Charles Drago

Greg,

Your most recent post above illustrates why "Colby" had been kept away from this forum's JFK threads: It was understood on high that "his" multiple vulnerabilities most likely would be exposed as never before -- except by me and a tiny handful of comrades -- by the extraordinarily high number (in relation to other topics) of informed correspondents who would note eloquently "his" intellectual failings and deep agenda.

Which is precisely what you have done: "What's important is seeing how you operate."

But we dare not relax our guard; "Colby's" calculated risk may yet pay off. Remember, the missions are simply to engage and to support the illusion of a level playing field for "his" disreputable positions as proffered in defense of what James Douglass has termed the Unspeakable.

Unless those of us dedicated to attaining truth and justice about and for JFK confront these people head-on, they win.

CD

John, would you care to address my "theory" that the timing and content of Fesser's essay are redolent of what I'm terming an "anti-Douglass" provocation?

Or do you conclude that Fesser is an innocent dupe/dope?

"So, structurally, there is just no plausible way for an 'inside job' conspiracy of the JFK assassination or 9/11 type to work."

To be charitable: pure, unadulterated lunacy -- psychobabble and pseudo-history in service to the grandest illusion.

In re the JFK assassination: Nothing stated in the entire analysis above addresses the irrefutable physical, medical, eyewitness, earwitness, photographic, audio, and additional forensic and circumstantial evidence -- that is, proof -- of conspiracy which, honestly and deeply analyzed, establishes beyond all doubt the identities and motives of the top tier conspirators.

This is nothing more than an old pig in a new dress. See, "People can't believe a nobody like LHO killed a world-historic leader."

And then we have: "I read a great deal about the JFK assassination case, and was even convinced for a time that there was a conspiracy involving the government. While I no longer believe that – I believe that Oswald killed Kennedy, and acted alone – I concede that there are certain pieces of evidence that might lead a reasonable person who hasn’t investigated the case very deeply to doubt the 'official story.'"

Anyone with reasonable access to the JFK evidence who does not conclude that conspirators killed the president is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

The author, Edward Feser ("One of the best contemporary writers on philosophy" -- National Review) is encouraged to explain his "essay" accordingly.

By the by, Feser is a self-described Christian philosopher. As such, he is being offered to refute James Douglass.

It's the old "level the playing field" tactic, one designed to prompt a "could go either way" fallacy among honorable thinkers.

"Colby" has been tasked to test the JFK waters.

To all of us who devote so much of our lives to the searches for truth and justice in this case: If you fail to recognize the ramping up of "Colby's" presence on JFK pages for what it surely is, you will have learned nothing from your labors.

Thank you, Len. (and Charles) My apologies for the diversion. I appreciate the clarification.

You're quite welcome, John.

As for "Colby" -- It exposes itself yet again.

Break the law to protect disinformation.

The ultimate benediction.

These guys are good.

How do you know?

Great question. You're penetrating the heart of darkness.

The "Colby" with pilot and/or aeronautical training is answering (directly or indirectly).

This persona routinely exhibits greater command of the language than do others in the Collective.

state the obvious

in tones of discovery

Constitution this!

Visit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThD4z9wn_Jo...feature=channel

to view a compelling and extended coversation between O'Neill and George Michael Evica. The footage is extended over multiple uploads.

Courtesy of Vince Palamara.

One thought I've been toying with (apart from the researcher being the conspirators best friend) ...

"The researcher" was anticipated and utilized as the single most important component of the cover-up. Doppelgangers, disinformation, slow releases of "official" information ostensibly prompted by citizens' demands but actually injected early into the coverup structure in classic time-release formulation, homogenized into nonsense.

This to me seems like the most effective guise behind which to look for the assassins. Hide sense behind nonsense

This realization prompted Evica's appreciation of the assassination as theater -- a consciously devised theatrical construct.

John, I cannot overstate the value of your posts in this regard.

In terms of the ambush itself, isn't the Heydrich assassination the more appropriate comparison?

Oh "Colby" ...

I can see you ...

This question, like the aforementioned "historical analysis." is as honest and believable as Big Tobacco's "scientific analysis" that nicotine is not addictive.

It is an effort to incite engagement by honest, reputable correspondents. All who do so play into the enemy's game, the object of which is to secure the illusion of a level and fair playing field.

Until now, the masters of this "correspondent" have avoided "his" engagement in the JFK discussion out of fear of exposure. Are they now so cocksure that they are willing to test the waters?

Don't do it. Don't play their game. You can't win.

The smoke screen is generated from tobacco, and it ranges from lower 5th Avenue to Brazil to Langley.

Frankly I can’t think of any major changes after the missile crisis can you point to any? Rolling back on escalations he initiated (Vietnam, the arms race etc) don’t count. JFK backed at least 6 coups in 1963 not far behind the 10 or so Ike backed in 8 years

PS – Perhaps we should continue this on another thread so as not to hijack this one.

This "historical analysis" is as honest and believable as Big Tobacco's "scientific analysis" that nicotine is not addictive.

Israel must lose.

If the arc of the universe truly bends toward justice, then Israel surely will lose.

But I agree with John Simkin and the letter's signatories that all people of conscience must spare no effort to hasten that day.

This "historical analysis" is as honest and believable as Big Tobacco's "scientific analysis" that nicotine is not addictive.

The U-2 data that enabled the Soviets to shoot down the plane -- if pre-flight sabotage can be ruled out -- was available via long-established high level (pun intended) contacts.

An American defector, false or otherwise, with specialized U-2 knowledge was sent to provide a plausible explanation and thus protect the treasonous cabal of U.S. and Soviet intelligence officers whose masters were above Cold War differences.

Hence the first known patsying of Lee Harvey Oswald.

That was when people should have complained, and the outrage should have been expended, and this extended battle could possibly have been averted.

Bill Kelly

Except ...

Since when has toothless outrage changed behavior such as that displayed by Israel?

Bill, if we've learned nothing else from our respective studies of the JFK case in particular and deep political phenomena in general, it is that things most often are not what they seem.

What makes you think that Israel did not encourage the rocket attacks as a tactic in a longer (in duration), deeper (in motivation) strategy?

Over at the Deep Politics Forum we've looked at Naomi Klein's proposal for dramatic, non-violent action to stop Israel's criminality in its tracks (see post #98):

http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sh...525&page=10

Her plan seems as viable as it is principled.

Back to my original point: We cannot in good conscience eschew deep political analyses of deep political events simply because we likely won't be pleased by what we discover.

Do two wrongs make a right?

NOTHING -- not even national survival -- justifies the murder of innocents.

Or anyone else.

The dead of Sand Creek and My Lai no doubt would concur with John Simkin.

So too would the victims of the Jallianwala Bagh (or Amritsar) Massacre.

There is all too much guilt to go around.

Until the life of the terrorist is valued as highly as the life of the terrorized, the terror will continue.

Lamar,

How do you get Liz Smith to promote your books?

Is she the Dorithy Kilgallon of today?

BK

Did I call that, or what?

I should go to Atlantic City. - BK

Let's flip all the cards.

If Smith truly wishes to emulate Kilgallen, she should take off her blindfold and meet the truth.

The HSCA discovered that the USMC/ONI conducted a private investigation into Oswald and the assassination, flying a team of investigators to San Diego and Japan, and wrote a report that concluded that Oswald could not have acomplished the assassination alone. No official record of this document has been released.

I've raised the alleged USMC flight to Atsugi previously here and elsewhere, and will delve into it more fully on www.deeppoliticsforum.com

For some time I've suspected that a core of loyal officers have attempted to work from within the system to combat its hijackers. When I broached this hypothesis to a JFK researcher/author -- and a former MI operative -- he became dismissive, evasive, and otherwise uncharacteristically uncooperative.

Israel has become a mass murderer, an entity which uses its power to slaughter the weak,

just like the Nazis. In that sense, Israel has now turned onto the very horror they themselves

have been complaining about since the WWII.

The abused child grows to become an abuser.

Indeed.

Jimmy Carter's first choice for DCI was Ted Sorenson.