your cogent and powerfully stated assessment of LBJ's relative position in the power structure that struck John.

The "Mastermind" book -- which I'm reading -- so far has offered absolutely NOTHING to persuade anyone with intimate familiarity with the evidence in the JFK case in particular and 20th century deep polititics in general that Johnson was anything other than a Facilitator of a conspiracy whose Sponsors were so far above his pay scale as to be as invisible to him as the dark side of the moon.

The author, Phillip Nelson, does offer cogent analyses of LBJ's facilitation efforts. And then repeatedly he makes the leap to "mastermind" without providing a scintilla of evidence to support the charge.

Noel Twyman, the deservedly respected author of Bloody Treason, is quoted on Nelson's website thusly:

"This book is very comprehensive about Lyndon Johnson as related to the JFK assassination. Nelson strips away the restraints and tells all that is known about the criminal character of LBJ. He plunges fearlessly into 'the unspeakable' about him. Nelson deliberately avoids going into scientific and forensic detail, without compromising his story. It is a well written book, easy to read, and exhaustive in its summations of the scores of other writers on this profoundly disturbing time in history."

Noel and I stand in near-total agreement. Alas, Nelson does not come close to telling us "all that is known" about LBJ's involvement in the assassination -- even as he repeatedly tell us more than is known -- and Noel does not see fit to comment on the "mastermind" claim, let alone define "mastermind" in this context.

Also quoted by Nelson is this passage by Jim Fetzer:

"Brilliant and pivotal, bringing coherence to our understanding . . . From first chapter to last, this is a beautifully written, intellectually captivating, and ultimately persuasive account of the role of LBJ in the assassination of JFK."

Alas, Nelson is absolutely incoherent whenever he makes the "mastermind" charge -- one that he leaps to without a shard of supporting evidence. Regarding his work's central conceit, Nelson persuades no one except those predisposed to avoiding the terrible truth revealed by LBJ's role not as "mastermind" of the hit but rather/only as faithful retainer to the true Sponsors of JFK's murder.

Folks, as we near the 50th anniversary of the death of our last president, we shall see paraded before us a platoon of False Sponsors. Prior to the ascendency of LBJ in that role, we were given E. Howard Hunt's deathbed "confession." Anyone care to wager who the next patsy will be?

(It looks like the Leonardo DiCaprio adaptation of Legacy of Secrecy will resurrect the Mob-did-it False Sponsor tale. One waits breathlessly for the endorsers of Nelson to jump on Leo's bandwagon.)

Make no mistake: Both EHH and LBJ conspired to kill John Fitzgerald Kennedy. But neither of them can be placed on the Sponsor level.

One is left mystified by Nelson's lamebrained "mastermind" charge. Why go there?

Here's one possible answer: The best way to bestow historical absolution upon LBJ is to inflate his role in the JFK assassination to the degree of absurdity. Thus all evidence for his complicity in the conspiracy will be flushed down history's toilet along with the patently absurd "mastermind" charge.

Another disastrous side effect of the "Mastermind" endorsements: its boosters' favorable comparison of Nelson's disinformation volume to James Douglass's utterly superb, incisive, and sound JFK and the Unspeakable.

It is Phillip Nelson's JFK: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination that is in all respects unspeakable -- in the Douglass sense of the word.

[Charles Drago]

Le me parallel your Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic model with a Deep
Politics/Politics/Executioner model, which is primarily an alternative
language for saying the same thing.

Not really, but valid and interesting on its own merits.

To bring the public from concern about the Executioners to the Politicians, such as LBJ, Nixon, Ford and Bush, is, in my opinion, a great advance.

Just how does inflating LBJ's role from Facilitator to Sponsor/mastermind amount to an advance of anything except the coverup?

It would be wonderful if the public could ultimately become informed of the Deep Political aspects as well, but focusing attention on the Political aspects is a tremendous advance.

Just how does inflating LBJ's role from Facilitator to Sponsor/mastermind advance anthing except confusion, misdirection, and the mission of the true Sponsors' bodyguard of lies?

I therefore find it offensive when you suggest there is some massively negative aspect about it.

What is it about the mislabeling of LBJ as a Sponsor of the assassination that is NOT massivelly negative?

The public could never be brought to understand the Deep Political aspects without initially understanding
the Political specs.

What is it about the mislabeling of LBJ as a Sponsor of the assassination that encourages the public's understanding of the hit's "Political specs"?

And Lyndon was the "pivotal player" because he was the one who had the driving ambition to become president, knew all of the players, and was instrumental in bringing "The Big Event"[.]

LBJ benefited from the assassination, LBJ knew some of the players, LBJ was instrumental in the coverup. Your brushstroke is too broad, Jim.

LBJ even sent his chief administrative assistant, Cliff Carter, to Dallas to make sure that all of the arrangements for the assassination were in place and where "Mac" Wallace, his personal hit-man, appears to have been involved as one of the shooters.

That's one hell of a "mastermind" you've got there, Jim -- sending well-known close personal associates to his own backyard crime scene.

I expect more of those of greater intellect and deeper understanding, if I may; and for that reason I am profoundly bothered by your reception.

Back at you, my friend.

Right back at you.

Charles

[Johnnie Wayne Prewett]

Only avowed Roman Catholic to be president. Summer of 63, Buddhist priest are protesting RC Diem led government oppression [so percieved by the Buddhist leaders] by burning themselves to death in front of Western journalist. NYTimes publishes article revealing some RC aspects of the war. Most of SV army is Buddhist, though officer corp heavily RC. VATICAN IS NOT STUPID. Vatican does not want the war in Vietnam tied to a Roman Catholic president. JFK becomes worth more as dead martyr than living president. Many high level RCs in key positions.

[James H. Fetzer]

Wow! I can see that I have really pissed you off. My point has been that this program carries public understanding several giant steps forward in relation to what it has been told in the past: the official shot sequence is a fantasy; crucial witnesses were never called; his own wife believes he didn't do it but is in fear of her life for talking about it; there are multiple indications that a series of presidents who would never have attained that office but for the death of their predecessor were involved in the assassination or the cover-up; that one of the actual participants has broken his silence; and that a leading apologist for the official account can't appreciate that the reasons he has given for why Lee might not have made a reliable assassin were also ones that would have made him an ideal patsy! In my opinion, this is a great -- even tremendous -- advance in what the public has been told. Which remains the case even if you think there is EVEN MORE to it in terms of those who were at an even higher level in the background as SPONSORS, where it is your take that this is all about the FACILITATORS and the MECHANICS. But as I see it, you are confounding the graduate seminars with the undergraduate curriculum, where if the public doesn't gain insight and understanding about the FACILITATORS and the MECHANICS it will never be in the position to qualify for more advanced research. If that offends you, so be it, because I think you are putting the cart before the horse and that your objections to this program are not well-founded. You are entitled to your opinion, which I respect, but that does not mean you are right and I am wrong. For reasons like those I have explained, I think that the opposite is the case.

Le me parallel your Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic model with a Deep
Politics/Politics/Executioner model, which is primarily an alternative
language for saying the same thing.

Not really, but valid and interesting on its own merits.

To bring the public from concern about the Executioners to the Politicians, such as LBJ, Nixon, Ford and Bush, is, in my opinion, a great advance.

Just how does inflating LBJ's role from Facilitator to Sponsor/mastermind amount to an advance of anything except the coverup?

It would be wonderful if the public could ultimately become informed of the Deep Political aspects as well, but focusing attention on the Political aspects is a tremendous advance.

Just how does inflating LBJ's role from Facilitator to Sponsor/mastermind advance anthing except confusion, misdirection, and the mission of the true Sponsors' bodyguard of lies?




What is it about the mislabeling of LBJ as a Sponsor of the assassination that is NOT massivelly negative?




What is it about the mislabeling of LBJ as a Sponsor of the assassination that encourages the public's understanding of the hit's "Political specs"?

And Lyndon was the "pivotal player" because he was the one who had the driving ambition to become president, knew all of the players, and was instrumental in bringing "The Big Event"[.]

LBJ benefited from the assassination, LBJ knew some of the players, LBJ was instrumental in the coverup. Your brushstroke is too broad, Jim.

LBJ even sent his chief administrative assistant, Cliff Carter, to Dallas to make sure that all of the arrangements for the assassination were in place and where "Mac" Wallace, his personal hit-man, appears to have been involved as one of the shooters.

That's one hell of a "mastermind" you've got there, Jim -- sending well-known close personal associates to his own backyard crime scene.

I expect more of those of greater intellect and deeper understanding, if I may; and for that reason I am profoundly bothered by your reception.

Back at you, my friend.

Right back at you.

Charles