• Thomas Aldrich
  • Gravitas
  • Email
  • Posts 376
  • Reputation 1007
  • Member Since
  • Last Active
Email
    This user has not added any photos yet.
All Posts Topics Started Likes
Ethics Question of the Day

Katie wrote: About a month ago I found a painting at a yard sale that sold for ten bucks. I had a hunch about the artist and Googled him when I got home. The painting, although the water color version for his portfolio, is worth a lot more than the ten bucks. A lot more.

Question is, do you have an obligation to tell the seller at a yard sale that their goods are worth much more than what they're selling for?

For the record, I didn't. But I'm feeling really guilty.

If it were me, being the lucky one that found it, depending on what it's true value is, I'd return to where I bought it and explain to them that someone had offered more to you than what was originally paid, and give them about 30%. You'd still get the "lions" share and it would make you feel much better and they'd be real happy that you were an honest person.

2 0
Favorite Book Genres
I suppose it varies considering what stage of life I was in at the time. My younger days saw me caught up in Tarzan, Tom Sawyer & Huckleberry Finn*, (now banned from public schools)  [tongue] In my late teens and early 20s' SciFi such as Orson Welles, The Fugitive, The Executioner. Then I started becoming more interested in every aspect of History, "to know where you are going you must first understand where you have been and how you got there". I wanted to find out what drives civilizations and the more I saw the more I came to the conclusion that we are doomed to repeat ourselves because we either don't learn anything from past mistakes or don't care enough to avoid them again. It's called time loops or as an older song says "you've got me going in circles".
1 0
The Rolling Stones Keep Rolling

Chara wrote: OMGosh.  I went to one of their concerts in Charlotte, NC at the Panthers stadium yearrrrrrrrs  ago.  Bridges to Babylon.  Still have the T-Shirt.  The Stones are one of my most favorite groups and I'm glad they are still going strong.  It hurts to see how they have aged though.  Then again, I just have to look in the mirror.  HaHa!! [rofl]

*Makes me think of my first big concert experience, feeling really old now*

in 1962 Dion, Del Shannon, Roy Orbison, Frankie Valley, The Platters, The Drifters and others at RPIs' Houston Field House

Before that, in 1961, seeing a relatively unknown future super star at the Cafe Lena in Saratoga Springs, New York, Bob Dylan

1958 I saw James Brown at the Palace theater in Albany, New York

1 0
JFK, Nixon, Watergate -- Len Colodny Interview With Bud Fensterwald

http://watergate.com/Len-Colodny/jfkconnection.aspx

 

JFK Connection

[photo2][photo1]
[photo3]

My Kennedy Credential: 1986 Interview with Bud Fensterwald, Co-founder of the "Committee to Investigate Assassinations" Primarily that of President Kennedy

FENSTERWALD:

... h. How are you doing?

COLODNY:

Well, I hope very well.

FENSTERWALD:

Understand you're working with Robert Gettlin.

COLODNY:

Yeah, Bob and I have been working now almost three years.

FENSTERWALD:

Good. Ah, I have a letter I want to send to John Ehrlichman, and Jim said he thought you had his address.

COLODNY:

Yeah, just a second, ah, hold on. It's a post office box.

FENSTERWALD:

That's all right.

COLODNY:

P.O. Box 5559.

FENSTERWALD:

555.., O.K.

COLODNY:

Santa Fe.

FENSTERWALD:

Hmm-mm.

COLODNY:

New Mexico.

FENSTERWALD:

Hmm-mm.

COLODNY:

87502.

FENSTERWALD:

O.K., that is fine, I have, ah, a way-out letter I wanted to send him and I couldn't find his address. This will solve my problem.

COLODNY:

So what are you up to?

FENSTERWALD:

Oh, in addition to practicing law and running a couple of businesses, I'm spending about half my time organizing an assassinations research center. And we're having a lot of fun, and collecting a lot of materials, but we're not making a lot of money.

COLODNY:

[Laughs] I didn't know that was the purpose.

FENSTERWALD:

It isn't. [Colodny Laughs] Ah, but we are putting together, I think, the greatest collection in the world, of research materials of various assassinations. And I know most of the people in the field, so as they get older, I dog 'em for their collections and we're having some success with it.

COLODNY:

Have you solved any?

FENSTERWALD:

Our batting average is 000. That's why we're collecting the material, so the historians can solve 'em.

COLODNY:

What's your number, Bud?

FENSTERWALD:

My number here in Washington?

COLODNY:

Yeah.

FENSTERWALD:

202-393-1917.

COLODNY:

393-1917. Yeah, I know Jim worked very closely with you.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah, another -- a better number for me though, is 703 ...

COLODNY:

O.K.

FENSTERWALD:

Ah, 276-9297.

COLODNY:

9297. Ah, see -- I think he told Bob that, ah, and it's certainly prominent in his book, that, ah, you had given him a lot of good leads.

FENSTERWALD:

He was very kind to me in that book, he could'a cut me a new one if he'd'a wanted to. [Colodny laughs] But he didn't want to.

COLODNY:

Well, it's that -- that book intrigues me. I just think it's a very well written book.

FENSTERWALD:

It's an excellent book, and I tried to help him with various parts of it, where I knew bits and pieces, and I think it came out very well.

COLODNY:

Yeah, the book's well written, the -- the problem is that it didn't -- didn't go anywhere.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, it's like John Kennedy's death and there ain't no answers to it yet.

COLODNY:

Yeah, I thinks that's probably -- that's probably a part of it.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

You know, but, clearly you, ah, you knew an awful lot about what was happening in that break-in.

FENSTERWALD:

I knew certain things about it that were not public, which I was free to tell him, ah, unfortunately our friend Sam Dash did such a lousy job at the hearings, that most of the questions went unasked.

COLODNY:

Well, you know, I talked to, um, Henry Petersen about three weeks ago ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

... and he -- he expressed to me a -- a great deal of surprise that the CIA took a walk on this one.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

I mean, and this is from a guy who prosecuted the case who, basically, felt there were -- you know, he read Jim's book ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

... but he even felt at the time that he was prosecuting the cases, that it was strange, that there was so much CIA involvement and nothing -- you know, not -- no-- nothing was ever pursued.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, I -- I --I -- early on I tried to get Jim McCord to tell me what the damn thing was about, and he said, "Not on your life." He said, "I'll answer that question before that committee under oath." So I went up and I sat with him for two days and nobody ever asked him the first question. And I knew Sam Dash and I saw him later and I said, "Sam, for god sake, you know, what were you guys doing, you had two full days unlimited attention, you know, why didn't you ever ask?" He said, "I thought we asked the important questions." And I thought, "Holy crap." So that was, sort of, the end of that conversation.

COLODNY:

Well, they weren't the first people to do that kind a turn-around.

FENSTERWALD:

No?

COLODNY:

I mean, we found the same thing w-- you know, our book's on Woodward.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

And we found him doing it -- the identical thing. I mean, he sits in a courtroom and hears McCord say CIA and he says, "Holy crap." And you can look from now to doomsday and you can't find him writing a word about it.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, you never know where his money's coming from either.

COLODNY:

Well, that's one of the -- certainly that, ah, probably he was one of the biggest revelations we got out of Jim's book.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah, and it's true.

COLODNY:

Oh, I have no doubt, now, that it's true. I mean, there's no question about it that -- that his past is certainly a key to what happened.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

But, you know, the CIA involvement intrigued me. Do you think that the CIA involvement -- do you think that was strictly a CIA operation?

FENSTERWALD:

You mean just as a guess?

COLODNY:

Yeah.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

That -- that ...

FENSTERWALD:

But -- but I do-- I can't, you know, I can't prove it, it's just a guess.

COLODNY:

Well, I'm saying that you don't believe Nixon ordered that?

FENSTERWALD:

No.

COLODNY:

In other words, y-- yo--

FENSTERWALD:

I think it would'a been absolutely nuts for him to order it, ah, and he was not nuts, you know, he ...

COLODNY:

Oh ...

FENSTERWALD:

I don't like the guy, I thought he was a mess.

COLODNY:

But what was the significance, Bud, of there no -- of there being no bug in the Watergate?

FENSTERWALD:

I don't know, I never did figure out what the hell they went into the Watergate for.

COLODNY:

Well, that -- that's my point, in other words, if you were doing it for Nixon, you would've wanted a bug, 'cause he'd'a wanted information. That's all he could'a wanted out of it.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

If you were covering for that other operation, then you wouldn't of had a bug in there.

FENSTERWALD:

That's right, and I'm not sure that, ah, for some reason the damn thing wasn't just a set up, just to get -- get at Nixon.

COLODNY:

Well, you know, immediately, the CIA denied involvement, I mean, Helms and Walters both told -- and I've interviewed Haldeman, I've interviewed Ehrlichman, I've interviewed Mitchell. They had no idea, based on what they were being told, that there was any reason to believe that there was CIA involvement.

FENSTERWALD:

That's right.

COLODNY:

They were being told these guys hadn't been on the payroll for two years.

FENSTERWALD:

You know, ah, Andrew St. George?

COLODNY:

No.

FENSTERWALD:

Do you know who he is?

COLODNY:

Mmm-mm.

FENSTERWALD:

Andrew St. George is a crazy, Hungarian-born, journalist, and I could find his address if you wanted to talk to him. But in any event, he wrote an article about Richard Helms, being called, early in the morning after the break-in, by the watch officer at CIA. And he said, "For Christ sake, what are you waking me up at seven o'clock in the morning for, I know all about that." And this sole exorcise -- exercise, Stewart Symington that he subpoenas St. George before the Senate Armed Services Committee, I guess it was, and St. George, who was a very nervous character, called me Sunday night saying, "I've been subpoenaed for tomorrow, will you come hold my hand, you know Symington and all these people?" So I said, "Yeah, I'll come up with ya." And Symington chewed on him for two days, trying to find out what his source for this segment was. And he never would give it to him, on my advice. But I concluded that Andrew St. George didn't have any source, it was just a rumor that that's what Helms said. But I also think the rumor is true. And I have a lot different reason for thinking it's true -- you may want to talk to St. George.

COLODNY:

Di-- is he in Washington?

FENSTERWALD:

No, but, ahhh, [Pause] he's in Dobbs Ferry, New York and he has a public, you know, listed phone.

COLODNY:

O.K. I, now, I ...

FENSTERWALD:

It's a crazy story ...

COLODNY:

Well, you know ...

FENSTERWALD:

But I went through it with him, and, ah, you know, it's just one of these things where a Senator gets himself incensed, 'cause he's a great friend of Helms, and he thought Helms was being, some how, maligned.

COLODNY:

Well, it just seems to me that -- in the evidence we've looked at, and we're not -- I think Jim did such a good job on the break-in, I don't see any need to redo it, I don't see a need to go back over the ground he covered.

FENSTERWALD:

[INAUDIBLE] so repetitive.

COLODNY:

Well, we're not doing the break-in story, we're do-- we're doing the story of what motivated Woodward to do what he did.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

And in looking at that, it's important for -- to explain to our readers, so that they understand, fully, that the -- the CIA was involved and that Nixon wasn't. Now as an attorney, what do you think Nixon did that was illegal?

FENSTERWALD:

Well, first place, he lied, repeatedly about the thing. Ah, but the main thing he did was, the -- the minute that the story broke, he involved himself in the cover-up.

COLODNY:

Well, the ...

FENSTERWALD:

You have got to divide the story into two parts, one the break-in and two the cover-up.

COLODNY:

All right, but in the break-in to which he has nothing to do with.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

O.K., now he ends up covering up a crime he didn't commit.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

That's the irony.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah. I agree with you.

COLODNY:

The -- the -- the one -- the one move he made that was purely illegal was to pay off the burglars.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

Now if I'm wrong, you tell me. But essentially he was paying off the burglars, who were CIA agents.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, you use the term CIA agents and you use -- if you use it in the loose sense, that's correct.

COLODNY:

O.K.

FENSTERWALD:

If you're using it in the technical sense, I think you're wrong.

COLODNY:

Well, were they on the payroll or weren't they on the payroll?

FENSTERWALD:

They received money from time to time, but they weren't an agent in the sense ...

COLODNY:

All right, but they -- but on, the mission they were on was a CIA mission.

FENSTERWALD:

That's correct.

COLODNY:

So at the time they broke in -- so in essence he was paying off guys who weren't working for him, because he believed that they were working for him.

FENSTERWALD:

I think that's right.

COLODNY:

You know, one of the things that really intrigues me in the interviews, and we've done hours with all of his key aides ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

... everyone believed the other guy did it. Every single one of 'em, if you talked to -- to Haldeman he would have sworn it was Mitchell, you talked to Mitchell he thought it was them.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

Do you see? Be -- because they didn't do it, the crime ...

FENSTERWALD:

They were lost.

COLODNY:

They had no idea.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

And when you go back and reread the Nixon tapes, Bud, it's amazing, the guy knows nothing.

FENSTERWALD:

What -- what is your, ah, guess as to what the "18 Minute Gap" was about?

COLODNY:

My guess?

FENSTERWALD:

Hmm-mm.

COLODNY:

I believe it was a deliberate erasure by the people who were trying to point the gun at Nixon.

FENSTERWALD:

I see.

COLODNY:

I me--

FENSTERWALD:

Not Nixon himself?

COLODNY:

Oh, no, I mean, I just got re-- got through reading a piece by -- a guy name Gulley. Milly Gulley, who was in Military Affairs office over there. And he said Nixon didn't know how to work a ball-point pen, which is exactly what Ehrlichman told me. He said the guy wouldn't know how to operate the damn machine.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

But he wouldn't -- see, Nixon wouldn't have been that stupid.

FENSTERWALD:

And he -- but he was too vain to admit all of that.

COLODNY:

Well, no, I -- I think, in our story you're gonna see that Nixon was set up.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

I mean, the very -- the gun was pointed at Nixon, that's why I'm asking you the question I'm asking you ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

...because, clearly, if you believe that -- that the CIA was the break-in people ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

...and you believe that Nixon paid off the break-in people, that's two crimes, right?

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

Now, what if a third party points the gun at Nixon, knowing full well it's the CIA at the break-in?

FENSTERWALD:

Very possible.

COLODNY:

Well, that's who did it.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

So, that's why I'm saying it -- the -- I'm not -- I would be very, very surprised, I mean, John Dean is certainly not a fan of Nixon's and he says pretty much what we said, that the guy -- the guy had no idea where to look.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

Instead of being the mastermind, he sort of wa-- waffled all over the place. But it's my theory, and it's Bob's and my theory, that in fact, a third party was the people pointing the gun.

FENSTERWALD:

That sounds like a pretty saleable story to me.

COLODNY:

Well, it's -- it's the -- the -- you know ...

FENSTERWALD:

You got a publisher yet?

COLODNY:

That's the one thing we've learned from Woodward now, not to talk about. The first time we offered ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

...strange things happened, to manuscripts, our own attorney, so, you know, we've been told just don't talk about it.

FENSTERWALD:

That's all right.

COLODNY:

Ah, and you know, essentially, Woodward's a powerful guy.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, you bet your ass.

COLODNY:

I mean, just look at what he writes today, you know, you don't have to be a genius to figure out he's getting his information at a very high level.

FENSTERWALD:

Do you get up to Washington ever?

COLODNY:

I'm supposed to be there. We've had a series of interviews lined up there, ah ...

FENSTERWALD:

You might wanta come spend a few hours roaming through our files, which are open to the public.

COLODNY:

Let me ask you this, do you, you know -- you knew I -- I was intrigued by the Kennedy assassination. Is there anything to link these two events? If you had to guess who was behind Kennedy's thing, who was behind it?

FENSTERWALD:

I don't know. I -- the only thing I can tell you is I believe I know who physically shot John Kennedy, but I don't have any really workable knowledge as to who hired him and paid for it.

COLODNY:

You know -- you know what's funny about that -- 'cause I -- you know, I once -- when I had talked to people and, you know, and I give them a brief sketch of what we're doing, and the first thing they say is, "Well, is that what happened to Kennedy?"

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

And I said, "I just don't know."

FENSTERWALD:

Well I don't know either.

COLODNY:

You know, essent--

FENSTERWALD:

It certainly wouldn't surprise me, but I don't know.

COLODNY:

Well, you know, the -- Dean did a good job of uncovering what he said was Deep Throat, which Bob and I just don't believe exists.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

We believe that, you know, Jim and I have talked about that. But essentially, we believe that -- that he's a -- you know, a wo-- just fiction.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

If you follow Deep Throat, you're gonna go down the wrong path.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

But essentially, it looks like the people who were pointing the gun at Nixon were the military.

FENSTERWALD:

I don't know. I -- I don't know that much about Watergate, really.

COLODNY:

I'm talking about the -- the people around him at the time. They're the only people we can find with a motive, and that's the only -- you look for -- you're looking -- you're always looking for some motivation. And that -- that -- that appears to be the motivation.

FENSTERWALD:

One of the interesting little things that I do know, that you -- may be of some significance, is that Nixon insisted, but never got from the CIA, their files, the essential files on the Kennedy assassination. He was never able to get that. Ehrlichman knows a lot about that.

COLODNY:

The Ehrlichman -- well, the Bay of Pigs was another one he wanted ...

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

... a file on, and he gave a direct order to Helms, and Helms did not turn it over to him.

FENSTERWALD:

That's right, and he -- he also wanted the Kennedy assassination stuff and he didn't get that either.

COLODNY:

Well, I know that Haldeman was interested in that -- that kind of information.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

Well, look, it's been good talking to you, Bud, and if I can ...

FENSTERWALD:

If you get up this way let me know and I think we may have some material you might find helpful.

COLODNY:

I appreciate that.

FENSTERWALD:

Good.

COLODNY:

Nice talking to ya.

FENSTERWALD:

Thank you.

COLODNY:

Righto, Bud.

FENSTERWALD:

Bye.

COLODNY:

Bye.

 

COLODNY:

Well, we're trying to finish this damn thing, hopefully.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

If it doesn't get finished soon, St. Martin's gonna be very upset to say the least. They've missed their Christmas publication date, and I don't think they want to miss the next one. They're...

FENSTERWALD:

What's holding it up?

COLODNY:

It's the -- basically, we, we had a -- since you and I last talked -- we, we ended up going from one chapter on John Dean to eight and it's the entire middle part of the book, and we hadn't planned to write but one chapter, and it's very slow writing. It's not an easy story to tell. I guess you can gather as so many different players in the game and some are attached and some aren't attached. It would be a lot simpler if they were all co-conspirators with each other rather than just at many times acting in their own best interests or their own concerns.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

And, we're sort of at the very end. You know, Jim took us a long way, an awful long way. But we're at a point now where we know what the break-in was about, or at least we think we know what the break-in was about.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, I hope somebody does because I sure don't.

COLODNY:

Well, I interviewed Martinez and I've interviewed Magruder and I've interviewed obviously Mitchell and all the other players --

FENSTERWALD:

How about McCord?

COLODNY:

McCord is a key player and is hard to find as Jim will attest to.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

But he's clearly a very important player in the game.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, he's in Fort Collins.

COLODNY:

Florida?

FENSTERWALD:

No, Colorado.

COLODNY:

Colorado? Is that where he is now?

FENSTERWALD:

Uhuh.

COLODNY:

Well, he's probably worth a shot once we can figure out what happened inside that building. The order that went down to Liddy and that Liddy passed on to Hunt was to go for Larry O'Brien's desk, and the attendant file cabinets around it. The order got changed. Martinez said that O'Brien was never the target, that Spencer Oliver was the target and he was always the target. He was target number one in the first break-in. He was target number two in the second break-in. And as Jim reported, the key to Hunt that Hunt gave to Martinez was the key to Maxie Well's desk. The thing that's most troubling is, is that I don't understand why or who Hunt was acting for if he wasn't carrying out the order that came down through the White House. And, I, you know, it just sort of occurred to me as we went through this thing that Hunt shows up not only in this story but at least in some versions of the Kennedy assassination. And I wondered if you did any work on Hunt and had any sense of what Hunt was all about.

FENSTERWALD:

I can't find any hard evidence he had anything to do with the Kennedy assassination.

COLODNY:

Yeah, there was that rumor that he was in Dallas that day --

FENSTERWALD:

Nahh --

COLODNY:

And I, you know I've never seen any evidence to support it.

FENSTERWALD:

No, he's got a pretty good alibi for that.

COLODNY:

I do know that on the -- you know, I know that at least Haldeman believes that Nixon believed there was a connection between the CIA and the Kennedy assassination, and he's told me that. That was one of the things he thought he had on Helms.

FENSTERWALD:

Uh huh.

COLODNY:

That they destroyed so much material, I guess Nixon believed that there was a connection, either directly or indirectly to what happened that day.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, there probably was but that does not necessarily involve Hunt in anything.

COLODNY:

No, Hunt is clearly -- Hunt in my judgment never left the Central Intelligence Agency. I don't care what they say about retirement --

FENSTERWALD:

No, I don't think he did either.

COLODNY:

And Mullen and Company was clearly a front.

FENSTERWALD:

Right.

COLODNY:

For the CIA. What is surprising in all of this is -- have you run across Spencer Oliver before?

FENSTERWALD:

No, not really.

COLODNY:

Oliver, apparently his dad was in the CIA, his dad worked for the CIA, and the best I can tell, Spencer Oliver didn't know anybody. I mean he was just listed basically up until 1975 or 6 as some kind of political hack. You know, a guy who works for a senator, goes to work at the Democratic National Committee, President of the Young Democrats, that kind of resume.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

And then in 1975, he becomes an expert in foreign affairs. I mean, just out of nowhere. Do you know what he does today?

FENSTERWALD:

No.

COLODNY:

He is the chief counsel to the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, that's pretty interesting.

COLODNY:

Not only that, but he's tied up with all the -- he's tied up with the Helsinki Accord, he's tied up with all kinds of foreign policy matters between 1976 and today, but the first part of his resume looks like you know just a young Democrat political hack.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, that's what I thought he was.

COLODNY:

Well, according to Howard Hunt and he told this in private to the Watergate Committee that he, Spencer Oliver, was involved with the CIA through a group called the Young American Political Leaders which was a, which Hunt claimed was a CIA front.

FENSTERWALD:

Never heard of that group.

COLODNY:

Well, Pat Buchanan's in that group and Harry Fleming's in that group and they're alive and well and functioning. There was a second group called the Atlantic Political Leaders which he also was involved in in the mid '60s. Now, strangely enough in 1970, he had dinner with Mr. Bennett, Mr. Mullen and Mr. Hunt to discuss, he, Spencer Oliver, becoming a partner in Mullen & Company. Now that to me says something very strange is going on here and the fact that Liddy cannot explain the change of orders, I mean, he always assumed that they went for O'Brien. In fact, he said if he knew it was Oliver he never would have gone ahead with it because he said he didn't Oliver from a hole in the wall.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, well.

COLODNY:

And that's why I thought, you know, in all this stuff you've been in and certainly you know these agencies a lot better than I do. There was something very strange going on that night, and I think McCord's role is not quite the same as Hunt's role. I think McCord pulled the plug.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, McCord never put any electronics in.

COLODNY:

Well, there's no question about that.

FENSTERWALD:

What the hell was he doing there?

COLODNY:

Well, McCord was ordered to go in and bug the Watergate the first time. I don't think the CIA wanted the Watergate bugged so they pretended to bug it and they produced according to Liddy what they produced were not transcripts. McCord told him that the bug couldn't be picked up on a tape recorder, that only Baldwin could listen to it. I mean, this is bizarre, to which Liddy said that's bull crap. If he can listen to it, you can tape it. All he ever got were things like hairdresser appointments, and they were little snippets. I think they faked it. What happened to change everything, in my judgment, is that between Friday the 9th which Jim describes the order goes to Liddy through Magruder to go back in and change the bug, and when Dean gets that address book, the order changes. Now they're going to send as what Liddy calls a photo recon team in, and the photo recon team is supposed to photograph everything in the desks that are marked on the floor plan, and of course, the desks that are marked on the floor plan turn out to be Oliver and Well's desks. Not O'Brien's desk. So, my sense is that the CIA who I think had their own game to protect in the DNC, meaning the call girl ring, decided that they were -- you know you can fake [laugh] the phoney bug but how do you fake the pictures.

FENSTERWALD:

That's not easy.

COLODNY:

So, what they -- I think they pulled the plug for fear that Dean was about to expose their own operation. I guess Bob told you that Dean ordered the break-in. Dean is -- there's no question about it. He ordered the first break-in and he ordered the second break-in, and Magruder has changed his entire testimony now. Our thinking is that the one piece of the puzzle that Jim didn't have or that he couldn't get because Mr. Bailley, who was his source, never told him that Maureen Biner was in the book. I think if Jim had know that he would have immediately sensed what we sensed. And according to Mr. Bailley, not only was Maureen in the book but Maureen's picture was in the DNC in the desk with the key. Now, I don't know if -- it certainly makes a lot more sense to me than the original break-in and whatever it was somebody thought they were going to get.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah, that didn't make any sense.

COLODNY:

But, you know, now that we've got this information, here we've got Hunt and I think the CIA -- see I think Hunt's role originally was to infiltrate the White House for the CIA. I think that's what he was sent there to do. And I think Helms, who had been cut out by Nixon, was in a sense doing the same thing that the Moorer-Radford people were doing.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

And when he got there, lo and behold he ends up in the Plumbers and the CIA makes the Plumbers operational. In other words, they're driving their own operations under the cover of Nixon's Plumbers, meaning Fielding and all that other crap that was go--

FENSTERWALD:

When do you think you'll get this book out?

COLODNY:

It's due out next March.

FENSTERWALD:

Do you think you'll meet that deadline?

COLODNY:

They say that we will, come hell or high water. They are determined to do whatever is necessary. They've got two editors on it. It's being lawyered as it's being written. I mean anything that St. Martin's can do they're doing. And, they may decide at some point to -- you know Bob writes most of it. If he falls too far behind they may let me do a couple of the chapters myself, which I haven't written any up 'til this point. Essentially, my role has been to investigate and to analyze the material which is probably what you and I do better than writing something. Or maybe I can't speak for you, you probably can write. It's a hell of a story. It's an incredible story.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

And, even the first part of the story is incredible. The whole Moorer-Radford thing that Hersh and Hougan both worked on, I think that is going to come as a bomb shell. Certainly the Mitchell interviews are very intriguing. I went step by step with Mitchell over all of this, and Mitchell is clearly framed. I mean, Dean even produced phony evidence to involve Mitchell and gave it to the Watergate Committee. There was nothing he wouldn't do. Remarkable character. A remarkable character. He will go down in history as one of the all times.

FENSTERWALD:

Well, I will look forward to the book with great interest.

COLODNY:

Well, look, if you hear anything on Hunt or if you get any thoughts on this, I -- the CIA thing is troubling to me. Is there anything that I'm saying about the CIA that makes sense to you.

FENSTERWALD:

It does not make sense?

COLODNY:

No. I mean you know, you probably know them better than anyone.

FENSTERWALD:

I'm -- about the only explanation of rigid position the CIA's is is that some people, probably graduates or alumni or something were in on the Kennedy killing. There's got to be something . . .

COLODNY:

Well, I mean I've never, I've never understood. I got to believe that Oswald had a tie to the intelligence community. There's just never made any sense if he didn't.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

I mean I think that's something that's been hanging there for a long time.

FENSTERWALD:

But I would doubt that he was connected to the CIA. I think it was much more likely it was Naval Intelligence. It's the CIA that's really carried on this coverup for all these years --

COLODNY:

And of course, you've had good experience with the people at Task Force 157.

FENSTERWALD:

Oh yes.

COLODNY:

Which is Woodward's [laugh] -- yeh. Is Woodward a surprise to you or no?

FENSTERWALD:

Not really.

COLODNY:

Did you suspect that he had those kind of ties? Is that where you thought it was coming from?

FENSTERWALD:

Well, I [INAUDIBLE]

COLODNY:

So would you have bet on? Moorer? Haig? or all the above.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

Woodward is a strange duck, and I don't know, if he can send it to interview which is beyond my belief, I mean, we're going to print the entire interview in the back of the book. But I think it's something that I, being as familiar as I was with the Kennedy assassination and having Haldeman bring it up -- Haldeman was very interested in the Kennedy assassination -- and when he came in the White House he wanted to set up a project and Nixon wouldn't let him. So my sense is that Helms was around for both events, wasn't he?

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

I think he knows. I think Helms knows what Watergate is all about and I think he knows what the Kennedy assassination is all about.

FENSTERWALD:

It wouldn't surprise me.

COLODNY:

Because, I can't believe that McCord and Hunt were operating without the knowledge of Helms. Do you think that's a possibility.

FENSTERWALD:

I wouldn't be able to guess on that one.

COLODNY:

Did you know how well that they knew -- both of them seemed to know Helms real well.

FENSTERWALD:

They did.

COLODNY:

Would the CIA supply the kind of materials they supplied to Hunt? Remember those charts that were in the, in Mitchell's office. The GEMSTONE charts.

FENSTERWALD:

Um huh.

COLODNY:

They were made at Langley. Now, you think that kind of stuff and the [DIDA BEARD?] and the Fielding stuff all could have gone on and he didn't know it?

FENSTERWALD:

I don't have any way of guessing that.

COLODNY:

You don't have an educated guess either?

FENSTERWALD:

No.

COLODNY:

Well, there are, you know, he admits to knowing a good deal about Hunt and claims he cut it off at a given point in time.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

COLODNY:

Well, look it's good talking to you my friend.

FENSTERWALD:

Len, keep up the good work.

COLODNY:

Well, I hope you like it when it comes out.

FENSTERWALD:

We'll look forward to it.

COLODNY:

See you at the book party.

FENSTERWALD:

Okay, buddy.

COLODNY:

Alright, Bud. Take care.

FENSTERWALD:

Yeah.

5 0
Your gut feeling
There's a question that keeps on coming up in my brain that I just can't seem to ignore. Is it just me or have others noticed that for the past 35 years, seeing that hunting season for deer is open right now in most States, "they" have declared "open season" on We The People and our Democratic Republic all year long? Personally? I feel that we no longer have our Democratic Republic. We have lost it to the .01% who have "installed" a Corporate Fascist Oligarchy.
4 0
Your gut feeling

Admin wrote: Nothing quite written in stone just yet, but trending data suggests one candidate is fairing much better than expected in early voting states ---> http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/clinton-enjoys-solid-lead-in-early-voting-reuters-ipsos-poll/ar-AAjAAol?li=BBnb7Kz

Of course, this shouldn't deter anyone from going to the polls and voting on election day. Lest we forget, remember the so called experts once prompted this world famous OOPS! --->

                    imagesC4TEPVAD.jpg 

I was born during Trumans' administration. One of the bad things he did was to create the CIA out of former members of the OSS. Before he left office he warned us about the CIA "running amok", that our government nor our President can can control this "wayward son", to this day we struggle with the ideals of Allen Dulles.  [frown] Must we really "swallow" either of these bitter pills that want to be President?

4 0
A Coup In Camelot - The Trailer of The Movie
[image]
A COUP in Camelot

What makes A COUP IN CAMELOT so special? Unlike every other JFK assassination program, this is a forensic study mixed with good historical context. Most other programs are long on theory and short on hard facts; include silly notions; cover the "same ole same ole"; and always seem to include Posner and his ilk to counter what is being espousing.

In my opinion, this is the greatest JFK assassination documentary ever (honorable mentions go to The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Jim Marrs new DVD Crossfire, and JFK: A President Betrayed). And, yes, I say this with or without my segment (to which I am proud of) included. What makes this one special is that it covers new or little-covered areas of the case and, again, does so with a forensic angle firmly in mind. No ghosts on the grassy knoll; no photo interpretations of blobs that "could" be gunmen...Vince Palamara, Jerry Dealey, Dr. David Mantik, Sherry Fiester, Doug Horne, Barry Ernest, and Richard Russell, along with producers Stephen Goetsch and Art Van Kampen, provide much substance in a professionally presented and major network worthy program. Excellent graphics, restored films, photos and never-before-broadcast audio excerpts are included at length.

https://www.acoupincamelot.com/buycoupnow.html

 

 Watch a clip of 3.33 minutes here:

https://vimeo.com/ondemand/acoupincamelot 

 

 

4 0
A Coup In Camelot - The Trailer of The Movie

https://www.amazon.com/Coup-Camelot-Peter-Coyote/dp/B01MECN1LP/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478255391&sr=8-1&keywords=a+coup+in+camelot

 

 

This is a link for the trailer

A Coup In Camelot, narrated by Peter Coyote, brings together the top experts, latest evidence and modern day technological advances in a powerful new examination of the JFK assassination. Shocking details emerge as the dramatic tale of A Coup In Camelot is revealed.

Starring:
Peter Coyote, Doug Horne, Vince Palamara
Runtime:
1 hour, 39 minutes

Available to watch on supported devices.

 

Microsoft Silverlight is not installed

Install the free Silverlight plug-in; it will just take a minute. Please refresh this page when the installation completes.

If you have issues after installing, restart your browser and try again. If the issue persists, try using our new HTML5 video player on Chrome, Internet Explorer 11 on Windows 8.1 or later, Microsoft Edge or Opera.

4 0
The Key To Watergate

In this A & E documentary,"The Key To Watergate", you will learn about the real target of the Watergate Break in, and role of Eugenio Rolando Martinez who we now learn was a paid CIA agent at the time of the break in.. Martinez had the "key to Maxie Wells desk"" on his person, when he was searched by the police in the DNC Offices.

"White House Call Girl" vindicates "Silent Coup's" call girl theory:
http://watergate.com/John-Dean/White-House-Call-Girl.aspx

This information was revealed for the first time in Jim Hougan's "Secret Agenda" in 1984. "SA" was the book that gave birth to "Silent Coup".

4 0
The JFK Records Act of 1992

Pause the video as soon as you see JFK come up and read JFK's statement. You will see what needs to be done to restore our Democracy!

4 0
The JFK Records Act of 1992
I doubt very much the government will tell us that they were involved. They do not want a Country wide revolution on their hands. That would surely hurt our "national security", probably force their hand, making them actually come out and show their true colors. Even Amnesty International says that we are no longer a Democracy!
2 0
John Wesley Dean III and "White House Call Girl"

This and other subjects of interest are on the same link.

[whitehousecallgirl]

"White House Call Girl" Evidence Package Confirms "Silent Coup" Theory- 25 years later Click on Book to View the Evidence Package

Heidi's the name. And in case you haven't figured out the game yet, you might want to take a peek at one of her earlier nude photos, circa 1957 or 58-which is to say, roughly fifteen years before she either did or didn't get involved in the Watergate affair.

That, of course, is the question before us.

It's how she got her start, you see-moonlighting as a nude model while still serving as a private in the U.S. Army in Washington, D.C. Not long after she arrived at her duty station in the nation's capital, she was named "Miss Fort Myer." The photographer who covered the event asked her if she'd like to do something a little more interesting, and as so often happens, one thing led to another. And while that may not be a typical career path for an aspiring photographer's model-or stripper, which was Heidi's next big career move-you can see how it might have worked for her.

So if the soft curves and round, plump nipples offend your sense of historical propriety, just take a deep breath and think of it as documentary evidence because that's what it is. If you didn't know before what it takes to get into the jet set party girl business, well, now you've got a pretty good idea. More importantly, though, the photo should lend some flesh and blood substance to the life of a woman whose ghost has hovered over the Watergate saga for years now. Even today, as we go about celebrating the fortieth anniversary of that long-ago political scandal, there is a nasty little argument among Watergate scholars, not to mention all the others who have axes to grind, over what role, if any, she played.

As it happens, there's a good deal of evidence that a call girl operation Heidi was running in 1972 triggered the infamous break-in that led to the downfall of the thirty-seventh president of the United States, Richard M. Nixon.

Needless to say, this is not part of the Watergate story that has come down to us over the decades. There are, in fact, those who disagree so vehemently with this version of events that they've sued-unsuccessfully, as it's turned out-to prevent it from being discussed in print.

It is also only fair to point out that virtually all the more conventional Watergate histories-but especially the more-or-less official version as propounded by the Washington Post-dismiss it out of hand as dangerous "revisionist" history. If you're not careful, you might even end up being called a "conspiracy theorist."

And if all else fails, they can always call you crazy-which is what happened to a young lawyer named Phillip Bailley, one of the principal witnesses to this roundly ignored bit of American history. When it appeared that he might be foolish enough to blow the whistle on Heidi and her call girl ring, he was locked up at St. Elizabeth's, the District of Columbia's mental hospital. In the ward for the criminally insane, no less.

Some forty years later, rhetorically at least, that's still the last line of defense for those who would like this story to go away.
Well, at least you can't say you haven't been warned.

3 0
John Wesley Dean III and "White House Call Girl"

http://watergate.com/John-Dean/John-Dean.aspx

 
[johndean]

John Wesley Dean III, Counsel to the President (Official White House Photo)

John Dean admits "Blind Ambition", his autobiography, contains false information

Why This Is Significant:

This is extremely important because the false information contained in "Blind Ambition" directly contradicts his sworn testimony to the Senate Watergate Committee. So this means that John Dean either lied under oath or is lying to his readers in his autobiography.

Evidence:

In a taped interview for the book "Silent Coup", when Dean was confronted with the contradiction between his book and his sworn testimony, he accused his editor of making up the false material in the book.

[mp3]

Listen to and Read the Excerpt from John Dean Interview 1/5/89 for "Silent Coup"

COLODNY:

Well let me give you an example. Okay? In your testimony to the Committee, which I reviewed, let's just take two issues. one issue was the Larry O'Brien, to which you passed over as being a peripheral issue to your office. Literally you just said, "Ya know, we didn't have much to do with Larry O'Brien." (Larry O'Brien, Chairman of the DNC and alleged target of the Watergate break-in.)

DEAN:

We didn't.

COLODNY:

But in your book, you say exactly the opposite

DEAN:

I'll tell, let me tell what the st-, I can go through that process for you. What happened is, the editors got real excited, interesting wanted to make it more intriguing. That's why all that poop got in there. My testimony is what I'm going to stand on.


[mp3]

Dean's editor, Alice Mayhew, accuses Dean of lying.

MAYHEW:

. . .and you can say that I was the editor and, um . . .

COLODNY:

I know, that's why I came -don't you - I wanted to be fair this is a difficult enough book to write and you don't nor -

MAYHEW:

Right, well I never told John Dean what to put in his book, and, ah, that's a lie, L-I-E, that is spelled, L-I-E.

 
3 0
Bobby Kennedy's Speech for Humanity

 

The Day of Affirmation speech was a speech given by Robert F. Kennedy to National Union of South African Students members at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, on June 6, 1966. Kennedy, who was then a U.S. Senator from New York, gave the speech two years before his 1968 presidential campaign, which came to an end when Kennedy was assassinated on June 5, 1968 in Los Angeles.

5 0
Robert F. Kennedy and the girl in the polka-dot dress

http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/18548

A review of Fernando Faura’s ‘The Polka-Dot File: on the Robert F. Kennedy Killing’

There is a vast literature on the CIA-directed assassination of President John Kennedy. Most Americans have long rejected the Warren Commission’s findings and have accepted that there was a conspiracy. There is much less research on the assassination of JFK’s brother, Senator Robert Kennedy, and, if asked, far fewer people would say it was a conspiracy and a cover-up. They may not even know the alleged assassin’s name.

But the assassination of Robert Kennedy did involve a conspiracy and a cover-up. There is abundant evidence that the accused, Sirhan Sirhan, who was standing 1–3 feet in front of Kennedy when he was shot and who has been languishing in prison since June 5, 1968, did not kill RFK. And there is overwhelming evidence that there was at least a second shooter who shot Kennedy from the rear. The autopsy concluded that Kennedy was shot four times from the rear exclusively (three entering his body) and that the fatal shot was fired upward at a 45 degree angle from 1–3 inches behind his right ear. Sirhan’s handgun held 8 bullets. Visual and acoustical evidence shows that up to 13 shots were fired. Thus Sirhan could not have been the killer.

A reporter’s investigation

The Polka Dot File by Fernando Faura is the latest in a small but growing number of books to make that case, and more. It is a powerful, fascinating, and down-to-earth chronicle—never before told—of an investigative reporter’s dogged search for the facts of the case from day one.

It is a very important book for understanding the assassination of RFK.

It reads like an Elmore Leonard detective story, albeit less literary, but more engrossing because of its profound importance. For like the killing of JFK, Malcolm X and MLK, the killing of Robert Kennedy echoes down the years, and in many ways signified the end of progressive hope and the ascendency of the national-security-warfare state that reigns today.

Faura’s account of his step-by-step investigation is of vital importance in understanding the murder of RFK. For unlike other works on the case, he was there from the start, pursuing and interviewing key witnesses and interacting, at first in good faith, with the LAPD and FBI, who were lying, stealing (his tape-recorded interview of a key witness, John Fahey), and intimidating witnesses.

In fact, those agencies were running steps behind Faura, and were afraid he would discover and reveal truths they wanted hidden. Although he was a seasoned and skeptical reporter, this book is also the tale of his education into the mendacity of government agencies whose ostensible job is to solve crimes rather than cover-up their involvement in them.

He eventually discovers that “the FBI and the LAPD, as well as other investigating agencies involved with national security, had deliberately and methodically misled and defrauded the American populace at large.”

Faura, an old-school reporter nominated for a Pulitzer Prize for another series of articles, is a very reliable investigator who instills confidence with his thoroughness, logic, and use of documentary sources. Reading his methodical and fair-minded account—including extensive verbatim interviews—I am surprised he could have waited so long to give us the full story. Why he did, and what propelled him to finally write The Polka Dot File, is interesting in itself. It involves a fascinating and tantalizing theory on whyRFK was killed, and by whom. But that must be saved for last.

The assassination

First the essentials: In 1968 Senator Robert Kennedy was running as an anti-war candidate for the Democratic nomination for President. On June 4, 1968, two months to the day since Martin Luther King had been assassinated by a government conspiracy in Memphis, he won the California primary that all but assured him of the nomination. After addressing his followers in the Embassy Ballroom of the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, at a few minutes past midnight he was proceeding to a press conference through the kitchen pantry when he was shot and killed.

Sirhan Sirhan, a young Arab-American, who was in the pantry in front of Kennedy, fired a pistol eight times and was subdued. He was charged with the crime. It seemed like an open-and-shut case, and was accepted as such by the mass media and the public.

But there were exceptions. Fernando Faura was one of them. A reporter for the Hollywood Citizen News, he was immediately suspicious. While working the night of June 4–5, he was driving with a young Kennedy campaign worker, Luke Perry, when they heard that RFK had been shot. They immediately went to Good Samaritan Hospital where Kennedy had been taken, then to LA Police Headquarters, and Faura’s chase for the truth began.

“We shot him, we shot him!”

That pursuit centered on the search for a young woman in a white polka-dot dress who became a key person in solving RFK’s murder. Faura writes, “Seconds after the shooting stopped, a young woman in a polka-dot dress ran out of the kitchen, past Sandra Serrano, a Kennedy campaign worker. The woman shouted, ‘We shot him, we shot him.’ Asked who they shot, the woman replied, ‘Kennedy,’ and ran into the morning darkness and history, never to be found.”

This “Girl in the Polka-Dot Dress”—seen by many witnesses with Sirhan and other men before and after the assassination—becomes the object of Faura’s search and the hub of this book. Quoting transcripts of his own tape recorded interviews with key witnesses, as well as police and FBI records, Faura systematically takes us through his investigation from start to finish. Reading it carefully, one cannot but be deeply impressed by his thoroughness and attention to detail. Nor can one not be chagrined by the ways his work was stymied by law enforcement and he was “followed, spied on, and harassed.” It becomes evident that his pursuit of the truth was dangerous.

Early in his investigation Faura joined forces with Jordan Bonfante of Life magazine, but when Life eventually killed the investigation after a call from the White House that cited “national security reasons,” Faura abandoned his pursuit out of fear for his children and lack of adequate resources.

Much of what government forces had to hide involved the girl in the polka-dot dress.

First news of the girl in the polka-dot dress

The public first heard of her shortly after the shooting, when Sandy Vanocur of NBC News interviewed Sandra Serrano live from the Ambassador Hotel at 1:30 AM on June 5, 1968. Faura prints the transcript of that interview from a FBI report of June 10, 1968, File # Los Angeles 56–156, in which Vanocur asks her to recount exactly what she observed as she cooled off outside on a rear metal emergency fire escape.

“Then this girl came running down the stairs and said, ‘we’ve shot him, we’ve shot him.’ Who did you shoot? And she said ‘We’ve shot Senator Kennedy!.’ . . . And after that a boy came down with her, he was about 23 years old, and he was Mexican-American. . . . She was not of Mexican-American descent. She was not. She was Caucasian. She had on a white dress with polka-dots, she was light-skinned. . . . she had a funny nose.”

An hour later Serrano is interviewed by the LAPD. She tells them that while she was sitting on the samesteps 15–20 minutes prior to seeing the girl flee down the steps with one man, she saw the same woman, together with two men, ascend the stairs past her.

Later she tells the FBI the same thing, even adding that the woman said, “Excuse us” as they brushed past her. She identifies one of the men goingup as Sirhan.

Serrano never retracted her story, although she was subjected to ruthless intimidation by the LAPD and the FBI. “Serrano was not the first decent citizen to come forward with information, feeling it was her duty, and wind up on the receiving end.” Faura presents the testimony of many others he interviewed that saw the girl in the polka-dot dress with Sirhan and other men in the pantry, fleeing the crime scene, in the hotel earlier in the day, etc. They too were subjected to government intimidation to retract their stories.

Other witnesses

There is Vincent DiPierro—the son of the Ambassador’s maître d,’ a student at the University of California, and a hotel employee—who voluntarily testified to a grand jury that he saw, from a distance of five feet, the girl in the polka-dot dress with Sirhan in the pantry moments before the shooting. He testified that they were together. He told the grand jury, “They were both smiling. In fact, the moment the first two shots were fired, he still had a very sick looking smile on his face. That’s one thing—I can never forget.”

There is Jose Caraval, another employee, who after the shooting saw the girl run into a dead-end hall trying to escape, only to run back out frantically.

There is Greg Clayton, Mrs. Carlos Gallegos, Booker Griffin, Pamela Russo, Susan Locke, et al. More than a dozen witnesses placed Sirhan with the girl and other men at the hotel that night. And yet, “the LAPD, less than a month after the ‘girl in the polka-dot dress’ had gone world-wide, denied her existence, this in spite of the numerous witnesses who had seen her.”

John Fahey: The key witness

While all these witnesses are crucial, the most important, whose story is at the core of Faura’s investigation, is John Fahey.

A week after the assassination, Fahey had read an article Faura had written about another witness. He approached him to talk. He told Faura that he hadn’t gone to the police because he was afraid and asked if Faura could give him protection. Faura agreed to meet with him and tape-recorded his story, the transcript of which is printed verbatim as chapter ten.

As he writes, “The story the stranger told is one of the most important, fascinating and mystery-ridden of all those that would come to light.”

Following is a summary.

Fahey, a salesman for Cal-Tech, a chemical company, was at the Ambassador Hotel early on the morning of June 4, 1968, to meet another salesman. By the time Fahey arrived late, the other salesman had left. He meets “a pretty lady” whom he invites to breakfast and with whom he then spends the day.

She tells him she’s only been in town three days, that she came from New York City, and that she was from another country whose name he didn’t hear clearly—“something like Beirut or something like this—is there a Beirut?”

When he asks her what she’s doing there, she replies cryptically, “Well, I don’t want to get you involved.” And she repeats that she is not sure she can trust him. She is very nervous and jittery; her hands are sweating.

She tells him they are being watched and followed, which Fahey notices and confirms. She invites him to accompany her later that night to the “‘winning reception’ and watch them get Mr. Kennedy.” He asks her what she means, but she doesn’t say; just repeats, “I don’t want to get you involved.”

As they leave the hotel together via an unobtrusive stairwell that takes them up to the lobby, she tells him that she knows the hotel stair routes very well although she is not staying there and has been in town just a few days. She says she has to be back at the Ambassador that night. They spend the day driving up the coast together and are followed by a man in another car. They stop and have dinner on the drive back.

Fahey describes her: “She looks Caucasian, but has an Arabic complexion, very light. . . . very good English. . . . a little accent when she wants to put it on. . . . around 27, 28. . . . dirty blond hair. . . . very pretty. . . . hooked nose.” She gives different names; is obviously frightened; asks for Fahey’s assistance in helping her escape to Australia the next day so “the Chinese can’t get her there.”

He leaves the girl back at the Ambassador Hotel at 7 PM. Although no sex was involved, Fahey is nervous because he has picked up the girl and spent the day with her and doesn’t want his wife to find out. But he is especially nervous because of the day’s strange experiences and the subsequent assassination of RFK.

Faura logically concludes that “Fahey’s lengthy and dramatic tale, if true, boiled down to a conspiracy.” From Fahey’s description the girl sounded like the girl in the polka-dot dress described by others. But Faura needed to confirm Fahey’s veracity. So they retraced the route Fahey said he took with the girl. Malibu, Santa Monica, the Trancas restaurant, the road to Ventura. All the details of the trip checked out. But what about the girl? It was still only Fahey’s word. Faura would need to find a witness that saw Fahey with the girl.

Sketch of the girl who disappears

He has an artist do a sketch of the mystery girl based on witnesses’ descriptions. All confirm that the sketch looks very much like the girl in the polka-dot dress they saw. Then he shows it to Fahey who says it looks like the girl he spent the day with. Yet this still doesn’t prove he actually spent the day with the girl. Faura needs further confirmation.

He finds it together with Life magazine’s Jordan Bonafante when they travel to the Trancas restaurant and meet the owner at his mansion in “a scene out of the ‘Godfather.’” The owner allows them to go through the receipts for June 4 when Fahey said he and the girl stopped to have dinner. They find the receipt for exactly what Fahey said they ordered. More important, they find the woman who waited on them, show her the sketch of the girl and she confirms the likeness. Finally, Faura has Fahey subjected to a rigorous lie detector test that he passes with flying colors.

So the witnesses confirm that the girl in the polka-dot dress they saw and the girl in the sketch look alike. Fahey’s independent description of the girl also matches the sketch. And Fahey tells Faura that the girl predicted the time and place of the assassination. A conspiratorial link is established.

Faura tells the authorities, but they refuse to follow up. Instead, they badger witnesses to change their stories. Faura realizes that the truth about this girl, her very existence, must be suppressed.

Faura, however, continues the search for the girl, always a few steps ahead of the FBI and LAPD, but he never finds her. He eventually concludes that she was probably eliminated by the organizers of the conspiracy.

He discovers that the LAPD officer in charge of the investigation—Lt. Manny Pena—is CIA connected, having worked for U.S. AID and been recently brought back to control the investigation. He documents the brutal interrogation techniques of Sgt. Hank Hernandez, CIA affiliated like Pena, to intimidate and break witnesses to change their stories.

Facts and confirmations

There is much more that Faura discovers and details in his first-hand narrative. A review can only suggest it all. He rarely speculates. He sticks to giving us the record of his investigation as it happened—transcripts, documents, FBI and LAPD records, his day-to-day itineraries, his doubts, hunches, confirmations, etc.—all in the space of days, weeks, months of the assassination. Therein lies its great value.

A careful reader will note what he has to say about the strange case of the preacher Rev. Gerry Owens, Sirhan, Robert Weatherly, and the Shamel Ranch; about various attempts to kill or intimidate witnesses; about Sirhan’s and the girl in the polka-dot dress’s connection to the Rosicrucians and the practice of hypnosis; about various look-a-likes for Sirhan and the girl, etc. While he does not solve the case, he emphatically proves through his focus on the girl in the polka-dot dress that there was a conspiracy and a cover-up.

When at the end he diverges from his personal experiences, it is to present facts confirmed by other respected investigators that confirm and fill out the conspiracy. For example, he refers to the esteemed writer William Turner (The Assassination of Robert F.Kennedy, Review Mirror), a former FBI man, on the witness Jamie Scott Enyart. Enyart was a high school student who was trailing Senator Kennedy, his hero, that night, taking photographs from slightly behind and to his left. When the shots rang out, he continued taking pictures rapidly. They were shortly confiscated by the LAPD, allegedly to be used at the Sirhan trial, which they never were. They were then sealed for twenty years.

Twenty years later Enyart asked for them back and was told they had been burned. He sued and in 1996 was awarded $450,000. But during the trial they told him the photos werediscovered, misfiled in Sacramento. The film that Enyart found had been tampered with, and most importantly there were no photos from within the pantry where Enyart had seen security guard Eugene Cesar get up from the floor behind RFK with his gun drawn. Cesar, who had suspected CIA links, was in the exact position from which Kennedy was shot. He is free to this day, and “there is no record that the LAPD gave Cesar a paraffin test to determine if he had fired the gun.”

Faura quotes Turner: “Thus disappeared the RFK version of the Zapruder Film, which might have shown who shot him from behind.”

A few questions

Faura’s work leaves this reader with some questions.

If, as he writes a few times (as if asking an implied question), RFK’s route through the pantry was “spontaneously changed by his staff at the last minute,” how could the killers have known where to lay in wait? Was there an inside collaborator?

Who was the girl in the polka-dot dress? He doesn’t say or speculate, but the excellent researcher Lisa Pease (see The Assassinations, pp. 591–7, 602) has presented a case that she may have been Shirin Khan, the daughter of Khaiber Khan, a very suspicious Iranian who had come from NYC to volunteer in Kennedy’s campaign office where he did very strange things and was seen with Sirhan a few days before the assassination. Khaiber Khan, even more suspiciously, had given a ride on the night of the assassination to Michael Wayne, a Sirhan look-a-like who was arrested running out of the pantry after the shots were fired.

Faura, however, does tell us how witness Greg Clayton had seen Sirhan earlier in the evening with the girl in the polka-dot dress and three other men; how after the shooting he helped tackle the one who looked like Sirhan as he ran out of the pantry, saying, “let me go, got to get out of here. I am not answering any questions, I am not going to say anything in public.” That man was Michael Wayne.

Was the girl in the polka-dot dress the same woman that New Orleans District Attorney, Jim Garrison, in his pursuit of the JFK case, had discovered being picked up by two Cuban anti-Castro revolutionaries that he was having followed at one of New York’s international airports three days before the RFK assassination? She answered the description of the polka-dot girl. Garrison was said to think they were the same woman. Was she?

Did the polka-dot girl scream “We shot Senator Kennedy” intentionally as part of some sort of “limited hangout” in a most sophisticated conspiracy? For why would a person involved in the conspiracy run away screaming such words, drawing attention to herself and her fleeing companion, unless it was a diversionary tactic?

(“Limited Hangout” according to Former Special Assistant to the Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Victor Marchetti, is “spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further.”)

Foundational agreements

Because of its richness of detail, The Polka-Dot File suggests many important questions and lines for further research. But it also affirms certain fundamental key facts about the case.

In his chapter on the work of Dr. Daniel P. Brown, an Associate Clinical Professor of Psychology at Harvard Medical School, an international expert on hypnosis, he affirms the obvious: that Sirhan was hypno-programmed to shoot his pistol in response to a post hypnotic touch cue, most likely from the girl in the polka-dot dress.

Dr. Brown states that Sirhan “did not have the knowledge, or intention, to shoot a human being, let alone Senator Kennedy.” At the request of Sirhan’s defense team seeking a new trial and a parole for Sirhan (efforts led by the great lawyer William Peppers and the heroic Paul Schrade), Dr. Brown “conducted a forensic assessment in six different two-day sessions over a three year span spending over sixty hours interviewing and testing Sirhan at Corona Penitentiary and Pleasant Valley in California.”

In his declaration to the Parole Board Dr. Brown stated unequivocally that Sirhan was hypnotized and was therefore a “Manchurian Candidate” who did not kill RFk (see the CIA’s programs ARTICHOKE and MLKULTRA).

Furthermore, Faura affirms the fact of a highly sophisticated conspiracy and cover-up that implicates the FBI, LAPD, and CIA. He affirms the fact that far more than the eight bullets in Sirhan’s gun were fired (upto 13), as proven by physical and acoustical evidence. He affirms the fact that, as Los Angeles County Medical Examiner Dr.Noguchi’s autopsy concluded, Kennedy was shot from behind by at least a second gunman with all four bullets entering from the rear, three entering his body. And he affirms the fact that none of the bullets from Sirhan’s gun hit RFK.

Buried in memory: A time bomb

“For more than forty-five years,” Faura tells us, “my children have urged me to write a book chronicling my investigation. At the time risks to my family were too high to bring the story public. I was pursuing very powerful people who did not want me nosing around.”

But what induced him to publish his work now?

Here it gets very interesting. He always had, at the back of his mind, something strange that Fahey had told him. “Returning to the scene of his self-described harrowing experience refreshed Fahey’s memory. He remembered that the girl had suggested that perhaps she could get passage on CAT or Flying Tiger Airlines. Also that she had met a Mrs. Claire Chennault in New York.”

Faura realizes that those airlines are CIA proprietaries.

If what the girl said to Fahey was true, that “I haven’t been but three days here” (to this reviewer a vague statement), and had come from NYC, then that would mean she had met Chennault sometime before the assassination.

The only people who knew about this meeting were Faura, Fahey, and the girl. The FBI or LAPD didn’t know. No other researchers have known this.

This memory lay in Faura’s mind like an unexploded time bomb for many decades until he read a report by journalist Robert Parry about how Richard Nixon sabotaged the Paris Peace talks in 1968 in order to win the election. It was a very solid, well-documented report.

It startled Faura because a prominent name at the heart of this treasonous activity that caused 20,000 more American and millions of Vietnamese deaths as the war went on for years was Mrs. Claire Chennault, aka Anna Chennault, aka “The Dragon Lady.” She was the Chinese wife of General Claire Chennault, the legendary founder of the Flying Tigers and Flying Tigers Airline, Civil Air Transport (CAT), “which later morphed into Air America, both of them CIA proprietaries.” (The girl had mentioned these airlines as possible escape routes.)

Anna Chennault became an important figure in the Republican Party and was a member of the Republican National Committee. In 1968, she was candidate Nixon’s contact with the South Vietnamese government through the South Vietnamese Ambassador to Washington, Bui Diem. President Johnson at the time “was adamant about ending the war” and wanted a peace settlement. It didn’t happen.

On “Nov. 2, 1968, an FBI intercept recorded Anna Chennault calling Ambassador Diem to relay a message from ‘the boss’ asking Diem to ‘hold on we are going to win.’” Johnson discovered the treachery but was dissuaded by Secretary of State Dean Rusk, National Security Adviser Walt Rostow and Secretary of Defense Clark Clifford from making it public in the interest of “national security.” Nixon won the election and the war went on. Faura documents all this in an appendix that presents a memorandum to LBJ and the document, The Chennault Affair.

Was the polka-dot girl’s connection to Anna Chennault and Nixon the reason Life magazine had received a call from the White House that led to Life telling Faura’s colleague Bonfante that the investigation into the RFK murder had to be shut down? Faura suggests as much.

He asks, “Lacking credible proof, how do you tell the American public of a link between the assassination of Senator Kennedy and the Nixon campaign?”

“All this was going on while Senator Kennedy was within sight of the White House in his campaign. He was a clear threat to Nixon’s manipulations because of his declared opposition to the Vietnam War. He was the only real obstacle between Richard Nixon and the White House. Had he won the election, Richard Nixon and his cohorts might have been charged with treason.”

Faura ends The Polka Dot File with some excellent questions about the Chennault/girl in the polka-dot dress connection. But he asserts this as well: “Anna Chennault had suggested at one time that she ‘eliminated’ her opposition. With the stakes so high, it is not beyond credibility that the ‘peace talks’ conspiracy was the genesis of the Kennedy killing.” While she later admitted her part in the treasonous ‘peace talks’ conspiracy, she said she had been acting “under orders.”

We are left to wonder who might have given such orders, and who gave the orders to kill RFK?

But as Faura and others have proven, there was a conspiracy and a cover-up. That is a fact. It was intricate and well-executed conspiracy, just as the one in Dallas. Like Oswald, Sirhan was not the killer.

While fascinating and important in its detailed focus on the girl, The Polka Dot File suggests many intriguing connections between the JFK and RFK murders. It is a significant book and essential reading for anyone interested in the murder of Senator Robert F. Kennedy. That should include everyone.

Postscript: Two weeks before publication of the book and not included in the first printing, Faura, together with Shane O’Sullivan (Who Killed Bobby?—Union Square Press), were granted an interview with Anna Chennault, now 91, at her Washington, D.C., Watergate penthouse. Faura showed her the drawing of the girl in the polka-dot dress. She said she didn’t recognize her; couldn’t remember anyone by the name Gilda Dean Oppenheimer, one of the names the girl gave to Fahey. She said no one else in the Nixon administration knew of the efforts to scuttle the Paris Peace Talks. She said she was talking directly with the President of South Vietnam. But when asked if the CIA knew of the conspiracy, she very positively said, “Yes.” (N.B.: President Johnson learned of the conspiracy from the NSA, not the CIA.) Anna Chennault’s daughter, Prof. Cynthia Chennault, was present at the meeting and said her mother was in Colorado giving a speech on June 2, 1968. O’Sullivan confirmed this through Anna Chennault’s calendar at the LBJ Library where copies for that period are kept. Faura concludes that since the girl in the polka-dot dress said she came through NY and had only been in LA three days, the issue is unresolved.

Previously published by Global Research, July 15, 2016

Edward Curtin is a sociologist and writer who teaches at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts and has published widely.

3 0
Robert F Kennedy Announcing The Death Of Martin Luther King

 

 

April 4th, 1968 Martin Luther King was shot and killed.

On that night, Robert F Kennedy, New York's senator back then, wanted to deliver the news to the people of Indianapolis, IN

Local police warned him, they won't be able to provide protection if the people wold riot because he was in the heart of the African-American ghetto.

He wrote his notes on his ride and started the speech without any drafts or prewritten words before his assistance would give him their proposed draft.

This speech was delivered on a back of a Flatbed truck.

Although all major cities had riots, Indianapolis remained calm after RFK's speech

63 days after this speech, RFK got assassinated.

The speech:

I have some very sad news for all of you, and I think sad news for all of our fellow citizens, and people who love peace all over the world, and that is that Martin Luther King was shot and was killed tonight in Memphis, Tennessee.
Martin Luther King dedicated his life to love and to justice between fellow human beings. He died in the cause of that effort. In this difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it's perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in.

For those of you who are black - considering the evidence evidently is, there were white people who were responsible - you can be filled with bitterness, and with hatred, and a desire for revenge.

We can move in that direction as a country, in greater polarization - black people amongst blacks, and white amongst whites, filled with hatred toward one another. Or we can make an effort, as Martin Luther King did, to understand and to comprehend, and replace that violence, that stain of bloodshed that has spread across our land, with an effort to understand, compassion and love.

For those of you who are black and are tempted to fill-be filled with hatred and mistrust of the injustice of such an act, against all white people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man.

But we have to make an effort in the United States, we have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond and go beyond these rather difficult times.

My favorite poem, my favorite poet was Aeschylus. He once wrote: "Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, until, in our own de-despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God."

What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.

(Applause)

We can do well in this country. We will have difficult times. We've had difficult times in the past. And we will-we will have difficult times in the future. It is not the end of violence; it is not the end of lawlessness; and it's not the end of disorder.

But the vast majority of white people and the vast majority of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our land.

With-

(Interrupted by applause)

Let us dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.

Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people. Thank you very much. (Applause)

Robert F. Kennedy - April 4, 1968

2 0
Thane Eugene Cesar Killed RFK

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=110062

In the discussion thread: RFK assassination witness tells CNN: There was a second shooter

Response to Marzupialis (Original post)

Mon Apr 30, 2012, 01:41 PM

37. Ace Security guard Thane Eugene Cesar Killed RFK

 

Ace Security guard Thane Eugene Cesar took the senator's right elbow and led him through the doors of the hallway into the serving area...
.
Powder burns on Kennedy's clothing reveal that all three of his wounds were from a gun fired from 0 to 1-1/2 inches away. And yet, all witnesses claim that Sirhan, who was in front of Kennedy, never got closer than three feet away.
.
Sirhan's gun could hold only eight bullets. Seven bullets were removed from victims, an eighth bullet was traced through two ceilings into airspace, and two more bullets were identified as lodged in the door frame of the pantry by both LAPD and FBI personnel.

Three bullets were found in Robert Kennedy, and a fourth grazed his suit jacket. The upward angle of each trajectory was close to 80 degrees. And yet, all witnesses claim Sirhan's gun was completely horizontal for his first two shots, after which his gun hand was repeatedly slammed against the top of a steam table.
.
All four shots; the fatal penetration to the brain, the shot that passed through the right shoulder pad of the Senator's coat, and two additional bullets that entered Kennedy's body were all fired from the back and all produced powder residue patterns which indicated that they were all fired from a distance of only a few inches. Since RFK was walking towards Sirhan, and his body was always facing Sirhan during the shots even as he fell backwards it is impossible these shots originated from Sirhan's weapon.
.
Terry, Cesar, a recently hired 26 year old, stood to the Senators right as the group passsed into the pantry. Cesar admitted to police that at the time of the assassination he was standing behind, and was in contact with Kennedy, and that when the shooting started he dropped down into a crouching position, and pulled out his gun. This , by his own admission, puts him in a much better position to have caused the upward angle of the wounds than Sirhan. The trajectories of these two bullets were nearly vertical, and the shot fired into Kennedy's brain was, at most, from a couple of inches behind him.
.
The results of the 1968 test firing of Sirhan's gun were missing.
The test gun used for ballistics comparison and identification was destroyed.
Over 90% of the audio taped witness testimony was lost or destroyed. Of the 3470 interviews the LAPD conducted, only 301 were preserved.
.
On August 21, 1968, 2400 photographs from the original investigation were burned, in the medical-waste incinerator at LA County General Hospital.

In 2007, analysis of an audio recording of the shooting
made by freelance reporter Stanislaw Pruszynski
appeared to indicate, according to forensic expert
Philip van Praag, that thirteen shots were fired, even
though Sirhan's gun held only eight rounds.

--If John Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy were killed by lone gunmen, why is it so important to keep classified so many documents relating to their cases?

--One of the most tantalizing nuggets about Nixon's possible inside knowledge of JFK assassination secrets was buried on a White House tape until 2002. On the tape, recorded in May of 1972, the president confided to two top aides that the Warren Commission pulled off 'the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated.' Unfortunately, he did not elaborate.
6 0
Martin Luther KIng Was Killed By The FBI and J. Edgar Hoove, NOT JAMES EARL RAY

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MLK/mlk.html

This just in from Reuter's

Tuesday March 24 11:07 AM ESTNew Evidence Revealed in King AssassinationATLANTA (Reuters) - A former FBI agent who investigated the 1968assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. was to presenton Tuesday what he claimed was evidence never before disclosed in the case.Donald Wilson, who left the FBI in 1987, was one of two agents who on April10, 1968, impounded a white Ford Mustang belonging to James Earl Ray, whoconfessed to the killing but later recanted, saying the case was aconspiracy involving federal agents.Wilson said Monday he found and kept two slips of paper from the car, whichwas found in Atlanta's Capitol Homes housing project, that may support Ray'sclaim of a government conspiracy in the April 4, 1968, assassination."This is very significant," King's son, Dexter King, told The AtlantaConstitution. "The evidence that he has will go a long way toward disputingthe official story."Ray, 70, was sentenced to life in prison for killing King He has beendiagnosed with liver cancer. The King family said it supports his requestfor a new trial.Wilson said he did not reveal the evidence earlier because he did not trustsome of the investigators in the case. He said he also feared for hisfamily.He said he contacted the King family after hearing the slain civil rightsleader's wife Coretta Scott King ask Tennessee officials in 1997 to letRay's case go to trial.Wilson, who heads a career management company, was to present the evidenceto Fulton County District Attorney Paul Howard because the documents werefound in Atlanta and Howard has jurisdiction.

CLICK TO JUMP TO WSB-TV 2 IN ATLANTA, AND A REAL VIDEO NEWSCAST OF THE NEW EVIDENCE.

THE JAMES EARL RAY RIFLE DID NOT FIRE THE BULLET THAT KILLED MARTIN LUTHER KING!

This just in from CNN.

                                                                    July 11, 1997                  Web posted at: 11:47 a.m. EDT (1547 GMT)                                         MEMPHIS, Tennessee (CNN) -- Markings on some of the test bullets fired   from the rifle believed used in the killing of Martin Luther King Jr.   do not match the markings on the bullet that killed King, according to     an affidavit filed by confessed killer James Earl Ray's attorneys.                                          The results of bullet tests, conducted in May, were read in court by                            Judge Joseph Brown .                                         Lawyers for Ray, who sought the tests in a bid to prove his innocence,    are asking Brown to approve additional tests on Ray's .30-06 hunting                                  rifle .                                          "A comparison was conducted of the bullet material removed from Dr.     King with the 12 test bullets that could be adequately analyzed,"           Brown said, reading from a report on the test firings.                                           "This comparison revealed that the gross and unique characteristic   signature left on the 12 test bullets by the James Earl Ray rifle was                     not present on the death bullet."                                     

IF JAMES EARL RAY DID NOT KILL MARTIN LUTHER KING, THEN WHO DID?

PART 1: COINTELPRO

Back in the 60's, the FBI's COINTELPRO program specifically targeted the civil rights movement for harassment and disruption. Not lawful investigation, but actual criminal acts committed by the FBI designed to deny the black population (along with Native Americans, the anti-war movement, and the early feminist movement) their civil rights.

That no limits were set on the type of actions directed against the central figures of the civil rights movement is illustrated by the following quote from an FBI document made public by the Freedom Of Information Act.

      "Concerning the first proposal submitted by Detroit,   counterintelligence action by San Francisco to capitalize on Huey P.   Newton's favorable stand toward homosexuals has already been   authorized by the Bureau. The second Detroit proposal to consider   directing an anonymous communication to Newton accusing David Hilliard   of stealing BPP funds and depositing them in foreign banks does have   merit and the Bureau does not concur with San Francisco's observation   that this would have little effect since there is no record that   Hilliard is skimming large amounts of money. Purpose of   counterintelligence action is to disrupt BPP and it is immaterial   whether facts exist to substanciate the charge. If facts are present   it aids in the sucess of the proposal but the Bureau feels that the   skimming of money of money is such a sensitive issue that disruption   can be accomplished without facts to back it up."      -from Sept. 16, 1970 Airtel from Hoover informing his COINTELPRO   operatives that outright lies were appropiate content for anonymous   letters.

Among the "outright lies" committed by the FBI against the civil rights movement was a fraudulent coloring book distributed by the FBI but blamed on the Black Panthers by the all-too-willing media. Scans of the book are at http://whatreallyhappened.com/~rivero/POLITICS/COINTELPRO/coloring.html.

The coloring book was chosen because this attack came long before the Black Panthers became militant, when their primary activities were the 60's equivilent of food banks, free food for children, and the desire for local control of the schools.

The fact that mostly white households were receiving the coloring book in the mail should have been the tipoff that the coloring book was not what it was claimed to be. But those were innocent days, when the true nature of our government was still well hidden from the general population, and the media was always assumed to tell the truth (those days are forever gone as the last poll taken shows that the media is trusted by only 5% of all Americans).

The coloring book was filled (as you san see at the above URL) with highly racist, overtly anti-white and anti-police illustrations that so angered the white population that they stopped listening to the black's legitimate political grievences, which is what the FBI intended. The manufactured image of the Black Panthers as racists educating their children to hate whites legitimized open political repression.

Individuals who had become prominant supporters of the civil rights movement were targeted for similar "outright lies". No more tragic example exists than the FBI's scheme to deliberatly ruin the career of actress Jean Seberg, a vocal and financial supporter of civil rights.

Jean Seberg, a well known actress in the 60s, starred in such films as "Saint Joan", "Airport", "Dead of Summer", "Paint Your Wagon", "Pendulum", "A Fine Madness", "Moment to Moment", "Lilith", and "The Mouse That Roared" along with dozens of films made in France. Jean Seberg was married to French Diplomat Romain Gary and was carrying his child when the Los Angeles office of the FBI sent the following memo to Washington D.C.

   "Bureau permission is requested to publicize the pregnancy of Jean   Seberg, well-known movie actress by (name deleted) Black Panther (BPP)   (deleted) by advising Hollywood "Gossip-Columnists" in the Los Angeles   area of the situation. It is felt that the possible publication of   Seberg's plight could cause her embarrassment and serve to cheapen her   image with the general public.      " 'It is proposed that the following letter from a fictitious person   be sent to local columinists:      "I was just thinking about you and remembered I still owe you a favor.   So ---- I was in Paris last week and ran into Jean Seberg, who was   heavy with baby. I thought she and Romaine [sic] had gotten together   again, but she confided the child belonged to (deleted) of the Black   Panthers, one (deleted). The dear girl is getting around!      " 'Anyway, I thought you might get a scoop on the others. Be good and   I'll see you soon.                                      'Love,                                                                        " 'Sol.,                                         "Usual precautions would be taken by the Los Angeles Division to   preclude identification of the Bureau as the source of the letter if   approval is granted."

(Note the comment about "usual precautions"; yet another indicator that such smear campaigns, then and now, are common operations).

Permission was granted (but with the suggestion that the smear be delayed until Jean Seberg's pregnancy was in a very obvious condition), and the rumor started by Los Angeles Times propagandist Joyce Haber. The story was picked up by Newsweek and the international press. The shock of the story was so severe that Jean Seberg suffered a miscarriage. The funeral for the child was held with an open casket, so that the lie stood revealed in it's most tragic form. Jean Seberg, her baby dead and her career shattered by this outright lie, attempted suicide several times, finally succeeding in a French Hotel.

(The name which was redacted from the above memo during the FOIA process is thought by many to have been Raymond Hewit, a Black Panther leader. His "outright lie" was far more direct. The FBI typed up a letter on official FBI stationary identifying Hewit as an informant and planted it where other Black Panthers would find it in the hopes that Hewit would then be killed.)

Following Seberg's death, the Los Angeles Times, the key instrument of her torment, issued a statement by the FBI.

   "The days when the FBI used derogatory information to combat advocates   of unpopular causes have long since passed. We are out of that   business forever."

The Senate committee that looked into COINTELPRO disagreed, however.

   "Cointelpro activities may continue today under the rubric of   'investigation.'

(From my own experiences in Hollywood following my interest in the Vincent Foster murder, I can attest that the Senate committee has a far more accurate grasp of reality. Threats, smears, and blacklisting are still the tools of choice for the FBI.)

Disinformation was not the limit of the FBI's tactics against the civil rights movement. While officially critical of the KKK, the FBI's "White Hate" program let it be known that KKK attacks against certain black leadership targets would not result in any reprisals.

All of the covertness and subterfuge was to allow COINTELPRO to stifle dissent while maintaining the illusion that the nation was a democracy with a still-functioning Bill Of Rights. However, no matter how many times the word "Democracy" gets drummed into our ears as we grow up, common sense will tell you that the mere existence of a secret police force, able, willing, and permitted to destroy the lives of citizens at will, proves we live in a dictatorship.

PART 2: MARTIN LUTHER KING

No single figure of the "unpopular" civil rights movement attracted the ire of the FBI more than Martin Luther King. Several attempts were made to discredit him and to drive him to suicide so that a more "tractable" synthetic leader could be manufactured to take his place; someone who would provide a focus for the black population, but who who could be counted on not to cross certain lines (and I note that when the children of Dr. King went public with their belief that James Earl Ray was actually innocent, the most vocal criticism of them came from the Reverend Jesse Jackson).

Martin Luther King first became a target of the FBI following the riots in Albany, Georgia, when the New York Times ran an article critical of the overt racism the FBI was demonstrating, and Dr. King went on record as agreeing with that assessment.

Notice that in all cases, the appellation "hate-group" was used as psychological justification for the actions being undertaken, even against clearly pacifist organizations such as Dr. King's.

SAC, Albany                                               August 25, 1967                                        PERSONAL ATTENTION TO ALL OFFICES                                        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[From] Director, FBI  COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PROGRAM  BLACK NATIONALIST - HATE GROUPS  INTERNAL SECURITY         [...] The purpose of this new counterintelligence endeavor is toexpose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or OTHERWISE NEUTRALIZE [emphasis added] the activities of black nationalist hate-type organizations and groupings, their leadership, spokesmen, membership, and supporters, and to counter their propensity for violence and civil disorder.  The activities of all such groups of intelligence interest to the Bureau must be followed on a continuous basis so we will be in a position to promptly take advantage of all opportunities for counterintelligence and inspire action in instanceswhere circumstances warrant.  The pernicious background of such groups,their duplicity, and devious maneuvers must be exposed to public scrutinywhere such publicity will have a neautralizing effect.  Efforts of thevarious groups to consolidate their forces or to recruit new or youthfuladherents must be frustrated.  NO OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE MISSED TO EXPLOIT THROUGH COUNTERINTELLIGENCE TECHNIQUES THE ORGANIZATIONAL AND PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF THE LEADERSHIPS OF THE GROUPS AND WHERE POSSIBLE AN EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO CAPITALIZE UPON EXISTING CONFLICTS BETWEEN COMPETINGBLACK NATIONALIST ORGANIZATIONS.  [emphasis added]  When an opportunity is apparent to disrupt or NEUTRALIZE [emphasis added] black nationalist, hate-type organizations through the cooperation of established local news media contacts or through such contact with sources available to the Seat of Government [Hoover's office]*, in every instance careful attention must be given to the proposal to insure the targetted group is disrupted, ridiculed, or discredited through the publicity and not merely publicized...         You are also cautioned that the nature of this new endeavor is suchthat UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD THE EXISTENCE OF THE PROGRAM BE MADEKNOWN OUTSIDE THE BUREAU [emphasis added] and appropriate within-office security should be afforded to sensitive operations and techniques considered under the program.         No counterintelligence action under this program may be initiated         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~by the field without specific prior Bureau authorization. [Emphasis in orig.]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--- * [EDITOR'S NOTE:  "Seat of Government" (SOG) is an official designation  created by J. Edgar Hoover to refer to his own office.  Hoover was director of the FBI for some 40 years, even receiving a special exemption from compulsory retirement by President Ford (blackmailable because of the samereason he was appointed Vice President under Nixon; his connections tothe coverup of the JFK assassination). The "SOG" appelation is indicative of his egotistical view of his power, which saw presidents come and go.]

PART 3: THE ASSASINATION

Years later, the growth and popularity of the civil rights movement, along with Martin Luther King's persistant ability to survive the various COINTELPRO operations launched against him, prompted this memo.

   COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PROGRAM   BLACK NATIONALIST - HATE GROUPS   RACIAL INTELLIGENCE                                              3/4/68 [...]         GOALS         ~~~~~         For maximum effectiveness of the Counterintelligence Program, andto prevent wasted effort, long-range goals are being set.         1.  Prevent the COALITION of militant black nationalist groups.  Inunity there is strength; a truism that is no less valid for all its triteness.  An effective coalition of black nationalist groups might be thefirst step toward a real "Mau Mau" [Black revolutionary army] in America, the beginning of a true black revolution.         2.  Prevent the RISE OF A "MESSIAH" who could unify, andelectrify, the militant black nationalist movement.  Malcolm X might havebeen such a "messiah;" he is the martyr of the movement today.  MartinLuther King, Stokely Carmichael and Elijah Muhammed all aspire to thisposition.  Elijah Muhammed is less of a threat because of his age.  Kingcould be a very real contender for this position should he abandon hissupposed "obedience" to "white, liberal doctrines" (nonviolence) and embraceblack nationalism.  Carmichael has the necessary charisma to be a realthreat in this way.         3.  Prevent VIOLENCE on the part of black nationalist groups.  Thisis of primary importance, and is, of course, a goal of our investigativeactivity; it should also be a goal of the Counterintelligence Program topinpoint potential troublemakers and neutralize them before they exercise their potential for violence.         4.  Prevent militant black nationalist groups and leaders fromgaining RESPECTABILITY, by discrediting them to three separate segments ofthe community.  The goal of discrediting black nationalists must be handledtactically in three ways.  You must discredit those groups and individualsto, first, the responsible Negro community.  Second, they must bediscredited to the white community, both the responsible community and to"liberals" who have vestiges of sympathy for militant black nationalist[sic] simply because they are Negroes.  Third, these groups must be discredited in the eyes of Negro radicals, the followers of the movement.  This last area requires entirely different tactics from the first two.  Publicity about violent tendencies and radical statements merely enhances black nationalists to the last group; it adds "respectability" in a differentway.         5.  A final goal should be to prevent the long-range GROWTH ofmilitant black organizations, especially among youth.  Specific tactics toprevent these groups from converting young people must be developed. [...]         TARGETS         ~~~~~~~         Primary targets of the Counterintelligence Program, BlackNationalist-Hate Groups, should be the most violent and radical groups andtheir leaders.  We should emphasize those leaders and organizations thatare nationwide in scope and are most capable of disrupting this country.These targets, members, and followers of the:   Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC)   Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)   Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM)   NATION OF ISLAM  (NOI)   [emphasis added]         Offices handling these cases and those of Stokely Carmichael ofSNCC, H. Rap Brown of SNCC, Martin Luther King of SCLC, Maxwell Stanford ofRAM, and Elijah Muhammed of NOI, should be alert for counterintelligencesuggestions.  [...]                                    J. Edgar Hoover ----- [SOURCE:  Brian Glick, _The_War_At_Home: _Covert_Action_Against_U.S._ Activists_And_What_We_Can_Do_About_It_  (Boston: South End Press, 1989) ISBN: 0-89608-349-7.]

On April 4th, 1968, one month after the above memo was sent out by Hoover, Martin Luther King was in Memphis Tennessee, trying to pick up the pieces of a peace march that on March 28th had been disrupted by a gang of agents provocateur called "The Invaders," later revealed to be connected with COINTELPRO.

When Martin Luther King announced his return to Memphis, the FBI, with direct approval of J. Edgar Hoover, circulated to friendly press contacts a memo riducling Martin Luther King for staying at the white-owned Holiday Inn instead of the Motel Lorraine, which was black-owned. King fell for the ruse and booked himself into a ground floor room at the motel. An unknown individual, claiming to be King's advance man, changed the booking to the second floor room with the balcony, claiming that King liked to look at swimming pools.

[Motel Lorraine]

This new room, in the rear of the building and facing open alleys, was a security disaster, wide open to sniper fire from numerous angles.

At 6PM, while standing on the balcony and speaking to his driver, Martin Luther King was shot and killed.

Conveniently placed individuals immediately pointed to the bathroom window of Bessie Brewer's boarding house. Those individuals who claimed that the shot had been fired from a hedge next to the building were ignored and ridiculed. James Earl Ray was arrested, urged to confess by his lawyer, then retracted his confession. He is still in jail, at present dying of liver desease (but probably not fast enough to suit the FBI).

There are numerous reaosns to doubt the official story.

[James Earl Ray's arrest photo]

[James Earl Ray today]

  • 1. James Earl Ray, not unlike his lone-nut cousin Lee Harvey Oswald, was a poor shot in the Army.

10. Finally and most telling, the FBI lab was never able to ballistically match the bullet recovered from the body of Martin Luther King with the James Earl Ray rifle conventiantly found in the doorway.

PART 4: THE JAMES EARL RAY RIFLE

The only basis for James Earl Ray's imprisonment is his confession, one offered under coercion by his court-appointed attorney and immediately retracted. There exists no evidence at all that James Earl Ray was the killer of Martin Luther King.

James Earl Ray is now trying to avail himself of a Tennessee law which allows the re-opening of his case in the face of new investigative technologies that might exhonorate him. Here was the initial CNN story (quoted under "Fair Use").

               Bullet test results due in King assassination                                                    evidence                                     May 21, 1997                  Web posted at: 3:14 p.m. EDT (1914 GMT)                                                                                            CRANBERRY TOWNSHIP, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- Criminal experts might know    by the end of the day whether James Earl Ray Jr.'s hunting rifle was           the murder weapon that killed Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.        Technicians at the CamScan laboratory were to use a powerful scanning    electron microscope to zoom in on markings made on bullets test-fired     from the hunting rifle found with Ray's fingerprints on it near the                  Memphis motel where King was slain in 1968.           The test bullets are to be compared to a bullet taken from King's      body. If tests prove Ray's rifle was not the murder weapon, he can ask   for a hearing on his assertion of innocence. The results, however, may                        not be released until June.                 Eighteen test bullets were fired from Ray's .30-06 Remington rifle     last week in Rhode Island and taken to the CamScan lab near Pittsburgh                             for the analysis.

The tests were completed a month later. Had they concluded that the rifle owned by James Earl Ray had indeed fired the bullet that killed Dr. Martin Luther King, I think it's safe to say that it would have been page one news across the country. Instead, the release of the results has been continually put off, and now is on indefinate hold under the claim that new tests are needed because the rifle was not cleaned properly.

Here is the latest CNN story (quoted under "Fair Use").

          Sources: Tests fail to rule out King assassination rifle                                                                             June 13, 1997             Web posted at: 10:31 a.m. EDT (1031 GMT) Ray photo                MEMPHIS, Tennessee (CNN) -- Defense lawyers for James Earl Ray have      requested a second test-firing of the rifle believed to have killed    Martin Luther King Jr., sources citing a sealed affidavit told CNN.         The defense made its request after testing last month failed to rule    out the rifle as the murder weapon, the sources said. The results of     those tests were to be released June 18, but could now be delayed.                  Defense attorney William Pepper, contacted by phone Thursday, said the      defense request does not mean the test results are inconclusive.                    "The process is still going on, so there are no conclusions," he said,     adding that he could not comment further due to a gag order on the                                   case.

Note that the only actual statement made by the defense lawyer is that the tests were NOT inconclusive. All else is attributed to "sources" and commentary about "sealed affidavits". Note also that a gag order has been issued in this case.

The meaning of the hemming and hawing is clear. The test results are not something that the government wishes We The People to be aware of. So, by decree, and with the willing complicity of the ministry of truth (otherwise known as ABCNNBCBS), We The People will not be told.

We will not be told that the tests did not match the bullet that killed Martin Luther King with the rifle owned by James Earl Ray. We will be given excuses, delays, obfuscations, and hopefully we will all forget that tests even took place. Hopefully, James Earl Ray (who has spent his life behind bars solely for the crime of trusting his court appointed attorney) will die soon and solve the government's problems.

The sealing of the affidavits, the issuance of a gag order, and the claim that the complete failure to match the bullet to the rifle doesn't "rule out" the rifle as the murder weapon all underscores the scale of the big lie being protected.

Ballistics tests are an either/or situation. Either the bullet matches or it doesn't. Either the James Earl Ray rifle fired that bullet or it didn't. Legally, if it cannot be proven, it didn't happen.

A report leaked from the court confirms that the second set of ballistics tes showed that there is a manufacturing defect in the James Eal Ray rifle that gouges any bullet it fires. That mark does NOT appear on the bullet that killed Martin Luther King. When the judge ordered one more set of tests to make sure, the Federal government, instead of complying with the court order, had the judge removed from the case March 7th, 1998!


In the 60's, COINTELPRO, with the full knowledge and blessing of the political leadership, destroyed the leadership of the civil rights movement, intentionally, covertly, and with malice of forethought.

In the present, the inheritors of COINTELPRO, with the full knowledge and blessing of the present political leadership, still perpetuate the lies and coverups.

And all of Bill Clinton's postured "apology for slavery" does not change that fact. A photo-op is not absolution.

What does it say about the reality of our nation when the secret police destroy careers and frame innocent people, aided and abbetted by the media and the machinery of so-called law and order?

What does it say about the reality of our nation when a quarter of a century after the murder and frame up took place, a government composed of entirely new individuals willfully perpetuates the lies of the past?


CLICK TO JUMP TO THE OFFICIAL JAMES EARL RAY WEBSITE

[The FBI teletype making James Earl Ray a The FBI teletype making James Earl Ray a "top ten" fugitive! Click for full size picture.(158.2K)

  • 2. At Ray's evidentiary hearing, a former FBI ballistics expert testified that not even the most skilled gunman could have accurately fired a rifle in the manner claimed by the government prosecution. According to the expert, to effectively line up the rifle for such a shot, the butt of the rifle would have had to stick six inches into the wall. The prosecution countered that Ray had contorted himself into position around the bathtub in order to make the kill shot, which seems equally incredulous.
  • 3. After the assassination, Wayne Chastain, a reporter at the Memphis Press Scimitar, came across an unpublished Associated Press photograph in the newspaper's files which was taken from the boarding house bathroom window, through which Ray allegedly shot King. The sniper's view was obscured by branches from trees growing between the boarding house and the Motel Lorraine. The City of Memphis ordered the sanitation department to cut those trees down shortly after the assassination, making it impossible to conclusively determine how the tree branches may have interfered in a shot fired from the boarding house bathroom. (Students of one of the other assassinations from that period, that of President John F. Kennedy, will recall how the government of Dallas almost immediately replaced and relocated all the street signs in Dealey Plaza, some of which were reported to have had bullet holes).
  • 4. Only one witness claimed to have seen Ray leaving the boarding house bathroom, a man named Charles Stephens. According to two other sources, Stephens was extremely inebriated at the time. The first three descriptions Stephens gave didn't resemble Ray at all--in fact, Stephens' first two descriptions of the alleged assassin were of a black man. Stephens admitted that he did not get a good look at the alleged assassin. It wasn't until the FBI paid $30,000 in bar tabs for Stephens that he fingered Ray as the hit man. Charles Stephens, it should be noted, did not see the actual shooting. According to another witness, Stephens was busy urinating in some bushes when the killing actually occured.
  • 5. Two other witnesses saw someone leaving the boarding house bathroom. One witness, Bessie Brewer, the owner of the boarding house, could not identify the individual and refused to identify Ray as the man she had rented a room to. The other witness, Stephens' common law wife Grace, said she did get a good look at him, and that it was definitely not James Earl Ray. Grace's drunken husband became the preferred witness. Grace was committed to a mental institution. According to her lawyer, C.M. Murphy, she was committed illegally, and after she was committed, the Memphis prosecutors removed her records from the hospital. After years of imprisonment under heavy sedation, Grace still refused to recant her story.
  • 6. In addition to Brewer, two other witnesses at the boarding house insisted that the man who rented Ray's room looked nothing like James Earl Ray.
  • 7. Less than two minutes after the fatal shot was fired, a bundle containing the 30.06 Remington rifle allegedly used in the assassination and some of Ray's belongings was conveniently found in the doorway of the Canipe Amusement Company next door to the boarding house. Ray would have had to fire the shot that killed King from his contorted position in the bathroom, exit the sniper's nest, go to his room to collect his belongings and wrap and tie it all in a bundle, leave his room, run down the stairs and out of the boarding house, stash the bundle next door, and then get away from the scene unnoticed--all within two minutes! (Again, students of the JFK assassination will recognize a familier pattern in the superhuman running skills attributed to the patsy).
  • 8. A service station manager told an investigator for Ray's defense team that he saw Ray several blocks from the boarding house at the time of the shooting. He was stabbed soon after he started talking to the defense team. After changing his story about his involvement in the assassination, Ray himself was stabbed while in the library of the Brushy Mountain Prison.
  • 9. Martin Luther King's brother, an excellent swimmer, was found drowned in his pool following Martin Luther King's assassination.
5 0
Alligator attack - is Disney to blame?
There should have been alligator warning signs. The majority of the people visiting Disney Land are not from Florida and could not be expected to know. The only persons that would have a clue would be those that live in States that have alligators and I believe they would only be Florida and Louisiana.
5 0
Thane Eugene Cesar Killed RFK

Uploaded on Oct 21, 2011

Free the innocent victim of the CIA coup.
Free Sirhan.

On Nov. 22, 2013 Sirhan was moved to San Diego.

Please write to him at:
Mr. Sirhan B. Sirhan #B21014
480 Alta Road.
San Diego, Ca 92179

Write Sirhan and ask him for his signature.
Wish him happy birth day: DOB 3-19-44.

Correction:

For copies of the autopsy report, send $25.
435 Bryant, SF, Ca 94107

"63 Dead eye witnesses who knew key facts about the
Kennedy assassination.
Witnesses to crimes frequently get threatened by the criminals, who are trying to hide their crime.
After JFK was murdered a number of witnesses died under curious, unusual, unlikely circumstances from 1963 to 1976, because they were eye witnesses who had very valuable informations about distinct parts of the assassination that would have greatly helped investigators discover why & by whom JFK was killed:

Lee Bower, (Union Pacific RR yard master in the tower behind the grassy knoll watching the shooters with binoculars ).




John Beers, DMN photographer who took the famous photos of Hunt, Sturgis & Bush under arrest ).

Dorthey Kilgallen, (journalist, TV show "What's My Line") etc.

In reality, most of these deaths can be argued to have been, murders done by a professional hit men, in a very creative manner.

Made to look like accidents, suicides or natural causes. It takes a professional to do a good job. A smooth cover up.




Cuba sent 5 investigators to Miami to investigate who was bombing hotel in Havana.
The Cuban 5 uncovered that it was the same crew that did the Watergate burglary, E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, Geo. Bush, Richard Nixon, etc.

The same people who were in Dallas & did the JFK hit.

There is so much known about the deaths of these 63 eye witnesses, that a whole book could be written just about their lives on 11-22-63
and the strange circumstances of their deaths the next day, or the week after they testified before the Warren Commission or
the week after they received a subpoena to testify at DA Jim Garrison's trial of CIA assassin Clay Shaw in New Orleans.

Over 18 eye witnesses who all testified before the Warren Commission, headed by FBI agent & assassin Gerald Ford,
Jack Anderson reveals how George Bush, E. Howard Hunt & Frank Sturgis killed JFK for Wall Street fat cats.
The military financial industrial complex.

An example of insider trading by Senators can be found in 1963. Dozens of Senator sold their stocks the day before JFK was hit. Then the same Senators bought back the same stocks the day after the greatest one day drop in the history of the market, the day JFK was murdered by the Bush CIA. Who killed Ceasar? It was 12 Senators. Who killed JFK? It was many Senators, the military industrial complex and the CIA controlled US media.

That is why there was no real investigation into who killed JFK, King & RFK. The whole class of rich pigs who killed them closed ranks to censor any real investigation. That is why the People, Oliver Stone, still continue the investigation.

Read the book, "Battling Wall Street: the Kennedy Presidency, by Gibson


Philippines.
In 1983 Marcos assassinated Aquino.

Marcos went on the radio & TV, an hour after he killed Benigno "Ninoy Ninoy" Aquino,
accusing "the communist, hiding in the hills
of the assassination."
Almost no one fell for that lie. Except the US media.




Marcos did the same thing George Bush did in the US.
Accused a communist, friend of Cuba, Oswald
of the lone assassination.
who supposedly fired 5 shots in 6 seconds.
Impossible to do with a bolt action rifle.

The Philippine people did their own investigation.

The Philippine people did not fall for that red herring.
They accused Marcos of assassinating Aquino.
The People began demanding Marcos step down.
Demonstrations against Marcos began marching every week.
Then every day. Huge marches.
In 1985
Marcos sent the army to suppress the marches.
Helicopter gun ships refused to fire on the marchers.

The catholic church in the Philippines, having seen how the Bush CIA killed the first catholic President of the US, Kennedy, stood up against the Army.

Then Marcos tried to ambush Sec. of Nat. Police Juan Ponce EnRele.
Enrele decided to hide out in Camp Crame.
Then a, Police chief, Fidel Ramos joined Enrele at camp Crame, on Edsa Ave. Quezon City, to support the People's demand for Marcos to leave.

The People's Power movement forced Marcos to load a plane with gold and flee to Hawaii. I was hired by attorney Melvin Belli to track down Marcos and bring him to court. I located Marcos and was ready to serve papers on him. I called Belli. We forced Marcos lawyers to accept service of process in NYC.

The People's Power movement drove out Marcos in 1986. The People's Power movement in the US was too blinded by the CIA controlled media, ABC, CBS & NBC to be able to fight back against the US military industrial complex.
I was there."

5 0
Peter Dale Scott: Ask the 2016 candidates to make this JFK pledge

http://jfkfacts.org/peter-dale-scott-ask-presidential-candidates-make-jfk-pledge/#more-21157

December 15, 2015

In advance of tonight’s CNN Republican presidential debate, Peter Dale Scott has this question for the candidates:

“How can we best fulfill what we now know to have been the intentions of Robert Kennedy with respect to his brother’s murder?”

I suggest that truth, justice, and an open society will be best served if all of us can persuade presidential candidates in 2016 to pledge:

“2017 is the year scheduled, by law, for the release of all remaining governmental records pertaining to the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

“If elected, I promise to appoint an independent committee to review those records and other relevant evidence, and I promise also to pursue vigorously whatever recommendations that committee may make for further investigation.”

 

5 0
Last Word My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK by Mark Lane

http://marklane.com/the-last-word.htm

Mark Lane tried the only U.S. court case in which jurors concluded that the CIA plotted the murder of President Kennedy, but there was always a missing piece: How did the CIA control the Dallas Police Department and secret service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza? How did federal authorities prevent the House Select Committee on Assassinations from discovering the truth about the complicity of the CIA?

Now, New York Times best-selling author Mark Lane tells all in this explosive new book—with exclusive new interviews, sworn testimony, and meticulous new research (including interviews with Oliver Stone, Dallas Police deputy sheriffs, Robert K. Tanenbaum, and Abraham Bolden) Lane finds out first hand exactly what went on the day JFK was assassinated. Lane includes sworn statements given to the Warren Commission by a police officer who confronted a man who he thought was the assassin. The officer testified that he drew his gun and pointed it at the suspect who showed Secret Service ID. Yet, the Secret Service later reported that there were no Secret Service agents on foot in Dealey Plaza.

 

Last Word proves that the CIA, operating through a secret small group, prepared all credentials for Secret Service agents in Dallas for the two days that Kennedy was going to be there—conclusive evidence of the CIA’s involvement in the assassination.   Order the book from Amazon.com

 

There is a 2 minute video with this link of a Mark Lane conversation with Oliver Stone

 

1 0
count post selected

Add a Website Forum to your website.