Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Communication Breakdown


Recommended Posts

Thanks Mark

Thanks DGH

Henry Cabot Lodge was Nixon's running mate in 1960, and he was a principle agent in the DIEM SAIGON 1963 situation.

He helped William Bundy Willliam Colby and Maxwell Taylor consolidate joint agency wartime power in southeast asia and domestically after the death of JFK.

Pumping change into a payphone?

The senior statesman and ambassador to Viertnam for the United States?

Communication break down ------- its always the same

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 262
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Shanet, I've told you this before on other threads:

the word you want here is "principal" not "principle".

You can character assassin C. Douglas Dillon, and now Henry Cabot Lodge, but, for heaven's sake, don't murder the King's English in the process!

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice to know that the English professor-in-residence is on the job.

BUT...Mr. Professor...since "assassin" is a NOUN, how did ANYONE "...

character assassin C. Douglas Dillon, and now Henry Cabot Lodge, ..."???

Or, in the words of one mightier than I: "Physician, heal thyself."

And I sincerely doubt what's going on here is the "murder [of] the King's English", but rather the hijacking of the thread, under the guise of a "higher purpose." For you undoubtedly know by now that "the King's English" hasn't been spoken here in "the colonies" for approximately 200 years or more. So you're raising an issue that ISN'T an issue.

Lodge undoubtedly WAS a principal in the Diem coup/murder/whatever you choose to call it. Whether he had prior knowledge of JFK's murder hasn't been proven; one can only speculate at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark, I deliberately used the term "King's English" in deference to our illustrious and kind host. Somehow it does not surprise me that you did not discern that.

And by the way, while it is true that we Americans have clearly bowlderized the English language, there is still a distinction between "principal" and "principle" that should be observed.

Look, I'll save you and Shanet some time: the book that clearly discusses the close friendship between JFK and C. Douglas Dillon is Sorenson's biography of JFK. As I suspect you know--nah, why should I suspect that--for your information Ted Sorenson was for years one of Kennedy's closest friends and political advisers.

Why don't you for a week or two quit reading some of the garbage posted here (and some of the posts clearly are) and read Sorsenson's book? I think you might learn a lot.

I am seriously considering contacting Sorenson to obtain his comment on the charge that C. Douglas Dillon was complicit in the murder of his boss. I know he would probably be even more enraged than I am!

Re Lodge, I do hold him guilty for participating in the Diem coup. But it was clearly authorized by JFK, over the objections of LBJ, RFK and his military advisers. It was supported by Harriman, Hilsman and the CIA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Knight wrote:

Nice to know that the English professor-in-residence is on the job.

BUT...Mr. Professor...since "assassin" is a NOUN, how did ANYONE "...

character assassin C. Douglas Dillon, and now Henry Cabot Lodge, ..."???

Oops! Sorry, I forgot to "ate"! I stand corrected. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HELP !!! HIJACKING !!!!

Communication breakdown, its always the same.

Telephonic communication in the nation's capital, goes out 11/22/63.

Radio communication in the motorcade, goes out around 12.28 pm.

Coded information in the Cabinet Plane, code book missing.

Nuclear code football disconnected during ambush, finder and sender goes out.

Evidence of Military Coup under cover of Executive Sanction?

Great thread until the Gratz showed up.

Let's split.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, Shanet, when I "show up" and ask for evidence, not just your vain imaginings. I guess it does spoil your fun! Somehow I do not consider it fun to accuse Kennedy's friends and advisers of murdering him.

I assume you have never read Sorsenson's biography of JFK. Why don't YOU write Sorenson and tell him you think Dillon conspired to kill his friend. See what Sorenson thinks of your magesterial theory.

I also assume you are not familiar with the telegram JFK sent Lodge thanking him for his wonderful work in arranging the coup against Diem.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Telephonic communication in the nation's capital, goes out 11/22/63.

Two questions. Did the system go out completely, go out partly, or basically just slow down? And has whatever happened ever been reasonably explained? I recall reading somewhere that there was an unsinister explanation for the problem, but I don't remember what it was. Just too many people using the phones?

Nuclear code football disconnected during ambush, finder and sender goes out.

What is the evidence of this? Where can I read about it?

Ron

Edited by Ron Ecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I'll save you and Shanet some time: the book that clearly discusses the close friendship between JFK and C. Douglas Dillon is Sorenson's biography of JFK. As I suspect you know--nah, why should I suspect that--for your information Ted Sorenson was for years one of Kennedy's closest friends and political advisers.

Why don't you for a week or two quit reading some of the garbage posted here (and some of the posts clearly are) and read Sorsenson's book? I think you might learn a lot.

I am seriously considering contacting Sorenson to obtain his comment on the charge that C. Douglas Dillon was complicit in the murder of his boss. I know he would probably be even more enraged than I am!

Tim, you're obviously not paying attention to what I have posted on this forum. Here's a cut-and-paste from the "Deep Throat" thread [which you ALSO have so conveniently hijacked at every opportunity]:

I have also stated elsewhere on this forum that I seriously doubt that C. Douglas Dillon was involved in any assassination plot, if for no other reason than the fact that the Secret Service was, prior to 11/22/1963, little more than a minor detail in the administration of the Department of the Treasury...and, as such, wasn't an overriding concern of Dillon, to the exclusion of other matters at Treasury.

SO WHY DO YOU INSIST IN ASSOCIATING MY NAME WITH ANY THEORY IMPLICATING DILLON IN JFK'S ASSASSINATION? If you're going to start a reply using my name, I would appreciate it if you'd stick with what I actually have posted, and not what you ASSUME that I think.

NOW, Mr. Gratz...can you grasp YET what my position is regarding C. Douglas Dillon? Or do I need to check yet ANOTHER thread to find where you've accused me of posting things I haven't?

GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD: I'M NOT ACCUSING DILLON.

Can I make my point any more clearly? Or, better question: CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another thread where you stated the same thing I apologized for associating you with the insane idea that C. Douglas Dillon did it.

But there is no more evidence that Nixon did it, even though he was not, like Dillon, a friend and adviser of JFK.

But I am glad that you recognize that it makes no sense to blame Dillon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark wrote:

Nice to know that the English professor-in-residence is on the job.

According to a recently released study, the Japanese, who have far fewer heart attacks than either the English or Americans, eat very little fat. On the other hand, the French consume a high amount of fat, but French people also have far fewer heart attacks than either Britons or Americans.

The Japanese drink very little red wine. On the other hand, Italians drink a lot of red wine and have far fewer heart attacks than Britons or Americans.

The inescapable conclusion is eat and drink whatever you want. It's speaking English that kills you!

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim, I resent the fact that you make it sound as if YOU convinced me that Dillon wasn't involved in the JFK assassination. I have held that position from the start. Dillon was a bureaucrat, a manager of his department; I have serious doubts that he ever thought twice about the Secret Service protection of the president prior to 11/22/1963. Dillon was they type of manager to delegate such [prior to 11/22/1963] mundane tasks to underlings. I differ with Shanet's idea that Dillon actively stepped aside from presidential protection, as I believe that this aspect of Treasury was the furthest thing from his mind ON A DAILY BASIS.

I'm not agreeing with you that the idea of Dillon's participation would be insane, either; given the uneventful nature of presidential protection prior to 11/22/1963, I just believe he never gave the subject a second thought...that was the province of the "underlings" at Treasury, not Dillon.

I'm NOT one of your Limbaugh-regurgitating buddies; I DON'T believe that you're either with us or against us, as "El Rushbo" spouts, parroting the White House line. I think there is room for the entire spectrum of thought here, and that ALL areas that aren't an impossibility should be explored...rather than dismissed as "insane." Perhaps I don't have your esteemed credentials, but I tend to believe the majority here are a bit more open minded than the Warren Commission. I've seen some quality work from Jim Root, Ron Ecker, Pat Speer, Antti, and so many others here. But it appears that YOUR primary purpose is to lead the "Castro-did-it" cheering section, and to obstruct, sidetrack, and confuse any other line of investigation.

Ever hear the advice, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way"? [i'm sure you're well-read to a sufficient degree to have come across it at least once.] I came here to ask questions, to pose some "what-ifs," and to draw upon the knowledge and the research of others here to broaden my own knowledge. But I feel like I'm being told to PROVE that Nixon did it, while we can't even decide what Oswald's role in the assassination was or wasn't. I can't PROVE Nixon did it any more than I can PROVE that Castro did it. As I've previously said, if we could PROVE who did it, we could publish our results and all go home relieved.

And why are you "glad that recognize that it makes no sense to blame Dillon"? Why should you CARE what I think of Dillon? Because he was a "good Republican"?? Your condescending tone toward me is making me quite irritable, as I don't believe I deserve it. GET OVER YOURSELF, TIM. My opinion is, if you ever read Dale Carnegie, it must not have made much of an impression on you...or else you brushed it off as some liberal fluff from some Commie, so it becomes inherently unbelievable...maybe even "insane"??

Tim, I don't subscribe to the "Castro-did-it" scenario because it's become the CIA's fall-back position, since the Warren Report didn't fly. I'm not saying it COULDN'T happen; I just tend to have my doubts that the CIA position should be embraced unquestioningly. If I was ever convinced that this IS what happened, to the exclusion of all other possibilities, then I would be humble enough to admit it. But so far, I don't think we've exhausted all the other RELEVANT avenues of inquiry. In fact, I believe that's why we're all here...yourself excluded, of course, because you're evidently convinced you already have the answer...but so was the Warren Commission, Tim.

Communication Breakdown, indeed.

Now...what about that DC phone service on 11/22/1963? I believe Ron has raised a point to investigate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

Communication break down ------- its always the same

Shanet, are you now trying to tell us that you belive, Jimmy Page, & Robert Plant had a hand in this?? :up:up:up

"Im havin a *%!! breakdown---Gonna drive me insayyyyne

Edited by Stephen Turner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...