Charles Drago

For Ashton and BK,

I would benefit greatly from your respective takes on the assassination sponsors' purposes in constructing the LHO-Fidel links.

Presumably you've had a chance to read my own view that the highest level of conspirators never intended for Castro to be removed, etc. etc. etc.

By definition, you would be weighing in on another of my pet constructions (FYI endorsed by G. M. Evica; I'm not alone out here): the three-tiered conspiracy structure of sponsors, facilitators, and mechanics, with the middle level factionalized and compartmentalized.

Surely you both have better uses for your time and energies. So if and when the spirit moves ...

Charles

I responded to this posting immediately after it appeared yesterday. At the time Charles' message

was last on the thread. Nearly two days later my message still has not appeared. It is unfair that

moderators can hold up or delete postings in this manner. I spent a quarter hour composing the

message. There was nothing controversial about it. I was not given any notice nor reason for

the deletion. I think the board administrators should look into such as this.

Jack

Jack,

Believe me, I would have responded immediately to your post had it been available for review.

Thanks for taking the time, and please know that I look forward to reading your views at the earliest possible time.

Charles

Ah yes, Frank Sinatra, Major Marco was it, in The Manchurian Candidate? Even though Sinatra

and Frankheimer insisted they just wanted to "Do Condon's book!" someone inserted 5 references

to Abraham Lincoln using close shots on Lincoln Bronze busts, and gratuitouosly inserted Lincoln

costumes at a Haloween party and surreptitiously hidden Lincoln head pennies in all the actors' pockets.

(Just kidding, I made that one up!) And though Benjamin K. Arthur is the only subtle reference

to Douglas MacArthur in the entire novel, the movie both begins (with a MacArthur oil portrait) and ends

with MacArthur references. Anyone else notice this and have any comments? Remember Dick Russell's

informant's reference to "THE MAN WHO COULD DO NO WRONG IN AMERICAN HISTORY" - Willoughby's

boss. Makes you think, right? Way Far Right! The FIRST Presidental coup attempt in history, The

Plot to Take the White House, also funded by J. P. Morgan and Draper money via John Raskob of

Chase Manhattan bank wanted either MacArthur as a replacement (he declined) or General Smedley Butler

who turned all the louts in after stringing them along to no avail. It was Butler who first said: "War is

Good for Business!" or something similar.

Also, did it ever become public why Sinatra's son was kidnapped? Ransom, blackmail or otherwise?

The attempted Roosevelt coup must be understood in all its implications if we are to have the slightest chance of discovering the "who" and "why" of the Kennedy assassination.

To reduce it to near-absurdity: "This time," says MacArthur in late 1962, "no more Mr. Nice Guy!"

Make no mistake: The Butler lesson had been learned.

The Old Soldier's blessing was the "go" order without which certain highest-ranking officers would not act to strike JFK. I have reason to believe they received just such a sanction.

I would submit, John, that the first presidential coup in American history was targeted -- successfully -- at Mr. Lincoln. Further, let me simply note that there are -- how shall I put it -- continuities of characters and motivations in the Lincoln-to-Roosevelt-to-Kennedy progression.

If only JFK had had a Smedley Butler on his JCS.

As for the theft of Frankie, Jr.: Question the timing.

Charles

Evan-

I hadn't even thought about a security test. An argument can be made for that ...

NOW we're getting somewhere.

The so-called security test -- or security stripping, if you prefer (and I do) -- is an essential component in an attack on a target (human and otherwise) well protected by non-corruptable safeguards (human and otherwise).

It happened in Dealey Plaza and, to a lesser but still significant degree, in Memphis. Regardless of where you come down on the Diana issue, her security inarguably was stripped on that fatal night.

As for 9-11 ... Well, I've yet to hear any of the Human Error Irregulars or the Coincidentalisimos go on record with an endorsement of the notion that OBL sure got lucky when he scheduled his operation on the very same day that the air defense stripping exercises that amounted to the sine qua non for the attacks' collective success were initiated.

Man, wouldn't you have loved to take LHO, JER, and OBL to Vegas? The cooler hasn't been born who could freeze their assets!

Charles

“But there is a downside: dynasty.....”[/indent]

Or, in the cases of Bushes and Clintons ... travesty.

Charles

Of the many possible NON-SINISTER -- if anything related to nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons may be so described -- goals of a "perfect failure" of safeguards in this instance might be to engender just this sort of discussion, in which disinformation regarding stockpile protection methods, onboard telemetric and other relevant electronic systems, etc. could be cast upon the waters.

Not unlike my preferred methodology for analysis of the JFK assassination, here we would be wise to ask and answer the "how" question before we move on, if warranted, to "who" and "why."

Of course the "how" of the JFK assassination has been answered definitively.

Yup. It's the "C" word.

Charles

The sacred Sands building was imploded some years ago.

And now they're all ... wait for it ...

dooby dooby dead.

I was very fortunate to have become a good friend of Sammy Cahn over the last five years or so of his life. For those who don't know, Sam wrote the lyrics to "All the Way," "Three Coins in a Fountain," "High Hopes," "Call Me Irresponsible," "Let It Snow," and about 2,500 other songs. He often was described as "the man who put the most words in Sinatra's mouth."

As it turns out, I wrote a few words for Sam. But that's a tale for another time and place.

But I do have stories. Including a few that cannot be repeated.

And yes, I did ask THE question.

Sam replied with a song.

"It's the last dance,

we've come to the last dance ... "

If there is an appropriate site on this forum for a discussion of popular song in general and the American version thereof in particular, I'll be happy to share some rather wonderful anecdotes and memories.

Charles

Evan,

We'll just have to wait for more information.

Again, the inference I was led to draw is that the weapon would "announce" its N payload without detection systems having to be activated.

But I very well may be wrong.

Charles

Questions I have that might also address the above - If they were carrying inert missiles, would the crews even have bothered to connect the missile’s avionics cables to the pylon? The pylon’s avionics cables to the plane?

The answer would be yes to both your questions, IMO. That normally happens with external stores that I am aware of... but I have no experience with the B-52. I have been able to contact an experienced B-52 crewmember and have asked some questions regarding visual indications in the cockpit.

I hope to get a reply within a few days.

I for one look forward to learning more about the nature of N-load indicators.

Charles

You Mr. Colby have posted much on this Forum. To my knowledge you have only posted AGAINST things that you believe are contrary to the official propaganda line. Never once have you told us on any subject what you believe IN. Now is your moment..........Do you believe in anything? Or do you just protect the offical line? The floor is yours.....

You also have dodged about your past and bona fides so you can also fill us in on those if you like.

I see your cute little lines in your signature about harboring doubt....but I'd rather harbor some truth and facts. You bombard every post by Jack, myself and a few others to naysay it...not for anyone on the Forum...your hoped-for audience are the naive and unschooled out there in cyberland....IMO. So, when I match your innane and annoying posts with statement

 from people with 

real credentials and real passion over the crisis of loosing our country, you protest. Oh, by the way, seen the video on thermate by Jones yet....or are you awaiting my posting the cliffs notes version for you?

This post of yours here is just more of the same...provocation and naysaying. What DO YOU STAND FOR?!?!?! WE KNOW YOU ARE AGAINST ANYTHING NOT OFFICIALLY PRESCRIBED BY THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE. We know that all professors not beknighted by you are to be ignored. We know that all the research and speculation about an inside job false-flag op called 911 must be ignored to preserve whatever it is you are trying to preserve...but, again, WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IN AND WHAT DO YOU THINK HAS BEEN HAPPENING WW2 TO PRESENT?! You say you believe in a 'conspiracy' behind Dallas but have offered NOT ONE PEEP about it and frankly, I think no one believes it,....unless you think it was Lee and his 

est buddy or Lee and Marina. Enlighten us. Who pulled off 911? Where did the mystery energy come from? Why the molten steel from gravitational collapse and paper fires? Why must you degrade those who would expose the truth of the treason that went on that day and the lies since? What became of the 16 floors that had enourmous momentum to the side? Why the thermite signiture in the dust? Why the WTC7 with no fires and hits? NO! ....not your official crud reports...lets hear it from you.....what YOU Believe IN.....or are you 'harboring enough doubt' to not have any beliefs?

Peter,

What you've discovered is that there is more than one way to proclaim, "I am no one."

Charles

Friends,

On another thread, Ashton Gray has offered the following:

"I've said it before and I'll say it again in yet other terms: It seems highly unlikely to me (not to say bunghole-plug dumb) that sophisticated, highly-trained intelligence agents would plot for months, if not years, to set up an assassination of the President of the United States, to set up a Communist patsy to take the fall for it, to set up the location for the patsy behind and above the target at the time of the shooting—and then have the real sniper(s) shoot from in front of the target."

Unless ...

If the selfsame "sophisticated, highly-trained intelligence agents" were assigned to design an assassination that would simultaneously A maximize chances for a kill, B convince honest investigators, via the development and planting in advance of wholly contrived "evidence," that the multi-shooter attack so obvious that day to even untrained civilian observers was pulled off by the Commies, and C provide a defensible public LN fallback position so as to protect the real conspirators from exposure by cutting off in-depth investigation before it could get started, then shots from the front do indeed make sense.

The plotters' argument: Of course there were multiple shooters, Mr. Chief Justice. The ambush was designed and executed by Commies. Although if we say so, the public demands WWIII. But don't worry. We can bury everything but Oswald, convince the public that he acted alone, and what we do to even the score later on, in private, will never see the light of day.

The KEY to this multi-phase conspiracy would be evidence of multiple-shooters.

But couldn't they be restricted to rearward firing positions?

Not if the chances for a kill were to be maximized. And as Ashton and I agree, a Parkland coup de grace was mandated for precisely that reason.

The rust on Occam's razor thickens.

Or does it?

Charles

[Charles, I am very chary of addressing this at all in this thread because it potentially could open the door to all manner of off-topic garbage. I am going to address it once to answer you briefly because I believe you're asking in good faith, but strictly speaking the question is not at all germane to this thread or to the very clear and inarguable evidence regarding the throat wound.

4. I've said it before and I'll say it again in yet other terms: It seems highly unlikely to me (not to say bunghole-plug dumb) that sophisticated, highly-trained intelligence agents would plot for months, if not years, to set up an assassination of the President of the United States, to set up a Communist patsy to take the fall for it, to set up the location for the patsy behind and above the target at the time of the shooting—and then have the real sniper(s) shoot from in front of the target. Could one possibly conceive of anything more stupid in terms of a sophisticated frame-up of Oswald?

I hope that answers your question, and now I hope that people responsibly will restrict discussion in this thread to discussion of matters related to the throat wound, which I believe deserves a great deal of attention all by itself. If the wound in John F. Kennedy's throat was not caused by a bullet or fragment, but by another device, it truly is proof beyond any doubt whatsoever that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a "lone nut assassin," and that there was, in fact, a sophisticated and far-reaching conspiracy to murder.

Ashton,

I thank you for your good faith answer, and I'll refrain from a follow-up discussion precisely because you are right in calling for discipline of focus in this -- and other -- threads.

Accordingly, I'll reproduce your paragraph 4 above in a new thread titled "Shots from the Front and the LN Construct."

Charles

And speaking of the head wound. Ashton's position is that there was NO shot from the front, so that includes the headshot.

Dawn

Ashton,

Is Dawn reading you correctly vis a vis her "NO shot from the front" interpretation of your view?

Otherwise: Agreed that JFK alive and preserved -- even in a vegetative state -- also would pose a grave threat to the conspirators.

(We are indeed through the looking glass when vegetables are judged to be detrimental to one's health. But I digress.)

A comprehensive review of the Parkland photographic record -- scenes in and around the hospital -- seems to be in order. Are familiar faces to be found? Perhaps Brother Richards will check in.

Charles

Ladies and Gentlemen,

All sarcasm and vitriol aside, I most sincerely wish to impress upon one and all that an event such as this MUST immediately activate our own hard-earned, multi-layered warning systems.

Under these and similar circumstances, I would argue, the only sane and defensible interpretation of events MUST be guilty until proven innocent.

Consider it to be a post-Dealey Plaza survival skill.

Charles

Red tips.

An equally revealing, pregnant-with-meaning factoid:

If one were to take every freshwater eel caught in North American waters in 2006 and place them, head to tail, in a straight line across the Gobi desert, the stench would be unbearable.

Alas, brainwashing is as useful a skill in the American south as barnicle scraping is in the Yukon.

Ashton, both you and I should live so long.

Charles

Larry Craig likely could set the matter straight.

If you'll excuse the expression.

I must admit, the Sistine Bunker has me a bit spooked.

Not to mention the arrangement of Ave Maria in march tempo.

Although arguing against all this is Benedict's demonstrated ability to say "mass" without "extermination" in the same sentence.

But seriously, ladies and gentlemen ...

Do you recall the NBC TV announcer providing -- there's no other term for it -- play-by-play coverage of Pope Paul VI's first visit to America at Yankee Stadium?

I was a kid at the time, but I'll never forget the line. The princes of the Church were assembled in a dugout. At the appointed time, they appeared to the multitudes.

And the announcer intoned with all due gravitas, "And the cardinals take the field."

Charles

Again, allowing such topics as this to be posted and continued, will either be the demise of this forum, or else give it the name of the "non-educational/educationally deprived" JFK Forum.

Conclusions other zan mine vill not be ALLOWED!

Ahh, schnitzel ... von more year und ve vould have pulled it off.

Vat a shame. Mein beret brought out ze green flecks in ze bunker draperies so nicely.

Heil be seeing you.

It's why we fight.

Charles

P.S. -- Are zere any Gages in ze family?

As I've pointed out in a previous thread, a conspiratorial presence at Parkland was essential to the plan. Once the hit was initiated, the only survivable outcome for the conspirators would be eradication of the target.

That being noted, it surely must have been clear to the designated administrator(s) of the coup de grace that JFK's head wounds were fatal. So why risk an unnecessary hospital attack?

Then again ... better safe than oh so sorry.

Charles

As I've always known, Terry Berry, you can see right through people.

Mr. Transparent

The point, of course, is that some Lincoln assassination files are still under wraps -- if not officially "classified," although I've been told that such is the case.

Families, it sees, do run the world.

Bill,

I think we agree that it serves no purpose to see sinister shapes in every snapshot of shrubbery.

In fact, we serve the truth poorly when we jump the gun(s) in such a fashion.

To be clear:

1. The purpose of my original post was to counter a charge of paranoia by explaining how, based upon the history so many of us have struggled to reveal, analyze, comprehend, and/or just plain accept,events such as those under consideration here warrant immediate suspicion and, in certain instances, a "guilty until proven innocent" perspective.

2. I have not signed on to the commonly held (among those suspecting perfidy) theory that this was all about "Cheney" looking to false flag an N-strike. As I attempted to make clear previously, there may be any number of sinister reasons for staging this provocation (if that's what it was) that have nothing to do with the Middle East misadventures.

3. Finally, we are reduced to taking the bad guys' word for snafu. Yes, screw-ups happen. But yet again I'll ask if the excuse that multiple redundant safety measures simultaneously failing passes the laugh test.

Best,

Charles

Just in the event that the CT Community is of the opinion that I only pick on them!

http://openlettersmonthly.com/issue/he-died/#comment-1938

There is no such thing as a "CT Community" - that's a figment of VB's imagaination.

And Von Pain doesn't count for anything.

BK

I'll go you one better.

There's no such thing as CT.

It's CF.

Conspiracy fact.

Charles

The "Mafia" did it???

What the hell is "the Mafia"?

One of the most persistent, significant shortcomings of the self-annointed experts in this case is their failure to understand that within the deep political structure there are no meaningful distinctions whatsoever between and among organized crime, big business, and intelligence agencies (civilian, military, public, private, religious) and their patsy and puppet offshoots.

None.

Each and every either/or Mafia/M.I. complex/CIA/anti-Beard/pro-Beard/commie/capitalist/fascist/big oil/big vinnegar did it accusation and debate serves only to debilitate us and prolong the cover-up and delay justice and empower the assassins.

In which category would you place Roselli/Rawlston? LCN? CIA?

How about El Indio?

Or Trafficante, Harvey, King?

Care to pigeon-hole Maheu, anyone?

Hell, how about LHO? Or HLO?

Remember, you can choose ONE and ONLY ONE affiliation.

Have we learned NOTHING???

Charles