Deep Political Science and Altgens 6: A Hypothesis

[Charles Drago]

Which brings you and, by extension, me to the point of diminishing returns.

Thanks, Greg.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Could you all please stop fighting among each other? Isn't that what their purpose is, to divide us over insignificant issues? Fetzer and Cinque want to scientifically prove that the films and photos were altered and by doing this they see the tree but miss the forest, while falling in the trap of the instigators as Salandria described it to Fonzi.
On the other hand CD is not interested to prove any alterations and he is trying to place the pieces together to explain how the wilderness of mirrors works to create cognitive dissonance and to preserve doubt, so he is trying to see the whole forest.
I don't think there is any real differences between Charles and Seamus, it is definetely semantics and it will be counterproductive if their relationship is disrupted, that is what the agent provocateurs will be happy to see happening.

[Albert Doyle]

Could you all please stop fighting among each other? Isn't that what their purpose is, to divide us over insignificant issues? Fetzer and Cinque want to scientifically prove that the films and photos were altered and by doing this they see the tree but miss the forest,

Thank you Vasilios. You have proven my point by using the hypothetical concept in question to produce and cite a tree that most definitely doesn't exist.

[Charles Drago]

Let it go, Vasilios. Attempting to communicate complex ideas to these guys is like trying to access the Internet via an IBM Selectric.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Could you all please stop fighting among each other? Isn't that what their purpose is, to divide us over insignificant issues? Fetzer and Cinque want to scientifically prove that the films and photos were altered and by doing this they see the tree but miss the forest,

Thank you Vasilios. You have proven my point by using the hypothetical concept in question to produce and cite a tree that most definitely doesn't exist.

Maybe i have proved your point about Fetzer but not about CD. And please re-read the rest of my messages to understand my point.

[Greg Burnham]

Look, as far as I can tell, this thread--and I'm sure Charles will correct me if I am wrong--is not about Fetzer or Cinque. I hate to lump Fetzer's name together with Cinque's at all. Having said that, Jim Fetzer has made MAJOR contributions to the discovery of the truth. That he is off on yet another tangent "is what it is" but none should be so distracted by that fact that they fail to appreciate the effect of psy-ops on the big picture.

Charles' citing of a Fetzer quote was not intended to criticize Fetzer at all. Charles is pointing out a very astute observation, that many things are not as they appear. And, indeed, some operations appear counter-intuitive to what we would "expect" the perps to do, but that is a fault in our own reasoning.

I posted the following on another forum recently:

David,

IF Altgens was altered--and I am neither convinced that it was or was not--but, IF it was, then there are several factors to consider, some of which are NOT necessarily obvious.

I agree with you that it would have been a "simpler" solution to add Oswald to a photo of the 6th floor--IF--framing him for the crime was their ONLY (or their most important) goal.

But, what if an equally--if not more--important goal was to cause: confusion, infighting, the chasing of red herrings, mis-direction, doubt, fear, cognitive dissonance, and myriad other psyops "effects" that serve a more long term goal? If true, then we must look at the subject of alteration with a different eye altogether. For instance, the topic of Z-film alteration has led, understandably, to some skeptics asking the legitimate question: "If the conspirators altered the film why did they leave in some of the most damaging evidence, such as, the "back and to the left" motion that clearly indicates a shot from the front?" That question is similar in nature to the one you raised.

Again, sometimes motivations are not as obvious or "simple" as all of that. The events in Dealey Plaza, in my view, were not just the murder of the president, a coup, and a frame-up of a patsy so the perps could get away with it. It was much more than that.

It was psychological warfare on a very deep level perpetrated against the sovereignty of the PEOPLE of the United States. I believe that the perpetrators were fully capable of completely covering up this crime to the point of it being Case Closed--accepted by everyone--within a few months.

IMHO:

THAT the official story is still being doubted by the vast majority of Americans is by DESIGN.

[Charles Drago]

Look, as far as I can tell, this thread--and I'm sure Charles will correct me if I am wrong--is not about Fetzer or Cinque.

Precisely -- and just as I noted back at the beginning of this chain.

It was psychological warfare on a very deep level perpetrated against the sovereignty of the PEOPLE of the United States. I believe that the perpetrators were fully capable of completely covering up this crime to the point of it being Case Closed--accepted by everyone--within a few months.

THAT the official story is still being doubted by the vast majority of Americans is by DESIGN.

Again, precisely my point.

I cannot possibly overstate the importance of these insights into our shared inquiries.

[Greg Burnham]

Again, precisely my point.

I cannot possibly overstate the importance of these insights into our shared inquiries.

When I first began posting here, Stan Wilbourne sensed that you and I have a lot in common, particularly in the way that we think about and understand these things. In my view, Charles, nothing--and I mean nothing--is more relevant than what was said above. NOTHING. I can tell you feel the same way and for the same reasons. I also believe that one reason for the lack of appreciation of these things is not necessarily an inability to grasp the concept nor is it due to any prejudice creating a blind spot. I believe the reason is that it is too macabre, if you will...too over the top; it is "evil" on a nearly unimaginable level. An unspeakable level.

[Charles Drago]

Greg,

I am sadly and, at this point in my earthly existence this time around, likely irrevocably deficient in the skills and temperament -- especially patience -- required to help others understand what I've struggled long and hard to come to grips with. George Michael recognized this fact about my nature, although he so typically went out of his way to rationalize it.

I don't believe that Albert or Seamus come to us with less than honorable intentions. Perhaps you're right: the unspeakable is also, for most of us, unthinkable.

It is also impenetrable, and thus unknowable, by logical OR intuitive inquiry.

False choice.

The wolf was killed to eliminate its threat AND to ingest its courage.

And so the cenotaph is as sacred as the tomb.

Wilbourne, bless him, was right.

[Greg Burnham]

Greg,

I am sadly and, at this point in my earthly existence this time around, likely irrevocably deficient in the skills and temperament -- especially patience -- required to help others understand what I've struggled long and hard to come to grips with.

I am not far behind you, my friend.

George Michael recognized this fact about my nature, although he so typically went out of his way to rationalize it.

As did Don Riccardo Della Rosa recognize similar things in my case.

I don't believe that Albert or Seamus come to us with less than honorable intentions. Perhaps you're right: the unspeakable is also, for most of us, unthinkable.

It is also impenetrable, and thus unknowable, by logical OR intuitive inquiry.

False choice.

Hemming often said to me that: "One needs to develop a criminal mind to even begin grasping domestic special operations."

The wolf was killed to eliminate its threat AND to ingest its courage.

And so the cenotaph is as sacred as the tomb.

Wilbourne, bless him, was right.

Indeed...