The Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic Model Applied to 9/11

[Jeffrey Orling]

Thanks Jack, I'll fix it!

[Charles Drago]

Thanks, Jeffrey, for the timely response.

The inference I draw is that you created the graphic. Am I correct?

I ask because at first blush I find it to be well done (spelling gaffs aside), and I intend to give it further scrutiny and offer more valuable commentary.

Charles

[Jeffrey Orling]

Just a first go at it. I think there is room for improvement. Suggestions welcome.

[Charles Drago]

Vasilios,

Forgive my tardiness in responding to your thoughtful post. I'll do my best to address your points.

With all due respect Charles, but isn't your Facilitator list too long? They are too many, you only need a small circle of facilitators to avoid exposure and leaks.

I beg to differ. Most of the Facilitators who were aware -- at least in general terms -- of what they were facilitating were heavily compartmentalized. None knew enough to blow the operation. Those who inevitably broke operational security could not expose enough of the plot to threaten it fatally. Even when, in the agregate, the security lapses gave away the general contours of the cover story -- a marginalized character with emotional difficulties, three names, and an incriminating past was working with a shooting team of "Cubans" to kill JFK -- there was the Chicago ruse available to expose as the plot to which the leaks referred.

Some of the Facilitators also were tainted as False Sponsors.

All provided invaluable service -- knowingly or otherwise.

People like Phillips and Morales are mentioned by E.H.Hunt a professional lier which is supsect by itself (now i don't say that they were not, but we do not have concrete evidence) and there is a latest trend to blame Morales, rightly or wrongly i wouldn't know.

Your assessment of Hunt is absolutely correct. His "confession" was designed and executed to sow further confusion and to prompt, among other reactions, your very own when you state, in essence, "If Hunt said it is so, it cannot be so."

You see, the classic disinformation agent mixes truth with fiction; one of his/her goals (if they are publicly tainted as was Hunt) is to deflect attention from guilty parties merely by attempting to implicate them.

Suspicions surrounding Morales are not part of any "latest trend." In point of fact they stretch back nearly 20 years.

Dulles, General Cabell, Angleton, for sure, they were involved. Regarding Lansdale, beside the tramp photo, what other proof do we have that he was involved?

I would not base any ID's solely on the basis of the "tramps" photos. I strongly suspect that Lansdale was a witting conspirator because of his unique mix of skills, experience, connections, fealities -- he all but uniquely had the means, motives, and opportunity to be in the mix.

Was Lansdale a Sponsor of the JFK hit? Not a chance in hell.

Was he a Facilitator? I would make a larger wager that he was.

Charles

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Vasilios,

Forgive my tardiness in responding to your thoughtful post. I'll do my best to address your points.

With all due respect Charles, but isn't your Facilitator list too long? They are too many, you only need a small circle of facilitators to avoid exposure and leaks.

I beg to differ. Most of the Facilitators who were aware -- at least in general terms -- of what they were facilitating were heavily compartmentalized. None knew enough to blow the operation. Those who inevitably broke operational security could not expose enough of the plot to threaten it fatally. Even when, in the agregate, the security lapses gave away the general contours of the cover story -- a marginalized character with emotional difficulties, three names, and an incriminating past was working with a shooting team of "Cubans" to kill JFK -- there was the Chicago ruse available to expose as the plot to which the leaks referred.

Some of the Facilitators also were tainted as False Sponsors.

All provided invaluable service -- knowingly or otherwise.

People like Phillips and Morales are mentioned by E.H.Hunt a professional lier which is supsect by itself (now i don't say that they were not, but we do not have concrete evidence) and there is a latest trend to blame Morales, rightly or wrongly i wouldn't know.

Your assessment of Hunt is absolutely correct. His "confession" was designed and executed to sow further confusion and to prompt, among other reactions, your very own when you state, in essence, "If Hunt said it is so, it cannot be so."

You see, the classic disinformation agent mixes truth with fiction; one of his/her goals (if they are publicly tainted as was Hunt) is to deflect attention from guilty parties merely by attempting to implicate them.

Suspicions surrounding Morales are not part of any "latest trend." In point of fact they stretch back nearly 20 years.

Dulles, General Cabell, Angleton, for sure, they were involved. Regarding Lansdale, beside the tramp photo, what other proof do we have that he was involved?

I would not base any ID's solely on the basis of the "tramps" photos. I strongly suspect that Lansdale was a witting conspirator because of his unique mix of skills, experience, connections, fealities -- he all but uniquely had the means, motives, and opportunity to be in the mix.

Was Lansdale a Sponsor of the JFK hit? Not a chance in hell.

Was he a Facilitator? I would make a larger wager that he was.

Charles

Thank you Charles, point taken. What do you think of Phillips,was he an unwitting victim of the conspiracy or part of the plot? His role in the Mexico manipulation of Oswald is very confusing, it gives me a great deal of trouble.
Regarding disinformation, i consider Final Judgment, by Michael Piper Collins, a great disinformation. In his book, mixes truth and fiction, in a way similar to what you have described. I believe he reveals the truth, regarding false flag operations, Meyer Lansky and Angleton's involvement, but then he discredits all by implicating Israel as the planner of the plot. So his book becomes an Anti-Semitic smear, so people would say, o no the Israelis again. The above are discredited by association even if they are true, since noone will take them seriously anymore as Israel becomes once again the scapegoat. He does something else, more devious, in one of his appendices, he tries hard to prove that EO11110 and JFK printing of FED free money has nothing to do with the murder, in other words exonerates the money trust and blames Israel.
Another book that makes me wonder is Don Thomas' Hear No Evil, unless i have missed the point. He offers us a scientific proof that a shot from behind the picket fence hit JFK in the head and then he does something more subtle, he believes that the Warren Commission was right about the single bullet theory and Oswald, that there Xrays and Medical evidence were authentic. So by proving that a shot was fired from behind the fence , which is questionable, he satisfies the collective unconscious since we all were obsessed with the Grassy Knoll all these years, taking it one step further than Blakey, not a missed shot but a fatal one, and then he says that Oswald was in it with other conspirators. Since parts of the military and the intelligence community did not fake any xrays or photos, he exonerates them and leave us no other alternative than to conclude that it was the Mafia and or Anti-Castro Cubans. In that respect he shows an affinity with Blakey and Lamar Waldron. I wonder what are your thoughts on these.

[Charles Drago]

I do have thoughts on all; the value of those thoughts I leave for others to assess.

I am persuaded by the weight of the evidence that David Atlee Phillips played a role in the JFK conspiracy. I find his literary proclivities to be extremely interesting and relevant -- as are those of Angleton and Hunt -- insofar as the conspiracy was structured as a drama. And the fact the, just prior to his exit, he expressed the "belief" that a CIA faction helped kill the president indicates to me that, at the very least, he was an accessory after the fact.

Michael Collins Piper offers extraordinarily compelling information regading Lansky and the complicity -- at some level -- of Israeli interests. When he identifies "Israel" as, in effect, the Sponsor of the plot, he loses me. BUT NOT BECAUSE I'M READY TO PLAY THE "ANTI-SEMITE" CARD AT A MOMENT'S NOTICE.

For too long apologists for Israel have deflected legitimate charges of criminality and imperialism levied against that country by accusing the accusers of anti-semitism.

(Not exactly on point, but: A Jew walks into a restaurant and orders a tuna sandwich. The waiter says, "We're out of tuna." And the Jew says, "Look, buddy, my people have been persecuted for two thousand years!!!")

Again, for more on the money angle, read Donald Gibson.

Let the evidence come forth, and let the chips fall where they may.

As for Don Thomas -- He bugs the hell out of me, too.

If his work is not intentionally disinformative, it nonetheless has the impact of disinformation on all who read it.

The disconnect between the intelligence and insight we encounter in Thomas's acoustic analysis on the one hand, and in his flawed, naive analyses of the SBT and additional deep political matters on the other, is difficult to explain away as innocent naivete.

If we dismiss the acoustic argument because the rest of Thomas's work is worthless, we throw out the baby with the bathwater.

And wouldn't that stand quite well as the ultimate goal of this book?

[Vasilios Vazakas]

it is true that the Israelis abuse the anti-semitism and holocaust denier excuse every time they are cornered but to say that Israel killed Kennedy is pure disinformation.Maybe Angleton used Mossad as a cut out since he was handling the Israeli desk. Israel is a foot soldier always used by the money trust to achieve their goals. I have read Donald Gibson's books. I am glad that we both agree on Don Thomas' book.

[Simon Copping-Patton]

edit

[Keith Millea]

FACILITATORS:
Bush Administration (Elements)
Richard B. Cheney
Rudolph Giuliani & Elements of his administration
US Military/DOD (Myers, Jumper, Clark, Shineski, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, etc.)
Project for a New American Century (PNAC)
Defense Contractors (Lockheed, SAIC, MITRE, Raytheon, Boeing, etc.)
CIA
FBI
NSA

I don't think I would add Gen.Shinseki to this list.It was Rumsfeld that canned him when he suggested that we needed at least 200,000 troops to fight in Iraq.I can't imagine Rumsfeld would fire someone(ending the Generals military career) who might have some knowledge of events.

Shinseki is now the Secretary of the Veterans Administration.I get the feeling he is a good guy.

[Simon Copping-Patton]

edit