The LBJ-Did-It Operation Continues to Unfold

[Charles Drago]

Greetings, Simon,

Let's take a deep breath.

As one of the leaders of the charge to ridicule the "LBJ-as-prime-sponsor" disinformation and expose it as such, I should check in with a few words of advice.

1. One cannot hope to understand the "who" and "why" of the assassination without first gaining a solid grasp of the "how" it was undertaken. Once you understand the basic physics, if you will, of Dealey Plaza and the factors prompting the selection of LHO as the "perfect patsy," you can utilize a process of elimination to narrow your range of "who" suspects.

2. One cannot hope to understand the "how" absent a working conspiracy model for the JFK event (and certain prior and subsequent deep political conspiracies). Please research this forum for threads in which such a model (the "Evica-Drago" model) is proposed and discussed.

3. The proper elimination of LBJ from the Sponsors level of the Sponsors/Facilitators/Mechanics conspiracy model and his proper insertion into the Facilitators/(False Sponsors) level will follow upon close, learned deep political analyses of these matters.

4. If "follow the money" was the Watergate investigation mantra, then "question the timing" must be the mantra for this and related deep political inquiries. So ask yourself: Why is the LBJ-as-sponsor disinformation building momentum now?

5. Beware the bear traps of False Choices and meaningless rhetorical arguments. Proponents of the preposterous, poisonous LBJ-as-sponsor position will argue that, since clearly he was a prime player in the cover-up (I agree with that evaluation), LBJ must have been a Sponsor, or prime mover, of the assassination.

They will not offer working definitions of "Sponsor" or "prime mover." Nor will they describe their own conspiracy model from which their investigations begin.

Rather, they will attempt to force you into a False Choice: LBJ as Sponsor, or LBJ as innocent of involvement. Don't fall for this nonsense.

6. Don't rush to judgment regarding the identification of Sponsors.

You have much work to accomplish.

If you need assistance, don't hesitate to ask via this forum.

Best of luck,

Charles

[Charles Drago]

There has been an interesting turn of events on the Disinformation Bazaar.

"Phelps" and "Colby" are now at each others' throats.

This is another classic device to confuse those who see "agent provocateur" written all over the two combatants.

So much sound and fury ... signifying a great deal, methinks.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Greetings, Simon,

Let's take a deep breath.

As one of the leaders of the charge to ridicule the "LBJ-as-prime-sponsor" disinformation and expose it as such, I should check in with a few words of advice.

1. One cannot hope to understand the "who" and "why" of the assassination without first gaining a solid grasp of the "how" it was undertaken. Once you understand the basic physics, if you will, of Dealey Plaza and the factors prompting the selection of LHO as the "perfect patsy," you can utilize a process of elimination to narrow your range of "who" suspects.

Simon, further greetings.

I am not a specialist JFK researcher and defer to the knowledge and wisdom of many on this forum.

Phil Dragoo and Charles Drago's posts in this thread offer a macro or overarching view.

As a researcher of deep politics, I will offer a micro, or single, way into why the official narrative is a lie and LBJ can have been neither mastermind nor sponsor.

That key is the life of Lee Harvey Oswald (and probably the double known as Harvey).

As Charles states, LHO was the perfect patsy. His perfection comes primarily from his use and abuse by American (and probably Soviet) intelligence. Some chapters include:

- the childhood anomalies (see the excellent work in John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee);

- the time spent at Atsugi, an MK-ULTRA base, the manufactured "fight" in the BLUEBIRD cafe, the impossibly fast acquisition of fluency in Russian (allegedly), the missing time in LHO's military records;

- the sojourn in Russia, most probably as part of an intelligence false defection programme;

- the rumbling of LHO by Russian intelligence, and the subsequent medical and psychological investigations;

- the waltz straight back to the USA, complete with Russian bride from a Soviet intelligence family, of a defector suspected of revealing high level secrets;

- the ludicrous Mexico City games;

- the handling of LHO and Marina by George DeM and the Paines;

- the Fair Play For Cuba and Guy Banister games;

- the securing of employment "opportunities" at fascinating locations for LHO.

Etc etc etc.

LHO was the perfect patsy because the national security state could not allow an investigation into his use and abuse by American intelligence.

The sponsors of the ritual slaughter of JFK needed a patsy whose past had to be protected and hidden from scrutiny, whose career forced state structures to join in with the cover up for their own self-preservation.

LBJ did not control LHO, and did not know who controlled LHO.

The sponsors of the public execution of JFK did.

[Peter Lemkin]

LBJ did not control LHO, and did not know who controlled LHO.

The sponsors of the public execution of JFK did.

Good point. If LBJ did....in part [learn who did]...it was way, way after the events. And never did he control him; likely had never heard of him until the day of the murder...only knew [perhaps] a selected patsy was at hand [as standard operational procedure in false flag and deep political/ black op/ black bag ops]....of which he WAS familiar. Those in charge kept LBJ in the dark, as well; and under threat of being falsely exposed as the one responsible. He was NOT fully innocent, IMHO, but also far from fully responsible....very, VERY far from it..... He, like Nixon and many others, were 'later patsies' when their usefulness had run its course for those really in power and really behind Dallas and other such events......

[Jack White]

"Need to know" is the covert rule.

[LR Trotter]

Simon,
I'm kinda new around here myself, and consider myself, at the most, a student of the researchers, and on lookout for assassination professors. I believe this forum is well equipped, and agree with a lot, but not all of even some real experts. That said, it is my belief that LBJ knew, at some point, what took place in Dallas on November 22, 1963. However, I see no way he could have been a puppet master, and would have been unable to prevent the assassination, if in fact he knew beforehand. To be the Vice-President, and control the removal from office of the President, that required amount of power was beyond his reach. The POTUS is supposedly the most powerful person in the free world, and for the V-POTUS to take over just to me doesn't seem possible. And, considering the wealth and power under the control of the Kennedy family, along with the political power, a very powerful force had to be at play. LBJ, after witnessing the murder of JFK, was aware of that force.

[Bernice Moore]

hoover and lbj.......

:popworm:

[Seamus Coogan]

:banghead:

Simon keep on the look out for upcoming CTKA articles on this very topic. As far as I can see there are no valid arguments for LBJ's involvement (in the assassination) cover up that's a given simply by endorsing the Warren Commission shite! A Commission that was foisted upon him. By Rostow and Alsop. Scions of the CIA and the Eastern Establishment. Johnson had wanted the investigation to take place in Texas.

Theres a hell of a lot of myths out there though. What a lot of people don't get is that the Johnson did it angle was cooked up by the right wing. Clever you can admit there was a conspiracy but hey it was a Dem who did it (that was back in the day when there was still some vague differences between the Dems and the Republicans).

I've done a few articles dealing with this pox numerous times vis-a-vis John Hankey= officially the worst JFK researcher of all time and an article I did on Alex Jones. Id also take a look at CD's and Evicas model and you should also note that Phil, Peter myself and Jan (if you have a look around) have varied opinions on many things but more or less we say the same thing about this topic in particular. Dragoo is correct Helms is definitely someone you should look into. I'm just not sure about my mate Magda......but forgive the lass she is an Aussie!:poketongue:

[Lauren Johnson]

:banghead:

Simon keep on the look out for upcoming CTKA articles on this very topic. As far as I can see there are no valid arguments for LBJ's involvement.

Does you exclude the possibility that LBJ knew in advance and that he was on board with a his central role in the coverup? FWIW I personally heard Jim Douglass say that he thought LBJ knew about the assassination.

[Seamus Coogan]

:banghead:

Simon keep on the look out for upcoming CTKA articles on this very topic. As far as I can see there are no valid arguments for LBJ's involvement.

Does you exclude the possibility that LBJ knew in advance and that he was on board with a his central role in the coverup? FWIW I personally heard Jim Douglass say that he thought LBJ knew about the assassination.

Fletcher Prouty actually said that 'looking back' every body knew something would happen. That Johnson had an inkling that 'something' was gonna happen at some point is a possibility I don't rule out but he would have been a moron Lauren to allow it too happen in Texas where finger of suspicion would swing back on him. I mean thats just one of the many problems there is with this LBJ palava!

Furthermore be really, really careful of misappropriating Jim Douglas. He doesn't give scant mention too Johnson in his book. Yet a certain well known poster on this forum has grossly misrepresented his works before. It would be interesting to know in what context Douglas said the above statement. Johnson certainly knew of the conspiracy afterwards and he certainly aided in covering it up. If he did say Johnson knew it was likely in the scenario I mentioned above.

Thats my opinion though. I can't speak for JD and I can't speak for yourself as you were there! Excellent you met him though!

Here's Johnson and Hoover discussing the evidence eight minutes and 25 seconds into the conversation LBJ asks Hoover if 'they' shot at him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZWERQevz...re=related

Confirming Prouty's story he told in the original TMWKK.