Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Conspiracy IS the Conspiracy


Recommended Posts

The Conspiracy IS the Conspiracy.

Like Angletons Orchids.

Deception in its most successful form is an attractant that consumes the seeker.

If the Conspircy, in its true nature, is veiled, as the seven veils of the seductress, the seeker goes here and there, and falls in to innumerable traps and dead ends supported and guided and beguiled by an endless trickle of tantalising disclosures that never ever quite hit the spot.

The Conspirators mindset as an amateur is putty to the Pros.

Fourty three years, almost half a century, and there is no unassailable proof.

Why?

The simplest explanation is that the follow up deaths, all local, and intimidations, and the investigations all were on home turf. The pattern is one of diversion or deception. Ie. the True Orchid that actually is the room of mirrors beyond which the truth lies is in full view. It always has been. Therein the impetus for the mystery.

The mystery itself is the clue.

_________________

The solution lies in the pattern of the past half century. This pattern, when viewed equanimously, detached, with no pre judice is as clear as it was from day one.

The blinker to the perception of the pattern lies embedded within the natural human reaction to uncomfortable mind-body phenomena. Fear. Projection. Denial.

All the Conspirators had to do was to facilitate a resolution of the dilemma that arises within, away from full realisation of the truth, with a grateful complicity of the innocents.

_________________

The peoples vote had been annulled at the very moment that a revolution was taking place. 'Free at last' was in sight. Reaction triumphed.

It triumphed, but not without a cost. There is the mistake that such conspiracies always make. In the triumph, the seed of its own destruction is planted.

Truth as an entity, has a power all its own within its very nature. It has a lightness and a brightness, that lies do not. Lies have a nature too, they are dark and heavy, and follow natural laws. They sink, sooner or later.

The fact that such a vitality exists, almost half a century after the fact, around the question of 'Who killed the Kennedy's' or 'Why' is a testament to the Kennedy's. They live. They rise, where others fall.

__________________

All this must to some seem like some kind of mystic gobbledygook. I disagree. It's the dominant official and unofficial Conspiracy Theories that are the true metaphysical gobbledygook. The assassin is either a small collection of rosarch ink blot collection of pixels, or an illogic theory. Continually changing facts like 'where is Kennedy's Jacket' are set in stone. Belief overrides reason. Sandcastles are built on impossible to determine certainty and pointed at as the truth. Where good cases are made for altenatives built on no more shaky ground, they are automatically ignored. Demonstrably false statements such as "Don's DP map is absolutely correct" are accepted without a murmur, whereas the proof to the contrary are not discussed or deliberatel witheld. etc etc etc

If nothing else has been proven then at least the fact that the ordinary laws of physics do not applly to Dealey Plaza has been. Light does indeed bend there. Laws of perspective do not apply, in fact I wonder if the place even exists, and if so it does so in a time flux, where todays mores apply, and the DPD was not staffed by KKK members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Dolva,

I deeply appreciate your meditation on the quantum reality that is the subject we study.

However, I must register the strongest possible disagreement with the following:

"Fourty three years, almost half a century, and there is no unassailable proof."

Even within the context of your splendid paean to abstraction, this statement is demonstrably false.

The proof of conspiracy is clear in its multiplicity. Conspiracy in the death of JFK is the truth. It does indeed lie in full view.

It always has.

So much for the "how."

The "who" and "why" remain ... elusive.

Use the truth as we know it as a weapon. Use it brutally.

We are at war. So ... how many divisions do we have?

The sad answer: "Countless." We could not be more divided.

Charles

Edited by Charles Drago
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "who" and "why" remain ... elusive.

How about a process of elimination?

Is there anyone who doubts that LBJ was involved in the conspiracy?

Instead of asking "Who benefited?", one can legitimately ask, "Who could have possibly benefited more than LBJ?"

Given LBJ's character (i.e. lack thereof), the predicament he was in, and the power (for things like a cover-up) that he would immediately and automatically acquire upon JFK's death, it's hard to believe that anyone would have started a conspiracy without him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There does seem to be a fair number of people who believe LBJ was a central figure in the assassination. Some go so far as stating this belief as being a knowledge, and in some instances even using statements such as 'without any doubt!'.

Since this is a murder investigation (or so I thought) then it is the development of a court level case that's needed.

There are good arguments for Johnson for not being central.

After Kennedy was dead, Johnson became in a caretaker president. Only after 1965 election could he be said to be President. This is when he formed his cabinet. Prior to this there was a broad overlap to the Kennedy presidency.

(Katzenbach explains the difference between being an acting official and an appointed full official)

There was no guarantee that Johnson would become President. Was there? It can be argued that it was likely.

Therefore the period between the assassination and his election in 1965, the immense power some ascribe to him seems unreasonable.

I can understand that questions such as this that may seem to undermine particular theories (proof???) are easiest to deal with by ignoring them. (I've noticed over time that it is the difficult questions that (IMO) actually may provide a solution are stonewalled as a matter of course.) I would like to see a good argument against this premise that Johnson, in killing Kennedy, took such an enormous risk that it is a good reason to consider he was not as involved (if at all) as some believe.

There are statements such as he oversaw the elimination of a number of witnesses in Dallas. Dallas was a closed city, something that an understanding of what 'being local' means that movement of non-locals is something that stands out. ie. it was a local affair.

Without a credible rebuttal forthcoming, it is likely that the real assassiantion conspirators will continue to slip through the cracks.

There are a large number of reseachers who KNOW the who and why and how. Therefore the case is now in court.

Well, it isn't in court.

Belief is replacing Proof. ...I, and I, I too, and me too I also believe ...bla bla... Therfore it is so? Bollocks!

Edited by John Dolva
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...