Note: Immediately after the Bay of Pigs debacle the cry was "they ought to shoot that (expletive) traitor"--
And in a while, they did.
Now this.
Is Dulles to Lifton like O'Brien to Smith.
Angleton lifted the line from Eliot, Gerontion, line 65, wilderness of mirrors.
Made Oswald appear to be this, appear to be that.
Dulles summons Hunt as personal assistant for memoirs, 1961-3.
Operation Mongoose to assassinate a (foreign) leader Castro (or somebody).
The Church Lady will preside over a black mass next year, the bride will wear white, rotting flesh falling from the skull; Satan, in red, tail switching from left to right
An IBM Selectric sending messages, but Burroughs is nodding on smack, again
When is daddy coming home
Your father was killed
There was a terrible accident
One of those Communists ran a red light
Did I tell you of his sins
Roll up for the mystery tournext year we leave the Golden Crescent
Soros spelled backwards accepts the obamaromney
In the sixties there were happenings
They didn't begin to call them assassinations until the realignment
There appear to be further examples of this modus operandi in Dealey Plaza. For instance, we know there was at least one "known" person in Dealey Plaza who should NOT have been there from a trade-craft point of view. In other words, trade-craft dictates that known operatives (almost an oxymoron in and of itself) are not employed in high profile domestic operations. Anonymous professional mechanics who have provided reliable work in the past are more desirable as they are without allegiance one way or another, dispassionate, but focused. If anything goes wrong or if they are captured photographically or on movie film they are not recognized because they do not exist. Thus, their sponsors are not connected to the deed by association. That is standard operating procedure.
So what of Jim Braden's (aka Eugene Hale Brading) presence in Dealey Plaza and his having been photographed minutes after the shooting? If we accept the positive I.D. made by both Major General Victor "Brute" Krulak, USMC, and Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, USAF, what do we make of General Ed Lansdale's presence there? If we accept the photo analysis made by Cutler and Sprague, among others, who believe that the Umbrella Man is Gordon Novel, then what of his presence in Dealey Plaza that day? What if even a small percentage (or even a single one) of those who are the focus of attention in Allan Eaglesham's "Familiar Faces in Dealey Plaza" study are actually identifiable in the photographic record?
What if you deliberately allow and/or order operatives into the kill zone to be photographed there even though they had absolutely NOTHING to do with the deed beyond their having been there to create red-herrings?
=================
From Tree Frog:
=================
193 Pinewood Road
Hartsdale, NY 10530
August 3, 1978
Mr. Robert Blakey
Select Committee on Assassinations
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Bob:
Following our telephone conversation on Tuesday August 1,
I checked with Bob Cutler, my co-author on the Umbrella
Weapon System article in Gallery June 1978. Bob told me
he left with Mr. Preyer and with you, photographic material
showing that The Umbrella Man (TUM) was quite probably
J. Gordon Novel.
Your news photo of him reinforces that belief for both of
us. I did not have that portion of the Couch film from
WFAA and so had never seen TUM's face as clearly as it
appears there. The Bothun photo of him has a light
reflection around his nose, as I'm sure you know.
We have a 1962-3 photo of Novel taken from the same angle
as the Couch film of TUM and a photo comparison convinces
us more than ever that Novel is TUM. Mr. Preyer no doubt
told you back in April that Novel is in a jail in Georgia,
framed for a crime he and Jim Garrison, his former lawyer,
both claim he didn't commit.
Best regards,
Dick Sprague
DS/mc
P.S. I am still waiting for a response to my letters to
Louis Stokes about attending the hearings beginning
August 14.
cc: L. Stokes
R. Cutler
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
This could be about promotion of false Sponsorship and/or misdirection and misappropriation of investigative initiatives and energies.
The emergence of what has come to be known as our "critical community" had to have been anticipated pre-assassination by high-level Facilitators. For a host of reasons, some but hardly all of which surely overlapped, European intellectuals and Soviet intel planners could be counted upon to raise very public objections to an official LN conclusion. So too "fringe" domestic observers. Rather than fight the unwinnable battles to suppress these ideas and eliminate their originators, the cover-up Facilitators made the decisions to confuse, incite, disinform, misdirect, preempt, and/or buy off the individuals and groups who would challenge the central JFK assassination lie.
The greater goals would be to create first a national, and then a global pandemic of helplessness and political disenfranchisement in the face of power sufficiently fearsome to stage without fear of reprisal a public execution of a U.S. president and to enlist generations of his successors and, indeed, the permanent U.S. government into the cover-up.
The LAST thing desired by the Sponsors was consensus -- even if it were attainable.
Doubt breeds conflict among the masses.
The chances for successful control of the many by the few are heightened in direct proportion to the ability of the few to keep the many at each others' throats.
Back to our subject for examples of fatally debilitating internecine conflict:
Lancer v. COPA.
Competing ceremonies in Dealey on 11/22 anniversaries.
Z-film alterationists v. non-alterationists.
LHO v. BL Altgens 6 advocates.
Jim Fetzer v. the world.
DPF v. EF.
And those are just for starters.
Fifteen or a million years ago I asked, in an essay titled "In the Blossom of Our Sins," how we, as a community, define "justice" in this case.
As I type these words, said "justice" had been neither defined nor attained.
This could be about promotion of false Sponsorship and/or misdirection and misappropriation of investigative initiatives and energies.
The emergence of what has come to be known as our "critical community" had to have been anticipated pre-assassination by high-level Facilitators. For a host of reasons, some but hardly all of which surely overlapped, European intellectuals and Soviet intel planners could be counted upon to raise very public objections to an official LN conclusion. So too "fringe" domestic observers. Rather than fight the unwinnable battles to suppress these ideas and eliminate their originators, the cover-up Facilitators made the decisions to confuse, incite, disinform, misdirect, preempt, and/or buy off the individuals and groups who would challenge the central JFK assassination lie.
The greater goals would be to create first a national, and then a global pandemic of helplessness and political disenfranchisement in the face of power sufficiently fearsome to stage without fear of reprisal a public execution of a U.S. president and to enlist generations of his successors and, indeed, the permanent U.S. government into the cover-up.
The LAST thing desired by the Sponsors was consensus -- even if it were attainable.
Doubt breeds conflict among the masses.
The chances for successful control of the many by the few are heightened in direct proportion to the ability of the few to keep the many at each others' throats.
Back to our subject for examples of fatally debilitating internecine conflict:
Lancer v. COPA.
Competing ceremonies in Dealey on 11/22 anniversaries.
Z-film alterationists v. non-alterationists.
LHO v. BL Altgens 6 advocates.
Jim Fetzer v. the world.
DPF v. EF.
And those are just for starters.
Fifteen or a million years ago I asked, in an essay titled "In the Blossom of Our Sins," how we, as a community, define "justice" in this case.
As I type these words, said "justice" had been neither defined nor attained.
And these conflicts are not real, but artficial and fictitious. They are reflections of the wilderness of mirrors. It is time to break the mirrors and see the naked reality. And only then we could say that we have been released from C.D.Jackson's, Angleton's and Dulles' spider's web.
