Wednesday, December 24, 2014

John Stokes / Phil Nelson

NYPD killing, Sandy Hook / The New JFK Show #41, LBJ in "Evidence of Revision" (w/ Gary King)


  1. People should know Phil Nelson wrote a book on LBJ having mastermind of the JFK Assassination. This review by Joseph Green at CTKA, highlights faults in Nelson's thesis:

    A Texan Looks at [Phil] Nelson: LBJ Mastermind of JFK’s Assassination
    By Joseph E. Green

    "The book is divided into 10 chapters that purport to show LBJ’s hand in every aspect of the assassination, from the planning to the execution to the aftermath. It begins, however, by spelling out his basic criteria. Nelson argues that Johnson has motive, means, and opportunity, and that further he was a psychopath who would stop at nothing to achieve power.

    "The author discusses Johnson’s rise to power, the ins and outs of the all too familiar tale of Box 13, and Johnson’s many distasteful characteristics. These are, by and large, taken from Johnson’s multi volume biographer Robert Caro. In the first chapter alone, at one point there are 26 consecutive footnotes going back to Caro. To this summary he also sprinkles a few quotes from Robert Dallek, but here also begins his penchant for questionable sources. He quotes from Jack Valenti, Victor Lasky, and (of all people) Seymour Hersh, just for starters. Now the problematic aspects of using those particular writers – at least without some qualification – is apparent to most Kennedy scholars. I won’t explain the nuts and bolts here, but instead direct the reader to Jim DiEugenio’s essay “The Posthumous Assassination of John F. Kennedy” for details. But suffice it to say that each of these writers has a rather large axe to grind and a willingness to use any means necessary to grind it.

    "Now these sources do little harm to the early part of the book because Johnson’s character is well-established. He was a low-class sort of a person, prone to vulgar and over bearing displays of machismo in public, and employing men like Mac Wallace who were murderous criminals. And if you take all these famous incidents a face value, and then string them in tandem over the years, then hey! Maybe LBJ does seem like the sort of man who, were it within his power, could have had the president killed and not be halted by any moral barriers............

    1. Jim's great interview with Nelson about that book is at:

    2. Thanks for posting a book review by someone who didn't read the book. I read the review a long time ago and it was obvious he had not read the book. Thanks Compass

    3. Gary, maybe the reviewer had read the book but, in reader bias, explained it all away as "just derived from LBJ's character". Of course, the character analysis in the book has some repeats of what is known (LBJ's "low" side), but makes more connections to other things. The author is thinking there's only one form of proof: direct, best evidence. This is hardly true, nor would we find a signed confession for this (or many other crimes). :)

  2. "The "author" is thinking there's only one form of proof: direct, best evidence.."

    The "author" is right but you'd expect a so-called author to read the book. Why do you persist in making inane excuses for an idiot "author" who "reviews" a book without even bothering to read it?

  3. Compass, CTKA is a book review club better known by serious scholars as a hatchet job factory. A cult, a Mossad disinfo site, anything other than a repository for cutting edge reflection on the JFK assassination. Perhaps you do that to compensate for not adding to our knowledge base of new JFK research nor honestly reviewing good books but driving people away from them simply because this reviewer reviewer thinks quoting Caro in an LBK book is a faux paux.

    Here and other places we try to illuminate new research and stimulate new paradigms as well as discuss other germane issues you dare not risk discussing.

    Also the newest facts and current thought on JFK is not censored, as it is with CTKA where if you don't think the same groupthink memes you are a pariah, an other to be squashed like a bug.

    Any sober reading of The review of Marys Mosaic is a fine illustration of what CTKA is about.

    Worse, James D's influence on Black Op radio has narrowed the discussion so much that the show only has the same clique of JFK aficionados who don't have the courage or intellectual honesty to admit when they are wrong, or to consider other scholars who make vast contributions to new knowledge with a little more respect.

    I believe it was Joan Mellon who went as far as to say the LBJ theories are part of a conspiracy themselves, a limited hangout. While mentioning sekected sources, perhaps, she argues isn't it odd all these 50 anniversary books implicate LBJ?

    I think she has causality confused. While she mentions Roger Stone and other right wing people who showed up with books on the 50th she conveniently leaves out what James Tague wrote, or what E. Howard Hunt said in his quasi-confession, or what inside Texans believe, the Texas in the right circles.

    I am agnostic about certain high level sponsors, but sorry, LBJ is guilty at least as an accessory after the fact, and those more in the know like the author of Breach of Trust and The Man Who Knew Too Much have a different opinion than Jim on some of your most cherished dogmas.

    But for me, all I need is Ruby himself, the only bulletproof member of the conspiracy who pointed at LBJ to consider him a viable subject of scrutiny. Forget the long list of names like Jackie, Bobby, oh, and the KGB. Funny you belittle that with rhetoric.

  4. The CTKA site is infused with hubris and little scholarship. It bashes some of the best books with a venom that is just unprofessional.

    Who made Jim the cop to police those in a league above him in some cases.

    And he was so disingenuous when he recently dismissed the Murchison party and Hoover on Black Op recently saying that there was no corroboration when there was from multiple sources. But Im sure you dismiss every fact that comes your way.

    I respect some of Jim's new work on profiling JFK's meritorious character and international policy, but I think he is a curmudgeon who is too dogmatic to be in this wilderness of mirrors. He shits on everyone else and then complains about the lack of unity. He won't touch the Israel nuke material because he still has one foot in the very establishment he is afraid of offending, the very establishment he presumes to criticize through his work.

    I find him troubling in that unlike Socrates, he isn't aware of what he doesn't know, or in zen terms, his cup is full, so you cannot pour into his vessel any other truth. His opinions are entombed with dogma.

    Even I admit I can be wrong but Jim has a certainty about things that blocks his ability to really see with new eyes, especially when he is wrong.

    But I will love him like all brothers of truth when he and yourself stop behaving like provocateurs poising wells.

    So you don't think LBJ singlehandedly controlled the conspiracy; you probably don't mention that Nelson does not either, and thus this is but one straw man you or your kin hype. Nelson's book is one of the best JFK books I have read, and if you read it, you should know he blames the CIA and many others in a very thorough and nuanced way, not in the black and white CTKA way like your review.

    It troubles me that you come and put venom here but leave no argument, but use a sardonic tone unfitting for a review of a serious work. Try making your tone more serious, since we are serious people.

    I enjoy much that Jim does so I don't want to hate on him; but just call out the hypocrisy of your site. Any intelligent reader can read your brief paragraphs above and find no substance but appeals to authority, special pleadings, as if all are loons to believe such a preposterousness idea. I think Lisa Pease still believes democrats are all good guys. It's a freshman college student/daily show view if the world. It's crazy to take on people who can't defend themselves because inevifvthevfrwone are allowed to debate any of you invalidation Bkack Op. What does that do to your credibility?

    I can't wait until you get to discover for yourself that those who suspect LBJ are not wrong, and that the most empirical evidence, motivation and opportunity all points to him and his network. But beyond that, LBJ obstructed justice, he was a criminal who oversaw the worst assassinations of our century, the Liberty Incident, the Vietnam War, and it was Jackie, Evekyn Lincoln and Bobbie who suspected LBJ of the crime.

    But forget all of that and just heed Ruby's words if no other

    Listen to his own words then read your article and tell me, are you moving your readers toward or away from facts?

  5. James D.'s Influence at Black Op radio -- a valuable assett -- has been squandered thevonce vital guest list to a narrow list of the same pre-approved guests that the self-proclaimed "research community cop" deems worthy. So if you want to hear old rehashing of the magic bullet story, you are in luck.

    Don't expect brand new perspectives or fresh ideas on that show as much as it used to, nor hardball questions

    In fact Len is all to happy to read Jim's odd fan mail as his main fare. Thank God for the archives. Listen to Len's interviews in years past and one feels progress and illumination shine forth.

    But now, all the cutting edge research is locked away in a politically correct lockbox and people are more than happy to just avoid the breathtaking new discoveries happening everyday so they can rehash the same old Warren Commission stories while giving a pass to the plethora of diverse JFK thought.

    In CTKA town, politics is black and white and the ultimate bad guys are just an abstraction called the CIA. An abstraction.

    How many authors, whether you like them or not are not given a venue at Black Op because the self-appointed expert Jim D. believes he has a monopoly on truth.

    Shouldn't readers and listeners get to make their minds up, or do we need you guys to come and tell people what is rubbish and whatvis gold.

    But Dick Russell, Gerald McKnight, and most true scholars I enjoy think you are wrong sir, and they somehow disagree with Jim's dogma, so I am curious which research community you casually refer to, unless you mean a small clique of sycophants who embarrassingly come around to cutting edge research a couple years too late and only because it becomes such irrefutable fact. I'll stick with the heavyweights when I need an opinion instead of hacks who place bashing other researchers above finding the truth.

    I think it is humerous how Janes D. finally came around to agreeing Oseald was on the steps of the depository, but not because the scholars he slanders says so, but because of "enter sycophant x pointing out an even more obscure photo than Altgens 6. I hear Jim might think the Zapruder film is altered now because of his friends in Los Angeles were pointing it out, and not because the police escort vehicles said so thirty years ago.

    Oh, and the KGB two year study of the assassination indicated LBJ as the culprit. But you will refute all facts. How many data pints do you need?

    I think it wouldn't matter what smoking gun evidence would convince those that refuse to hear. It's hard to hear truth when you think you got it in your back pocket already. Sorry, write a book like Nelson and make it persuasive like his book is. Otherwise you are a troll using smear tactics, not educating readers.

  6. Clare Kuehn

    The only evidence worthy of the name
    is "direct, best evidence" and the evidence for LBJ's pivotal role and involvement in the assassination of JFK is abundant, direct and
    the best which Nelson has clearly shown in his book. Unlike the "evidence" for your Paul-Is-Dead bunch of bull which amounts to nothing more than half a bucketful of warm spit.

  7. When I refer to "you", above, I presume then I am addressing the insanity of Joseph Green, who trashed another beloved book at CTKA. It's like you get a merit badge for bashing a book if it doesn't meet Jim's odd footnote benchmark. He seriously once said, "I opened the book and knew it was worthless when I read the footnotes." How arrogant can Jim D get? I'm seriously starting to wonder about his credibility. Like he has some agenda or a character disorder. I was only half joking that he may be a sayanim or such. Keep the hockey puck in the CIA. Notice no other topic can be addressed by that clique
    Oh the horror that a book on LBJ should quote our most celebrated LBJ biographer! What kind of thinking is this?

  8. "When I refer to "you", above, I presume then I am addressing the insanity of Joseph Green, who trashed another beloved book at CTKA. It's like you get a merit badge for bashing..."

    "I presume then I am addressing the insanity of Joseph Green..."

    Run that past me again: YOU presume YOU
    are addressing the insanity of Joseph Green...." Why do YOU presume what YOU
    are addressing? Don't YOU know what or
    whom YOU are addressing? Would you please cut the gibberish and write clearly, concisely and succinctly? Explain what you mean by the words: " I presume then I am addressing..."

  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

  11. JIm are you aware of this from RAND? and how the police are becoming corporatized across the country?

  12. First, I didn't write that review. At least I listen to the podcasts and do some searches on the guests I've not heard before which is usually all of them. This was all new to me. What are you so defensive about?

    DiEugenio is a RESEARCHER, not a conspiracy theorist. He is focused on the facts in the case particularly those in the Garrison case and the HSCA. It is thanks to him the right questions are being asked at the ARRB.

    I thought Green did an excellent job for someone who "didn't read the book." Did you guys read the whole review? And why did you make such a leap from Green to putting down the whole CTKA group?

    Also and most seriously, you people are protesting too much. Why would you spend so much time on this new theory of LBJ as "mastermind"? Don't you have any common sense to see this is just another scheme to take commercial advantage of the 50th JFK anniversary. You should have bigger fish to fry like getting Oswald's tax records among many other records. Furthermore, anyone who writes an LBJ did it book should expect a lot of negative press. I'll bet the MSM loved it, though.

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. How is it that you never seem to find any of the dozens of 9/11 nuke articles I have written?

    3. Compass, my apologies, I realized after that you were quoting and that is why I clarified the point afterwards. And you know what, you are also right that Ibdhould not paint withtoo large a brush. There are fine pieces on CTkA. And I respect much of Jim's work too, within the context of his work.

      Having said that, my diatribe above is directed to the gestalt wider context of CTKA, because it is not just that they trashed this book, but they have trashed some of the best books on the market. The same author I believe also trashed Joseph Farrell's book on JFK, which illuminates much of the NASA material that rarely gets discussed, even here on Fetzer's site. The Janney book Mary's Mosaic, of course. Was not reviewed by CTKA because whatever it was cannot be called a review. Both Lida Pease and James D. both weighed in for s one two punch on a book that Ibassyre you will be one of the few classics from this time period decades from now. The book moved me, it was so well written.

      As for Nelson's book, it is one of the best works on JFK period. I recommend getting the audible version as it is a rich full meal. To dismiss his book the way the CTKA review did with sarcastic fallacies is tragic. Because the work is something that Black Op listeners would really dig, especially Len.


    Testimony of Jim DiEugenio
    Los Angeles, California -- September 17, 1996
    The next witness today is Mr. James DiEugenio. He is the author of a book entitled Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba and the Garrison Case, which is an analysis of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison's inquiry and of the assassination itself.

    Author of Destiny Betrayed; JFK, Cuba and the Garrison Case

    MR. DIEUGENIO: "Thank you. I am kind of stunned after Mr. Belin's presentation..........

    ".......... About Lee Harvey Oswald. I strongly urge the Board to interview John Armstrong about some of his new discoveries about who, what or whatever Lee Harvey Oswald was because he's becoming a more and more complex kind of a figure.

    "The FBI seemingly knew about this and the Bureau attempted to cover up Oswald's espionage role with what looks like a forgery of the films -- the photos of the evidence discovered at the Paine household and taken over to the Dallas jail. And John has actual -- I mean, pretty undeniable evidence that this was the case. And of course this concerns the mysterious Minox Camera.

    "All the tax records on Lee Harvey Oswald, the ones that he filed and the W2s that were supposed to be filed by his employees, have to be collected in one place and analyzed. Armstrong has evidence that the W2 that was submitted is a false one. It was made up in 1964, which of course is impossible.

    "And the overwhelming evidence that Oswald was an FBI informant is I think has gotten to a critical mass. So I would suggest that the Review Board depose James Hosty and Warren DeBrueyes. .......And DeBrueyes is important -- and I think he's still alive because I interviewed him in 1994 -- because he was the FBI's contact with the Cuban exiles in New Orleans, which from other witnesses that you've heard, is a pretty important connection............

    "Every single file on Ruth and Michael Paine has to be located and declassified in its total entirety. And there's a reason why Ruth Paine was asked more questions than anybody else by the Warren Commission. And there's a reason why there is no record of her being interviewed by the House Select Committee.

    "There's evidence that Michael Paine bought a car for Oswald that he tried to apply the payments on. There's this Minox Camera controversy. The Paines had told differing stories about this Minox Camera over time and they don't coincide with each other........\

    "....And recently declassified FBI documents says there was an Oswald sighting in 1963 in Antioch, Ohio. That's where Ruth Paine attended college. Curiously the guy who stepped forward and said that wasn't Oswald, it was me, is a guy called Carl Hyde, this guy is Ruth Paine's brother........[and on and on.....]

  14. Jeez, if Pres. Johnson had been the mastermind, which is implausible on its face, then why didn't run for re-election in 1968? I have to totally disagree with someone's analysis about Black Op Radio and CTKA and also the former COPA. These organizations have way more voices than Jim Fetzer does and if anything it is Prof. Fetzer himself that limits debate on this issue. The Pres. Johnson did it IS a covert-op put on to take pressure away from the CIA on the 50th anniversary. Sure he may have been briefed on it, just like ex V.P. Nixon was, who had been in Dallas that entire week and left the morning of 11/22. And by the way Joseph Green is entirely credible and has written a couple great books, one very recent. I feel the Israeli nuke deal is overblown, but of course Dr. Fetzer sees a Zionist (read Jewish) conspiracy everywhere, just like Jeff Rense and Mike Rivero of what really happened. It is total nonsense of course. Sadly that ho-ho a-hole is also a Johnny one-note, perhaps himself an agent for someone.

  15. apstertane; your spOOky CIA connections are showing, I guess, as it is said, all you have to do is fool yourself. On that, you are light-years ahead, as far as convincing anyone else; let's say you don't. And please, quit calling yourself a ho! Although if that shoe fits! ;)

  16. This comment has been removed by the author.

  17. All of the writers and personalities, who have fingered the CIA as the major player in the assassination of JFK, are smeared, panned and dismissed by the mainstream, establishment so-called researchers and authors. These diminished persons include Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, Fletcher Prouty, etc. The books they have written are at the top of the "must-read" list but no one has read them thanks to the elbowing out by Gerald Posners, Norman Mailers and their PR agents.

    After 50 years, I was expecting some new light to be shed on the case, but noooooooooooooooo. Instead, we have more theory. Nixon did it. Johnson did it. New importance was given to the Zapruder film being tampered with and endless arguments over Oswald in the doorway. A whole new generation is learning bigger lies and irrelevant material to insure the coverup continues. And notice what happens when someone like me presents an "unpopular" view on a comment board.

    1. Compass: It was done by the CIA in a simple sense, for corporate interests in the broad sense, with International bigotry (incl. Zionists emigre Russians & emigre Cubans & British & other Europeans backing), through Canada & mob in Usa (incl. Jewish mob Lansky & Bronfmans), but run inside the government channels by the aspirant LBJ. -- To have the title that he was "Mastermind" came out of Nelson's critical insight in daring to talk of LBJ that way.

      But yes, Oswald was in that doorway & yes the Zapruder was remade.