Douglas Caddy Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/10/phillip-f-nelson/murder-jfk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) The article to which you link, Douglas, is written by Philip Nelson, an LBJ-did-it-author. I believe Nelson is largely correct about LBJ's reason(s) for deciding not to run for president in 1968. LBJ was in a terrible position. The anti-war Left hated him. I can't imagine what would have gone down in Chicago if LBJ had been running for president. The pro-war citizens were fed up with him as well. That's why he almost lost New Hampshire to Gene McCarthy. Tet proved to the American people the war wasn't going to be won anytime soon. LBJ had no other cards to play. I believe Nelson is wrong about E. Howard Hunt's "deathbed confession." Hunt was a professional xxxx; that's how he made his living. Nothing a professional xxxx says is trustworthy. Edit: "xxxx" is short for a person who prevaricates. Edited October 30, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Blank Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 to me a pivotal player is something much different than a mastermind. the difference being that the latter would involve (all) planning, etc., more of an overall command position. a pivotal player may be needed in a certain major role in order to make the plan/plot of the mastermind to work. here lbj would be needed to run the cover up. you don't think these cockroaches didn't want someplace dark to scurry back under? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 I agree with Martin Blank. I especially agree with the characterization of those responsible for the murder as "cockroaches". The most interesting thing to me about the cockroaches is not that LBJ had a hand in the cover-up; he had reasons unconnected to the assassination not to want a full, sweeping investigation. So did the Kennedy family. The cockroaches, I believe, could foresee all of this falling naturally into place. Could foresee Bobby Kennedy playing his own worst enemy, etc. The most interesting thing to me about the cockroaches is that they got to the highest levels of the U.S. military. That took detailed doing. Not by persons who came across as lowly cockroaches, but as persons who had inside information, inside access, and sway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Jon, which intelligence service plotted the JFK assassination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Or military branch? Are you thinking at the level of Joint Chiefs? I think JFK was worried about them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Gentlemen, I suggest we look at the nexus of military and CIA -- operators who were both military and CIA but neither. Edward Lansdale and Lucien Conein come to mind. Could they have been the air force colonel and the army colonel in the shadowy Staff Support Group out of Ft. Detrick? Pgs 160-1: http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 David Andrews, I have no inside information or hearsay on that score. I do believe an intelligence service had a hand in planning and carrying out both the assassination and the cover-up. The assassination was a remarkable feat, given that JFK, a moving target from any perspective, was shot from a distance with relatively little collateral damage or wasted effort. The set-up of Oswald is apparent to many JFK researchers, but it too was a remarkable feat. How did the plotters know to get Oswald a job in the TSBD, as another commenter has observed. Maybe that was just serrendipitous good luck for the plotters. The cover -up, which continues to this day, is also remarkable. Who is still being protected by the cover-up? Answer that question, and you've solved the case. I see no reason why the U.S. Government today has any reason to cover up for actions taken in 1963 by any individual who is dead and buried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger DeLaria Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Working for Dulles, and with his background, I've always felt Ed Lansdale was a prime candidate for organizing/managing DP. This picture I've thought is very telling. For myself, I've come to the conclusion that it was LBJ. It wasn't just LBJ alone by himself, but LBJ was the lynchpin at the epicenter of other conspirators(Texas Oil, CIA, industrialists/war profiteers) whom he had deep ties to, and whom had a vested interest in JFK being eliminated. LBJ was going to be personally and politically ruined and go to prison. LBJ had Big Oil and MIC money behind him, as well as the Texas political machine. He had deep relations and contacts throughout congress, the state of Texas, industry and commerce, as well as law enforcement to ensure he got off scot-free. I see the who and the why right there. LBJ had a clear motive and wouldn't have any problems finding willing co-conspirators. I feel that much of the continuing cover-up may have to do with protecting the legacy and integrity of institutions, and in people's confidence in those institutions. Edited October 31, 2015 by Roger DeLaria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Newton Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 How did the plotters know to get Oswald a job in the TSBD, as another commenter has observed. Jon, I think the motorcade route was altered to bring it closer to the TSBD, the sharp turn and terrain being an ideal spot for an ambush. The TSBD had "light security" if you can even call it that and any decent operator could have planted a weapon the night before. I have always assumed there were other patsies for other scenarios that weren't used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) David Andrews, I have no inside information or hearsay on that score. I do believe an intelligence service had a hand in planning and carrying out both the assassination and the cover-up. The assassination was a remarkable feat, given that JFK, a moving target from any perspective, was shot from a distance with relatively little collateral damage or wasted effort. The set-up of Oswald is apparent to many JFK researchers, but it too was a remarkable feat. How did the plotters know to get Oswald a job in the TSBD, as another commenter has observed. Maybe that was just serrendipitous good luck for the plotters. The cover -up, which continues to this day, is also remarkable. Who is still being protected by the cover-up? Answer that question, and you've solved the case. I see no reason why the U.S. Government today has any reason to cover up for actions taken in 1963 by any individual who is dead and buried. It may be less a question of what individuals are still being protected than of what institutions are. Give a listen to the last half-hour of David Talbot's interview on Black Op Radio this week for evidence of fear and loathing of JFK investigation by today's mainstream media and film industry. Who are they protecting? Talbot also points up an oral history interview of Allen Dulles on the topic of JFK, in which Dulles seems to gloat about how the assassination went off with the precision you describe due to the perfect placement and interaction of the participants and bystanders. The interview link is here. It's food for thought: http://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/Archives/JFKOH-AWD-01.aspx I asked my question because you did post elsewhere that you suspected a foreign intelligence service. I do not imagine you have special knowledge - I just wondered about your suspicions and their bases. Edited November 1, 2015 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) One of the triumphs of Vince Palalara's book is that he brings in about four witnesses to the fact that the motorcade route was altered within about 24 hours of that morning. And the Dallas police had no knowledge of it. In fact, they had to be instructed about it the night before. A guy who Vince is highly suspicious of, and who I am also interested in, is Winston Lawson. For a variety of reasons. FIrst, it appears he was instrumental in lightening up the protection for JFK, that is lessening the amount of motorcycles on the side, and also the complete lack of anyone on the rear bumper. Secondly, he is active in the whole WC cover up to a degree that I don't think anyone else in the SS is. Perhaps not even Rowley. I mean, I think Bledsoe mentions him--and we know what a stooge she was-- and he was also involved with the whole charade of the Howard Brennan mess, where it is doubtful he was even at a line up. So if the route was changed at the last minute, then the whole thing about Ruth Paine getting Oswald his job there becomes I think kind of fascinating. Edited November 1, 2015 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Jon, My two cents on a couple of your comments: How did the plotters know to get Oswald a job in the TSBD, as another commenter has observed. Maybe that was just serendipitous good luck for the plotters. I just cannot believe that the CIA -- having prepped Oswald as the patsy (including a trip to Mexico that will indicate to some that the KGB was behind his actions) -- would leave to chance Oswald being in the right place at the right time to shoot Kennedy. It is for this reason that I believe that both Ruth Paine and TSBD owner D.H. Byrd must have been CIA controlled. The TSBD might have even been a CIA front.The cover-up, which continues to this day, is also remarkable. Who is still being protected by the cover-up? The CIA is protecting itself. Suppose a smoking gun were found, clearly showing that the CIA was responsible for the killing of a president. Don't you think that would threaten the CIA's existence as we/they know it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramon F. Herrera Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 This dilemma can be readily solved applying the following logic: Allen Dulles and Lyndon Johnson: Neither one would have attempted the hit without the other. That statement cannot be said of any other set of protagonists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Joe Bundy Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 (edited) . Edited January 4, 2016 by Joe Bundy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now